I am not a translator or expert but I also see that it is not easy to translate namarupa. It will depend on how we understand its meaning. If we translate it to name-and-form or mentality-materiality, we will need to explain what does that mean? Somebody may understand name-and-form as a “being” without consciousness and the six-senses. Therefore, this is a fetus in its early stage. With this understanding, they accept the 3 lives model for DO and may take consciousness as rebirth consciousness that enters the womb. So, they think DO is about the rebirth process. However, by this understanding, they conveniently ignore the definition of nama and rupa in DO, and cannot explain the reversal process of DO.
Someone else may take namarupa as mentality-materiality. With this understanding, they may choose moment-to-moment interpretation and that all 12 links are realized in one and the same moment, or running uninterruptedly from ignorance to aging-and-death for each experience. However, with this understanding, they may accept that whenever we experience anything, feelings will arise so we must crave, cling to it.
Since I do not see DO can go straight from ignorance to aging-and-death in one shot; therefore, I also do not accept moment-to-moment interpretation. Here is what I explained about how I understand DO. I can see nama must have intention; therefore, it is not all mentalities and it does not have consciousness in its definitions, so we cannot simply call it “mind or mentalities”. Rupa can be internal or external, so it is not simply the body of the experiencer. Rupa is defined as the four great elements so it is physical, and it is also defined as the forms derived from them, so it can also be mental images. To my understanding, namarupa is the intentional mental connection of the being towards the rupa that he is interested in. In short, namarupa is the intentional connection between nama and rupa. This connection is intentional and it is driven by ignorance. Since this intentional connection is mental even if rupa may not be so, it can cease when ignorance ceases. With wisdom, we never have any intention to pursue rupa and stay with it. We can experience the rupa, but not because we like it or do not like it, so we will not have any intention to chase after it or to be with it; therefore, there is no namarupa for a person with wisdom.
Without namarupa does not mean that we are no longer able to experience anything. We can still experience the world, but without any intention to be or not to be with it.
I do not see DO as the refusal or acceptance of self or soul. However, this also depends on how we understand what we mean by “self or soul”? To me, self or soul is simply what refers to “I, me” no matter if it is permanent or not. Seeing dependent origination, I cannot say that I do not exist. However, seeing the cessation I also cannot say that I exist. It is weird to say that the perception or feeling that I just experienced is separated from me and is not related to me. If I do not exist, why do I experience that? However, seeing the cessation, it is also weird to say that the perception or feeling that I just experienced is my perception or feeling. If it is mine, why can’t I control and keep it? Therefore, as I see, DO is simply about how we get ourselves into suffering, and how we can get out of it.
Since I do not accept or reject self or soul, to me, it is what it is. I am not it, but I am also not apart from it. It comes and it goes away. By not clinging to or rejecting it, I can experience the world without identifying with it. Without any identification, how can you identify or describe me?
That’s how I understand namarupa and DO. Hope that someone may understand what I have tried to address.