Paṭic­ca­samup­pāda vs paṭic­ca­samup­panne? How do they differ?

[Deeele]

@frankk

I think the difference between paṭic­ca­samup­pāda vs paṭic­ca­samup­panne is just case, conjugation or tense. Uppanne is “arisen”, uppāda is “arising”. “sam” is a prefix meaning “together with”, and the paticca is the “dependent”.

Thank you, Frank. This sounds reasonable.

@DaoYaoTao

Question: does paṭic­ca­samup­pāda account for all conditioned phenomena? I guess not. I mean a grain of sand or soap bubble can’t be said to arise by paṭic­ca­samup­pāda.

Indeed. Thus the reason for my question. [quote=“DaoYaoTao, post:5, topic:5215”]
But hows does a soap bubble have consciousness, old age and sickness? In other words, PS (paṭic­ca­samup­pāda, 12 nidanas) might apply to our perception of material objects, but not to the ‘life cycle’ of material objects.
[/quote]

Yes. Thus the reason for my question.

I once heard the opinion that term ‘idappaccayatā’ should be used for non-suffering causation, such as for a soap bubble, cloud or tree. I recall @Sylvester & I discussed this before (here).

@Coemgenu

I had a (brief) online dialogue here with Ven Sujato a while back that touches on the differences between framing DO as the process itself in the abstract (paṭiccasamuppāda) and describing DO via the dharmāḥ themselves that are arisen (paṭic­ca­samup­panne,

OK. Thanks a lot. I will check it out.

Thank you, everyone.