Dependent origination
| Category | Buddhist traditions |
|---|---|
| Record type | Doctrine |
| Editorial status | Documentary term explained from a Catholic standpoint |
| Authority | Definition only; inclusion confers no religious authority |
Definition and ordinary meaning
The account of conditioned arising according to which phenomena occur through dependent causes rather than an independent self.
Historical setting
The term must be located among early discourses and monastic discipline, later scholastic analysis, Mahāyāna literature, tantric developments and modern reform. The oldest recoverable layer and the mature school formulation are not automatically identical.
Meaning within the tradition
Within Buddhist traditions, Dependent origination must be read according to the school, source and period that uses it. The same word may name a text, rite, institution or doctrine in more than one sense. This article therefore resists treating a later standardized definition as though it were present unchanged from the beginning.
Natural-philosophical and historical assessment
The claim must be defined before it is compared. Reason asks whether its account of reality, causality, personhood, moral obligation and final end is coherent; history asks when it appears and what evidence supports it. A later assertion cannot overturn earlier public evidence without proportionate proof.
Catholic judgement and necessary distinctions
Catholic doctrine affirms an enduring created person, a good though fallen creation, moral responsibility, resurrection and positive beatitude in the vision of God. It can recognize disciplined attention or moral precepts as natural goods without accepting no-self, rebirth or nirvāṇa as an adequate account of man’s origin and final end.
Primary texts and source control
Read the term first in the earliest available source and then in later school or institutional definitions. The following local routes keep documentary evidence separate from commentary.