user-1: When one analyzes Saṅkhāras, where does 'unconditioned' fit in?

The word means 'formations'[1] or 'that which has been put together'
and 'that which puts together'.

I take this to mean something about parts and wholes, as well as causation. But what about "the unconditioned": will it appear as cognitive residue or by-product of establishing every conditioned thing, or is it an object of cognition one gets to? Or what exactly?

user2493: I think of it this way: The Buddha's concept of "dependent origination" is similar to the modern idea of "emergence".
It's just a way of creating "maps" of sensory experience which enable us to better predict sensory experience.
Like so:
We notice, when THIS set of conditions is present, THIS phenomenon arises/emerges.
If, however, we remove one of these required conditions, the phenomenon will no longer arise/emerge.
The phenomenon has become "unconditioned".
For example: Consider avijjā: the choice to ignore uncomfortable truths.
Avijjā is the root condition of the dependent origination of suffering.
If the first arrow penetrates the heart (condition 1: dukkha), and we choose to respond to this by craving and clinging to a desired sensory experience (condition 2: taṇhā & upādāna) and thereby go to war with the part of us which desires to see the world the way it actually is (avijjā), the inner conflict between these 2 parts manifests as "suffering".
i.e. All suffering is a conflict between these 2 parts.
i.e. The purpose of dukkha is to alert us to mispredictions in our model which predicts sensory experience so that we can humbly correct the error in the model which gave rise to the misprediciton. If we, instead, cling to the broken model, this is unskillful. The wise part of us that knows it is unskillful will continue to protest until we correct the error.
If we, instead, choose to resolve the inner conflict between the 2 parts by (1) renouncing craving and clinging (condition 2) and seeking to see the world the way it actually is (condition 3), then we are removing the conditions for the emergence of the phenomenon of suffering.
i.e. We are "unconditioning" the phenomenon of suffering.

user-1: The word 'unconditioned', as is the thought of & the understanding of this word, all these are Sankhara and are conditioned.
That which is rightly thought of as unconditioned is not a sankhara, that which one understands as 'unconditioned' is not conditioned even tho one's thinking of it is conditioned.
If one is fixated in wrong views one can think of something conditioned and think of it as unconditioned due to stupidity.
Having discerned the cessation of the conditioned as a principally unconditioned reality, it is proclaimed to be unconditioned.

-1: <p>When one analyzes Saṅkhāras, where does 'unconditioned' fit in?</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The word means 'formations'[1] or 'that which has been put together'
and 'that which puts together'.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>I take this to mean something about parts and wholes, as well as causation. But what about &quot;the unconditioned&quot;: will it appear as cognitive residue or by-product of establishing every conditioned thing, or is it an object of cognition one gets to? Or what exactly?</p>
 2493: <p>I think of it this way: The Buddha's concept of &quot;dependent origination&quot; is similar to the modern idea of &quot;emergence&quot;.</p>
<p>It's just a way of creating &quot;maps&quot; of sensory experience which enable us to better predict sensory experience.</p>
<p>Like so:</p>
<p>We notice, when THIS set of conditions is present, THIS phenomenon arises/emerges.</p>
<p>If, however, we remove one of these required conditions, the phenomenon will no longer arise/emerge.</p>
<p>The phenomenon has become &quot;unconditioned&quot;.</p>
<p>For example: Consider avijjā: the choice to ignore uncomfortable truths.</p>
<p>Avijjā is the root condition of the dependent origination of suffering.</p>
<p>If the first arrow penetrates the heart (condition 1: dukkha), and we choose to respond to this by craving and clinging to a desired sensory experience (condition 2: taṇhā &amp; upādāna) and thereby go to war with the part of us which desires to see the world the way it actually is (avijjā), the inner conflict between these 2 parts manifests as &quot;suffering&quot;.</p>
<p>i.e. All suffering is a conflict between these 2 parts.</p>
<p>i.e. The purpose of dukkha is to alert us to mispredictions in our model which predicts sensory experience so that we can humbly correct the error in the model which gave rise to the misprediciton. If we, instead, cling to the broken model, this is unskillful. The wise part of us that knows it is unskillful will continue to protest until we correct the error.</p>
<p>If we, instead, choose to resolve the inner conflict between the 2 parts by (1) renouncing craving and clinging (condition 2) and seeking to see the world the way it actually is (condition 3), then we are removing the conditions for the emergence of the phenomenon of suffering.</p>
<p>i.e. We are &quot;unconditioning&quot; the phenomenon of suffering.</p>
 -1: <p>The word 'unconditioned', as is the thought of &amp; the understanding of this word, all these are Sankhara and are conditioned.</p>
<p>That which is rightly thought of as unconditioned is not a sankhara, that which one understands as 'unconditioned' is not conditioned even tho one's thinking of it is conditioned.</p>
<p>If one is fixated in wrong views one can think of something conditioned and think of it as unconditioned due to stupidity.</p>
<p>Having discerned the cessation of the conditioned as a principally unconditioned reality, it is proclaimed to be unconditioned.</p>
