The king said: ‘You were talking just now of name-and-form. What does “name” mean in that expression, and what “form”?’

‘Whatever is gross therein, that is “form": whatever is subtle, mental, that is “name.”’

‘Why is it, Nāgasena, that name is not reborn separately, or form separately?’

‘These conditions, great king, are connected one with the other; and spring into being together.’

‘Give me an illustration.’

‘As a hen, great king, would not get a yolk or an egg-shell separately, but both would arise in one, they two being intimately dependent one on the other; just so, if there were no name there would be no form. What is meant by name in that expression being intimately dependent on what is meant by form, they spring up together. And this is, through time immemorial, their nature.’

‘You are ready, Nāgasena, in reply.’