AN 10.61 says the food/nutriment of ignorance is the five hindrances and the food/nutriment of the five hindrances is the three unskillful actions (of body, speech & mind).
Bhikkhus, this is said: ‘A first point of ignorance, bhikkhus, is not
seen such that before this there was no ignorance and afterward it
came into being.’ Still, ignorance is seen to have a specific
condition. I say, bhikkhus, that ignorance has a nutriment; it is not
without nutriment. And what is the nutriment for ignorance? It should
be said: the five hindrances. The five hindrances, too, I say, have a
nutriment; they are not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment
for the five hindrances? It should be said: the three kinds of
misconduct. The three kinds of misconduct, too, I say, have a
nutriment; they are not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment
for the three kinds of misconduct? It should be said: non-restraint of
the sense faculties. Non-restraint of the sense faculties, too, I say,
has a nutriment; it is not without nutriment. And what is the
nutriment for non-restraint of the sense faculties? It should be said:
lack of mindfulness and clear comprehension. Lack of mindfulness and
clear comprehension, too, I say, has a nutriment; it is not without
nutriment. And what is the nutriment for lack of mindfulness and clear
comprehension? It should be said: careless attention. Careless
attention, too, I say, has a nutriment; it is not without nutriment.
And what is the nutriment for careless attention? It should be said:
lack of faith. Lack of faith, too, I say, has a nutriment; it is not
without nutriment. And what is the nutriment for lack of faith? It
should be said: not hearing the good Dhamma. Not hearing the good
Dhamma, too, I say, has a nutriment; it is not without nutriment. And
what is the nutriment for not hearing the good Dhamma? It should be
said: not associating with good persons.
The word 'nutriment' ('ahara') above does not mean 'cause' ('hetu') because ending the five hindrances does not necessarily cause ignorance to end. The word 'ahara' ('nutriment') is used because the five hindrances feed/maintain the inherent ignorance (rather than create it). For example, the suttas about the 'nutriments' say nutriment (ahara) maintains the delusion of the view of 'beings/self':
Bhikkhus, there are these four kinds of nutriment for the maintenance of beings that have already come to be and for the assistance of those about to come to be. What four? The nutriment edible food, gross or subtle; second, contact; third, mental volition; fourth, consciousness.
SN 12.63
If we remain in doubt/ignorant (due to not associating with good persons), SN 23.2 and SN 5.10 literally explain "beings" are attachments & views rather than conscious organisms (i.e., 'sentient beings').
In summary, we (i.e. the mind) indulge in ignorance when there is the mental volition to indulge in the five hindrances and the three unskillful actions. In the teaching of Dependent Origination, this mental volition to indulge in the five hindrances & unskillful thoughts or, otherwise, reject the five hindrances & the unskillful thoughts [refer to MN 19], occurs at the nama-rupa condition.
And what, bhikkhus, is name-and-form? Feeling, perception, volition, contact, attention: this is called name. The four great elements and the form derived from the four great elements: this is called form. Thus this name and this form are together called name-and-form.
SN 12.2
Note: again, the term 'sankhara' in Dependent Origination does not mean 'choices' or 'volitional formations', which again are mainstream Abhidhammic & Visuddhimagga translations by untrue persons (asappurisasa). 'Sankhara' in Dependent Origination refers to the breathing (kayasankharo), thoughts (vacisankharo) and perceptions & feelings (citta) stirred up by ignorance &/or the five hindrances.
