How accurate is it to say that it was the dissolution of the monasteries in 1536, that caused the risings of 1536?

It is accurate to say that the dissolution of the monasteries significantly contributed to the Pilgrimage of Grace, however it is inaccurate to state that that the dissolution of the monasteries alone caused the risings in 1536. One of the major reasons why the dissolution of the monasteries was so significant was that it combined the two biggest motifs behind the rebellion, which were religious, with the removal of Catholicism and economic with the extinction of charity. Thus, it may be accurate to say that the dissolution of the monasteries was the most significant cause of the rebellions in 1536. However, the impact of further unpopular and radical religious reforms, such as the 1534 Act of Supremacy, the 1535 treason law and the 10 articles, mean that while dissolution of the monasteries were integral to creating the religious tensions behind the rebellion, it was not the only cause. Furthermore, the economic causes of taxes and subsidies in 1535 and the political cause of growing factionalism, highlight that the dissolution of the monasteries alone did not cause the Pilgrimage of Grace.
Undoubtedly, the dissolution of the monasteries was a key factor in causing the rebellions in the North in 1536. Primary, the dissolution of monasteries was a huge motivation in the commons rebelling, as it attacked their religious beliefs and attacked the poor economically. Firstly, by attacking the monasteries, the monarch was directly attacking the symbolic radical form of Catholicism. Thus, this attack on religious belief, enraged many, especially in the north where Catholicism dominated. Secondly, the dissolution of the monasteries caused the commons to rebel, as it removed the only form of charity or aid that the poor received. Thus, highlighting how the commons felt physically and ideologically attacked by the dissolution of the monasteries. This is especially significant, when considering the views of historians like Michael Bush, who claim the rebellion was started by the commons. Furthermore, not only did the dissolution hamper the poor, which can be seen by the fact that despite removing aid for the poor, the government failed to install such necessary support for the poor up until the 1563 Act of Artificers and 1598 poor law. On top of this the dissolution of the monasteries enraged the commons, as it transferred the local power from the church, to the gentry and nobility, which the commons resented. Similarly, despite Henry collecting around 300,000 in pounds from the dissolution, the majority of this went to funding wars and enabling Henry to become a warrior king, rather than tackling social issues, such as unemployment and vagrancy among the poor. Thus, it is clear that the dissolution of the monasteries was very significant to the commons joining the Pilgrimage of Grace, especially due to the religious and economic hardship it caused the poor. However, the dissolution fails to explain why the gentry partook in the rebellion and also the political motivations which made Aske and others want to remove evil councillors, rather than overthrow the king. Therefore, showing that while the dissolution may be have been a large factor, it was not the definitive or only cause of the Pilgrimage of Grace.