English
without object, and sensual lust, included under the aggregate of formations, with object? Yes. Is the aggregate of formations partly with object and partly without object? It should not be said so… Is the aggregate of formations partly with object and partly without object? Yes. The aggregate of feeling… Is the aggregate of feeling, the aggregate of perception, the aggregate of consciousness, partly with object, partly without object? It should not be said thus... 555. Is the latent tendency of aversion, the latent tendency of conceit, the latent tendency of views, the latent tendency of doubt, the latent tendency of craving for existence, the latent tendency of ignorance, without object? Yes. Is ignorance, the flood of ignorance, the yoke of ignorance, the latent tendency of ignorance, the obsession of ignorance, the fetter of ignorance, the hindrance of ignorance, without object? It should not be said thus... Is ignorance, the flood of ignorance... the hindrance of ignorance, with object? Yes. Is the latent tendency of ignorance with object? It should not be said thus... Is the latent tendency of ignorance without object? Yes. Under which aggregate is it included? It is included under the aggregate of formations. Is the aggregate of formations without object? It should not be said thus... Is the aggregate of formations without object? Yes. Are the aggregate of feeling, the aggregate of perception, the aggregate of consciousness, without object? It should not be said thus... Is the latent tendency of ignorance, included under the aggregate of formations, without object? Yes. Is ignorance, included under the aggregate of formations, without object? It should not be said thus... Is ignorance, included under the aggregate of formations, with object? Yes. Is the latent tendency of ignorance, included under the aggregate of formations, with object? It should not be said thus... Is the latent tendency of ignorance, included under the aggregate of formations, without object, and ignorance, included under the aggregate of formations, with object? Yes. Is the aggregate of formations partly with object, partly without object? It should not be said thus... Is the aggregate of formations partly with object, partly without object? Yes. Are the aggregate of feeling, the aggregate of perception, the aggregate of consciousness, partly with object, partly without object? It should not be said thus... 556. Should it not be said: "Latent tendencies are without object"? Yes. When an ordinary person has wholesome or indeterminate consciousness present, should it be said that they are with latent tendencies? Yes. Is there an object for these latent tendencies? It should not be said thus... Therefore, latent tendencies are without object. When an ordinary person has wholesome or indeterminate consciousness present... Is it to be said that there is lust in him? Yes. Is there an object for that lust? It should not be said thus...etc.... Then lust is without an object. The discussion on latent tendencies being without an object is concluded. 9. The Ninth Chapter (88) 5. The discussion on knowledge being without an object. 557. Is knowledge without an object? Yes. Is form, Nibbana, the eye-base...etc....the touch-base? It should not be said thus...etc.... Is knowledge without an object? Yes. Is wisdom, the faculty of wisdom, the power of wisdom, right view, the enlightenment factor of investigation of states without an object? It should not be said thus...etc.... Is wisdom, the faculty of wisdom, the power of wisdom, right view, the enlightenment factor of investigation of states with an object? Yes. Is knowledge with an object? It should not be said thus...etc.... Is knowledge without an object? Yes. Under which aggregate is it included? It is included under the aggregate of formations. Is the aggregate of formations without an object? It should not be said thus...etc.... Is the aggregate of formations without an object? Yes. Are the aggregate of feeling, the aggregate of perception, the aggregate of consciousness without an object? It should not be said thus...etc.... Is knowledge included under the aggregate of formations without an object? Yes. Is wisdom included under the aggregate of formations without an object? It should not be said thus...etc.... Is wisdom included under the aggregate of formations with an object? Yes. Is knowledge included under the aggregate of formations with an object? It should not be said thus...etc.... Is knowledge included under the aggregate of formations without an object, and wisdom included under the aggregate of formations with an object? Yes. Is the aggregate of formations partly with an object and partly without an object? It should not be said thus...etc.... Is the aggregate of formations partly with an object and partly without an object? Yes. Are the aggregate of feeling, the aggregate of perception, the aggregate of consciousness partly with an object and partly without an object? It should not be said thus...etc.... 558. Is it not to be said that "knowledge is without an object"? Yes. Is it to be said that an Arahant endowed with eye-consciousness is one with knowledge? Yes. Is there an object for that knowledge? No. It should be said thus... Therefore, knowledge is without object. Is it to be said that an Arahant, endowed with eye-consciousness, is wise? Yes. Does that wisdom have an object? It should not be said thus... Therefore, wisdom is without object. The discussion on "Knowledge is without object" is concluded. 9. The Ninth Chapter (89) 6. Discussion on Past and Future Objects 559. Is a mind with a past object without object? Yes. But is it not with a past object? Yes. If it is with a past object, then it should not be said – "A mind with a past object is without object." To say "A mind with a past object is without object" is wrong. Or if it is without object, then it should not be said – "with a past object." To say "Without object is with a past object" is wrong. Is a mind with a past object without object? Yes. But regarding the past, is there not a turning towards... a resolve? Yes. If regarding the past there is a turning towards... a resolve, then it should not be said – "A mind with a past object is without object." 560. Is a mind with a future object without object? Yes. But is it not with a future object? Yes. If it is with a future object, then it should not be said – "A mind with a future object is without object." To say "A mind with a future object is without object" is wrong. Or if it is without object, then it should not be said – "with a future object." To say "Without object is with a future object" is wrong. Is a mind with a future object without object? Yes. But regarding the future, is there not a turning towards... a resolve? Yes. If regarding the future there is a turning towards... a resolve, then it should not be said – "A mind with a future object is without object." Regarding the present, there is a turning towards... a resolve, is a mind with a present object with object? Yes. Regarding the past, there is a turning towards... a resolve, is a mind with a past object with object? It should not be said thus... regarding the present there is a turning towards …etc… aspiration, is a mind with a present object an object-having mind? Yes. Regarding the future, is there a turning…etc… aspiration, is a mind with a future object an object-having mind? It should not be said so…etc…. Regarding the past, is there a turning…etc… aspiration, is a mind with a past object an object-less mind? Yes. Regarding the present, is there a turning…etc… aspiration, is a mind with a present object an object-less mind? It should not be said so…etc…. Regarding the future, is there a turning…etc… aspiration, is a mind with a future object an object-less mind? Yes. Regarding the present, is there a turning…etc… aspiration, is a mind with a present object an object-less mind? It should not be said so…etc…. 561. Should it not be said – "a mind with past and future objects is an object-less mind"? Yes. Is it not that past and future do not exist? Yes. If past and future do not exist, then indeed it should be said – "a mind with past and future objects is an object-less mind"…etc…. The discourse on minds with past and future objects is concluded. 9. The Ninth Chapter (90) 7. The discourse on minds accompanied by initial application 562. Is every mind accompanied by initial application? Yes. Is every mind accompanied by sustained application, accompanied by rapture, accompanied by pleasure, accompanied by pain, accompanied by joy, accompanied by displeasure, accompanied by equanimity, accompanied by faith, accompanied by energy, accompanied by mindfulness, accompanied by concentration, accompanied by wisdom, accompanied by greed, accompanied by hatred…etc… accompanied by shamelessness? It should not be said so…etc…. Is every mind accompanied by initial application? Yes. Is there not concentration without initial application, with only sustained application? Yes. If there is concentration without initial application, with only sustained application, then indeed it should not be said – "every mind is accompanied by initial application." Is every mind accompanied by initial application? Yes. Is there not concentration without initial application and without sustained application? Yes. If there is concentration without initial application and without sustained application, then indeed it should not be said – "every mind is accompanied by initial application." Every Is consciousness accompanied by applied thought? Yes. But weren't three concentrations taught by the Blessed One – concentration with applied thought and sustained thought, concentration without applied thought, only sustained thought, concentration without applied thought and without sustained thought? Yes. If three concentrations were taught by the Blessed One –