English
concentration with applied thought and sustained thought, concentration without applied thought, only sustained thought, concentration without applied thought and without sustained thought, then it should not be said – "all consciousness is accompanied by applied thought." The discussion on consciousness accompanied by applied thought is concluded. 9. The Ninth Chapter (91) 8. The discussion on the sound of the expansion of applied thought 563. Is the sound the expansion of applied thought for one who applies and sustains thought in every way? Yes. Is the sound the expansion of contact for one who contacts in every way, the expansion of feeling for one who feels in every way, the expansion of perception for one who perceives in every way, the expansion of volition for one who wills in every way, the expansion of consciousness for one who thinks in every way, the expansion of mindfulness for one who remembers in every way, the expansion of wisdom for one who understands in every way? It should not be said so... (etc.) Is the sound the expansion of applied thought for one who applies and sustains thought in every way? Yes. Is the sound of the expansion of applied thought cognizable by the ear, does it strike the ear, does it come within range of the ear? It should not be said so... (etc.) But isn't the sound of the expansion of applied thought not cognizable by the ear, does it not strike the ear, does it not come within range of the ear? Yes. If the sound of the expansion of applied thought is not cognizable by the ear, does not strike the ear, does not come within range of the ear, then it should not be said – "the sound is the expansion of applied thought for one who applies and sustains thought in every way." The discussion on the sound of the expansion of applied thought is concluded. 9. The Ninth Chapter (92) 9. The discussion on speech not being according to consciousness 564. Is speech not according to consciousness? Yes. Is there speech for one without contact, speech for one without feeling, speech for one without perception, speech for one without volition, speech for one without consciousness? It should not be said so... (etc.) But isn't there speech for one with contact, speech for one with feeling, speech for one with perception, speech for one with volition...? And is speech with thought? Yes. If speech is with contact, and so on, and speech is with thought, then it should not be said: "Speech is not according to thought." Is speech not according to thought? Yes. Is speech without turning towards, without attention, without intention? It should not be said so. Is not speech with turning towards, speech with attention, speech with intention? Yes. If speech is with turning towards, speech with attention, speech with intention, then it should not be said: "Speech is not according to thought." Is speech not according to thought? Yes. Is not speech arisen from thought, co-arisen with thought, having a single arising with thought? Yes. If speech is arisen from thought, co-arisen with thought, having a single arising with thought, then it should not be said: "Speech is not according to thought." Is speech not according to thought? Yes. Does one who wishes to speak not speak, one who wishes to tell not tell, one who wishes to address not address, one who wishes to use words not use words? It should not be said so. Does not one who wishes to speak speak, one who wishes to tell tell, one who wishes to address address, one who wishes to use words use words? Yes. If one who wishes to speak speaks, one who wishes to tell tells, one who wishes to address addresses, one who wishes to use words uses words, then it should not be said: "Speech is not according to thought." 565. Should it not be said: "Speech is not according to thought"? Yes. Is there not someone who, intending "I will speak one thing," speaks another; intending "I will tell one thing," tells another; intending "I will address one thing," addresses another; intending "I will use words for one thing," uses words for another? Yes. If there is someone who, intending "I will speak one thing," speaks another, and so on, intending "I will use words for one thing," uses words for another, then it should be said: "Speech is not according to thought." The discourse on "speech is not according to thought" is concluded. 9. The Ninth. (93) 10. Discourse on "Bodily action is not according to the mind" 566. Is bodily action not according to the mind? Yes. Is bodily action without contact... ...or without mind? It should not be said thus... ...Is not bodily action with contact... ...or with mind? Yes. If bodily action is with contact... ...or with mind, then it should certainly not be said – "bodily action is not according to the mind." Is bodily action not according to the mind? Yes. Is bodily action without turning towards... ...or without intention? It should not be said thus... ...Is not bodily action with turning towards... ...or with intention? Yes. If bodily action is with turning towards... ...or with intention, then it should certainly not be said – "bodily action is not according to the mind." Is bodily action not according to the mind? Yes. Is not bodily action mind-originated, co-arisen with mind, co-produced with mind? Yes. If bodily action is mind-originated, co-arisen with mind, co-produced with mind, then it should certainly not be said – "bodily action is not according to the mind." Is bodily action not according to the mind? Yes. Does not one who wishes to go forward go forward, does not one who wishes to go back go back, does not one who wishes to look ahead look ahead, does not one who wishes to look around look around, does not one who wishes to bend bend, does not one who wishes to stretch stretch? It should not be said thus... ...Does not one who wishes to go forward go forward, one who wishes to go back go back, one who wishes to look ahead look ahead, one who wishes to look around look around, one who wishes to bend bend, one who wishes to stretch stretch? Yes. If one who wishes to go forward goes forward... ...one who wishes to stretch stretches, then it should certainly not be said – "bodily action is not according to the mind." 567. Should it not be said – "bodily action is not according to the mind"? Yes. Is there not someone who, thinking "I will go elsewhere," goes elsewhere... ...or "I will stretch something else..." does he extend another? Yes. If there is someone who says 'I will go elsewhere' and goes elsewhere... or says 'I will extend another' and extends another, then it should certainly be said: 'His bodily action is not as his thought.' The discussion on 'His bodily action is not as his thought' is finished. 9. The Ninth Chapter (94) 11. Discussion on Being Endowed with the Past and Future 568. Is one endowed with the past? Yes. But isn't the past ceased, gone, changed, set, completely set? Yes. If the past is ceased, gone, changed, set, completely set, then it should certainly not be said: 'One is endowed with the past.' Is one endowed with the future? Yes. But isn't the future unborn, not come into being, not arisen, not produced, not manifested, not appeared? Yes. If the future is unborn, not come into being, not arisen, not produced, not manifested, not appeared, then it should certainly not be said: 'One is endowed with the future.' 569. Is one endowed with the past form aggregate, endowed with the future form aggregate, endowed with the present form aggregate? Yes. Is one endowed with three form aggregates? It should not be said thus... (etc.) Is one endowed with the five past aggregates, endowed with the five future aggregates, endowed with the five present aggregates? Yes. Is one endowed with fifteen aggregates? It should not be said thus... (etc.) Is one endowed with the past eye-base, endowed with the future eye-base, endowed with the present eye-base? Yes. Is one endowed with three eye-bases? It should not be said thus... (etc.) Is one endowed with the twelve past bases, endowed with the twelve future bases, endowed with the twelve present bases? Yes. Is one endowed with thirty-six bases? It should not be said thus... (etc.) Is one endowed with the past eye-element, endowed with the future Endowed with the past eye-element, Endowed with the present eye-element? Yes. Endowed with three eye-elements? It should not be said thus... (etc.) Endowed with eighteen past elements, Endowed with eighteen future elements, Endowed with eighteen present elements? Yes. Endowed with fifty-four elements? It should not be said thus... (etc.) Endowed with the past eye-faculty, Endowed with the future eye-faculty, Endowed with the present eye-faculty? Yes. Endowed with three eye-faculties? It should not be said thus... (etc.) Endowed with twenty-two past faculties, Endowed with twenty-two future faculties, Endowed with twenty-two present faculties? Yes. Endowed with sixty-six faculties? It should not be said thus... (etc.) 570. Should it not be said – "Endowed with past and future"? Yes. Is there not one who meditates on the eight liberations, Who is a master of the four jhānas, Who is a master of the nine successive abidings in attainment? Yes. If there is one who meditates on the eight liberations, Who is a master of the four jhānas, Who is a master of the nine successive abidings in attainment, Then indeed it should be said – "Endowed with past and future." The discourse on being endowed with past and future is finished. The Ninth Chapter. Its summary – For one who sees the advantages, The abandoning of fetters; The fetter with the deathless as object; Form with an object; Latent tendencies without an object; Likewise knowledge; Mind with past and future as object; All mind accompanied by thought; For one who thinks and ponders in every way, The sound of the spread of thought; Speech not according to mind; Likewise bodily action, Endowed with past and future.