English
have been abandoned by you?” he should be asked. “Are they those to be abandoned by the first path, or by the second and so on?” For all the defilements abandoned by the path they have attained are evident. If he says, “These defilements have been abandoned by me,” then “Of which states are you a possessor?” he should be asked. “Is it of the stream-entry path, or of any other among the once-returner path and so on?” For all the states they have attained are evident. If he says, “I am a possessor of these states,” even then his statement should not be trusted. For learned monks, skilled in learning and questioning, are able to verify these six points. However, the coming and going practice of that monk should be verified. If the coming and going practice is not pure, “By this practice a supramundane state is not attained,” he should be dismissed. But if his coming and going practice is pure, “For a long time he has been diligent in the three trainings, devoted to wakefulness, unattached to the four requisites, dwelling with a mind like a hand in the air,” it is understood. The declaration of that monk corresponds with his practice. “Just as the water of the Ganges corresponds and meets with the water of the Yamunā; even so, the path leading to Nibbāna well-taught by that Blessed One corresponds, Nibbāna and the path,” it becomes like the saying. Moreover, even with this honor should not be paid. Why? For some ordinary person, even while being a worldling, there is a practice similar to that of an Arahant. Therefore, that monk should be startled by various means. For an Arahant, even when a thunderbolt falls on his head, there is no fear, or terror, or horripilation. If fear, or terror, or horripilation arises in him, “You are not an Arahant,” he should be dismissed. But if, being fearless, unterrified, unfrightened, he sits like a lion, this monk's declaration is complete. is not worthy of the honor sent by kings, great ministers, and others from all sides. "Having evil wishes" means being endowed with evil wishes, as stated in the manner of "here, a certain person, though immoral, wishes that people know him as moral" (Vibh. 851). "Overcome by desire" means being overcome, overwhelmed by that evil desire, having committed a Pārājika offense. "Desiring purity" means wishing for, desiring, longing for one's own purity. Since this person has committed a Pārājika offense, he is unable to attain jhānas and so forth while remaining in the state of a bhikkhu. For his state as a bhikkhu is an obstacle to heaven and an obstacle to the path. For it has been said: "The ascetic life badly handled drags one to hell" (Dhp. 311). And again it has been said: "A slack ascetic life, it scatters more dust" (Dhp. 313). Thus, his state as a bhikkhu is not purity. But since he is able to attain the path to heaven through giving, taking refuge, observing precepts, and so forth, or the path to liberation through jhānas, deliverances, and so forth, by becoming a layman, or a lay follower, or a monastery attendant, or a novice, therefore his state as a layman and so forth is called purity. Therefore, because he desires that purity, he is called "desiring purity." For this reason, in the word-division, it is said: "wishing to be a layman," and so forth. "Should speak thus" means should say thus. How? "Friends, I spoke thus unknowingly, I see what I did not see." But in the word-division, without extracting this phrase "should speak thus," it is said that when one speaks, "Friends, I spoke thus unknowingly, I see what I did not see." To show that manner, it is said: "I do not know these things," and so forth. "I prattled empty lies" means I prattled empty words, devoid of meaning, and lies, with the intention of deception, it is said. But in the word-division, to show only the meaning with another word-expression, it is said: "I spoke falsely," and so forth. "Referring to the former" means a person who has committed the former three Pārājika offenses. for the foot. The rest is clear, as it has been explained before and its meaning is obvious. Explanation of the Word-Analysis 199. Having thus analyzed the precept that was laid down, in order of its words, now, because in the word-analysis below, the superhuman dhamma was shown only briefly, as in ‘‘jhāna, vimokkha, samādhi, samāpatti, ñāṇadassana… and so on… delight in empty dwellings,’’ and the rule was not established by extensively applying an offense; and since not everyone can grasp the method in every way when the meaning is shown briefly, therefore, in order to grasp the method in every way, he wishes to show the distinction of offenses by again placing that same word-analysis in the position of a matrix, and extensively showing the superhuman dhamma, so he says, ‘‘Jhāna means the first jhāna, the second jhāna,’’ and so on. There, by the first jhāna and so on, mettā-jhāna and so on, asubha-jhāna and so on, ānāpānassati-samādhi-jhāna, mundane jhāna, and supramundane jhāna are all included. Therefore, it should be understood that one who declares, ‘‘I attain the first jhāna… and so on… the fourth jhāna, mettā-jhāna, upekkhā-jhāna, asubha-jhāna, ānāpānassati-samādhi-jhāna, mundane jhāna, supramundane jhāna,’’ is indeed guilty of a pārājika offense. Completely released, or released from various defilements, is vimokkha (liberation). And this is called suññato (empty) because it is empty of greed, hatred, and delusion. It is called animitto (signless) because it is signless of the signs of greed, hatred, and delusion. It is called appaṇihito (desireless) because of the absence of the aspirations of greed, hatred, and delusion. Samādhi (concentration) means that which holds the mind evenly, establishing it on an object. Samāpatti (attainment) means that which is to be attained by the noble ones. The rest here is in the same manner as explained. And here, by the triad of vimokkha and the triad of samādhi, the noble path is spoken of. By the triad of samāpatti, however, the attainment of fruition is meant. Taking any one of these terms, if one declares, ‘‘I am a recipient of this,’’ one is indeed guilty of a pārājika offense. The three knowledges are: recollection of past lives, the divine eye, and the knowledge of the destruction of the taints. There, taking the name of even one of these, if one declares, ‘‘I am a recipient of this knowledge, saying, "I am one who has attained them," he incurs a pārājika offense. However, in the Saṅkhepaṭṭhakathā, it is said, "Even one who says, 'I am one who has attained the knowledges,' or one who says, 'I am one who has attained the three knowledges,' incurs a pārājika offense." The thirty-seven factors of enlightenment mentioned in the section on the development of the path are here intended as supramundane, associated with the path. Therefore, it is stated in the Mahāaṭṭhakathā, "One who says, 'I am one who has attained the supramundane foundations of mindfulness, the right efforts, the bases of psychic power, the faculties, the powers, the factors of enlightenment, or the Noble Eightfold Path,' incurs a pārājika offense." What is said in the Mahāpaccariya and other texts also agrees with this: "Even one who says, 'I am one who has attained the foundations of mindfulness,' thus speaking of each individual part, or one who says, 'I am one who has attained the contemplation of the body as a foundation of mindfulness,' thus speaking of each individual phenomenon within it, incurs a pārājika offense." Why? Because it is said with reference to what arises at the moment of the path. With regard to the realization of fruits, it should be understood that a pārājika offense is incurred for each individual fruit. In the triad beginning with "the abandonment of lust," the abandonment of defilements is spoken of. Since this does not exist without the path, for by the third path is the abandonment of sensual lust and ill-will, and by the fourth, the abandonment of delusion, therefore, a pārājika offense is declared for one who says, "My lust is abandoned," and so on. In the triad beginning with "the mind is freed from hindrances due to lust," only the supramundane mind is spoken of. Therefore, a pārājika offense is incurred for one who says, "My mind is freed from hindrances due to lust," and so on. In the section on "empty dwellings," since a pārājika offense is not intended merely by saying, "I delight in empty dwellings" without connecting it to jhāna, it is said, "delight in empty dwellings through the first jhāna," and so on. Therefore, it should be understood that only one who connects it with jhāna and says, "I delight in empty dwellings through such and such a jhāna," incurs a pārājika offense. In the section on the word "knowledge," among the eight knowledges mentioned in the Ambaṭṭha Sutta and other texts, the five knowledges, namely, insight knowledge, mind-made psychic power, various kinds of psychic power, divine ear, and knowledge of others' minds, are not included. Among these, only insight knowledge is not a ground for defeat, the others are, this should be known. Therefore, saying "I have gained insight" or "I have gained insight-knowledge" is not a defeat. But Elder Phussadeva says: "The other four knowledges, when not conjoined with knowledge, are not grounds for defeat. Therefore, saying 'I have gained the mind-made body, the psychic powers, the divine ear-element, the knowledge of others' minds,' is also not a defeat." This was rejected by his own pupils: "The teacher is not an Abhidhammika, he does not know the difference in planes. Higher knowledges are indeed exalted states of mind, based on the fourth jhana, they are perfected only by jhana. Therefore, whether one says 'I have gained the mind-made body' or 'I have gained the knowledge of the mind-made body,' in whatever way one says it, it is indeed a defeat." And here, although Nibbana is not mentioned in the Pali text, yet saying "Nibbana has been attained by me"