English
the state of being skilled in offenses is skill in offenses, āpattikusalatā. The state of being skilled in emerging from those offenses is skill in emerging from offenses, āpattivuṭṭhānakusalatā. The state of being skilled in attainments is skill in attainments, samāpattikusalatā. This is a designation for the wisdom that determines the application of attainments. The state of being skilled in emerging from attainments is skill in emerging from attainments, samāpattivuṭṭhānakusalatā. The state of being skilled in the eighteen elements is skill in the elements, dhātukusalatā. The state of being skilled in attention to those very elements is skill in attention, manasikārakusalatā. The state of being skilled in the eye-base and so on is skill in the bases, āyatanakusalatā. The state of being skilled in the twelve-linked dependent origination is skill in dependent origination, paṭiccasamuppādakusalatā. The state of being skilled in that particular place is skill in the place, ṭhānakusalatā. Place means cause. For the result is said to stand in it because its activity depends on it, therefore it is called place. The state of being skilled in the non-place is skill in the non-place, aṭṭhānakusalatā. 124-134. Straightness is rectitude, ajjavo. Softness is gentleness, maddavo. Forbearance, which is the state of enduring, is patience, khanti. The state of being well-behaved is good conduct, soraccaṃ. Friendliness, which is the state of gentle amiability, is sociability, sākhalyaṃ. Just as one's own fault is not with others, so is the reception with material things, paṭisanthāro. The state of unguarded doors in the six senses, which is a kind of sense restraint, is unguarded doors in the senses, indriyesu aguttadvāratā. The state of not knowing moderation in eating, in terms of receiving and consuming, is not knowing moderation in eating, bhojane amattaññutā. The subsequent pair should be understood by way of the opposite of what has been said. The state of lost mindfulness, which is a kind of loss of mindfulness, is lost mindfulness, muṭṭhassaccaṃ. The state of non-comprehension is non-comprehension, asampajaññaṃ. One who remembers is mindful, sati. One who comprehends is comprehending, sampajaññaṃ. Unreflecting, unmoving. The power known as reflection is reflection-power. The power arising in one developing the seven factors of enlightenment, with effort as the head, is development-power. Serenity is the calming of opposing states. Insight is seeing in various ways, such as impermanence. Serenity, having taken that form, is serenity-sign, as a condition for serenity that should be repeatedly practiced. The same method applies to the sign of exertion. Exertion is the grasping of associated states. Non-distraction is not being scattered. 135-142. The failure of morality, known as non-restraint, is the misfortune of morality, morality-misfortune. The failure of right view, known as wrong view, is the misfortune of view, view-misfortune. Propriety itself is the accomplishment of morality, the fulfillment of morality, thus the accomplishment of morality is morality-accomplishment. Knowledge that is the perfection of view is the accomplishment of view, view-accomplishment. Morality, having attained the state of purity, known as morality, is the purity of morality, morality-purity. Capable of leading to purity, known as liberation, is the purity of view, view-purity. View-purity, however, is both the purity of view and the effort appropriate to that view, that is, knowledge of the ownership of action, etc., is view-purity and the effort appropriate to that view, the virtuous view, and what is associated with it. Dismay is the agitation known as fear arising in dependence on birth, etc. Places of dismay are the causes of birth, etc., that generate dismay. For one who is dismayed, there is wise attention, that is, skillful attention for one in whom dismay has arisen. Non-contentment in wholesome states is the state of non-contentment in the fulfillment of wholesome states. Non-retreat from effort is non-turning back from effort, non-desisting, before attaining arahantship. Knowledge is knowing. Liberation is being freed. Knowledge of destruction is knowledge in the noble path that destroys defilements. Knowledge of non-arising is knowledge in the noble fruition that arises at the cessation of the non-arising of the defilements to be destroyed by that particular path, in terms of rebirth. This is the sequential explanation of the outline. Duka summary is complete. Analysis of the wholesome consciousness in the Sensuous Sphere: 1. Now, to show in detail the phenomena included in the matrix as it was laid down, the analysis of "Which phenomena are wholesome?" is begun. Therein, first, the wholesome consciousness in the Sensuous Sphere is shown, "At whatever time a wholesome consciousness in the Sensuous Sphere arises." In its exposition, there are three great sections: the section on determining phenomena, the section on inclusion, and the section on emptiness. Of these, the section on determining phenomena is twofold: in terms of question and in terms of exposition. In these, the section on question has four divisions: the question, the time exposition, the phenomena exposition, and the application. Of these, "Which phenomena are wholesome?" is the question. "At whatever time a wholesome consciousness in the Sensuous Sphere... at that time" is the time exposition. "Contact is... non-distraction is" is the phenomena exposition. "Or whatever other immaterial phenomena, arisen dependently, exist at that time, these phenomena are wholesome" is the application. Thus, of the section on question, which has four divisions, this first division, the question, "Which phenomena are wholesome?" is a question of intention to speak. There are five kinds of questions: the question to illuminate the unseen, the question to compare the seen, the question to cut off doubt, the question of agreement, and the question of intention to speak. Their distinctions are as follows: What is the question to illuminate the unseen? By nature, the characteristic is unknown, unseen, unweighed, unconsidered, unmanifested, undeveloped. To know it, to see it, to weigh it, to consider it, to manifest it, to develop it, one asks a question. This is the question to illuminate the unseen. What is the question to compare the seen? By nature, the characteristic is known, seen, weighed, considered, manifested, developed, so one asks a question to compare it with other wise people. This is the question to compare the seen. What is the question that cuts through doubt? It is naturally inclined to doubt, inclined to uncertainty, born of two minds – ‘Is it thus, or is it not thus, what is it, how is it?’ To cut through this doubt, one asks a question. This is the question that cuts through doubt. What is the question of agreement? The Blessed One asks a question of the monks for their agreement – ‘What do you think, monks, is form permanent or impermanent?’ ‘Impermanent, Lord.’ ‘But that which is impermanent, is it suffering or happiness?’ ‘Suffering, Lord.’ ‘But that which is impermanent, suffering, subject to change, is it fitting to regard that as: This is mine, this I am, this is my self?’ ‘No, Lord.’ This is the question of agreement. What is the question of wanting to speak? The Blessed One asks a question of the monks because he wants them to speak. ‘‘There are these four foundations of mindfulness, monks. Which four?’’ This is the question of wanting to speak. Of these, the first three questions do not apply to Buddhas. Why? For Buddhas, in all three times, there is nothing conditioned, or unconditioned free from time, unseen, unknown, unilluminated, uncompared, uninvestigated, unmanifested, undeveloped. Therefore, they do not have the question to illuminate the unseen. But that which is penetrated by the Blessed One with his own knowledge, there is no need to compare it with another ascetic or brahmin, or god, or Māra, or Brahmā. Therefore, he does not have the question to compare the seen. Since he is free from doubt, has crossed over uncertainty, has abandoned all doubt in all things, therefore, he does not have the question that cuts through doubt. But the other two questions do apply to the Blessed One. Among these, this should be understood as the question of wanting to speak. There, with the word ‘which,’ he asks about the things to be specified. ‘Things are wholesome’ It is not possible to know from the mere words "what was done, or what is being done." But when "Which?" is said, their question-worthiness becomes apparent. Therefore it was said, "By the word 'which?' he asks about the things to be specified." With the two words "wholesome things," he shows the things asked about in the question. Their meaning has already been explained below. Why, in this case, was the word order "things wholesome" used instead of "wholesome things," as in a matrix? To illuminate the teaching of things according to their divisions, and to show the possessor of divisions. For in this Abhidhamma, only things are to be taught. And they are of many kinds, with divisions such as wholesome and so on. Therefore, only things are to be taught here. This is not conventional teaching. And they are to be taught according to their many divisions, not merely as things. For teaching according to divisions leads to the knowledge of analysis of compactness, so having illuminated the teaching of things according to divisions in this way, "wholesome things," now, to show the things to be taught by that division, this word order "Which things are wholesome?" should be understood as having been made. For when the possessors of divisions are shown, the division being shown is fitting and easily understood. Now, "At the time when a wholesome consciousness belonging to the sense-sphere..." Here – The Sage specified consciousness at the time, And time by consciousness;