English
through the speech door, unwholesome verbal action; not reaching application in either, unwholesome mental action. Also, arising through the five doors of non-restraint is only unwholesome mental action. Arising through restraint of application of the body, it is only unwholesome bodily action; arising through restraint of speech, it is only unwholesome verbal action; arising through restraint of mind, it is only unwholesome mental action. Three kinds of bodily misconduct are only unwholesome bodily action; four kinds of verbal misconduct are only unwholesome verbal action; three kinds of mental misconduct are only unwholesome mental action. Restraint arising through the five sense doors is only wholesome mental action. But arising through the mind-sense door, this too, like non-restraint, there are three kinds of action. Also, arising through the five doors of restraint is only wholesome mental action; arising through restraint of application of the body, it is only wholesome bodily action; arising through restraint of speech, it is only wholesome verbal action; arising through restraint of mind, it is only wholesome mental action. Three kinds of bodily good conduct are only wholesome bodily action; four kinds of verbal good conduct are only wholesome verbal action; three kinds of mental good conduct are only wholesome mental action. Unwholesome bodily action does not arise through the five sense doors; it arises only through the mind-sense door. So too, unwholesome verbal action. But unwholesome mental action arises through the six sense doors; reaching application in the body and speech doors, it is unwholesome bodily and verbal action; not reaching application, it is only unwholesome mental action. And just as through the five sense doors... And so, unwholesome bodily action does not arise through the fivefold restraint-door; but it arises through the restraint-door of inciting the body, and through the restraint-door of speech; it does not arise through the restraint-door of mind. Unwholesome verbal action also does not arise through the fivefold restraint-door, but it arises through the restraint-door of inciting body and speech; it does not arise through the restraint-door of mind. Unwholesome mental action arises through all eight restraint-doors. The same method applies to wholesome bodily action, etc. But this is the distinction: just as unwholesome bodily and verbal actions do not arise through the restraint-door of mind, so these do not. But these arise even through the restraint-door of mind for one who, without inciting bodily or verbal action, undertakes the training rules. Here, a wholesome sense-sphere consciousness arises through the threefold action-door, it does not arise through the five sense-door; but it arises through the six contact-door in this way: ‘that feeling which arises conditioned by eye-contact, whether it be pleasant, painful, or neither-painful-nor-pleasant’; it does not arise through the eight restraint-door, it arises through the eight restraint-door; it does not arise through the ten unwholesome courses of action, it arises through the ten wholesome courses of action; therefore, whether this consciousness arises through the threefold action-door, or through the six contact-door, or through the eight restraint-door, or through the ten wholesome courses of action. When it is said, "A wholesome sense-sphere consciousness arises... with a form as its object... or... with a mental object as its object," everything is said. The Discourse on Doors is finished. "Whatever it may be, having begun" - here is the explanation: among the form-object, etc., mentioned below, having begun with a form-object, or having made it the object, is the meaning. Or having begun with a sound-object... or... having begun with a mental-object. To this extent, any single object among these objects is permitted to this consciousness as being similar. And this, at one time, It arises having taken a form object for one person, then at another time, it arises having taken another object, one of sounds and so on, for another person. For it arising thus, there is no sequence that in one existence, it first has occurrence having taken a form object, and afterwards a sound object. And among forms and so on, there is no rule that first a blue object, then a yellow object. Thus, to show this having all objects, and the absence of sequence, and even in the absence of sequence, the absence of rule among blue, yellow, and so on, he said, "Or whatever it may take." This is what is said: Among these forms and so on, it is not just any one alone, but rather it arises having taken whatever it may be. And arising thus, it does not arise as "first a form object, then a sound object," but rather it arises having taken whatever it may be; the meaning is, "either in reverse order or in direct order, or by way of alternating or non-alternating, it arises having made whatever object it may be from form object and so on." And even among form objects, it does not arise by this rule of "first a blue object, then a yellow object," but rather it arises having taken whatever it may be; the meaning is, "it arises having taken whatever form object it may be from blue, yellow, and so on, form objects." The same method applies to sound objects and so on. This, for now, is one explanation. But this is another: "Having form as its object" is a form object… … "having a mental object as its object" is a mental object. Thus, having said, "a form object or… …a mental object, the mind arises," he then said, "Or whatever it may take." Its meaning is: Among these forms and so on, it arises having taken whatever it may be, in the way stated below. But in the Great Commentary, "there is nothing new in 'or' and 'whatever'; what was taken below is what is taken," and having said that, "this was said to state 'having taken a form or… …having taken a mental object, having taken this or that'," that is all. Thus it has come. The Section on Expositions of the Dhamma Description of the Aggregate of Five Beginning with Contact "At that time" - this is a statement specifically indicating a time that was not specifically indicated before. Therefore, the meaning should be understood as: "At whatever time a wholesome consciousness belonging to the sense-sphere arises, at that very time there is contact...and so on...there is non-distraction." Here, just as with consciousness, so too with contact and the others, there is contact. What is there? The connection should be made according to the words obtainable in the manner of "belonging to the sense-sphere, being wholesome, having arisen, accompanied by joy," and so on. For in feeling, "accompanied by joy" is not obtainable, nor is "associated with knowledge" in the faculty of wisdom; therefore, it is said "according to the words obtainable." This is the opinion of the teachers, an extract from the commentary; but this should not be regarded as essential. Why, in this context, is contact mentioned first? Because it is the first to impinge on the consciousness. For contact, having first impinged on the consciousness in regard to the object, arises touching the object; therefore, it is mentioned first. But having touched with contact, one feels with feeling, one perceives with perception, one wills with volition. Therefore, it was said: "Having been touched, monks, one feels; having been touched, one perceives; having been touched, one wills." Moreover, this contact, like a pillar that, having reached a palace, is a strong support for the remaining materials, with beams, joints, walls, pedestals, gables, eaves, brackets, and cornices bound to the pillar, established on the pillar, even so, it is a strong support for co-arisen and associated phenomena. For it is like a pillar. The remaining materials are similar. Therefore, it is mentioned first. But this is without reason. For among phenomena arising in a single moment of consciousness, it is not possible to say, "This arose first, this arose later." Even in the state of being a strong support, the reason for contact is not seen. However, contact is mentioned first simply by way of exposition. There is feeling, there is contact; there is perception, there is contact; there is volition, there is contact; there is consciousness. Contact exists, feeling exists, perception exists, volition exists, thought exists— it would be fitting to bring them up too. But it should be understood that contact is mentioned first due to the mode of teaching. Just as here, a sequence of earlier and later should not be sought in the remaining phenomena. But the phenomena should be sought only by way of meaning, characteristic, function, and so on. That is: it touches, therefore it is contact. Its characteristic is touching, its function is impact, its manifestation is convergence, its proximate cause is the object that has come into the range [of sense]. For even though this immaterial phenomenon exists, it proceeds only in the manner of touching the object, thus its characteristic is touching. And though not clinging in one place, like form, the eye, and like sound, the ear, it impacts the mind and the object, thus its function is impact. Or, because it arises from the impact of the base and the object, it should be understood that its function is impact, in the sense of attainment. For it was said in the commentary: "There is no contact in the four planes that does not have the characteristic of touching. But the function of impact exists only in the five doors. For that of the five doors, there is the name 'having the characteristic of touching' and also 'having the function of impact'; for that of the mind-door, there is only the name 'having the characteristic of touching', not 'having the function of impact.'" And having said this, this sutta was brought forth: "Just as, great king, two rams might fight, in them, as one ram, so should the eye be seen,