English
For indeed, there is no bond for beings like craving, because of its nature of constantly depending. Because of consuming objects, hope. Because of covering over and because of consuming without ever reaching satisfaction, is the meaning. Based on wishing, wishing. The state of being wished for is the state of being wished for. Now, to show the place of its occurrence, beginning with 'hope in forms' was said. There, taking the meaning of hope as wishing, hope in forms is hope in forms, thus all nine terms should be understood. And here, the first five were said based on the five strands of sense pleasure. The sixth based on greed for requisites. That especially for renunciants. The three after that for householders, based on things that do not satisfy. For they do not have enough. There is nothing dearer than one's own child's life. "This is mine, this is mine," or "This was given to me by so-and-so, this was given to me," thus making beings chatter, hence "chattering." The next two words are augmented by prefixes. Then, because it begins to be divided in another way, it is again called "chattering." The manner of chattering is "chattering." The state of having chattered is "chatteredness." Again and again it snatches and draws in objects, hence "greedy." The state of greed is "greediness." The manner of greed is "greediness." The state of being associated with greed is "greediness." "Tail-wagging" means that craving, by which, in places of gain, like dogs wagging their tails, they wander trembling; that is the name for that trembling craving. He desires what is good, pleasing, and unpleasing, hence "desiring good." The state of that is "desiring goodness." In inappropriate places, such as "mother, aunt," etc., lust is "unrighteous lust." Even in appropriate places, greed that arises strongly is "uneven greed." Or, from the statement "Lust is uneven," etc., lust that arises in an appropriate or inappropriate place, being unrighteous in the sense of unrighteousness, is to be understood as "unrighteous lust," and as "uneven greed" in the sense of unevenness. Inclination due to liking for objects is "inclination." The manner of inclination is "inclining." Desire in the sense of longing is "longing." Yearning in the sense of yearning is "yearning." Strong longing is "strong longing." Craving for the five strands of sense pleasure is "sense craving." Craving for existence in the realms of form and formlessness is "existence craving." Craving for non-existence, which is called annihilation, is "non-existence craving." Craving only in the pure realm of form is "form craving." Craving in the realm of formlessness is "formless craving." Lust accompanied by the annihilation view is "view lust." Craving for cessation is "cessation craving." Craving for form is "form craving." Craving for sound is "sound craving." The same method applies to craving for smell, etc. The floods, etc., have already been explained. That which obstructs wholesome qualities is "obstruction." Concealment in the sense of covering is "concealment." That which binds beings in the round is "bondage." Having gone to the mind, it defiles and makes it defiled, hence "defilement." Lying latent in the sense of strength is "latent tendency." Arising Because it completely envelops the mind, it is an envelopment; meaning, it seizes the opportunity to arise, not giving a chance for wholesome conduct. For example, in "Thieves enveloped the road, rogues enveloped the road," it means they seized the road. Similarly, here, "envelopment" should be understood in the sense of seizing. Like a creeper in the sense of entwining, it is a creeper. Even in the context where it comes as "The creeper stands sprouting forth," this craving is called a creeper. Because it desires various objects, it is varied desire. The root of the round of suffering is the root of suffering. The origin of that very suffering is the origin of suffering. That suffering arises from this, therefore it is the arising of suffering. Like a snare in the sense of binding, it is a snare. The snare of Māra is Māra's snare. Like a hook in the sense of being difficult to swallow, it is a hook. The hook of Māra is Māra's hook. Those overcome by craving do not transcend the domain of Māra, Māra wields power over them; in this way, it is the domain of Māra. Like a river in the sense of flowing, craving is a river of craving. Like a net in the sense of covering over, craving is a net of craving. Just as dogs tied to a tether are led wherever they please, so too are beings bound by craving; thus, like a tether in the sense of a strong bond, it is a tether. Craving is like a tether, a tether of craving. Like an ocean in the sense of being insatiable, craving is an ocean of craving. 1066. In the exposition of aversion, "did me harm" means caused my decline. In this way, the meaning should be understood in all passages. Or, anger in an inappropriate situation is anger without cause – for example, someone gets angry because "the god rains too much," gets angry because "it doesn't rain," gets angry because "the sun is too hot," gets angry because "it's not hot enough," gets angry even when the wind blows, gets angry when it doesn't blow, gets angry at Bodhi leaves when unable to sweep them, gets angry at the wind when unable to put on a robe, gets angry at a stump after tripping over it; this is said referring to that – anger arises in an inappropriate situation. There, because it arises in relation to beings in the first nine instances, it is karmapa There is a difference in breaking. But the arising of non-harmful aversion in formations does not cause a break in the path of action. Aversion of the mind is when it arises afflicting the mind. Stronger than that is repulsion. Repulsion is in the sense of being repelled. Opposition is in the sense of opposing. Anger is in the sense of being enraged. Extreme anger is anger with a prefix added to the word. Hatred is in the sense of hating. Extreme hatred is hatred with a prefix added to the word. Disturbance of the mind is the mind's perversion, a state of change. Mental corruption arises corrupting the mind. Wrath is in the sense of being wrathful. The state of being wrathful is wrathfulness. Now, to show the method stated in the explanation of unwholesome qualities, it is said, "hatred is hating," etc. Therefore, "that aversion of the mind of such a kind...and... wrathfulness" is said here, and "hatred is hating," etc., is said below in the same way; this is called hatred. Thus, the connection should be made here. In this way, the fault of repetition is prevented. The explanation of delusion should be understood by the method of opposites stated in the explanation of non-delusion. But all of this will become clear in the commentary on the Vibhanga. 1079. Of those conditions, the states that have a cause: of those causal conditions, the other states, whether causal or non-causal, have a cause. The same method applies to the term "without a cause." And here, a cause is indeed a cause, and when three or two arise together, it has a cause. But delusion accompanied by doubt and restlessness is a cause and is without a cause. The same method applies to the explanation of the pair associated with a cause. 1091. In the explanation of the conditioned pair, the singular designation "that state" was made in reference to the unconditioned element stated in the previous pair. But because the question was raised in the previous pair in the plural, "these states are without conditions" is stated in the plural according to the line of inquiry. The same method applies to "these states are visible," etc. 1101. In the explanation of the pair knowable by someone, "visible to the eye" means knowable by eye-consciousness. The same method applies to the remaining terms. Here. And knowable by someone, that is, knowable by one of the sense consciousnesses, by eye-consciousness or ear-consciousness. Not knowable by someone, that is, not knowable by that same eye-consciousness or ear-consciousness. 'Thus, since the meanings of the two terms are different, it is a pair,' as stated below, 'Those things knowable by eye-consciousness are not those things knowable by ear-consciousness,' this is not a pair. But taking the meaning, 'Form is knowable by eye-consciousness, sound is not knowable by eye-consciousness,' 'Those things knowable by eye-consciousness are not those things knowable by ear-consciousness, or those things knowable by ear-consciousness are not those things knowable by eye-consciousness,' this is to be understood as one pair. Thus, having made four each based on each sense faculty, twenty pairs are to be understood as distinguished. But why is it that 'Knowable by someone through mind-consciousness, not knowable by someone' is not there? Why are pairs not stated here? No, it is not that it is not there, but it is not stated due to the absence of distinction. Indeed, just as there is a distinction that it is unknowable by eye-consciousness, so too, there is a lack of distinction that it is also by mind-consciousness, therefore pairs are not stated here. But the meaning, 'Knowable by someone through mind-consciousness, and also unknowable,' this meaning exists. Therefore, though unstated, it should be understood according to what is obtained. For by mind-consciousness, among the enumerated sense-sphere phenomena, sense-sphere phenomena themselves are knowable by some, unknowable by others. By those same, form-sphere phenomena and so on are knowable by some, unknowable by others. By form-sphere phenomena, sense-sphere phenomena are knowable by some, unknowable by others. By those same, form-sphere phenomena and so on are knowable by some, unknowable by others. By formless-sphere phenomena, sense-sphere phenomena, form-sphere phenomena, and the unconditioned are not knowable. But formless-sphere phenomena are knowable by some, unknowable by others.