English
having unceased-object. For they do not arise dependent on a ceased, past object. The same method applies to having uncorrupted-condition. In "The object and condition of eye consciousness are different," etc., for eye consciousness, the object is different, the condition is different. Different for ear consciousness, etc. Eye consciousness, having one of the ear sense base, etc., as object, or one of the sounds, etc., as condition, even going from eon to eon, does not arise; but having only the eye sense base as object, and form as condition, it arises. Thus, Its base, door, and object are fixed, it does not move to another base, door, or object, arising only as fixed-base, fixed-door, fixed-object. The same method applies to ear-consciousness and so on. 763. "Not experiencing each other's range" means the eye does not experience the range of the ear, nor the ear the range of the eye; thus, one does not experience the range of the other. For if, having gathered a visual object differentiated by blue and so on, one should bring it to the ear sense-faculty, saying, "Come now, determine and discern it – what is this object called?" Even without the mouth, the eye-consciousness, by its own nature, would say thus: "O you blind fool, wandering for a hundred or a thousand years, where other than by me will you find a knower of this? Bring it, place it in the eye-faculty; I will know this object – whether it is blue or yellow. This is not the range of another; this is my range alone." The same method applies to the remaining consciousnesses. Thus, these do not experience each other's range. 764. "For one who is directing" means for one who is directing with apperception itself. "For one who is attending" means for one who is attending with apperception itself. For these cittas arise at the very time of directing and attending with apperception. "Not interrupted" means they do not arise uninterrupted, being interrupted by another consciousness. By this, their contiguity is rejected. 765. "Not without a prior, not without a subsequent" means by this, the simultaneous arising of all is rejected. "Not immediately succeeding each other" means by this, succession is rejected. 766. "Turning towards" and so on, these four are names for apperception itself. For that is called "turning towards" because of turning away from the life-continuum, "inclining" because of inclining towards that, "directing" because of directing towards forms and so on, "attending" because of attending to those very things. Thus here, in brief, the function of apperception, standing in the place of apperception for the five consciousnesses, The ability to do that is rejected. "Does not cognize any dhamma" means, as it was said, "Mind precedes all conditions" (Dhp. 1-2), does not cognize even a single wholesome or unwholesome thing. "Except for mere impingement" means, setting aside the mere impingement of forms, etc. This is what is meant: even a very wise person, setting aside forms, etc., that have come into the range [of the senses], does not cognize a single dhamma among wholesome and unwholesome things with the five consciousnesses. Here, eye-consciousness is merely seeing. Ear-consciousness, etc., are merely hearing, smelling, tasting, and touching. But apart from mere seeing, etc., there is no other cognition of wholesome things, etc., for them. "Also by mind-element" means also by the receiving mind-element. Here, the "pi" is for the sense of combination. Therefore, the meaning here should be understood as: by the mind-element also, and by the mind-consciousness elements after that, that is, by all the five-door consciousnesses, one does not cognize any wholesome or unwholesome dhamma. In "Does not undertake any posture," etc., the same method applies. For the five-door consciousnesses do not undertake any posture in going, etc., do not initiate bodily action or verbal action, do not undertake a wholesome or unwholesome dhamma, do not attain concentration, either mundane or supramundane, do not emerge from concentration, either mundane or supramundane, do not decease from an existence, do not arise in another existence. For all this work, culminating in the statement of cognizing wholesome and unwholesome dhammas, is done only by mind-door consciousness, not by the five-door consciousnesses. Thus, the javana-cittas that are co-arisen in doing all this work are rejected. Just as these consciousnesses do not have these functions, so too, [they do not have] the functions of entering the fixed course, etc. For the five-door javana does not enter the fixed course of wrongness, nor the fixed course of rightness; nor does this javana cognize name and clan, nor the concepts of kasiṇa, etc.; nor does it proceed in the manner of insight with characteristics as its object, nor in the manner of strong insight leading to emergence; It does not occur regarding the form and formless states, nor regarding Nibbāna; Associative insight-knowledge does not arise together with it, nor higher knowledge, nor disciple-perfection knowledge, nor individual-Buddha knowledge, nor omniscient knowledge. But all this variety is obtained only in the mind-door impulsion. "He neither sleeps nor awakens nor sees a dream" - by all the five-door consciousness, neither does sleep descend, nor does he sleep, nor does he awaken, nor does he see any dream - in these three instances, the process-consciousness together with the impulsion is rejected. For when a great wick is lit and a lamp is brought near the eye of one who is sleeping, the first eye-door advertence does not turn back the life-continuum, it turns back only the mind-door. Then the impulsion having impulsed, descends into the life-continuum. In the second instance, the eye-door advertence turns back the life-continuum. Then eye-consciousness etc., ending in impulsion, occur. Thereafter, the life-continuum flows on. In the third instance, when the life-continuum is turned back by the mind-door advertence, the mind-door impulsion impulses. Knowing with that consciousness, he knows 'what is this light in this place?' Similarly, when musical instruments are played near the ear of one who is sleeping, or when fragrant or foul-smelling flowers are brought near the nose, or when ghee or molasses is placed in the mouth, or when a blow is given on the back with the hand, the first ear-door etc. advertences do not turn back the life-continuum, they turn back only the mind-door. Then the impulsion having impulsed, descends into the life-continuum. In the second instance, the ear-door etc. advertences turn back the life-continuum. Then ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-consciousness etc., ending in impulsion, occur. Thereafter, the life-continuum flows on. In the third instance, when the life-continuum is turned back by the mind-door advertence, the mind-door impulsion impulses. Knowing with that consciousness, he knows 'what is this sound in this place - the sound of a conch, the sound of a drum' or 'what is this smell in this place - the smell of roots, the smell of heartwood "Blind!" they say, or "What is this flavor placed in my mouth—ghee or molasses?" or "Who struck me on the back? The blow is very hard!" Thus, one awakens only through mind-door impulsion, not through the five sense doors. One sees dreams also through that, not through the five sense doors. And while dreaming, one dreams for four reasons: due to disturbance of the humors, due to prior experience, due to divine intervention, or due to a premonitory sign. Therein, one whose humors are disturbed due to conditions causing disturbance of bile, etc., dreams "due to disturbance of the humors." And while dreaming, one sees various kinds of dreams—as if falling from mountains, as if going through the sky, as if pursued by wild beasts, elephants, thieves, etc. Dreaming "due to prior experience," one sees an object previously experienced. For one dreaming "due to divine intervention," deities, wishing for benefit or harm, present various objects for good or ill. One sees those objects through the power of those deities. Dreaming due to a premonitory sign, one sees a dream that is a premonitory sign of a future event or misfortune arising due to merit or demerit, like the mother of a Bodhisatta regarding the sign of obtaining a son, like the Bodhisatta regarding the five great dreams, and like King Kosala regarding the sixteen dreams. Therein, the dream one sees due to disturbance of the humors and due to prior experience is not true. The dream one sees due to divine intervention may be true or false. For angry deities, wishing to destroy without means, show even the opposite. Here is a story: It is said that in the Naga Great Monastery on Rohana, a great elder, without informing the community of monks, had a naga tree cut down. The deity dwelling in the tree, angry with the elder, first enticed him and then announced in a dream, "Within seven days from now, your patron king will die." He brought her, somehow, and pointed her out to the royal harem. They, with a single cry, raised a great lament. The king asked, "What is this?" They announced, "Thus has the Elder spoken." The king, counting the days, after a week had passed, grew angry and had the Elder's hands and feet cut off. Whatever he sees from a prior sign is invariably true. And from the combination and separation of these four root causes, there is indeed a variety of dreams. But this fourfold dream is seen only by trainees and ordinary people, because of their unabandoned distortions; the non-trainees do not see them, because of their abandoned distortions. But does he see it sleeping, or awake? Or does he see it neither sleeping nor awake? What is the case here? If he sees it sleeping, then a contradiction of the Abhidhamma arises. For he sleeps with the life-continuum mind. And that is not associated with a sign of form, etc., or with lust, etc.