English
therefore there is transmission by others," just as the Pubbaseliyas do now; to refute their views, the question is by the proponent in all three talks, and the admission and denial are by the opponent. There, in all the questions and answers, the meaning should be understood by following the Pali itself. Explanation of the Talk on Non-knowledge, etc. 5. Explanation of the Talk on the Breaking of Speech. 326. Now, there is the talk on the breaking of speech. There, those who hold the view that, "At the moment of the Sotāpanna path, the speech of one who has attained the first jhāna is broken," just as the Pubbaseliyas do now; referring to them, the question is by the proponent: "Is there a breaking of speech for one who has attained?" The admission is by the opponent, standing by the view. Again, asked about "everywhere," referring to the three realms, he denies referring to the immaterial realm. Asked about "always," in terms of time, he denies referring to all times of attainment other than the moment of the first path from the attainment of the first jhāna. Asked about "all who have attained," he denies referring to those who have attained mundane attainments. Asked about "all attainments," he denies referring to the second jhāna and so on, all supramundane attainments, and all mundane attainments. "Breaking of the body" means... The body's expression arises through movements like hiccups. This asks, "If the same minds arise both speech and body expression, why isn't there also a bodily break?" The other rejects and accepts based on their understanding. Now, if on the path moment they utter "suffering," they should also utter "arising," etc. Or if they don't utter that, they shouldn't utter the other either. The questions, "knowing suffering," etc., are for the sake of this challenge. But the other accepts and rejects only based on their own understanding. Their view is that one attains supramundane first jhāna and contemplates suffering as suffering. 328. "Knowledge" means supramundane knowledge of the four noble truths. "Ear" refers to ear-consciousness, by which one hears that sound. "Two contacts" means ear-contact and mind-contact. 329. "It should not be said thus" means if there is no speech break for anyone in any attainment, it should not be said without distinction that "there is a speech break for one in attainment." The rest here is of obvious meaning, along with the sutta citation. But regarding the sutta brought at the end, "Ānanda, of the Buddha Sikhi," the bodily break arises from the same attainment-mind that the speech break arises from, and that is not the supramundane first jhāna mind, therefore it is not valid. Explanation of the Speech Break Discourse. 6. Explanation of the Suffering-Nourishment Discourse 334. Now, there is the discourse called "Suffering-Nourishment." There, "uttering the words 'suffering, suffering,' one brings knowledge to suffering, that is called suffering-nourishment. And that is a path factor, included in the path," whose view is like that, such as the Pubbaseliyas nowadays; with them in mind, the question of suffering-nourishment is for the proponent of their own view, the affirmation for the opponent. "Whoever" in the first question rejects with regard to the non-contemplative, in the second question accepts with regard to the contemplative, but that is merely their view. Therefore, "all To break that "they" argument, he said "foolish ordinary people," etc. That is just straightforward. Explanation of the Discussion on Painful Nourishment. 7. Explanation of the Discussion on the Duration of Consciousness 335. Now, there is a discussion on the duration of consciousness. In it, seeing the continuous flow of both meditative consciousness and subconscious consciousness, some hold the view that "a single consciousness lasts for a long time," like the blind men with the distinctions mentioned earlier. To refute that view, the question, "Does a single consciousness last a day?" is the proponent's argument, and the acceptance is the opponent's. In "half a day is the moment of arising," without touching on the moment of duration, the question is asked only in terms of arising and passing away, according to the teaching, "Impermanent are all conditioned things, subject to arising and passing away." Asked, "Do those phenomena change faster than consciousness?" he denies it, not seeing phenomena that change faster than consciousness. Asked a second time, he accepts it, referring to the consciousness whose long duration he desires. To the question, "How long does it last?" he denies it except in the immaterial realms, based on statements like, "Eighty-four thousand aeons last for the Maru gods," and accepts it in the immaterial realms. To the question, "Does it arise moment by moment?" the opponent accepts it, fearing contradiction with the sutta, "Subject to arising and passing away." But he wants its duration according to his view. The rest here is just straightforward. Explanation of the Discussion on the Duration of Consciousness. 8. Explanation of the Discussion on Embers 338. Now, there is a discussion on embers. In it, some, taking suttas like "All, monks, are burning" and "All conditioned things are painful" unwisely, hold the view that "without exception, all conditioned things are embers, mixed with extinguished charcoal, like ash and hell," like the Gokulikas of today. To distinguish that view by showing various kinds of happiness, the question is the proponent's argument, and the acceptance is the opponent's. There, "Without limit, what... That is, without making a boundary, a limit, or a section, meaning all without distinction. The rest should be understood according to the Pāli method, along with the sutta proofs. Explanation of the Kukkuḷa Story. 9. Explanation of the Gradual Enlightenment Story 339. Now, there is the story called the Gradual Enlightenment. In that context, for those who, "The wise person gradually, little by little, moment by moment, removes the impurities of the self, as a smith removes the dross from silver." (Dhp. 239) – Taking such suttas unwisely, [believe] "One who has entered the path to the realization of the fruit of stream-entry abandons some defilements through the vision of suffering, and some through the vision of the arising, cessation, and path; likewise, the remaining ones," thus, through sixteen sections, gradually abandoning defilements, the attainment of arahantship occurs," such diverse enlightenment views have arisen, just as those of the Andhakas, Sabbatthikas, Sammitiyas, and Bhadrayānikas at present; for the purpose of distinguishing their views, the question of gradual enlightenment is for the proponent of the other view, the affirmation for the one's own view. But when asked, "Is the path to stream-entry gradual?" he rejects it out of fear of the implication that one path has many aspects. When asked a second time, he affirms it in terms of the vision of suffering, etc. Or he affirms that those four knowledges are just one path to stream-entry, but he desires only one fruit, therefore he rejects it. The same method applies to the path to once-returning, etc. 344. To the question, "Is one established in the fruit when the path is seen?" since the seeing through the vision of suffering, etc., is not complete, but the seeing of the path is considered complete, then he goes to the designation of being established in the fruit, therefore he affirms it. 345. To the question, "When suffering is seen, are the four truths seen?" the question is for the proponent of the other view, the affirmation in terms of a single enlightenment is for the proponent of one's own view. Again, to the inquiry, "Is the truth of suffering the four truths?" the rejection is by that same person, because all four have distinct natures. To the question, "Is impermanence seen in the form aggregate?" for the proponent of one's own view, just as when the taste of a single drop is understood from the ocean, the rest of the water is understood, so too, when impermanence, etc., is understood in one phenomenon, All pierced are pierced, is the opponent's admission by doctrine. By four knowledges, that is, knowledge of suffering, and so on. By eight knowledges, that is, the common knowledge of the truth for disciples, and the knowledges of discrimination. By twelve knowledges, that is, the knowledges of the twelvefold dependent origination. By forty-four knowledges, that is, "knowledge of aging and death, knowledge of the arising of aging and death," thus the knowledges stated in the section on origins. By seventy-seven knowledges, that is, "Aging and death, monks, are impermanent, conditioned, dependently arisen, subject to decay, subject to vanishing, subject to cessation," thus the knowledges stated there. The rest here should be understood in accordance with the textual method, together with the scriptural evidence. Explanation of the Discourse on Gradual Comprehension. 10. Explanation of the Discourse on Convention 347. Now, there is the Discourse on Convention. There, whose doctrine is that the Buddha, the Blessed One, speaks with transcendental convention, just as the Andhakas do now; regarding them, the question is for the proponent, the admission by doctrine is for the opponent. "In the transcendental ear," and so on, are stated to show that he is speaking inconsistently. The meaning here is this: "Is the sense base of sound alone transcendental for you, or are the ear and the others also?" If the speech of the Buddha, the Blessed One, is obstructed in the mundane ear, here, if it were obstructed in the transcendental, the meaning should not be taken as "it would be transcendental." But there is no such thing as transcendence for what is obstructed in the mundane; this is the meaning here. "By mundane consciousness," here too, the meaning is "by mundane alone."