English
Explanation of the section on definition in the chapter on explanation. 2. Now the section on definition is begun in the manner of 'form is the aggregate of form,' etc. There, 'form is the aggregate of form,' means whatever is called form. Is all of that form the aggregate of form? he asks to purify the statement. Pleasant form, agreeable form, is form, not the aggregate of form, means that what is said to be form in 'pleasant form, agreeable form,' is only form, not the aggregate of form. The aggregate of form, is it both form and the aggregate of form? means that whatever is the aggregate of form, is it proper to say that it is both form and the aggregate of form? But here, in 'the aggregate of form is form,' since the aggregate of form must invariably be stated as form. Therefore, he says 'yes.' The meaning should be understood in this way in all the answers. But wherever there will be a distinction, there we will explain it. In the aggregate of perception, perception of views means the perception of views that comes in 'proliferation of perception,' etc. In the aggregate of volitional formations, the remaining volitional formations means the conditioned phenomena remaining from the aggregate of volitional formations that come in 'impermanent indeed are volitional formations,' etc. In the reverse order too, it is the same method. The section on word purification is completed. 28. The Aggregate-Root Wheel based on word purification. Does the aggregate of feeling include all aggregates, that is, are all aggregates the aggregate of feeling? The same method applies to the remaining questions. In the reverse, "not an aggregate, not the aggregate of feeling," those things designated as concepts and Nibbāna, since they are not aggregates, and are not the aggregate of feeling, therefore, he says, "Yes." The same method applies to the remaining answers. The Root Wheel of Word Analysis is complete. 38. In the Pure Aggregate Section, "Is form an aggregate?" He asks, "Is whatever is form, all of it an aggregate?" Since whatever form it may be, whether it is agreeable or pleasant form, or material and derived form, all of it is included in the five aggregates, therefore, he acknowledges, "Yes." In the second phrase, "Are aggregates form?" Since by the word "form" only the aggregate of form is intended, therefore, disregarding the wording, he asks according to the meaning, "Are aggregates the aggregate of form?" In this way, the meaning should be understood in all phrases. The same method applies even in the designation section of the subsequent pairs of sense bases, etc. Regarding "Is perception an aggregate?" Whether it is perception based on views, or simply perception, since all of it is of the nature of an aggregate, he says, "Yes." The same method applies to the phrase "Are volitional formations an aggregate?" For there is no volitional formation that is free from aggregates. 39. In the reverse, "Not form, not an aggregate," he asks, "Whatever is not form, is it also not an aggregate?" In his answer, however, excluding form, the remaining aggregates are not form, meaning that the aggregates other than form, such as feeling, etc., are not form, but they are aggregates. Excluding form and aggregates, the remainder refers to Nibbāna and concepts, which are free from the five aggregates. The same method applies to the phrase "the remainder" in the subsequent sections. The Pure Aggregate Section is complete. 40-44. In the Pure Aggregate Root Wheel, the meaning of "Is form an aggregate?" etc., should be understood in the same way as explained above. The Pure Aggregate Root Wheel is complete. Explanation of the Section on the Designation of Concepts. 2. Pava Description of the Occurrence 50-205. Now, the occurrence section begins with the phrase "For whom the aggregate of form arises," and so on. Why is the designation section not mentioned here? Because the method has been shown below. In the designation section, the method has been shown. By that method, it can be understood even if it is not mentioned here, so without mentioning it, only the analysis section is begun. In this great section called the occurrence section, there are three sub-sections: the arising section, the ceasing section, and the arising-and-ceasing section. Among them, the first is called the arising section because it reveals the characteristic of the arising of phenomena. The second is called the ceasing section because it reveals the characteristic of the ceasing of those same phenomena. The third is called the arising-and-ceasing section because it reveals both characteristics. In the arising section, the manner of the arising of phenomena is shown. In the ceasing section, the impermanence of those same phenomena is shown, that "what has arisen is not permanent." In the arising-and-ceasing section, both are shown. Here, in the arising section, there are six divisions of time based on the three times: present, past, future, present-with-past, present-with-future, and past-with-future. Among them, "For whom the aggregate of form arises" should be understood as the present, in terms of the designation of the present. Because the present phenomena are to be grasped directly, it is very easy to understand, so it is mentioned first. "For whom the aggregate of form arose" should be understood as the past, in terms of the designation of the past. Because past phenomena, previously experienced directly, are easier to understand by inference than future phenomena, it is mentioned second. "For whom the aggregate of form will arise" should be understood as the future, in terms of the designation of the future. Because phenomena are to be grasped by inference from phenomena grasped directly and from previously experienced phenomena, that "in the future, such phenomena will arise," it is mentioned third. "For whom the aggregate of form arises, for them did the aggregate of feeling arise?" should be understood as present-with-past, in terms of the designation of the present together with the past. So Because the first three are very easy to understand, the fourth is stated. "To whomever the form aggregate arises, to them will the feeling aggregate arise?" The future in relation to the present, the present with the future should be understood. Because of the existence of things to be directly grasped, it is very easy to understand, thus the fifth is stated. "To whomever the form aggregate has arisen, to them will the feeling aggregate arise?" The future in relation to the past, the past with the future should be understood. It is more difficult to understand than the previous ones, thus the sixth is stated. Thus, in these six divisions of time, in this first present, there are three sections: by person, by location, by person and location. Among these, "to whomever," the section on the person, explaining the arising of the aggregates by way of person. "Where," the section on location, explaining the arising of the aggregates by way of location. "To whomever, where," the section on person and location, explaining the arising of the aggregates by way of person and location. These three sections, however, are first indicated in the direct order, and later indicated in the reverse order. Among these, "arises," "has arisen," "will arise," the direct order, explaining arising. "Does not arise," "has not arisen," "will not arise," the reverse order, explaining non-arising. There, in the present time, in the direct order of the section on the person, "To whomever the form aggregate arises, to them the feeling aggregate arises. Or rather, to whomever the feeling aggregate arises, to them the form aggregate arises. To whomever the form aggregate arises, to them the perception aggregate, the mental formation aggregate, the consciousness aggregate arises. Or rather, to whomever the consciousness aggregate arises, to them the form aggregate arises." Thus, four pairs of yamaka with the form aggregate as the root; "To whomever the feeling aggregate arises, to them the perception aggregate arises," and so on, three pairs of yamaka with the feeling aggregate as the root; two pairs of yamaka with the perception aggregate as the root; one pair of yamaka with the mental formation aggregate as the root, By the abbreviation "ahi," there are ten pairs. Among them, in the four based on the aggregate of form, only one is expounded initially. The rest are abbreviated in the text, with expositions similar to that one, for ease of understanding. In those based on the aggregates of feeling and so on, only one similar exposition, "Yes," is given. Therefore, these too are abbreviated in the text for ease of understanding. Thus, it should be understood that these ten pairs are expounded in the present time, in the personal section, in the direct method, with only one pair expounded. Just as there are ten in the personal section, so too ten in the location section, and ten in the personal-location section; thus, in the present time, in the direct method, there are thirty pairs in the three sections. Just as in the direct method, so too in the reverse method; thus, in the present time, there are sixty pairs in all. Among them, it should be understood that there are two hundred and forty questions and two hundred and forty meanings. Thus, in the remaining five divisions of time, in each of the six sections based on person and so on, in the direct and reverse methods, there are six sections each. In each section, making ten each, there are sixty pairs each, thus three hundred pairs. These, together with the previous ones, are three hundred and sixty pairs, seven hundred and twenty questions, and fourteen hundred and forty meanings. This, so far, is the textual arrangement in the arising section.