English
so too, mental and mental factors, in dependence on a form or other object, both arise and stand. Therefore, all dhammas that are objects for mental and mental factors should be understood as object condition. A dhamma that is helpful by way of dominance is dominance condition. It is twofold, by way of co-nascent object. Herein, from the statement, "Dominance of desire is related to dhammas associated with desire and to forms produced thereby, by way of dominance condition," and so on, the four dhammas, namely, desire, energy, thought, and investigation, should be understood as co-nascent dominance condition, but not all at once. When, making desire the chief, the foremost, the mind proceeds, then desire alone is dominant, not the others. This method applies to the rest as well. But whatever dhamma, making it weighty, immaterial dhammas proceed, that is object-dominance for them. Therefore it was said: "Whatever dhamma, making it weighty, whatever mental and mental factors arise, those dhammas are related to those dhammas by way of dominance condition." A dhamma that is helpful by way of contiguity is contiguity condition. A dhamma that is helpful by way of immediate contiguity is immediate contiguity condition. And these two conditions are elaborated in many ways. Herein, this is the essence: that this order of consciousness, namely, mind-element subsequent to eye-consciousness, mind-consciousness-element subsequent to mind-element, and so on, since it succeeds only by virtue of the preceding consciousness, and not otherwise, therefore, a dhamma capable of producing a corresponding arising of consciousness immediately after itself is contiguity condition. Therefore, he said: "By way of contiguity condition, the eye-consciousness-element and dhammas associated therewith are related to the mind-element and dhammas associated therewith." and so on, "by the immediately proximate condition to states." That which is the immediately proximate condition, that itself is the contiguity condition. Only the wording is different here, like in 'accumulation' and 'continuity' and so on, and like in the dyads of 'designation' and 'expression' and so on, but in meaning, there is no difference. And that which is the opinion of teachers, "the immediately proximate condition is by unbroken proximity, the contiguity condition is by temporal proximity," that is contradicted by instances such as, "for one rising from cessation, the wholesome of the plane of neither perception nor non-perception is a condition by the contiguity condition for the fruition attainment," and so on. And that which they say there, "the capacity to establish states does not diminish, but because they are prevented by the power of cultivation, states do not arise contiguously," that also only proves the absence of temporal proximity. For by the power of cultivation, there is no temporal proximity there, and we also say this very thing. And since there is no temporal proximity, therefore the condition of contiguity is not fitting. For their doctrine is that the contiguity condition is by temporal proximity. Therefore, without clinging, the differentiation here should be understood as merely verbal, not in meaning. How so? Because there is no interval between these, they are immediately proximate. Because of the absence of a break, they are very immediately proximate, that is, contiguous. A state that is helpful by way of arising together with arising, is the co-nascence condition, like a lamp for light. That is sixfold in terms of immaterial aggregates and so on. As it was said: the four immaterial aggregates are a condition by the co-nascence condition for each other. The four great elements are a condition by the co-nascence condition for each other... At the moment of conception, name-and-form are a condition by the co-nascence condition for each other... Mental states and concomitants are a condition by the form produced by mind... The great elements are a condition by the clinging-derived form... Material states are a condition by the co-nascence condition for immaterial states for some time; for some time, they are not a condition by the co-nascence condition. This was said referring to the heart-base alone. A state that is helpful by way of mutually producing and supporting, is the reciprocal condition. Mutual support like a three-pronged staff. It is threefold in terms of the immaterial aggregates, etc. As it is said: "The four immaterial aggregates are a condition by way of mutual conditionality. The four great elements...pe... at the moment of conception, name-and-form are a condition by way of mutual conditionality." The Dhamma that is helpful in the way of being a foundation and in the way of being a support is the support condition, like the earth for trees, paintings, and crafts, and for cloths. It should be understood in the same way as stated in "The four immaterial aggregates are a condition by way of mutual support condition," in the case of co-arising. The sixth section here is divided as follows: "The eye-base is a support condition for the eye-consciousness element, the ear, nose, tongue, and body bases are a support condition for the body-consciousness element and for the Dhammas associated with it. The material form on which the mind-element and the mind-consciousness element depend, that material form is a support condition for the mind-element and the mind-consciousness element and for the Dhammas associated with it." Here, however, the meaning of the word "predominant support condition" is as follows: because it functions dependent on that, it is supported by its result, not rejected, hence it is a support. Just as intense effort is great effort, so intense support is predominant support. This is a designation for a strong cause. Therefore, the Dhamma that is helpful by way of being a strong cause should be understood as the predominant support condition. It is threefold: object-predominant support, immediately preceding-predominant support, and nature-predominant support. There, object-predominant support is distinguished, without making a distinction with object-dominance, in the manner beginning with "Having given alms, having undertaken morality, having performed the observance day, one reflects, making that heavy; having reflected, making heavy the previously well-done deeds; having arisen from jhāna, one reflects, making heavy the jhāna; trainees reflect, making heavy the change-of-lineage; they reflect, making heavy the purification; trainees, having arisen from the paths, reflect, making heavy the path." There, the mental states that, making heavy which object, They arise, that is definitely a strong object among their objects. Thus, it is an object-dominance in the sense of something to be taken seriously, and an object-support in the sense of a strong cause. Thus, their difference should be understood. The immediately proximate support, too, is distinguished without making a difference from the immediately proximate condition by the method beginning with "preceding wholesome aggregates are a condition for succeeding wholesome aggregates by way of support condition," etc. However, in the arrangement of the matrix, there is a special arrangement because of the occurrence of both the immediately proximate condition by the method beginning with "the eye-consciousness element and the mental factors associated with it are a condition for the mind-element and the mental factors associated with it by way of immediately proximate condition," etc., and the support condition by the method beginning with "preceding wholesome mental factors are a condition for succeeding wholesome mental factors by way of support condition," etc., but that also goes to a unity in meaning. Even so, the immediately proximate nature should be understood as the ability to bring about a mental arising that is suitable immediately after itself, and the immediately proximate support as being strong in the production of the subsequent mental arising by the preceding thought. Just as a thought arises without any mental factor in the case of the root condition, etc., it is not so with the immediately proximate thought; there is no arising of thought without thought, therefore it is a strong condition. Thus, the immediately proximate condition is in terms of a suitable mental arising immediately after itself, and the immediately proximate support is in terms of a strong cause. Thus, their difference should be understood. The natural support, however, is a support that is natural, a natural support. Natural means either faith, virtue, etc., produced in one's own continuum; or season, food, etc., that are frequented. Or, a support that is naturally so is a natural support, meaning it is unmixed with object and immediately proximate. Of that, "natural support - relying on faith, one gives alms, undertakes virtue, observes the sabbath, produces jhāna, produces insight, produces the path, produces higher knowledge." He produces attainment, relying on virtue... learning... generosity... wisdom, he gives a gift... ...he produces attainment. Faith... virtue... learning... generosity... wisdom, faith... virtue... learning... generosity... wisdom, are related by way of dependence condition. In this way, a variety of distinctions should be understood. Thus, these faith, etc., are both natural and, by way of being strong causes, conditions of dependence, therefore, they are natural dependence conditions. A phenomenon that arises earlier, and is helpful by way of being present, is the prenascent condition. It is elevenfold, by way of the five doors, the base, the object, and the heart base. As it was said: The eye-base is related to the eye-consciousness element, and to the phenomena associated with it, by way of the prenascent condition. The ear... nose... tongue... body-base, the form-base, sound... smell... taste... tangible-base,