English
"Cha anulomapacc Because it is said, "In the reverse order, the methods are very profound," in this conditional reverse order, these six methods of Paṭṭhāna should be extracted and shown in the form of questions. For indeed, this is the burden of the teachers who describe the Paṭṭhāna. 4. Description of Reverse Order 49-52. Now, there is the reverse order. To show that, it begins with "Because of a wholesome state, a wholesome state arises, not by way of root condition, by way of object condition," and so on. Here, the scope of the questions is exactly the same as the direct order questions. In this, all the questions that appear in the Pāli in the single-root, etc., and those that do not appear, should be understood according to the method stated below. "The excellent Paṭṭhāna of triads…pe… in the reverse order, the methods are very profound," here too, in the same way as stated below, there are two reverse orders – the state-reverse order and the condition-reverse order. Therein, the state-reverse order is so called because it proceeds in the manner of teaching the reverse order with respect to states collected by Abhidhamma matrix terms such as "wholesome states" as "because of a non-wholesome state, a wholesome state." The condition-reverse order is so called because it proceeds in the manner of teaching the reverse order with respect to terms obtainable in the twenty-four conditions such as "not by way of root condition, by way of object condition." Therein, in the commentary below, the verse "The excellent Paṭṭhāna of triads…pe… in the reverse order, the methods are very profound" is stated with reference to the state-reverse order. But here, this verse is stated with reference to the condition-reverse order, which is only a state-direct order. Therefore, in "in the reverse order, the methods are very profound," the meaning should be understood as "in the state-reverse order, the six methods beginning with the triad Paṭṭhāna are very profound." But in this instance, in the condition-reverse order that proceeds as "not by way of root condition, by way of object condition," the meaning should be understood as "in this state-direct order, the six methods beginning with the triad Paṭṭhāna are very profound." Among those, the direct order Only in the *Atikkapaṭṭhāna* is this threefold wholesome aggregate briefly shown in the chapter of designation in this section on dependent origination, with its divisions of questions. But in the remaining triads and the remaining *Paṭṭhānas*, not even one question is shown. However, in the subsequent sections, beginning with the section on co-nascence, without extracting a question based on the threefold wholesome aggregate, only the answers are shown according to what is obtainable. But because of the statement, "The methods in the six are profound in the direct order of conditions and their opposites," in this direct order of conditions and their opposites, all six of these *Paṭṭhāna* methods should be extracted and shown in the form of questions. For this is the burden of the teachers who describe the *Paṭṭhāna*. The description of the question section is finished. 1. Description of the Wholesome Triad 1. Description of the Section on Dependent Origination 1. Direct Order of Conditions (1.) Section of Analysis 53. Now, those countless questions that were shown in the chapter of designation, beginning with forty-nine, based on the threefold wholesome aggregate, in terms of the condition of root, etc., merely showing the method. Among them, because of the absence of the co-arising of wholesome and unwholesome, etc., those questions that do not obtain the answer, "Conditioned by a wholesome state, an unwholesome state arises through the root condition," etc. Having excluded those, this section on definition of the section on dependent origination is begun with the method, "Conditioned by a wholesome state, a wholesome state arises through the root condition," etc., in order to answer only those that obtain an answer. Here, there might be a question: If these forty-nine questions, based on the condition of root, etc., do not obtain an answer in every way, then why were they shown? Should not only those that obtain an answer be shown? Yes, they should be shown. But if they were shown in that way, in each and every triad, dyad, dyad-triad, triad-dyad, triad-triad, and dyad-dyad, etc., in all the triads, dyads, and *Paṭṭhānas*, they would have to be shown without making any abbreviation. Why? Because those that obtain an answer in the threefold wholesome aggregate do not obtain an answer in the threefold aggregate of feeling, etc. And in the direct order of states and the opposite of the *Paṭṭhāna* of triads, in the answers for the threefold aggregate of thought and the threefold aggregate of joy, all of them obtain an answer. Therefore, by precise definition, all questions that should be asked in each triad have been shown in the wholesome triad. For, having shown them thus, those that do not obtain an answer there, having discarded them, those that do obtain, being stated, can be easily understood; thus, for the sake of easy understanding, all have been shown in the wholesome triad. And here, those that do not obtain an answer, having discarded them, only those that do obtain should be understood to be answered. Therein, "Conditioned by a wholesome state," means having conditioned, having received, a single state, such as the feeling aggregate, etc., among the wholesome states of the four planes, having attained a similar condition by way of co-arising, having approached a state of arising together with it, is the meaning. "A wholesome state" means a single state, such as the perception aggregate, etc., among the wholesome states of the four planes. "Arises" means it proceeds upwards from arising until it reaches cessation, it comes into being, is also the meaning. It obtains itself, it attains all three moments, arising, etc., is what is said. "By way of the root condition" means by the wholesome root, establishing the state of root condition. Thus, having stated the answer "arises" to the question "might arise," now, in order to show in terms of aggregates the state conditioned by which a state arises, he says beginning with "a single wholesome aggregate." Therein, "single" means any one of the four, feeling, etc. "Three aggregates" means having set aside whichever was taken as the condition, the remaining three aggregates. "Three aggregates" means having set aside the single aggregate that was taken as arising among feeling, etc., the remaining three. "Two aggregates" means having conditioned any two aggregates among the six dyads, the feeling-perception dyad, etc. "Two aggregates" means having set aside whichever were taken as the condition, the remaining two aggregates arise by the wholesome root, establishing the state of root condition, is the meaning. Since, however, a single aggregate is not a condition for a single or only two, nor are two a condition for a single, therefore, "conditioned by a single aggregate, a single aggregate..." "One aggregate depending on two aggregates, two aggregates depending on one aggregate" is not said. In "a wholesome phenomenon depending on an indeterminate phenomenon arises," etc., the meaning should be understood in the same way as stated before. "Form produced by mind" is said to show that the meaning of "depending" is that of "co-nascent," i.e., that which is co-nascent with the wholesome and also obtains the condition of root-cause. And in similar instances hereafter, this is the method. In "resultant-indeterminate, action-indeterminate," because there is no root-condition, the causeless and the immaterial-resultant, due to not arising with form, should not be included. "At the moment of rebirth" is said to show the arising of the indeterminate, known as materiality-born, depending on the indeterminate. "Resultant-indeterminate" is said in terms of the indeterminate existing at that moment. "An aggregate depending on matter, matter depending on aggregates" is said to show the arising of aggregates depending on matter, even when matter is included by the inclusion of materiality-born. "One great element," etc., is said to show the arising of form-indeterminate depending on form-indeterminate. In "one aggregate," etc., the interpretation of the meaning should be understood in the same way as stated before. Thus, having stated the arising of elements depending on elements in the form-indeterminate, now, to show the arising of derived form depending on elements, "great elements depending on mind-produced," etc., is said. Since that is so, only "derived form" should be said; why are the other two said? To show the arising depending on great elements as well. For what was shown below as "mind-produced form and materiality-born form" arises not only depending on aggregates, but also arises depending on great elements; this should be understood as being said to show that. There, mind-produced exists only in the course of existence, materiality-born also in rebirth. "Derived form" is a qualifier of both of those. In "wholesome aggregates and great elements depending on," only mind-produced great elements are included. Mind-produced Here, "form" includes both material form and derived form. For material form arises in dependence on the elements, according to the method: "One great element being the condition, three great elements arise." And derived form arises in dependence on the elements, as stated: "Derived form in dependence on the elements." The same method applies in answering questions about unwholesome and indeterminate states. Thus, nine questions are answered regarding the root condition. Only these are obtainable here; the remaining forty are futile questions and are not answered. In this way, the meaning of questions and answers regarding the object condition and others should be understood.