English
by which initial and sustained application, the first jhāna is coarse, By transcending these, is the attainment of the second jhāna. Not by nature the transcending of subtle contacts and so on. This meaning is shown by "from the cessation of applied thought and sustained thought." Therefore, "is the cessation of applied thought and sustained thought of the first jhāna intended here, or of the second jhāna?" Such a question is out of place. And in "from the fading of joy" and so on, the same method applies. Therefore, the phrases about transcending applied thought, sustained thought, joy, and pleasure are the transcending of gross and grosser factors, and indicate the attainment of the second (jhāna) and so on. The phrase about transcending applied thought and sustained thought, being a part of these, by the method of indicating the whole by a part, is said to indicate that. Even when the phrases about transcending applied thought and sustained thought and so on stand separately, by the common intention of indicating factors to be abandoned, when taken as a whole, the phrase about the cessation of applied thought and sustained thought becomes a part of that. Or alternatively, by the phrase about the cessation of applied thought and sustained thought itself, which indicates the attainment of the second (jhāna) and so on by their transcending, the phrases about the fading of joy and so on, their indication of the attainment of the third (jhāna) and so on by the transcending of joy and so on, is indicated. Thus, its indication of that is stated. In this way, without indicating the whole by a part, by the phrase about the cessation of applied thought and sustained thought, the phrases about the fading of joy and so on, their similar function in their respective domains, is shown. "Internal" means one's own internal, not internal-internal and so on. Showing this, he says: "'Internal' means one's own internal." There he states the reason, "in the Vibhaṅga, moreover," and so on. The word "pana" also has the meaning of "api" (also), meaning "in the Vibhaṅga also." Or this is the reading. Like a blue cloth due to its connection with blue color, the intention is like a cloth being blue due to its connection with blue. And in this alternative meaning, in the case of "it clarifies the mind," "cetaso" is a genitive case in the sense of application. In the former case, in the stated case of "jhāna is also clarification due to its connection with clarification," "cetaso" is a genitive case in the sense of relation. In "as long as I do not make others unified" and so on, the word "eka" (one) is also seen in the world as meaning "excellent." He says: "Indeed, the best in the world is called one." And in phrases like "conquered by the solitary small ones," the word 'eka' is seen to mean 'unaccompanied'. So he says: "being one, unaccompanied." Faith and the like, indeed, are conditions for associated states, both in common and uncommonly. But concentration, at the moment of jhana, by making the characteristic of non-distraction supreme for the associated states, becomes an excellent condition. Thus showing, he says: "associated states... etc. ...appellation." The two qualifications, "clarity of mind" and "one-pointedness," are taken with the intention of expressing the excellence of jhana. And to show that this excellence is obtained in this jhana in a way not found in the first jhana, the phrase "but is it not so?" and so on, was stated. The states that occur by way of striking and re-striking the object, and by way of rubbing and re-rubbing, even with the abandonment of hindrances and the removal of mental defilement, as if causing some disturbance to the associated states, and they are not settled by them. Thus it is said: "by the disturbance of initial and sustained application... etc. ...not well clarified." There, small waves are ripples, large ones are surges. Concentration is also not very clear. Even with the balance of faculties and the balance of energy, due to that very disturbance and the lack of clarity, just like a fish in turbid water, concentration is not very clear. Here, "by the absence of the impediment of initial and sustained application," the aforementioned disturbance is indeed the impediment. By what was thus stated: that jhana is called "clarity" by reason of faith, and "one-pointedness" by reason of mental unification. By that Vibhanga passage (Vibh. 574) which states "faith" and so on, explaining the specific modes of their occurrence. This explanation of meaning: "From the connection with clarity, it is clarity. It brings about one-pointedness, so it is one-pointedness." Thus, this explanation of jhana proceeds. Otherwise, it corresponds and agrees. Thus it should be understood. How then does this explanation of meaning, by that... Does it agree and accord with the Vibhaṅga text? Indeed, in the Jhāna-vibhaṅga, having extracted the word "sampasādana" (clarity), "yā saddhā saddahanā" (that faith, believing) and so on, faith itself is stated. And having extracted the word "cetaso ekodibhāva" (singleness of mind), "yā cittassa ṭhiti saṇṭhiti avaṭṭhitī" (that stability, firmness, unwaveringness of mind) and so on, concentration itself is described. But in the Commentary, "sampasādanaṃ ekodibhāva" (clarity, singleness) is said to be jhāna itself. So, does a contradiction arise between the Commentary and the Vibhaṅga text? No contradiction arises, because in the Vibhaṅga too, the description is made with this very intention. Thus, by the clarity with which jhāna is called "clarity" due to its connection, when that clarity is shown by "yā saddhā saddahanā" and so on, the application of that word to jhāna due to its connection is shown by a co-referential description that clarity is jhāna. And having extracted the word "ekodibhāva" (singleness), when singleness is shown, by a co-referential description that singleness is jhāna, the increase of jhāna's singleness is already stated. Therefore, by this intention, without considering the mere words, only the meaning of the Dhamma is indicated, and thus no contradiction is appropriate. However, what is said by the Tīkā authors, such as the Elder Acariya Dhammapāla and others: "If the meaning intended by 'ekodī' is the grasping of concentration, then having extracted the word 'ekodibhāva', concentration should not be described. Therefore, it is appropriate that the word 'ekodibhāva' itself, like the word 'sampasādana' which applies to jhāna, applies to concentration." This contradicts the Commentary. Therefore, that should be taken as a separate interpretation of meaning, independent of the Commentary. For this is their intention: "Since it is not overwhelmed by initial and sustained application, it arises as one, hence 'ekodī' (single). Thus, taking jhāna-consciousness itself, endowed with such concentration, it is possible to say that the grasping of concentration is 'ekodibhāva' (singleness), the state of the single." But this insistence of theirs: "If 'ekodī' means the grasping of concentration, then having extracted the word 'ekodibhāva', concentration should not be described," that Because it is not conclusive, it is not proper. For elsewhere too, without considering the letters, the meaning itself is mostly explained in the analysis. "Calmed" means gone to complete cessation. "Completely calmed" means brought to complete cessation, suppressed by development. "Thoroughly calmed" means from that very fact, well calmed. "Set" means gone to an end, to destruction. "Completely set" is said by adding a prefix to extend the word. "Consigned" means gone to destruction, gone. "Dried up" means gone to dryness, to a dry state, by the absence of the continuum called 'occurrence'. "Made an end of" means made to have the end gone. This meaning (of "this is the meaning") is the meaning designated as the absence of initial and sustained application, due to their abandonment by development. To accept and refute the meaning stated by the questioner, it is said, "This meaning is thus established," and then "but not this," and so on. There, "this" refers to the statement "the calming of initial and sustained application." "Illustrating that meaning" means illustrating that meaning which is designated as merely the absence of initial and sustained application. "Not of the agitation of defilements" means that it is not the calming of the agitation of defilements, called hindrances, like at the moment of access concentration, nor is it clarification. But why is this said: "Even having said the former, it still needs to be said"? For, isn't the absence of initial and sustained application already indicated by the statement about the calming of initial and sustained application, which illustrates the means of attaining the second jhana and so on, and illustrates the cause of internal clarification and the mind's unification, and illustrates the cause of being without initial and sustained application? So, what is achieved by the statement "without initial and sustained application"? No, because it is not indicated. For the statement about the calming of initial and sustained application does not speak of the non-occurrence of initial and sustained application. Indeed, the abandonment of craving in initial and sustained application is their calming. For the suppression of attachment to those respective jhanas, through the gross factors, is revealed by statements like "calming of initial and sustained application." Since the statement about the calming of initial and sustained application indicates the state of dispassion towards initial and sustained application, and those who abandon craving in formations, in those paths where craving is abandoned, and in the fruits, the occurrence of formations...