English
"This I am" is the grasping of conceit, due to the sense of 'I'. This is the view-grasping, "This is my self," the grasping of the perversion of self-existence. Here, the grasping of craving is to be understood by way of the 108 modes of craving, the grasping of conceit by way of the nine kinds of conceit, the grasping of views by way of the sixty-two views. By way of these three graspings—craving, conceit, and views— it is said, "Is it fitting to regard that?" Thus, the Blessed One showed the characteristic of non-self by way of impermanence and suffering. For the Blessed One sometimes shows non-self by way of impermanence, sometimes by way of suffering, sometimes by way of both. For example, "If one were to say, 'The eye is self,' that is not fitting, for the arising and passing away of the eye are discerned. But for that of which the arising and passing away are discerned, it would come to this: 'My self arises and passes away.' Therefore, that is not fitting. If one were to say, 'The eye is self,' then the eye is non-self." In this Chachakka Sutta (MN 3.422), he showed non-self by way of impermanence. "And if, monks, form were self... (etc.) ... 'May my form not be thus!'" In this very Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta, he showed non-self by way of suffering. "Form, monks, is impermanent; what is impermanent is suffering; what is suffering is non-self; what is non-self, that should be seen as it really is with right wisdom: 'This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.'" In this Arahanta Sutta (SN 3.76-77), he showed non-self by way of both. Why? Impermanence and suffering are evident, non-self is not evident. For when utensils and such are broken, they say, "Alas, impermanent!" But there is no one who says, "Alas, non-self!" When boils or pimples arise on the body, or one is pierced by a thorn, they say, "Alas, suffering!" But there is no one who says, "Alas, non-self!" Why? For this characteristic of non-self is obscure, difficult to see, difficult to make known. For even teachers like Sarabhaṅga and others did not see it; how then could they make it known? Therefore, the Blessed One, by way of impermanence or or by way of both. And this, in these three rounds, is shown by way of impermanence and suffering. The same method applies to feeling and so on. 22. "Tasmātiha" means "therefore." The particles "ti" and "ha" are expletives. The meaning is: because these five aggregates are impermanent, suffering, and non-self, therefore. "Yaṃ kiñci" means "whatever," and this is an exhaustive inclusion. "Yaṃ" indicates an unspecified general reference, and "kiñci" indicates an unspecified reference, touching upon a distinction in kind. By both, it encompasses and includes everything that is past... or near, or little or much, or of whatever kind, or of such and such a kind, that is suitable for neuter designation. Therefore, "yaṃ kiñci" is an exhaustive inclusion. And this being so, seeing the possibility of its application to other things suitable for neuter designation, and since it operates with reference to the intended meaning there, to restrict the over-application, "rūpaṃ" (form) is stated. Thus, by these two words, the complete inclusion of form is made. Then, it begins the division of form into past and so on, with "atītānāgatapaccuppannaṃ" (past, future, present). For some of it is past, some future, and so on. The same method applies to feeling and so on. Here, form, by way of period, continuity, time, and moment, is fourfold past, and similarly future and present. First, by way of period: that which is before conception in one's one existence is past; that which is after death is future; that which is between the two is present. By way of continuity: that which is present, even while occurring, is present by way of prior and posterior, being generated by similar seasons and similar food; that which is before that, generated by dissimilar seasons and food, is past; that which is after is future. That which is mind-generated, generated in one thought-process, one javana, one attainment, is present; that which is before that is past; that which is after is future. For that which is karma-generated, there is no division into past and so on by way of individual continuity. However, its past and so on is to be understood by way of supporting those generated by season, food, and mind. By way of time: in times such as one moment, forenoon, afternoon, night, day, and so on. Form, existing in a stream of continuity, having its own time, is called present. Before that, past; after that, future. By moments, that comprised of the three moments of arising, etc., is present. Before that, past; after that, future. This alone here is direct meaning; the rest is figurative speech. "Internal or external" means the five kinds of form, like eye and so on, are internal because they arise based on one's own being. The rest, being external to that, are external. Moreover, one's own internal is internal here, and that of another person is external, so it should be understood. "Gross or subtle" means the nine, like eye and so on, and the three elements excluding the water element— these twelve kinds of form are gross because they can be grasped by impact. The rest, being opposite to that, are subtle. "Inferior or superior" means here the state of being inferior or superior is both figurative and direct. Therein, compared to the form of Akanittha devas, the form of Sudassi devas is inferior. That same form, compared to Sudassa devas, is superior. Thus, down to the form of beings in hell, the inferiority and superiority should be understood figuratively. But directly, that object by making which an unwholesome resultant consciousness arises, that is inferior because it is undesirable. That object by making which a wholesome resultant consciousness arises, that is superior because it is desirable. Just as an unwholesome result is itself undesirable and arises only in the undesirable, not in the desirable; so too a wholesome result is itself desirable and arises only in the desirable, not in the undesirable. "Far or near" means that which is subtle, that same is far because of its nature of being difficult to penetrate; the other is near because of its nature of being easy to penetrate. Moreover, here, the state of being far or near should be understood also by taking into account space. "All that" means all that form separately designated by terms like past, etc. "To be seen with right wisdom" means to be seen with insight-wisdom and path-wisdom. But in "whatever feeling," etc., the past, future, and present nature of feeling should be understood by way of continuity and by way of moments. Therein, 97 and so on) in terms of continuity, included in one path, one impulsion, one attainment, and arising from the conjunction of one kind of object, the feeling accompanied by faith and so on, present in one who sees the Buddha's form and hears the Dhamma for a day, is present; before that, it is past; after that, it is future. In terms of moments, included in three moments, it is present; before that, it is past; after that, it is future. The distinction of internal and external should be understood in terms of one's own internal. The distinction of gross and subtle should be understood in the way stated in the Vibhaṅga (Vibh. 11), such as "unwholesome feelings are gross, wholesome and indeterminate feelings are subtle," in terms of class, nature, person, mundane, and supramundane. First, in terms of class: unwholesome feeling is grosser than wholesome feeling because it is a cause of blameworthy action and has the nature of mental defilement and torment, and its activity is not tranquil. It is grosser than resultant indeterminate feeling because it is active, strenuous, has results, has the nature of mental defilement and torment, and is blameworthy. It is grosser than functional indeterminate feeling because it has results, has the nature of mental defilement and torment, is afflicting, and is blameworthy. Wholesome and indeterminate feelings, however, are subtler than unwholesome feeling for the opposite reasons stated. Both wholesome and unwholesome feelings are grosser than both kinds of indeterminate feeling, as appropriate, because they are active, strenuous, and have results. Both kinds of indeterminate feeling are subtler than these for the opposite reasons stated. Thus, the grossness and subtlety should be understood in terms of class. In terms of nature, however: painful feeling is grosser than the other two because it is without relish, has agitation, is agitating, and is overwhelming. The other two, however, are subtler than painful feeling, as appropriate, because they are pleasant, tranquil, refined, agreeable, and neutral. Both pleasant and painful feelings are grosser than neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling because they have agitation, cause disturbance, and are manifest. The latter is subtler than both of them for the opposite reasons stated. Thus, the grossness and subtlety should be understood in terms of nature. In terms of person, however: the feeling of one who has not attained absorption is grosser than the feeling of one who has attained absorption because it is scattered among various objects. Conversely, the latter is subtler. And by way of persons, the grossness and subtlety should be understood. But by way of worldly and supramundane, tainted feeling is worldly. It, being a cause for the arising of taints, bound by floods, bound by yokes, bound by ties, bound by hindrances, bound by clinging, and defiling, common to ordinary people, is gross compared to the taintless. That, conversely, is subtle compared to the tainted. Thus, by way of worldly and supramundane, the grossness and subtlety should be understood. In this regard, confusion by way of origin and so on should be avoided. Indeed, feeling associated with body-consciousness, the result of unwholesome kamma,