English
Homage to the Blessed One, the Arahant, the Perfectly Self-Enlightened One. The Ancient Commentary on the Dispeller of Doubts Introduction to the Text That which was expounded, beginning with "Buddha, Dhamma, and Saṅgha," by the Venerable Buddhaghosa, the beautiful Mātika-Aṭṭhakathā; This is an endeavor to elucidate its obscure passages. Elucidation of the Introduction to the Text "Vippasannena" means "with profound clarity." How? "Thus indeed is he... the Buddha, the Blessed One; well-proclaimed... by the wise; well-practiced... of the world" (AN 5.10), and so on. Since "cetasā" (by mind) is stated, mental homage is intended among the three forms of veneration. The act of prostrating with the body, etc., out of devotion, etc., is "vandanā" (veneration); the act of doing so mentally, based on virtues, is "mānaṃ" (reverence); the act of offering based on requisites and practice, etc., is "pūjā" (worship); the act of preparing requisites, etc., with care, is "sakkāro" (honor); of these. "Bhājanaṃ" means "receptacle" or "support." The Elders are Mahākassapa and others; their lineage is "theravaṃso" (lineage of Elders); those who are like lamps to that lineage through their attainment of scriptural knowledge and realization are "theravaṃsappadīpā" (lamps of the lineage of Elders); of those lamps of the lineage of Elders. "Thirānaṃ" (of the firm ones) because of their unshakeability. "Vinayakkame" (in the order of the Vinaya) is a statement appropriate to the beginning. They are firm in the Suttas and Abhidhamma as well. If it is asked, "Why are they mentioned separately instead of saying 'Buddha, Dhamma, Saṅgha, and the lion-like former teachers'?" The answer is to show a special purpose. The purpose of prostrating to the Triple Gem is the removal of obstacles; the purpose of prostrating to one's own teachers, who are one's support, is to show gratitude. Therefore, having venerated the Buddha, Dhamma, and Saṅgha, and by the word "ca" (and), having paid homage to the lion-like former teachers as well, this is the connection. Alternatively, "vanditvā" (having venerated) shows mental veneration, then "namo katvā" (having paid homage) shows verbal veneration, and "katañjalī" (having made the añjali gesture) also shows bodily veneration—this is how it should be construed. Now, to show the purpose of the title, he says, "pāmokkhaṃ" (foremost), etc. There, "pāmokkhaṃ" means "principal." For sīla (moral conduct) is the principal of all wholesome qualities, being their beginning. And just as for beings, kh Just as food of four kinds— that which is eaten, that which is chewed, that which is licked, that which is drunk— enters through the mouth and pervades the limbs and members, so too, for the yogi, the four-tiered wholesome deed enters through the mouth of virtue and accomplishes the goal. Therefore it is said, "mouth," and so on. Or, "mouth" means a means, meaning it is a means, a way, for entering liberation, for realizing Nibbana. The connection is: "What the Great Seeker proclaimed as the Patimokkha." "Mahesi" (Great Seeker) means one who sought, who investigated, the great aggregates of virtue and so on. "By the gentle, by the humble": "What is gentleness there? It is the non-transgression of the body," and so on (Dhammasangani 1349). By the gentle, by the humble, by not exalting oneself due to pride and arrogance. "Endowed with discipline and conduct": endowed with both the customary and the prohibitory rules. If it is asked, "Why is it said 'by the gentle' and so on, instead of saying 'requested by Elder Sona'? Is it not proper to describe someone requested by a wicked, or corrupt, or shameless person?" No, it is not improper. The Elder's words cannot be rejected. It is said to show that the Elder alone possessed such qualities, and that the request should be made with respect. "By name": by his name of qualities. "Subha" (auspicious) is auspicious in terms of the characteristics of words, in terms of judgment, and in terms of what is to be known. The description of the introduction to the book is finished. Description of the Nidana (Introduction) It is said, "For him, what is revealed is comfortable. There I ask the venerable ones... ...silence. Thus we hold it." And then, "The introduction, venerable ones, has been recited," and so on, in this manner. Here, at the end of the thrice-repeated announcement, at the time of recitation, it is said, "For him, what is revealed is comfortable," and then, "The introduction, venerable ones, has been recited. There I ask the venerable ones," and so on, in this manner. In the Uposatha Khandhaka too, it comes in the same way. There, what was said earlier contradicts what comes later in the sutta. Therefore, it should be examined and taken in such a way that it does not contradict. Some say, "Thus it does not contradict." How? "For him, what is revealed is comfortable," and then, "The introduction, venerable ones, has been recited. There "I ask the venerable ones," and so on, is well-declared, and this characteristic of declaration is stated here and also in the Khandhaka. Therefore, having said "it is convenient," it should be taken as implied, even if not explicitly stated in the place where "I ask the venerable ones there" is said. Why? The introduction is not shown here, because the characteristic of what is to be declared at the time of declaration is stated there. Moreover, wishing to show the declaration of the introduction by extracting the phrase "declaration of the introduction," having concluded the introduction that came in the form of the text, "May the Sangha hear me, venerable sirs... and so on... for him it is convenient when revealed," and having joined the Pāli text that is to be joined above in the form of a commentary, and having completed the introductory Pāli text, "I ask the venerable ones there... and so on... I uphold it," again, in the form of the extracted phrase "there, the declaration of the introduction," to briefly show the characteristic of the declaration of the introduction, having said "thus I uphold this," it is said, "The introduction, venerable ones, has been declared," and so on. Therefore, thus above and in the Khandhaka, but at the time of declaration, having said "for him it is convenient when revealed," "The introduction, venerable ones, has been declared. I ask the venerable ones there," and so on, only the declaration of the introduction is shown, not the introduction itself. If it is asked whether "the word of instruction for listening" is improper for a junior member of the Sangha to say, it is proper. Because it is said by the Buddha that "the reciter of the Pātimokkha should say thus," it is the Buddha's instruction, not the reciter's. Here it is said in the manner of a junior member. But to show that an elder can also recite, it is said, "the Pātimokkha with an elder in charge." If it is asked whether a junior member cannot (recite) by this Sutta, to show that, it is said, "whichever monk is there," and so on. Just as it is permissible for a group of four to perform all Sangha acts except for ordination, invitation, and rehabilitation, so too, by not saying "this particular act should be performed by a group of more than twenty," the word "more than" indicates another meaning. What is it? "By a group of four," and so on. For that is accomplished by them. How? By a group of four, ordination... …pe… with a group of twenty, no Sangha-act is proper. Here, by saying, “except for the act of abbhāna with a group of ten,” it is indicated that acts to be done by four or five are allowed to be done by ten. Therefore, it is shown that more than that is proper. By the word “except,” it is shown that less than that is not proper. Therefore, should it not be said “more than a group of twenty”? It should be said. It is shown that what is to be done by four or five is to be done by six, seven, eight, or nine, and what is to be done by ten is to be done by eleven, twelve…pe… or nineteen. It is clearly shown that less than that is not proper. However, it is written by Vajirabuddhitthera that even if it is said “more than twenty” or “not more than twenty” in every way, it is still indicated. From now on, when “written” is said, it should be understood as “by Vajirabuddhitthera.” If it were proper even on non-Uposatha days, he would not say, “he should perform the Uposatha.” Since it is not proper to do it on non-Uposatha days, after saying “today is Uposatha,” it is again said, “he should perform the Uposatha.” The emphasis “only on the full moon of the last Kattika” is made because there is no day for Pavāraṇā, etc., after that. This is also in accordance with the ordinary practice mentioned for the ordinary Uposatha above. Should it not be said, “connecting sign with sign,” since it is said, “endowed with three kinds of accomplishment”? It should be said. Why? The three kinds of accomplishment are the accomplishment of the sign, the accomplishment of the assembly, the accomplishment of the kammavācā, and so on. And it is said, “the accomplishment of the sign is the sign of a mountain, the sign of a rock,” and so on. It is not said “the connection of sign with sign.” Moreover, after showing “endowed with three kinds of accomplishment” among the factors of accomplishment, it is again said, “connecting sign with sign” to show the same among the factors of abandonment. Why is it said, “these are the boundaries of failure,” since acts do not fail in rivers, oceans, and natural lakes from the agreed boundary because they are boundaries of water-throwing? What then? If, having fulfilled the remaining characteristics, when a boundary is established in a river, making the water's edge the boundary, and because it has become part of the boundary, then, making that river internal, when a pond is made, if it were permissible to perform an act within that boundary, the acts would not fail from the boundary.