English
perform good conduct with the body, perform good conduct with speech, perform good conduct with the mind, for those beings performing good conduct, the self is dear. Even if those beings performing good conduct were to say, "The self is not dear to us," yet for those beings performing good conduct, the self is indeed dear. Why is that? What good conduct one would do for the benefit of one who is dear, that good conduct, those beings performing good conduct, do to themselves, by themselves, for their own benefit. Since they act for their own benefit, therefore, for those beings performing good conduct, the self is indeed dear. Such was the thought. This is how the saying was spoken. Having first said, "It is so, great king," the explanation of the Blessed One's words beginning with "whatever beings" should be understood in the same way. But in the verses, if a wise person knows the self as "dear," then that wise person would not connect that self with evil deeds. For truly, a dear self is not easily obtained. Happiness is not easily obtained by one who does evil. When a being is overcome by Death, the Ender, abandoning human existence, standing at the mouth of death, what is his own? That being, standing at the forefront, what does it take with it to the other world? Like a shadow that does not leave a departing being, what follows that being gone to the other world? Thus the Blessed One asks this, and having asked, he spoke the answer beginning with "both". In this world, whatever mortal performs both deeds, both merit and demerit, for that mortal gone to the other world, that pair of merit and demerit becomes their own. The mortal gone to the other world takes that very pair of merit and demerit to the other world, like a shadow that does not leave a departing being, thus for that mortal gone to the other world, that very pair of merit and demerit follows. Therefore, a wise person, accumulating good deeds that produce results in the next world, should do so. For beings in the other world, merits are their support, thus it should be understood that the Blessed One said. This discourse, beginning with "King Pasenadi", is the speech of another, being the words of the King of Kosala. The response, beginning with "It is so, great king, it is so, great king", is the Blessed One's own speech. This pair of speeches consists of both his own speech and the speech of another. (10) 118. When a question is asked: "This is the truth of suffering to be fully understood, this is the truth of the origin (of suffering) to be abandoned, this is the truth of the path to be developed, this is the truth of cessation, or the fruit to be realized. These wholesome and unwholesome states, understood as wholesome and unwholesome, or understood as blameless and blameworthy, or understood as having pleasant results and painful results— this produces a desirable result, this produces an undesirable result." For such wholesome and unwholesome states thus understood, "this is the meaning of growth, this is the meaning of decline." Thus, this discourse, beginning with "When a question is asked", is called an "explanation" because it functions as an expounder and clarifier of the meaning of the explanation. By this phrase, "The Buddha, the Blessed One, is sublime," one should describe the sublimity of the Buddha unequivocally, in one aspect. "Well-proclaimed By the phrase "the Dhamma is well-proclaimed," one should declare the well-proclaimed nature of the Dhamma unconditionally, in one aspect. By the phrase "the Saṅgha is well-practising," one should declare the well-practising nature of the Saṅgha unconditionally, in one aspect. By the phrase "all formations are impermanent," one should declare the impermanence of formations unconditionally. By the phrase "all formations are suffering," one should declare the suffering nature of formations unconditionally. By the phrase "all phenomena are not-self," one should declare the not-self nature of phenomena unconditionally. Not having said "all formations are not-self," but by saying "all phenomena are not-self," by this phrase, whatever other class of phenomena exists apart from formations, such as paths, fruits, cessation, and attainments, that class of phenomena, paths, fruits, cessation, and attainments, is also to be declared in this way, as being of this nature, unconditionally. Thus, it declares the not-self nature even of the class of phenomena comprising paths, fruits, cessation, and attainments, unconditionally—this is the interpretation. This discourse, beginning with "exalted," is called "explicable" because it functions as a speaker and declarer of the Buddha's exalted nature and so on, in the context of what is explicable. When the Buddha, the charioteer of men to be tamed, desires, the knowable phenomenon conceived in his mind, his initial mind accompanied by omniscience, gods, humans, all beings would not know, would not understand. When the Buddha cultivates peaceful, faultless concentration, even the *kasiṇas* conceived in his mind, all beings would not know, would not understand. Or even the *kasiṇas*, or the wisdom based on *kasiṇa* objects, they would not know, would not understand. And here, in "kasiṇāpi," even though it should be "kasiṇāyapi," it is stated as "kasiṇāpi" by way of elision of the 'ya' sound. Alternatively, the question asked, "What does he desire? What is that desire?" is inexplicable because it is beyond the scope of others—this is the interpretation. This discourse, beginning with "when he desires," is called "inexplicable" because it functions as a speaker and declarer in the context of what is inexplicable. The Blessed One, regarding the aggregate of morality, and the cause of the aggregate of morality, is of such and such a measure, of such a limit. The Blessed One, regarding the aggregate of concentration, and the cause of the aggregate of concentration... This much, this measure, the Blessed One in the aggregate of wisdom, due to the cause of the aggregate of wisdom, is this much, this measure. The Blessed One in the aggregate of liberation, due to the cause of the aggregate of liberation, is this much, this measure. The Blessed One in the aggregate of knowledge and vision of liberation, due to the cause of the aggregate of knowledge and vision of liberation, is this much, this measure. The Blessed One in deportment, in bodily and verbal conduct, due to the cause of bodily and verbal conduct, is this much, this measure. The Blessed One in glory, due to the cause of power, is this much, this measure. The Blessed One in wishing well, due to the cause of loving-kindness, is this much, this measure. The Blessed One in compassion, due to the cause of compassion, is this much, this measure. The Blessed One in psychic power, due to the cause of psychic powers, is this much, this measure. Thus, it is unanswerable. This Sutta, beginning with "this much," is called "unanswerable" because it functions as a speaker and indicator in an unanswerable domain. Monks, due to the arising of the Tathāgata, the Arahant, the Perfectly Self-Enlightened One in the world, there arises the three jewels. In the future, the Buddha-jewel arises. It is said "in the future" because during the lifetime of one Buddha-jewel, another Buddha-jewel does not arise. The Dhamma-jewel arises. The Saṅgha-jewel arises. These are the three jewels. When asked, "What is the measure of these three jewels in terms of their qualities?" it should not be answered that these three jewels are of this measure in terms of their qualities. This Sutta, beginning with "of the Tathāgata," is called "unanswerable" because it functions as a speaker and indicator in an unanswerable domain. A question concerning the Buddha, relating to a person, with a person as its main subject, is unanswerable. The knowledge of the past and future of a person, concerning the Buddha, is unanswerable. Monks, the prior end of beings shrouded in ignorance, bound by craving, is not discernible. Of beings who have run on and wandered through hell once, of beings who have run on and wandered through the animal realm once, of beings who have run on and wandered through the realm of hungry ghosts once, of beings who have run on and wandered through the asura realm once, of beings, of beings who wander, who roam among devas at one time, who roam among humans at one time, the prior end is not discerned, is not seen, is not found. “Which is that prior end?” A question asked by someone is unanswerable, because of the absence of a prior end to transmigration, it is unanswerable. “It is not discerned”— this teaching was given due to the disciples’ lack of knowledge, not due to his own lack of knowledge. “It is not discerned”— if it were to be said that this teaching should be given due to his own and his disciples’ lack of knowledge, then, bearing this objection in mind, “There are two kinds of teachings of the Buddhas, the Fortunate Ones,” and so on, was stated. That by which oneself is to be led is a self-leading teaching. That by which another is to be led is an other-leading teaching. Because it must be asked, “Which is a self-leading teaching? Which is an other-leading teaching?” to define and show them, “It is not discerned,” and so on, was stated. “It is not discerned”— this teaching, because it is taught for the sake of the disciples who are to be led, is called an other-leading teaching. “There is no not-knowing in the Buddhas, the Fortunate Ones”— this teaching, because it is taught for the sake of oneself who is to be led, is called a self-leading teaching. Because it is said, “There is no not-knowing in the Buddhas, the Fortunate Ones,” it is understood that it is not discerned precisely because of the absence of a prior end. It is not understood that it is not discerned because of an inability to make the knowledge of the Fortunate One manifest. Therefore, in the commentary,