English
“By this, ‘There is no not-knowing in the Buddhas, the Fortunate Ones,’ it is shown that it is not discerned precisely because of the absence of a prior end, and there is no obstruction to knowledge there,” (Netti. Aṭṭha. 118) was stated. Because it must be said, “How then is the non-existence of not-knowing in the Buddhas, the Fortunate Ones, to be known?” to make known the non-existence of not-knowing, “Just as the Fortunate One to the monk Kokālika,” and so on, was stated. In the commentary, however— “But that which exists, even if immeasurable to others, is not immeasurable to the Fortunate One, and the Fortunate One’s unobstructed knowledge everywhere…” It is said that to show the command, he spoke beginning with 'as the Blessed One concerning the monk Kokālika'. The Blessed One, concerning the monk Kokālika, having asked the question 'How long, venerable sir, is the lifespan in the Paduma hell?' to a certain monk who was seated, spoke in such a way as 'just as... (etc.)... having harbored ill-will'. Therefore, it should be understood that the meaning is that there is no not-knowing in that way. Monk, you should consider this: Kokālika is like twenty *khāri* measures of Kosala sesame seeds piled up. From that sesame, if a man were to remove one single sesame seed after every hundred years, that twenty *khāri* measure of Kosala sesame seeds would, by this method of removal, come to an end and be exhausted more quickly. But one Abbuda hell would not come to an end and be exhausted. Twenty Abbuda hells would come to an end and be exhausted in that much time. Even so, one Nirabbuda hell would not come to an end and be exhausted in that much time. This method applies to the rest as well. Having harbored ill-will towards Sāriputta and Moggallāna, the monk Kokālika was reborn in the Paduma hell, monk, you should consider this, so the Blessed One spoke, is the connection. The Blessed One did not say anything like "this is immeasurable, this is incalculable." A question asked by someone, "Among that which is immeasurable, which is immeasurable? Among that which is incalculable, which is incalculable?" is unanswerable because it is within the Buddha's domain. This Appameyya-Asaṅkhyeyya Sutta is unanswerable in the manner stated. (11) 119. In 'When that Upaka' and so on, the connection is clear. The question asked by Upaka, 'How, by what means, is he a conqueror?' is answerable because 'he is a conqueror by means of abandoning defilements' is answerable. The question asked by Upaka, 'By what means is he a conqueror?' is answerable because 'he is a conqueror by having conquered evil states' is answerable. 'Which is the conqueror?' A question: "Is the Victor form and so on?" or "Is the Victor other than form and so on, having abandoned it?" cannot be answered, therefore unanswerable. A question asked: "What is the destruction of defilements? What is the destruction of lust? What is the destruction of hatred? What is the destruction of delusion?" "Nibbāna is the destruction of defilements," or "The path of arahantship is the destruction of defilements," or "The fruit of arahantship is the destruction of lust," and so on, can be answered, therefore answerable. A question asked: "How much is the destruction of defilements? How much is the destruction of lust? How much is the destruction of hatred? How much is the destruction of delusion?" "This much, this quantity is the destruction of defilements," and so on, cannot be answered, therefore unanswerable. This kind of discourse mentioned is, in the manner stated, both answerable and unanswerable. (12) A question: "Does the Tathāgata exist as a being?" "A being is designated by clinging to the five aggregates, and such exists," can be answered, therefore answerable. A question asked: "Does form exist?" because form is answered, "Yes," can be answered, therefore answerable. A question asked: "Is form the Tathāgata?" because it cannot be found to be so, cannot be answered, therefore unanswerable. In "Is the Tathāgata possessed of form?" and so on, the same method should be applied as appropriate. This kind of discourse mentioned is, in the manner stated, both answerable and unanswerable. A question asked: "Does the Blessed One see with the divine eye... ...does he know beings according to their karma?" "The Blessed One sees," or... ..."The Blessed One knows," can be answered, therefore answerable. A question asked: "Which are beings? Which is the Tathāgata?" because they cannot be found in the ultimate sense, cannot be answered, therefore unanswerable. A question asked: "Does the Tathāgata exist?" is answerable in the manner stated below. A question asked: "Does the Tathāgata exist after death?" If it is answered, "The Tathāgata exists after death," then this world becomes the other world, "does not exist..." If it is declared that "the Tathāgata exists after death," then it implies that there is another world beyond this one. Therefore, because it is not to be declared, it is undeclarable. This kind of discourse, as stated, concerning both declarable and undeclarable matters, because it proceeds by way of declaring and making known, is both declarable and undeclarable. 120. Various kinds of declarable and undeclarable discourses have been determined by the teacher, and are known by us. Because it is to be asked "Which discourse is kamma?", it is said "Therein, which is kamma?" and so on. The meaning in "For one overcome by the Ender" and so on, is clear from the method stated below. This discourse, "For one overcome by death... (etc.)... like an unceasing shadow," because it proceeds by way of declaring and making known both good kamma and bad kamma, is called kamma. Monks, you should further discern kamma. For one sick and unable to rise, for a fool seated on a stool, or for a fool lying on a bed, or for a fool lying on the ground, the evil deeds by body, the evil deeds by speech, the evil deeds by mind, the wicked kammas which were done by that fool in the past, in former times, or in hundreds of thousands of crores of aeons, those wicked kammas at that time of being seated on a stool and so on, appear as if hanging down, appear as if hanging over, appear as if hanging all around. Monks, just as the shadows of great, mighty mountain peaks at evening time on the earth hang down, hang over, hang all around, Monks, even so for the fool, for one sick and unable to rise, for one seated on a stool, for one lying on a bed, for one lying on the ground, the evil deeds by body, the evil deeds by speech, the evil deeds by mind, the wicked kammas, in the past, in former times, or in hundreds of thousands of crores of aeons, which were done by that fool, those wicked kammas at that time of being seated on a stool and so on, appear as if hanging down, appear as if hanging over, appear as if hanging all around. Monks, there, in that manner of appearing, because of that manner of appearing, for the fool who has done evil, such a thought arises: "Alas, good was not done by me! Alas, wholesome was not done by me! Alas, protection from fear was not done! Alas, evil was done by me! Alas, cruelty was done by me!" Alas, by me what evil has been done! Alas, sirs, for the sick, for the good people, for those who have not done good, for those who have not done wholesome deeds, for those who have not done brave deeds, for those who have done evil, for those who have done cruel deeds, for those who have done wicked deeds, whatever destination there is, whatever woeful state there is, to that destination, to that woeful state, I shall go after death. Thus does he reflect. Reflecting thus, that fool grieves, toils, laments, beats his breast, and falls into confusion. The shadows of mountain peaks, even when hanging over the earth at sunrise, hang in a diminishing way. But at evening time, the shadows hang in an increasing way. Just so, deeds at that time manifest in an increasing way. Therefore, referring to that very increasing manifestation, it is said, "evening time." The explanation for the bright fortnight should be made according to the explanation for the dark fortnight. This pair of suttas, beginning with "and again," is called kamma (deed) because it operates as a speaker and a notifier regarding wholesome and unwholesome deeds. Various kinds of kamma have been determined by the teacher, and known by us. Because it is to be asked, "What is the result?", there it is said, "What is the result?" and so on. There, among those twenty-eight kinds of mundane and so forth foundations of the teaching, he asks, "What is the result?" Monks, whatever attainments you have gained, such as faith in human existence, those attainments, such as faith in human existence, are gains for you. Whatever accomplishment of the fourfold purity of morality and so forth you have gained by going forth, that accomplishment of the fourfold purity of morality and so forth is well-gained for you. Monks, the ninth moment, the appearance of a Buddha, which you have gained, that ninth moment, the appearance of a Buddha, is gained by you for living the holy life. Monks, I have seen hells called the six sense-sphere hells. There, in those hells called the six sense-sphere hells, whatever form one sees with the eye, one sees only undesirable forms, not desirable forms. One sees only unpleasant forms, not It sees only unpleasant forms, not pleasant forms. Whatever sound by ear… whatever smell by nose… whatever taste by tongue… whatever touch by body… whatever mental object by mind it cognizes, it cognizes only disagreeable mental objects, not agreeable mental objects. It cognizes only undesirable mental objects, not desirable mental objects. It cognizes only unpleasant mental objects, not pleasant mental objects— this reading is correct. The reading beginning with "It cognizes only disagreeable forms, not agreeable forms" is incorrect, though an incorrect reading is seen in some Pāli texts.