English
endowed with craving, does not know. In the verse, proliferations and so on were spoken of by the Blessed One. Because it must be asked, "what are they?" therefore, "Proliferations are called..." and so on, was said. Craving, conceit, and views, which cause their supporting person to proliferate and expand for a long time in transmigration; and formations conditioned by craving, conceit, and views, either by way of co-arising or by way of supporting – these are called proliferations. Underlying tendencies and craving, by not being abandoned in the continuum, are the cause for beings to stand still, therefore, they are called standpoints. The obsession of active craving, and the various movements of the net of thirty-six cravings that have been spoken of – all of this, because it binds its supporting person, is like a fetter, therefore, it is called a fetter. Delusion, because it obstructs its supporting person's entry into the city of Nibbāna, is like a cross-bar, therefore, it is called a cross-bar. "For whom there are no proliferations and so on," Because it should be asked, "What has he overcome?" the phrase "and those" and so on, was said. Those proliferations and formations of the kind described, and the persistence of the kind described, and the binding of the kind described, and the bar of the kind described, are said not to exist. The sage who has overcome all this, beginning with proliferation, that sage is called "free from craving." This should be understood. 28. In the verse beginning "Whose proliferation," regarding those proliferations and so on that are mentioned, because it should be asked: "When do the formations rooted in craving, conceit, and views yield how many kinds of fruit? When does craving, associated with those formations, yield how many kinds of fruit?" Therefore, "there, the formations of obsession" and so on, was said. "There" means among those proliferations, formations, and so on. "Formations of obsession" are unwholesome volitions that are obsessions arising through transgression. "Experienced in this very life" and so on: It yields fruit to be experienced in this very existence, in the seen, observable state. Thus, "experienced in this very life." Or, it experiences fruit in this very state. Thus, "experienced in this very life." What is that? It is the first impulsion-volition arising through excessive corruption and so on, in things like non-corruption. It experiences fruit in rebirth. Thus, "experienced in the next life." This is the seventh impulsion-volition. It experiences fruit in subsequent existences. Thus, "experienced in later lives." These are the five impulsion-volitions occurring in the middle. Formations are threefold by way of yielding three fruits. In this way, craving is threefold, associated with this threefold volitional formation. It yields or produces threefold fruit either in this very existence, or in the immediately subsequent existence, or in a later existence. Thus, the Blessed One spoke of the formation that produces fruit, or of craving associated with it. Because it should be asked: "By which teaching, or by which verse, did he speak of the formation that produces fruit? With what other teaching-element is that teaching or verse connected?" Therefore, "whatever action is done out of greed" and so on, was said. The teaching "whose...world" and the teaching "whatever action done out of greed...or in a later" and the teaching "in due course" was stated, these two teachings of the Blessed One are connected with each other, the former with the latter, the latter with the former, they meet and join, just as the water of the Ganges with the water of the Yamuna, and the water of the Yamuna with the water of the Ganges, they flow together and meet. The teaching "Whose... the world" meets and joins with the teaching "What is born of craving... in due course," and the teaching "What is born of craving... in due course" also meets and joins with the teaching "Whose... the world" - this meaning should be understood. Because it should be asked "How do they connect?", "Therein, the obsessions" and so on were stated, meaning they connect in the sense of producing the three fruits: directly experienced, subsequently experienced, and experienced in future lives. Whatever Sutta was taught by the Blessed One that connects the former with the latter, to show the connection of that Sutta too, by extracting it, "as it was said" and so on was stated. The manner of connection should be understood according to the method stated. Therein: among those obsessions, formations, and cravings. Obsession: the course of craving that arises in the being's continuum by improper attention to sense objects and so on. By the power of reflection: to be abandoned by the power of seeing impermanence, impurity, and so on, by way of temporary suppression. Formations: formations to be abandoned by insight. By the power of insight: to be abandoned by the power of the knowledge of the first path, which is insight. Thirty-six cravings: the remaining thirty-six cravings apart from those to be abandoned by insight. One from whom craving has departed is without craving, the state of being without craving is Nittaṇhatā, what is that? The Nibbāna element with a remainder. Although the three types of delight in proliferation-formations are essentially one and the same, to show that there is a distinction in the teaching, in terms of words and letters, "furthermore" and so on was stated. Because it should be asked, "How many kinds is this connection of former and latter expounded by the teacher?", "And this connection of former and latter" and so on was stated. But in the commentary it was said: "Not only the connection of Suttas..." a connection of before and after, and indeed, to show that there are others, 'that and this' etc. was said (Netti. Aṭṭha. 28). Therein, "meaning-connection" is the connection of meaning with meaning, by way of verbs, agents, etc. "Word-connection" is the connection of a noun-word etc. with another noun-word etc. "Discourse-connection" is the connection of a discourse of the described kind with another discourse of the described kind. "Explanation-connection" is the connection of one explanation with another explanation. And connection, indeed, is not another inherent phenomenon apart from meanings etc. And because meanings etc. are included in the six meaning-terms etc., "meaning-connection is six terms" etc. was said. Meaning-connections and expression-connections were distinguished by the teacher, and understood by us. Because it is to be asked "what is discourse-connection?", "discourse-connection is not earth" etc. was said. Therein, regarding "the meditator does not meditate relying on earth, and meditates," the meditator, the person endowed with jhana, does not meditate relying on and taking earth as object, but relying on and taking Nibbāna, which is free from all formations, as object, he meditates, enters into the attainment of fruition; this meaning should be understood. And this method should be applied to "not water" etc. as well. For a person endowed with the attainment of fruition, indeed, abandoning earth etc., takes Nibbāna itself as object and enters into the attainment of fruition. And here, by earth etc., the great elements, the realms of sense-desire and form are understood, due to their connection with form. And by the sphere of infinite space etc., the formless realm is understood, and the intention is that one meditates avoiding the three realms of existence. If the meditator does not meditate relying on earth etc., then there is a suspicion that the meditator meditates relying on the continuum of beings called this world, or the continuum of beings called the next world, or the continuum of non-sentient things. Avoiding that, he says "not this world" etc. Therein, "this world" refers to the seen self-existence, the continuum of beings, called this world. Relying on that, the meditator does not meditate, and meditates. "The next world" is from this world, a The stream of beings, called the stream of existence, is known. Relying on it, the meditator does not meditate, and meditates. As for "this twofold" and so on, this twofold refers to the two worlds, this world and the next. Having avoided these, what is seen, the visible object, that visible object too. What is heard, the audible object, that audible object too. What is smelt, tasted, touched, the olfactive, gustative, tactile objects, those olfactive, gustative, tactile objects too. What is known, the characteristic form of the water element, the space element, the form called nutriment, a partial form of the mind-object element, that water element and so on, that partial form of the mind-object element too. What is sought, or not sought, obtained nearby, that object too. What is obtained, or not obtained, sought, worthy of seeking, beautiful, that object too. What is thought, to be apprehended by way of thinking, that object too. What is examined, to be apprehended by way of pondering, that object too. What is contemplated by the mind, to be apprehended by way of contemplating, relying on that object too, the meditator does not meditate, and meditates— this is how the connection should be made. Here, what is seen and so on, refers only to external forms, because non-sensory-bound form is intended. Therefore, the commentator said: "A stream of form, free from both, not bound to the senses." If the meditator, relying on the earth element and so on, as described, does not meditate, and meditates, then in such a case, is it known by anyone in the world, relying on what this meditator meditates, or is it not known? To show that it is not known, because it must be asked, he says, "This in the world with its deities," and so on. Here, the meaning to be taken is: This Arahant, meditating with the fruition attainment jhāna, in the world with its deities... ...