English
The meaning, “‘The path is dominant for these’,” is stated by taking the method of meaning that appears in the section on exposition by way of example. However, since it is said in the Paṭṭhāna, “The path-dominant dhamma arises conditioned by the path-dominant dhamma, not by the dominance condition; the path-dominant dominants arise conditioned by the path-dominant aggregates,” therefore, it should be understood that the meaning “the path is dominant, path-dominant” is also included in the Pāḷi by way of ekasesa (retention of one form) or by way of similar meaning. 17. By “unrisen” all arisen states are denied, not merely the state of arisen dhammas. Therefore, it should be understood that those that have arisen, ceased, or are past are not included. For if they were included, it would be said, “The unrisen dhamma is a condition for the arisen dhamma by way of the contiguity condition,” and so on, but it is not said. Future vipāka, kamma-born, and formless states will arise only from kamma that has already ripened, whether past or future, not from unripened kamma. Therefore, they are only partial causes that are completed. Thus, they are called “dhamma that will certainly arise.” 18. “Their own nature” means the nature of hardness, contact, and so on. 20. “Thus occurring” means occurring in a single continuity by way of being eye, etc., and by way of being contact, etc. “Within oneself, internally” —the word “adhi” in a compound is used to convey the meaning of “concerning” and “occurring.” Thus, “ajjhattā” means occurring concerning oneself, or with oneself as the object. “By him” means by that bhikkhu from whose jhāna, having arisen, when he attends to emptiness and imperturbability internally, externally, and internally-externally, his mind does not leap into, is not purified by, does not settle in, and does not become resolute in internal emptiness and so on; and who is not fully aware in this or that. “In that very former sign of concentration” means in the sign of concentration of the first jhāna and so on. “Internally only” means in the jhāna object, such as a kasiṇa. “The mind should be established” means the mind of the first jhāna and so on should be established. One who delights in the destruction of craving, delights in Nibbāna, which is the range of the senses, or delights in the meditation subject, which is the range of concentration. "Concentrated, alone, contented, they call such a one a bhikkhu," is the remainder of the verse (Dhp. 362). In "inwardly purifying," the word "inward" is used for jhāna because it belongs to one's own continuity. Thus, "inward" means belonging to one's own self. "Inward" means belonging to one's own continuity. "Internal" means those that arise inwardly, such as the eye and so on, which are within one's own self. Here, however, the word "internal" is shown as operating with regard to the eye and so on, not the word "inward." And there is indeed a distinction between the words "inward" and "internal," just as there is between "outward" and "external." For the word "internal" operates with regard to all eyes and so on, and forms and so on, whether belonging to oneself or others, like the word "external." But the word "inward" operates only with regard to one's own eyes and forms and so on, like the word "outward" with regard to others. Therefore, since they are not the same in sound and meaning, this example is not appropriate here. This is the intention to be understood here: "Internal" means those that arise inwardly— this is indeed the meaning of the word. And that which arises inwardly must be inward. Therefore, the word "inward" and the word "internal," which denote it, have the same meaning. Since both words have the same meaning, it can be said that the word "inward" operates where the word "internal" operates, which is in the inward. "This, Ananda, is a dwelling" is said in the Discourse on the Dwelling of Emptiness (MN 3.187) after stating the danger of delighting in company and delighting in forms and so on, in order to show the dwelling that is opposed to them. "Inward emptiness" means emptiness as an object, emptiness as a state of mastery, which is to say, the attainment of the fruit of emptiness. For the Buddhas, the Fortunate Ones, are masters of their minds. Even when teaching the Dhamma, for the moment they must be silent, they attain the fruit attainment for that moment, how much more so at other times. Therefore, for those who are masters, the fruit attainment is abundant everywhere. Because of the functioning of sovereignty, the attainment of fruition is called "the state of sovereignty." Or, by the attainment of the fruition of arahantship, the sovereignty of the Tathagatas arises by the very path that generates it; that is their state of sovereignty. And their domain is indeed their own place, just as "birds in the sky, fish in the water." And Buddhas, even though seen elsewhere, are inclined towards seclusion and indeed inclined towards the attainment of fruition. Therefore, immediately after each and every action, they exist only in the attainment of fruition; that is their domain. And their being in that domain should be shown by the Saccaka Sutta (MN 1.364 onwards). 22. Those for whom there is a visible nature are with illustration. The visible nature is indeed the sphere of eye-consciousness. Even though it is not different from the form-sphere, to distinguish the form-sphere from other phenomena, it is said "with illustration" (sanidassana) as if making it distinct. Indeed, among phenomena that are unified by their common nature, the nature that creates diversity is appropriate to treat as if it were distinct. For thus, a clear understanding of specific meanings arises. And the face-to-face nature, the nature of falling upon each other, of striking each other, belongs to those that are connected and not connected, by themselves and by way of support. By which, in the spheres of the eye and so on, accompanied by other conditions like activity and change, change arises. The explanation of the terms in the Tika-mātikā is finished. Explanation of the terms in the Duka-mātikā 1-6. By way of root means by the nature of being a root, which establishes a well-established state. Not merely by way of condition; the distinction between the two readings, "hetu-dhammā" and "hetū dhammā," is the mode of designation, compounded or uncompounded. Just so, by way of association. It should be understood that "by way of association" is said because of the associated nature of causes for those with causes, not because the word "saha" (with) means association. But the word "saha" indicates the nature of being a cause, etc., for those with causes, which arise in a single cluster and occupy the same place as the causes, from arising until dissolution. The word "sampayutta" (associated) indicates the coming to be one with the causes, by way of co-arising and so on. And from that, the distinction between the two pairs should be understood. Indeed, even in the absence of a diversity of phenomena. Another pair is spoken of due to the difference in meaning of the terms. For indeed, other phenomena are not called 'with-cause pair' and so forth, by those included in the 'cause pair'. But those very things are called 'with-cause pair' and so forth, by virtue of being 'with-cause' and 'without-cause' and so forth. Thus, those included in the 'with-cause pair' are called 'associated with cause pair' by virtue of being 'associated with cause' and 'dissociated from cause'. For there is no fault of repetition, as the statement of another pair is not dependent on the unstatedness of phenomena. For knowing the type of what is to be taught is the elegance of teaching, and also the knowledge of teaching. By this, the nature of those phenomena is stated. Combining the first pair, in whole or in part, with the second and third, the fourth and subsequent three pairs are stated. For indeed, combining the entire first pair with a part of the second pair, the term 'with-cause', and a part of the third pair, the term 'associated with cause', the fourth and fifth pairs are stated respectively. Likewise, combining a part of the first pair, the term 'not-cause', with the entire second pair, the sixth pair is stated. By "this too is possible," it shows that even what is unstated is indicated by way of possibility. For possibility is the reason for acceptance. Just as "cause and with-cause" is accepted because it is possible, so too "cause and without-cause" should be accepted because it is possible, and thus it should be applied elsewhere as well. Thus, combining the first pair with the second terms of the second and third pairs, the two pairs that should be formed are: "phenomena are causes and without-causes, and phenomena are without-causes and not causes; phenomena are causes and dissociated from causes, and phenomena are dissociated from causes and not causes." Having shown the inclusion of these by way of possibility, furthermore, with the particle "kho pana," to show the inclusion of other pairs, it states "among these, that which..." and so forth. "Among these" is in the Pāli. This means "additional meaning," referring to what will now be stated. There, by the separate occurrence of "others also" and "in other ways also," two pairs are shown. But by their simultaneous occurrence, this pair should also be understood: "phenomena are causes and also associated with causes and also dissociated from causes." Among these, p... In other pairs, just as the third pair is different from the second pair, and the fifth pair is different from the fourth pair, so too, because of the difference in the sixth pair, the pair "Are phenomena causes, or are they conjoined with causes, or are they disjoined from causes?" is not stated. For that method of difference shown is from the previous pairs. Among the other four, the pair "causes and non-causal" is synonymous with "causes,"