English
having made it with an object like a drum. "Existing object" means an object like a drum. In the proclamations of Dhamma listening and so on, having made it with an object, the giving of sound, the making of sound-objects to function with sound, that is, their establishment and production, is to be understood as the offering of an existing object. The Dhamma King showed by dividing: here, the state of being a visual object and so on; elsewhere, "Monks, these are the three bases of meritorious action" (Dī. Nī. 3.305), the state of being giving and so on; and elsewhere, "Which states are wholesome? Three… and so on… bodily action arising from them," thus speaking of the state of being bodily action and so on. And "not included" means not encompassed, because they do not exist in ultimate reality and are other sense-spheres. The taste of enjoyment is the joy and happiness that is a condition for enjoyment. This is called a taste-object by way of being similar to a taste, not by its intrinsic nature. By its intrinsic nature, joy and happiness are only Dhamma-objects, so it is said, "pleasant feeling is a Dhamma-object." "The object is fixed" means it is stated as fixed thus: visual object… and so on… Dhamma-object. "Because action is not fixed" means because action is not determined. Just as a mind with one object among visual objects and so on does not have another object, it is not so that an action with one door among the body-door and so on does not arise in another door. Therefore, because action is free from door-fixation, the door is also free from action-fixation, so it is not stated as fixed here like the object. Because it does not arise without an object. And the meaning of this is: "Just as one action among bodily actions and so on operates through another door without that door, so too, a mind with one object among forms and so on does not arise in another object-field without that object" —this should be understood. For just as what arises through the speech door is called "bodily action," so too, what arises in the sound object-field is not called "form object-field." Wholesome sense-sphere kamma Elucidation of the discourse on the door of bodily action And of this meaning: to make known that "actions operate through doors" and so on, due to the non-fixity of karma-doors in relation to each other. Here, in "five consciousnesses," the sixth consciousness and its door are not specified, due to the co-existence of doors and their possessors. When "bodies arising from four causes" are spoken of in terms of fixed material forms, sound and other modified forms are not included. Although the wind element, arising from the first impulsion, cannot at that moment move forms to arise in another place, nevertheless, it should be understood as accompanied by intimation and modification. For in the ten directions, whichever direction one wishes to go, or wishes to throw limbs, it stabilizes and holds the forms facing that direction; thus it possesses the modification of facing that direction. And modification co-existent with intention is intimation. And having done thus, even adverting's capacity to generate intimation is established by producing modified forms according to intention, since thirty-two types of consciousness are said to generate bodily intimation. Having arisen many thousands of times, it leads to the statement: "He went a yojana, he went ten yojanas." ...for the wind element... ...to be a condition: There is a specific mode of the mind-originated great elements, capable of being a condition for the wind element in stabilizing and moving; this is called intimation. For because they have that mode, the wind element stabilizes and moves. By "not mind-originated," it shows its ultimate non-existence. For no form exists without a condition, and no phenomenon apart from Nibbana is permanent. By 'viññattitā' is meant the state of being a modification, a 'viññatti'. It should be understood that just as the arising of mind, so too is the state of being an upādā-rūpa (derived materiality) due to the modification of the great elements, intended here. 'Kāyikakaraṇa' means an action of the mind that occurs through the body-door. 'Adhippāya' means intention. 'Kāreti maññeti' (causes to think) shows that the 'viññatti' is understood by the knowing of the action that is to be known through the 'viññatti' grasped according to the apprehension of its appearance. For, in the case of movements of trees and the like, which are devoid of 'viññatti', there is no knowing, "This causes it to act." For the eye-consciousness, its function is merely to fall upon the visible object, not to grasp the movement-modification accompanied by intention. But because the mind changes rapidly, even a movement understood by the mind-consciousness immediately after the eye-consciousness process, is thought by those who do not distinguish clearly, to be seen by the eye. Therefore, just as the interval between the eye-consciousness process, which arises due to the falling upon blue, and the mind-consciousness process, which arises as 'blue', is not perceived; so too, when that movement, which is grasped by the mind-door consciousness with an unperceived interval and which immediately follows the mind, is a modification of the body such as stiffening or agitation, there is the knowing, "This causes it to act, this is its intention." It is like seeing forms such as palm leaves, and then, by the mind-door process that immediately follows, without a perceived interval, grasping the characteristic of being associated with water, etc., of the palm leaves, and then grasping the water, etc. Here, it should be understood that by "there will be water here," and so on, the 'viññatti' of that form is said to be understood by the knowing of the water, etc., which is to be known by the consciousness that follows the apprehension of the form in the manner of its connection with water, etc. It should be understood that the prior established apprehension of connection is the proximate cause for this apprehension of bodily action and the apprehension of water, etc. And even if 'viññatti' is not the object, it is a condition for the apprehension of bodily action, and by way of the proximate cause of the prior established apprehension of connection, it is a condition for the apprehension of intention, which arises immediately after the apprehension of the appearance, which is a modification with intention. Because of its absence when there is no bodily change, just as after perceiving color, the perception of water and so on leads to the recognition of a palm leaf and so on, so after perceiving color, by perceiving the intention, communication becomes manifest. Thus, it is said that communication is understood by knowing the intention, thinking "this person intends to do this and that." "This person intends to strike us" – by knowing this intention, the manifest nature of communication is shown. For if it were not manifest, there would be no knowing of the intention. "It is indeed present..." (etc.) – just as the visual cognoscibility of forms, etc., which are not present and not within range, so too this inherent two-fold nature of communication is established. Even without the intention to inform another, by the occurrence of walking forward and so on, that mental concomitant change makes the intention known, and is itself known. Thus, it should be understood as communication in both ways. "Established in that door" means: it is established by being knowable through that door, by gaining its name through that door, and by being manifest in that door. It should be set aside whether it is wholesome or unwholesome. Why? Because for others, the karmic nature of that which is without result is not established, but for us, it is established. Therefore, it should be set aside by completing the triad in terms of the eleven functional consciousnesses that generate communication. Here, the meaning of "actions move in the door" is this: If doors were to move between doors, then due to the confusion of doors, there would also be a confusion of actions. There would be no mutual distinction like "bodily action is the door of bodily action." The same applies to actions moving between actions. But if doors, as doors, did not move between actions, and actions did not move between doors, then there would be a much better distinction of action-doors. However, there is no non-movement of actions between doors; rather, actions move in a door and in another, and other actions too. But since doors do not move in a door, therefore, by the doors which do not move as doors, and which are the causes, actions are distinguished even while moving between doors. Not only actions, but by them... The doors, thus the doors of action, are mutually defined by the principle of definition, which is called "by prevalence of occurrence, by frequency of occurrence." There, the actions, being dependent on the doors, have their definition as bodily action and so on by the doors that act without other doors, but not by actions that act within other doors, since bodily actions and so on, which are defined by doors like the body-door that are not dependent on actions, are the definers of the body-action-door and so on. Or, even those actions that act within other doors are characterized by the body and so on, because the nature of killing and so on is such, and even what is expressed by commands, hand gestures, and so on, is understood to be of a nature to be accomplished by the body and so on. Therefore, an action of one kind, even when acting in itself, does not give its own name to a door of another kind, nor does an action give its name to a door. Rather, that particular door gives its name to the action, and the action, even when acting in another door, gives its name to its own door. Thus, mutual definition is established. Previously,