English
after a three-rooted one should be understood as not denied. And this exposition of results is by way of the kamma generating rebirth with full results, and is merely an initial illustration of it. And the sixteen resultant consciousnesses, etc., of a single three-rooted kamma of the process-result type, should be combined in the manner stated. Therefore, when many resultant consciousnesses arise from any single kamma, because there is no distinction in kamma for those to which it is connected, it becomes distinguished by the specific conditions called javana. Thus, this rule of resultant consciousness is stated by way of javana, not by way of arising from various kammas. And having done so, in the Paṭṭhāna (Paṭṭhāna 3.1.98), it is said: "One discerns the rooted aggregates as impermanent, suffering, non-self. When wholesome and unwholesome states have ceased, a rootless resultant consciousness arises as resultant apprehension." Thus, a rootless resultant consciousness is mentioned after knowledge. And "When wholesome and unwholesome states have ceased, a rooted resultant consciousness arises as resultant apprehension" is mentioned after unwholesome states. And it is not the case that a denial of it is made by saying, "That was not shown by this elder." But what was said about javana... (etc.)... "that refers to wholesome kamma," this was said because there is no similar result for unwholesome kamma as there is for wholesome kamma. The rule of prompted and unprompted... But referring to the mind, when that is said, even in unwholesome states, it is not that it is not fitting. "This is impossible," this is said referring to the absence of establishing, rightly or wrongly, when turned rightly or wrongly, by way of determination, etc. "It is prohibited" is said by taking non-speaking itself as prohibition. "By action born of craving for sensual pleasures, there is no experience-result of exalted or supramundane states." There, the absence of that object should be understood. When an object comes into range, the life-continuum inclining towards it produces advertence. Advertence arises due to inclination towards the object. But the life-continuum is always inclined towards its own object. Even though it is a condition for consciousness of other objects, due to its absence, it arises without advertence, being inclined towards its own object. "Due to being practiced" means it has arisen frequently without advertence. "Due to being customary" means it has arisen frequently in objects that come into range and in rebirth-linking objects. Or "due to being practiced" refers to the state of being cultivated by the individual. "Due to being customary" refers to the state of occurring frequently by itself. "The immediate condition for cessation is the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception." This is said referring to the immediate touching of cessation, not like the immediate conditionality of cessation for the formless aggregates. But the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception does not arise without some preparatory work. The preparatory advertence itself is its advertence. Like others, this too must have advertence. But here, this intention should be seen: The inclination of the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception towards the immediate conditionality of cessation is not seen elsewhere, nor its arising in the state of not having that as its preparatory work. Yet it is its immediate condition, and thus it arises. Thus, the mind-consciousness element as stated, even though there is no inclination in the arising without advertence, arises without advertence. And having done so, "The noble path-consciousness and the immediately subsequent fruition-consciousnesses" — this is said. If this were said referring to the absence of advertence to Nibbāna as object, then the lineage-changing (consciousness)... are illustrations, for by them is established their non-deviation. And at the time of fruition attainment, because of the saying: "The limited object, the exalted object, the adaptation, are conditions for the fruition attainment by way of immediate condition," and because of the absence of an identical object-adversion, the fruition attainments should not be excluded, as in "fruition thoughts immediately following the path." But the Gotrabhū and Vodāna thoughts, although they are not practiced or occur with Nibbāna as object, but are practiced and occur with other objects. And the fruition attainment thoughts are not taken into account because there is no preparatory work for them after the path-process. And the fruition attainment thought immediately following the adaptation is practiced and occurs, not like the one immediately following the neither-perception-nor-non-perception which lacks preparatory work immediately following the path, and that is the illustration "for one emerging from cessation." But the statement "it does not arise without an object" was made to determine the object, after raising a question due to its not having an exalted object. Therein, in the discourse on results. The illustration of the blind man and the crawling snake is to show that results do not occur without a support. "Grasping the object" is said to show the result of eye-consciousness, etc., by the grasping of their respective objects by the eye, etc. "By way of support, in terms of meaning" is said to show that very result by way of support for the eye, etc., and in terms of seeing, etc. "Only the heart-base" means that just as previous thoughts are supported by the heart-base and are associated with the sense-bases and have other objects, the Bhavanga is not so. But this Bhavanga is said to occur solely supported by the heart-base, devoid of other bases and objects. "Having the heart-form-base" here also, the meaning "associated with other bases" should be understood. For just as a monkey's climbing a rope is like a thought having a sense-base, so are the other thoughts associated with it, like going by the rope, etc. Just as the rope's shaking and the monkey's moving, so are the sense-base's shaking and the Bhavanga's moving simultaneous. Thus, by showing that “each one… …comes,” it also shows this. “The time of the turning of the life-continuum” —this is said by taking the immediate conditionality of the adverting consciousness, which is like a foot-cleaner, to sense cognitions, which are like doorkeepers, as a giving of a sign, as the turning of the life-continuum. The doing of receiving, etc., without seeing the resultant mind-element, etc., is said in the sense of merely a firm grasp, merely knowing the broad square shape, merely knowing the coin, merely bringing about the action, in a general way. It should be understood that the absence of seeing the coin by the firm grasper, etc., and its similarity are not intended for receiving, etc. “This is white” —this should be understood as showing that the eye-consciousness alone accomplishes the function of seeing by the generality of seeing a white form. Similarly, it should be applied to the ear-door, etc., in terms of hearing, etc. “Goḷiyaka” is one with a sweet disposition or sweet purpose, in the sense of causing delight. “By way of support” —this is not said with reference to the support condition. But that without which something does not exist is here intended as “support.” “Dependent on light” —this is also said with reference to its existence when there is light, not its being a support condition. “Weakened” means that which occurs by itself, without becoming a condition for the functional consciousness. “Seeing fault in the unprompted and prompted” means seeing fault in unprompted action having prompted results, and prompted action having unprompted results, in that action should not have a result with a contradictory nature. But for the rootless, for mere falling into forms, etc., there is no nature contradictory to promptedness, so there is no unpromptedness; and since there is no nature contradictory to unpromptedness, there is also no promptedness. Thus, due to the non-contradiction of both, it allows their arising by both. “Mind-rule” means the rule of the object. “Five from function” —after these… …it is established, and after functional impulsion, the object-registering is mentioned. In the Paṭṭhāna (Paṭṭhāna 1.3.94), however, it says, “When wholesome and unwholesome cease, the result, that object-registering…” the apprehension arises,” thus, immediately after the resultant states, that apprehension of the object is stated. And in the section on wholesome states, “whether trainees or ordinary people, the wholesome as impermanent,” and so on, having spoken only of wholesome and unwholesome impulsion, immediately after that, the apprehension of the object is stated, not after the inoperative, nor is a place found anywhere where the apprehension of the object is stated after the inoperative. And if it exists, there is no reason for not stating it, therefore, this Theravāda teaching should be examined. For it is fitting that impulsion, being expansive, like a river current, follows the life-continuum, but not that the tranquil inoperative impulsion of one with sixfold equanimity, like a leaf-cup, follows the river current. “Impulsion runs in a group,” thus, the wholesome, unwholesome, and inoperative impulsions are spoken of as if grouped together, or, having been shown grouped together in a single apprehension of the object, they are spoken of as having run. And in speaking of this grouped impulsion, taking only the four accompanied by equanimity from the unwholesome, the twelve impulsions accompanied by equanimity are spoken of as if grouped together. However, in the Paṭṭhāna, “one enjoys and delights in the wholesome, lust arises concerning it. Wrong view, doubt, restlessness, displeasure arise. When the unwholesome ceases, resultant apprehension of the object arises,” because it is stated thus,