English
But even though it is non-existent, taking it as if existent, it is not possible for the perception that arises in the limited and so on, to say "this is such and such a phenomenon as an object," because even though it arises dependent on those very phenomena, it does not stand in those phenomena. Therefore, it is said that it should not be said that it, together with its associates, has limited objects and so on. But this phrase "having unutterable objects" refers to the unutterability of the object of perception in its grasped aspect. It is said in the commentary, forming a compound of another meaning, "these have unutterable objects, thus 'having unutterable objects,' these are states of consciousness." Fifty-four states of consciousness and by way of form, fifty-five. "Purely" means without grasping. "By way of not having reached an end" means without desire... By way of mind, or unwillingly, the thought that has gone to a dilemma, has not reached its desired end. In that way, the occurrence is called "an occurrence by way of not reaching its desired end." The scattering of the mind among various objects is distraction. Instability is lack of calm. In the explanation of Gotrabhū, taking "Gotrabhū," it says "at the time of Gotrabhū." Regarding "the fourth of the basis for all," here the word "sabbattha" (all) should be understood in the sense of "owner." Or, it is the cause, the basis, in all vipassanā and so on, "basis for all" is a designation by way of the result's sphere. Regarding "the fourth of the space kasiṇa," it refers to the fourth of the delimited space kasiṇa. For that is of the rūpa-sphere, not the other. From the wholesome, it is twelvefold, and from the functional, it is also twelvefold, thus twenty-fourfoldness is stated. "It is indeed a basis for the round of existence as well," thus, having combined wholesome and functional, "basis for all" is stated, but because functional jhāna is not a basis for the round, it speaks with reservation. "He concentrates on the exalted mind" – this, by the method stated in "when his mind is thus concentrated" and so on, taking the manifest foundational jhāna-mind with its preparations, is said because one concentrates the rūpa-body into the mind with the determination-mind. "The foundational jhāna-mind concentrates on the rūpa-body" – this too is said because, making the aforementioned foundational jhāna-mind the object, one concentrates the mind-continuum into the rūpa-body, making it conform, and then determines it. And these two determinations bring about an invisible body and a visible body. By way of the preparation of the desire to go, due to the associated perception being a perception of ease and lightness, it should be understood that it also accomplishes going. "The mind of a Stream-enterer" – this should be understood as the individual path and fruit mind of a Stream-enterer. For it is said that Māra and others knew the mind of the Blessed One; why would one who has attained the knowledge of penetrating others' minds not know a defiled mind? Those with broken paths, those with the round of existence cut off, are the Buddhas. "Also by reviewing the path, fruit, and Nibbāna" – here, the reviews of the path and fruit, when the path and fruit are known by the knowledge of recollecting past lives, first... they occur, and the reviewing of Nibbāna, when the immeasurable phenomena with Nibbāna as object are known, the reviews of the path and so on should be understood as establishing the immeasurable object-nature of the knowledge of past lives. For it is said (Paṭṭhāna 2.12.58) "The immeasurable aggregates are a condition by way of object-condition for the knowledge of past lives," not Nibbāna. Therefore, even when the function of reviewing path and fruit is spoken of as being by the knowledge of past lives, the reviewing of Nibbāna cannot be said. However, in the commentaries, its Nibbāna-object-nature is seen to be allowed. "Will be reborn in the sense-sphere" refers to knowing the aggregates that will be reborn. "Will attain Nibbāna in the Nibbāna-element" means, it is possible that one will attain Nibbāna through the path and fruit, which have Nibbāna as their object and are the cessation of defilements. 1429. "Because of not being co-arisen" means "because of not being associated." For there is no co-arising of immaterial phenomena with immaterial phenomena other than by association. "At the time of having other phenomena as object" is said. But even at the time of having the path as object, when it is not made weighty, its not being spoken of as path-dominance should be understood. 1433. "By necessity" or "necessarily" refers to this meaning, hence "definitely" is said. Or "necessities" are those with necessity, meaning "definite." For in the section on mind-states, among the mind-states explained, there is none that is exclusively future-object. 1434. It is said that when arising based on kamma or kamma-sign, they have past objects. But the present-object nature when arising based on kamma-sign for rebirth-linking will be explained in the commentary on the Vibhaṅga of Dependent Origination. Therefore, this should be understood as referring to the past kamma-sign that has come into the mind-door at the mind-door death-consciousness. For a death-consciousness with a hundred objects, when rebirth-linking occurs with a destiny-sign in the remaining five mind-moments of life, four bhavaṅgas have present objects. And in other cases, six are referred to, hence it is said "and in the bhavaṅga period thereafter." For when in the impulsion with the destiny-sign as object, it arises when they have not yet arisen, then there is a passing away in that object, like for beings in the rūpa and arūpa realms who are reborn in the kāma realm. Then, the six bhavaṅga states after rebirth have present objects. Things like enjoyment, accompanied by wrong view, should be seen as always involving clinging. And regarding the javana thoughts whose objects are concepts and Nibbāna, in their preceding time, it cannot be said that they have past objects, etc., because of the nature of the advertence. In this way, the method is shown. Even for javana thoughts whose objects are Nibbāna, it cannot be said that way in their preceding time, but it is not that it is not a Nibbāna-object in the path and fruition thought-processes. "These scents" - were not present scents taken? How can there be a future object here? It is said, "May they not dry up for two hundred and eighteen years." The intention is that it proceeds by taking a future scent, "May they not dry up" refers to the future. When one transforms the body by means of the mind, one makes the body that is present and facing one at that time the object. Thus, the adhiṭṭhāna-mind has a present object. Similarly, it should be applied to making one's own body long, short, subtle, gross, blue, etc., and to performing other miracles. "Herein, one or two continua are to be understood" - the meaning is that the continua of rūpa and arūpa that occur herein are called "one or two continua." Or they are called "one or two continua" because they arise from extremely subtle seasons, etc. "Both of these are present" - the meaning is that both of these are present in time. "Is drawn in" means it is attracted by craving, wrong view, and delight. Some say, "The Abhayagiri dwellers." They do not desire a moment of duration for the mind, so it should not be said, "or penetrates in the moment of duration." Similarly, for those who say, "the mind of oneself and another arises in one moment," their statement, "or penetrates in the moment of duration or dissolution," is not It meets. For it does not arise in two moments, nor does it arise in one moment together with another's mind. And arising in the moments of duration and dissolution, it becomes partly a present object, partly a past object. And what was said: "When, desiring to know another's mind, one attends to the minds of the multitude as a heap," here it should be said that the intention to know the minds of many individuals, others, by oneself, is what occurs. Even if the meaning "of another" could be "of the multitude," still, it is improper to penetrate the mind-heap of that one individual after attending to it. For attending to a heap is not attending to a part. Therefore, they should not say, "when the minds of the multitude are attended to," and so on. But what they say: "Because the mind of the one with psychic power and the mind of the other arise in one moment," here this might be the intention: The one who has attained the knowledge of penetrating minds, desiring to know another's mind, enters the base jhāna, emerges, and without making a distinction of past, etc., makes a preliminary effort with the general idea of mind, "I will know this mind." Then again, entering the base jhāna, emerging, and attending to the mind generally, after three or four preliminary efforts, with the knowledge of penetrating minds, he penetrates and discerns another's mind, just as one discerns form with the divine eye. After that, with sense-sphere minds, there is the determination of being with lust, etc., just as there is the determination of blue, etc. There, attending to the mind generally, making the existing mind, which is facing the being whose heart-base form was seen by the divine eye, the object, one attends to the mind. And the preliminary efforts, making that existing mind generally the object, occur as preliminary efforts for knowing the mind. But the knowledge of penetrating minds, penetrating and discerning the existing mind, arises in the same moment with it. There, because the continuum's apprehension of the continuum Therefore, due to their oneness, advertences and so on occur as mind itself. And that is the mind itself which is discerned by mind-penetrating knowledge. Thus, due to their similar occurrence, there is no difference in object