English
Therefore, dissociated, existent, and non-absent conditions, and also post-natal dissociated conditions, etc., should be connected to the eye, etc. Regarding "the remaining mind-base," it should be understood that since "in the five-aggregate existence" is continued, the remaining mind-base, which functions in the five-constituent existence and is distinct from the five consciousnesses, is spoken of. The common conditionality of name and form, such as co-nascence, and the uncommon conditionality, such as association, should be connected as appropriate. The explanation of the section on the six sense-bases is concluded. Explanation of the section on contact 230. The Abhidhamma analysis text, "Contact due to the sixth sense-base," refers to the immaterial realms, thus it says, "According to the Pāli text, 'Contact due to the sixth sense-base'." "Internal" takes only what belongs to one's own continuum. For that, being produced by karma belonging to one's own continuum, is a condition for such contact. But material forms, etc., which are external and ungrasped, are objects of contact; they are not conditions for contact in the way that the eye, etc., are, by functioning as a result of karma, defilements, and signs belonging to one's own continuum. Therefore, they are not included in the view of the first teachers. But in the view of the second teachers, they are included, as it is not possible to exclude them if they are conditions in any way. If one contact could arise from all sense-bases, then the statement "Contact due to the six sense-bases" would be appropriate for a single instance. Even if all contacts could arise from one sense-base, still, from all sense-bases, all Since contact does not arise from the difference of sense-bases, there is no difference in contact due to the difference of sense-bases. Therefore, speaking of one (contact) due to its non-difference would be appropriate. But since it is not possible in that way, it is not appropriate, as challenged by "not from all sense-bases," etc. Or, to explain the impossibility of another arrangement, it is said, "nor do all contacts arise from one sense-base." But this, "one contact does not arise from all sense-bases," should be understood as the reason indicating the inappropriateness of speaking of one contact. Or, this is said by way of example: nor do all contacts arise from one sense-base; thus, one contact does not arise from all sense-bases; therefore, speaking of one is inappropriate. However, showing the possibility of one contact from many sense-bases, he says, "Here is the answer," etc. Even one (contact) can arise from many sense-bases; one (contact) can arise from many sense-bases. In being a six-fold condition, it explains five (types); thus, the application should be made in the remaining cases too. And thus, it is said with reference to present forms, etc., and present form-material included in the mind-object base. By way of object condition only, it is said with reference to all that is not present and other mind-object bases. The exposition of the term 'contact' is concluded. Exposition of the term 'feeling' 231. Here, in "for the remaining," the five (contacts) like eye-contact for receiving consciousness, although they are conditions also by way of contiguity, etc., but since contiguity, etc., are included in decisive support, and due to its commonality with investigating consciousness and apperception, it is said "in one way." That contact, reckoned as co-nascent mind-contact, is an eight-fold condition for the resultant feelings of the three planes; thus, it should be applied. Some desire a condition that is not clung to; thus, by "that which," etc., the conditionality of mind-door-adverting contact is stated, and that should be understood as merely showing the way. By this method, the decisive support of all contiguous and non-contiguous contacts for each respective resultant feeling should be applied. Exposition of the term 'feeling' Finished. Explanation of the Term Craving 232. By "attachment" is meant being fond of, it is said to be craving for enjoyment. There, feeling is to be seen like a son, material forms and so on, which are causes of feeling, are like milk and so on, the mind-makers and so on, who provide the six sense objects, are like a wet nurse who provides milk and so on. There, the doctor is to be seen as the provider of the mind-object, by way of the essence of remedies and by way of life sustained by them. The object-condition is just the object for what arises, it is not a producer like a strong support, so it is said "one stream" by way of the producer and the strong support. Or, the object-strong support is included by strong support, and by that object-nature, another object-nature of the same kind is indicated, so it is to be understood that the condition-nature is stated only by way of strong support. Since, by "because" and so on, it shows that not only resultant pleasant feeling, but also that feeling, especially resultant feeling, is a strong support-condition for craving, and generally the other is too. But equanimity, being tranquil, is spoken of as pleasure itself, therefore, the intention is that it too is a strong support for craving by way of desiring more. But equanimity, being an unwholesome resultant, being undesirable, should be included in suffering, the other, being desirable, is pleasure, so it can be said that it is a strong support like suffering and like pleasure. To prevent the possibility of craving arising when there is a cause for all feeling, due to the statement "feeling is a condition for craving," it says "and also feeling is a condition for craving" and so on. But, is it not possible to prevent over-application, since there is no statement that "feeling accompanied by latent tendencies is a condition for craving"? No, because it is spoken of in the context of the cycle of existence. For, since the cycle of existence does not exist without latent tendencies, it is implicitly stated that it is a condition only when accompanied by latent tendencies. Or, since "conditioned by ignorance" is continued, it is understood that it is a condition only when accompanied by latent tendencies. And here, in "feeling is a condition for craving," craving is conditioned by feeling itself, not without feeling. this rule is understood, not that craving arises from feeling, thus there is no over-extension. Vusīmatoti: one who has lived, meaning, one who has lived the holy life. Or, "vusī" is said to be the path, and he has traversed it, thus vusīmā. Or, the ultimate fruit is called "vusī" because the dwelling is completed, and he possesses it, thus vusīmā. The explanation of the term "craving" is finished. Explanation of the term "clinging" 233. "The self is eternal"— this is said to illustrate a later view that grasps an earlier view. Just as this view grasps the earlier one by way of strengthening it, so too do views like "there is no gift." The grasping of self, however, is the clinging to the doctrine of self, and this should not be seen as clinging to views. Or, it should be understood that the grasping distinct from the grasping of self, which is clinging to views, is expressed here by the terms "earlier view" and "later view." "In the summary and detailed exposition of the Dhamma, briefly, the strength of craving, briefly, merely views, but in detail"— thus it determines the summary and detail from the summary and detailed exposition of the Dhamma. "Dhammasaṅkhepavitthāre" should be seen as locative indicating determination. The grasping of self, which is preceded by the eternalistic view of primordial atoms and so forth, and preceded by the annihilationist view of the body, is sometimes present, as if there is some eternal or annihilated self that is their owner— thus "mostly" is stated. Or, "mostly" is connected with "first, the clinging to the doctrine of self," and so on. Even though the bhavarāga-javana-vīthi operates first, because one who has grasped rebirth must operate with delight in existence, yet, considering that this delight in existence is not strong craving, he does not state the first arising of sense-desire clinging. However, if craving is not distinguished as sense-desire clinging, then all craving is sense-desire clinging; and even if distinguished, craving other than sensual passion, having reached a strong state, is sense-desire clinging— thus its being avoided by the path to arahantship is stated. Place of origin The arising of consciousness is the sphere of the mind. The five aggregates of clinging are the dwelling place, there one delights, thus they are delighting in dwelling, these beings. Therefore, that delight in dwelling becomes manifest in one's own continuum and in the continuum of others. By the word 'condition' (upanissaya), the immediately preceding natural conditions are meant, thus the 'immediately preceding condition' (anantarapaccaya) and others are also included. The explanation of the term 'clinging' is finished. The explanation of the term 'existence' (bhava) 234. Existence is said to be 'kamma-existence' by way of result, thus, making the definition of 'rebirth-existence' common to both, he says: "That which comes to be is existence." It goes to existence, meaning, in terms of the result of production, it proceeds towards existence during its own period of activity, or, here, 'going' is intended as 'coming into being'. In "existence of perception" (saññābhava) for those with perception (saññāvataṃ bhava), the elision of the word 'vantu' should be understood, or, making 'a' in its place, "saññābhava" is also a reading. That which is scattered, spread out, expanded, is 'vokāra', or the act of scattering is 'vokāra'. Since it occurs in one place, it is called 'one vokāra', meaning, an arising spread out in a region. Associated with volition... and so on... included: