English
by which, if present, the mind would produce another form, is not present there. Indeed, the former form also has the nature of a condition, as seen in the similarity of a son to his father. But temperature first produces form. The meaning is that it produces it at the static moment of the rebirth-consciousness. And this "temperature" is said to have slow cessation, etc., to show the reason for its production at the static moment of temperature, and to show the time of production for formless things. Because of its slow cessation, it is powerful at the static moment, and then it produces form. While it endures, due to its swift cessation, when sixteen consciousnesses have arisen, the consciousness immediately after rebirth again produces form in the form produced by temperature. This is the meaning. "While it endures, sixteen consciousnesses arise and cease." By this statement, if the moments of arising and ceasing are taken as within the enduring moment, then it is said that "form has a life-span of sixteen consciousness-moments." But if the moment of arising is not taken, and the ceasing… if it is grasped at the moment of dissolution, "its lifespan is seventeen thought-moments." If the moment of production is grasped, without grasping the moment of dissolution, "its lifespan is more than sixteen thought-moments." But if the moments of production and dissolution are not grasped within the enduring moment, "its lifespan is more than seventeen thought-moments." However, since it is said, "among them, immediately after rebirth," and rebirth itself is grasped among those arising in its enduring moment, therefore, the moment of production is grasped in the enduring moment. Thus, when the moment of dissolution is not grasped, the lifespan being more than sixteen thought-moments is to be understood as what will be stated; or when it is grasped, the lifespan being sixteen thought-moments is intended. "Nutriment is coarse" refers to nutriment with a basis. For subtle nutriment, by its very nature, there is coarseness and subtlety depending on its basis. "And mind" is stated because mind is primary. But its associated factors also cause the production of matter. As it is said, "Conditions are a condition by way of condition for conditions and their associated factors, and for matter produced by them," and so on. Or "mind" refers to the arising of mind, not to a single, non-existent phenomenon like volitional karma. If it is asked, "Should karma-produced matter also arise from its associated factors?" No, because their arising from them is not stated. And their not being stated is due to their not being a condition by any condition. "By division of duration" means by division of time. Here, the intended division of duration is: "Seventeen thought-moments is the duration of matter; the seventeenth part of matter is that of the immaterial." "At the moment of rebirth" should be seen as merely an illustration of method, because even beyond that, the co-arising of matter and immateriality exists. And it should be understood that this is not stated with reference to the non-co-arising at the moment of rebirth, for it will itself state the arising of matter even in the enduring and dissolving moments of the rebirth consciousness. And by illustrating the attainment of fruition, it demonstrates the non-simultaneity of matter and immateriality, not their co-arising, as it is not initiated for that purpose. However, non-simultaneity by co-arising is well... It is for the purpose of clarifying that very point, that the inclusion of simultaneous arising is made. If this is the case, since matter and immateriality do not have the same duration, it would follow that matter would arise, abandoning immateriality. To prevent this, it is said, "although there" and so on. "Of one measure" means that in the continuously arising phenomena of matter and immateriality, there is no matter without immateriality, nor immateriality without matter, without gaps. And this statement should be understood as referring to the arising of kamma-born matter in the five-constituent existence, excluding the cessation of Nibbāna-like attainment. "Step by step" means treading lightly, as if placing one's foot in its own step, quickly. "Without abandoning" means without forsaking until death; at the moment of death, they cease together. And the duration in which they arise without abandoning each other, delimited by rebirth and death, is their maximum duration. "Thus" should be understood as encompassing the previously mentioned duration type of "descent" and this one. "Of one arising and various cessations": these two, taken together, should be understood as one aspect stated for matter and immateriality, namely "of one arising and various cessations." And similarly for what follows. "Excluding the last kamma-born" is said, they say, because it ceases together with the death-consciousness, so there is no various cessation. But it also has no single arising, as it is said to arise at the moment of the breaking of the last sixteen. If, however, that which has neither a single arising nor various cessations is to be excluded, then all that arises at the moment of the breaking of consciousness should be excluded. But since kamma-born matter does not arise when consciousnesses are arising after the arising of the last kamma-born, there is nothing to be avoided or included at that time. Thus, it is to be understood that "excluding the last kamma-born" is said. Before that, however, there is a lineage of forty-eight kamma-born matters, and among them, what arises at the moment of the arising of one consciousness ceases at the moment of the arising of another. Thus, it is taken as "of one arising and various cessations." having excluded the forms arisen at the dissolution moments of the elephant, it should be understood that the connection is made thus: it should be seen that it is to be understood as having one arising and different cessations. For that form, with the non-form, and the non-form with that, have one arising and different cessations. Here, considering the connection as a chain, the statement of forty-eight kamma-born things is made; otherwise, a statement of forty-nine kamma-born things would have to be made. Not arising...etc... it is said that it should be explained by the last kamma-born, because it is well explained by it. For by this method, it is possible to understand that even before that, a form arisen at the dissolution moment of one consciousness also ceases at the dissolution moment of another, and that form with the non-form, and the non-form with that, do not arise together but cease together. However, in both cases, a form arisen at the static moment of another consciousness at the static moment of another, and a non-form that arises at its static moment and ceases at its static moment, are not included. It should be understood that these are included in "not arising together, but ceasing differently." For here, the explanation of not arising together and ceasing differently by means of the four-continuum form is a presentation of the method by showing what is arisen at the static moment and not showing what is not arisen. Even for one who remains in the thirty kamma-born forms, there is death for one who has entered the womb, and so the last is also connected with these. They would be immortal, why? Just as there is the occurrence of six bases, so there must be the occurrence of bhavanga and others, which have those as their basis, by the very kamma that produces them. For there is no such cause by which some of those kamma-born things would occur and some would not. Therefore, it is said, "they would be immortal," because the life-constituents of the consciousnesses of the venerable ones are not deficient. "What arises at the arising moment ceases at the arising moment of another; what arises at the static moment ceases at the static moment of another; what arises at the dissolution moment ceases at the dissolution moment of another" this is said because it is found in the commentary. But his own intention is: at the arising moment, that which arises at the moment of cessation, that which arises at the moment of abiding, and that which arises at the moment of origination, that which arises at the moment of dissolution, ceases at the moment of abiding— this is what it explains. And having done so, in the determination of time, it is said: “That, however, ceases together with the seventeenth consciousness.” This contradicts the Pāḷi, why? Because even the four-originated material form must have the same lifespan— this is the intention. But as they have connected it, the material form does not have one origination and multiple cessations, nor does it have multiple originations and one cessation. As for the seventeen consciousness-moment lifespan of material form that they have stated, and the lifespan of more than sixteen consciousness-moments (specifically, the third part) in the commentary, that contradicts the sixteen consciousness-moment lifespan shown in the Paṭiccasamuppāda Vibhaṅga Commentary, where, to show a rebirth-consciousness with a present object immediately following a death-consciousness with a past object, it is stated: “By this much, eleven consciousness-moments have passed, and similarly, fifteen consciousness-moments have passed, then the rebirth-consciousness arises on that very object, with a lifespan of five consciousness-moments or one consciousness-moment.” Indeed, it is not possible to say “material form comes into range only at the moment of abiding.” For if that were the case, not just eleven or fifteen consciousness-moments of material form would have passed, but more than eleven or fifteen consciousness-moments. Therefore, although it might be reasonable to say that in the five doors, material form, having reached the abiding moment, strikes the sensitive faculty, in the mind-door, however,