English
the feeling that is called "gross" or "inferior" by reference to which it is so called, by reference to that same thing, it never has subtlety or superiority, as stated by "due to the absence of mixture of gross, subtle, and so on." "Of contact as stated" means of contact productive of pleasant feeling, and so on. From contact productive of pleasant feeling itself, there is pleasant feeling, not from other contact. From contact productive of pleasant feeling, there is only pleasant feeling, not other feeling. Similarly in the remaining cases, by way of a dual determination, the determination of feeling is according to contact, and the determination of contact is according to feeling. By these two phrases, the non-intermixture of the result with other causes, and the non-intermixture of the cause with other results is shown, considering the first aspect as a determination of non-confusion. In the second aspect, however, a specific result is determined by a specific cause differentiated by the difference in condition, and a specific cause by a specific result. This meaning is shown by "determination is ascertainment." Having done so. And in the first part, the distinct arrangement of phenomena, without confusion, is stated. And in the second, the knowledge of their truly arranged state. This is the distinction between them. By "season, etc.," with the word "etc.," mental disorders, and bile, wind, etc., are also included. When one humor is disturbed, the others also become agitated. Even when they are present, because the disease subsides with phlegm treatment, phlegm is prominent; this is the meaning. "Becoming" (bhava) is the specific cause of the formations (saṅkhārā) spoken of. Or rather, craving (taṇhā) is the cause, as it is said: "Craving is the cause of formations." Of that too, craving too. For craving is the canker of sensual desire and the canker of becoming. The cankers of sensual desire and becoming are the clinging to sensuality. The canker of views is the other clingings. Thus it is said: "The cankers of sensual desire, becoming, and views are the basis for the four clingings." And these, by the saying "clinging is the condition for becoming," are clinging. And by the saying "craving is the condition for clinging," craving is clearly the cause of formations. Showing that the perception of gratification in formations, which are ungratifying and fraught with many dangers, does not occur without ignorance, it is said: "For those who perceive gratification... ...it is shown." By the absence of formations in one whose cankers are destroyed, the causal nature of ignorance for formations is also explained by way of exclusion. For only one whose cankers are destroyed is truly wise. By this, it is shown that ignorance is unique, as it arises only in the foolish. For objects and supports, etc., are common to others as well. Considering the objection that ignorance, like objects, supports, craving, and clinging, etc., is a common cause for meritorious formations, etc., it is said: "meritorious becoming, etc." There, by the word "etc.," unmeritorious and imperturbable becomings are to be understood. "Meritorious becoming" means the rebirth-becoming caused by meritorious formations. This is the method for the rest. And here, ignorance, having its function, is shown differentiated by the distinction of its function and mode of action. For it cannot be understood that the state of ignorance which is the strong support for meritorious formations is the very same state that is the strong support for others. And here, "concealing the danger of becoming, etc." means, in essence, for meritorious formations, etc., the... The sign of not understanding the nature of the cause of suffering, which is called becoming. "Existence" means being present, it is said, "unobstructed by existence" means "unobstructed by being." Unobstructed by existence are eye and forms, and so on. By "the former consciousness," etc., the unobstructed by existence is exemplified, so it is said, "this may not be absolute." For by "eye and forms," etc., later, the unobstructed by existence are exemplified. Former training in crafts, etc., is an obstruction to existence because of the impossibility of combining later-occurring actions of crafts, etc. To support the meaning stated above, "and not of crafts, etc." is said. There, "that" refers to the state of rebirth-linking, etc. "Here" means the grasping of state, nature, function, etc. By the word "etc.," those obstructed by object, plane, continuum, etc., are to be taken. And these are to be understood in their occurrence in the order of the change of lineage, etc., from the mundane to the supramundane, and from the supramundane to the path. The connection is: "because of the opposition of bending and breaking, the cause is obstructed by nature." There, "bending and breaking" shows the state of non-form and form itself. Action has the nature of volition, form has the nature of breaking, thus they are obstructed by nature. "Sweet and sour tastes, etc.": Milk has a sweet taste, calms bile, has a sweet ripening nature. Curd has a sour taste, increases bile, has a pungent ripening nature. Therefore, they are opposed by nature. "Curd, etc." means curd and straw. "Of Bhūtiṇaka" means of a specific medicinal herb called Bhūtiṇaka. "Avī" means sheep. But they are mostly red-haired, so it is said, "red sheep." Because even results are causes, and even non-results are causally arisen, causality and causal arising do not depend on resultant phenomena and their results. So it is said, "and they are indeed results." Therefore, he says, "thus," etc. "Of those non-resultant" means of those that are non-resultant of that ignorance. It is not that it is not fitting; it is indeed fitting, because only the state of being causally arisen is intended. "Of those unopposed" means of those unopposed by that ignorance. "Arrangement of prior and subsequent" means the occurrence of the body's activities, destinations, births, etc., in their due order, as prior and subsequent. , but to show that it is not made by anyone, not of a made nature, and of a fixed essence, he brings forth the example given by the fatalist, saying, “like unbreakable threads and unpierceable gems.” In the second alternative, “association” (saṅgati) means accidental origination, randomness, which is why it is said, “arising by chance, ceasing by chance,” and so on. “Nature” (bhāva) means the inherent existence of phenomena, which is why they say, “Who makes the thorn sharp at its tip, the wood apple fruit round, or the varied colors and forms of animals and birds? This distinction is merely due to inherent nature.” Therefore, he said, “All beings, all creatures, all living things, all individual souls are without power, without strength, without vigor, determined by fate, association, and nature” (Dī. Ni. 1.168). “By these alternatives” means by these alternatives, such as “a being dies,” and so on, which are causes due to confusion about death and so forth. “Having made the mind unwholesome” means having made the mind unwholesome by cultivating unwise attention. “Suttas and other teachings” means the teachings of the Pāli canon, such as suttas and geyyas. For one who truly understands the teachings of the Pāli canon, having perfected the practice, one becomes established in the realization of the truth. “That” means that understanding, that is, the realization of Nibbāna. The explanation of the term “formations” is concluded. The explanation of the term “consciousness” 227. “Conditioned by formations as stated” means conditioned by formations of the type stated, such as meritorious formations. He says that consciousness and so on, up to feeling, which are currently in the nature of the result-cycle, are intended here, saying, “that consciousness should be the result of that very kamma.” And showing that this explanation of meaning does not accord with the Pāli of the Dhātukathā, he says, “But in the Dhātukathā,” and so on. There, the meaning is that in the Dhātukathā, by the word “Dhātukathā,” all consciousness, contact, and feeling are included. “With a specific part” means with a remainder, the intention being that they are only results. For when only results are intended in consciousness and so on, as in – “What phenomena are disjoined from resultant phenomena? Those phenomena are the unconditioned, the moment…” excluding the element, it is comprised of five aggregates, twelve sense bases, and thirteen elements. By how many is it not comprised? It is not comprised by any aggregates, by any sense bases, but by five elements.” (Dhātu. 477) The inclusion and exclusion of things dissociated from result have been explained, and so here too it should be explained. Therefore it is said: “It should be explained like this: ‘states that are results’.” Therefore, because in the explanation of terms of inclusion and exclusion by dissociation, consciousness, contact, and feeling are taken without division, therefore. There, in the Dhātukathā. In the manner of the Abhidhamma analysis, in this analysis of dependent origination, in the manner of the Abhidhamma analysis. Therefore it is said: “From ignorance, volitional formations,” and so on. Thus, the explanation of the meaning as stated is given in the manner of the Suttanta analysis, and so it avoids the contradiction as shown. If the Pāli of the Dhātukathā proceeds in the manner of the Abhidhamma analysis, then why is existence explained by way of the aggregates that are clung to, as in: “Sense-sphere existence is comprised of five aggregates, eleven sense bases, and seventeen elements. Fine-material existence is comprised of five aggregates, five sense bases, and eight elements,” and so on (Dhātu. 67-68)? Considering this objection, it is said: “Existence, however… is not taken in the manner of the Abhidhamma analysis.” And having done so, precisely because it is not taken