English
Description of the Occurrence Section 19. The occurrence Because there is room for formations and individuals, the jhāna and the plane are taken as distinct rooms. And in the individual section, by taking individuals according to their room, these two rooms are taken. Therefore, it should be seen that the individuals taken as the room of the second and third jhāna are shown with a distinction: “at the moment of the arising of in-breaths and out-breaths without initial application and sustained application.” Again, it shows the individual by the jhāna-room as “those who have attained the first jhāna,” and by the plane-room as “those in the sense-sphere.” But to distinguish both types of these, it says: “at the moment of the arising of in-breaths and out-breaths.” By this, it excludes those in the form and formless spheres, those who have attained the first jhāna, and those in the sense-sphere who are in the womb, etc. For even in those in the sense-sphere who are in the womb, etc., initial and sustained application arise without in-breaths and out-breaths. In the commentary, however, the form and formless spheres are exemplified as exclusive. But by this phrase: “at the moment of the arising of initial and sustained application without in-breaths and out-breaths,” the individuals shown are to be understood as distinguished by the absence of in-breaths and out-breaths, whether they are in the room of the first jhāna or in the room of the sense-sphere, etc. In this way, the division of individuals should be understood everywhere. 21. “In the first jhāna, in the sense-sphere” is stated in the commentary as “in the first jhāna that arises in the sense-sphere plane.” But if this meaning were taken, then in the phrase: “in the fourth jhāna, in the form-sphere, in the formless-sphere, there the mind-formation arises, but there the body-formation does not arise,” the meaning would also be “in the fourth jhāna that arises in the form and formless planes.” And that is undesirable, because it would lead to the planes not being taken as rooms, and to all fourth jhāna not being taken as a room. Therefore, without mixing the rooms of jhāna and plane, their distinct room-nature should be applied. For in the room of the first jhāna, both body-formation and speech-formation arise, and in the room of the sense-sphere too. Although not in all first jhāna and not in all sense-sphere do both arise, But it should be understood that this was said because the arising of both exists there. And because of separate space, the statement "here only as a factor" and so on, should not be said. And in this Yamaka, it should be understood that the second jhāna, which is without initial application and sustained application, is included in the first jhāna by way of sustained application. Or, taking the prominent second jhāna, the other is not included. In the meaning of which, "for those who have attained cessation" is not taken. For they do not exist in space like the non-percipient beings. 37. "When the second thought of the Suddhāvāsa beings is occurring" means that by showing that both did not arise when their first thought, which is without initial application and sustained application, and their second thought, which is with initial application and sustained application, were occurring in the thought of "desire for existence" or "adverting," it is indeed shown that they did not arise even in the preceding thought moments. Just as "for those reborn in the Suddhāvāsa realms" was said to show the beginning of mental formations, so too "when the second thought is occurring" should be understood as said to show the beginning of verbal formations. The explanation of the Occurrence Section is finished. The explanation of the Formation Yamaka is finished. 7. The Latent Tendencies Yamaka Explanation of the Section-by-Section Outline Section 1. "Knowledge of the known," which culminates in the full comprehension of conditions, having elucidated "knowledge of the known" by the root Yamaka which illuminates conditions, and "knowledge of investigation" by the Khandha and other Yamakas due to the abundance of investigation in the aggregates and so on, the Latent Tendencies Yamaka has been commenced to elucidate "knowledge of abandonment," which culminates in the abandonment of latent tendencies, by means of the latent tendencies which are the chief things to be abandoned. "By way of what is obtainable" means by way of what is obtainable in the form of latent tendencies. The taking of latent tendencies in three ways is because the Pāli text of the latent tendencies section and so on would be difficult to understand if they were not taken in that way. "Here, among the former" means among these former sections such as the section on latent tendencies. Since there is no special meaning, if it is not stated as "for one reborn in the sense-sphere, having passed away from the sense-sphere, or for one reborn in the form-sphere, having passed away from the sense-sphere," and so on, how can this ya Is this a teaching of pairs? This is not a teaching of pairs. But from previous sections, the latent tendencies taught in pairs, their ceasing and arising, shows the distinction of their places. Yet, due to many pair-teachings, the whole collection of sections should be seen as "Latent Tendency Pairs." Or, reverse questions are also possible in meaning, but due to no special meaning difference, they are not stated. Thus, by their possibility, this teaching too should be known as a teaching of pairs. "Arising having obtained a suitable condition" – by this, it shows their potential to arise when conditions are met. For unabandoned latent tendencies arise when conditions are met. And as long as the path has not made them incapable of arising, so long are they of this nature, and are called "latent tendencies." This nature is grasped by the word "arises," not as "being in the process of arising" as in the Khandha Yamaka. Therefore, by "If the latent tendency of sensual lust arises in someone, does the latent tendency of aversion arise in them? Yes," and so on, the section on arising is distinguished from the section on latent tendencies as not being different. Moreover, those which arose and are arising, having obtained suitable conditions, they too, by being unabandoned, were and are strong. And they arose and arise by their potential to arise. And there are no other things capable of arising apart from past, future, and present. Therefore, all past, future, and present sensual lusts and so on are called "latent tendencies." For they are latent tendencies precisely because they are unabandoned. And it is the past and so on that are unabandoned. But by the path bringing about the inability of such things to arise, the abandonment of latent tendencies occurs. The state of being unabandoned is a mode of phenomena, not a phenomenon itself. And it is phenomena themselves that arise. With this intention, it is said: "It is not appropriate to say that the state of being unabandoned arises." Here, regarding "seven latent tendencies," if they are latent tendencies because they lie dormant in the continuum by being unabandoned, then why are only seven stated? Do not other defilements, being unabandoned apart from the seven latent tendencies, also become latent tendencies? No, they do not. Only the unabandoned... because of not stating the nature of lying down. For it is said: “Anusaya is a defilement that has become strong, in the sense of not being abandoned.” Therefore, it is proper to say that anusaya is a defilement that has become strong, in the sense of not being abandoned. And “has become strong” should be understood as a characteristic not common to others. Thus, the Tathāgata, who knows the nature of phenomena, called these very things “anusayas.” “Has become strong” means being endowed with anusayas. If it is said that just as the word “lies down” indicates the state of not being abandoned, due to the similar movement of the occasions of anusaya arising, so too the word “arises” might be, and thus the non-statement of the word “arises” in the occasion of arising can be said? That is not so, because those two are stated with a distinction in the meaning of the words. For even if the meaning “arises having obtained a suitable condition” is not distinct, the word “lies down” indicates the state of lying down and the strong nature in the continuum. If the word “arises” were to indicate the same, then due to the absence of any distinction, the occasion of arising should not be stated. But the word “arises” indicates suitability for arising. Why? Because suitability for arising is shown by the occasion of arising. The statement “they lie down, meaning they arise having obtained a suitable condition,” which is a word indicating suitability for arising, is well said, in order to prevent the anusaya word from always referring to those that are present but not fully manifested as lying down, and to show the intended meaning of lying down, which is the strong nature as suitability for arising. And that too is well said by this textual authority— this is the connection. For by the three texts, the concomitance with consciousness is indicated. The description of the section on the delimited exposition and the occasion is finished. Description of the occasion of the place of arising 2. In the two feelings in the Kāma-sphere— in the Kāma-sphere, in pleasure and equanimity— the mention of the Kāma-sphere in the commentary is stated as a qualifier for the two feelings. In this way, the Kāma-sphere is the place of anusaya for the anusaya of sensual lust, and not... is stated. Among the two lusts, the latent lust for existence is stated to be the ground for latency in the form and formless realms among the three realms. Therefore, it must be said that the ground for latency of the latent lust for sensual pleasures is in the sensual realm.