English
Wisdom, thought, right speech, action, livelihood, effort, mindfulness, concentration, wrong view, wrong speech, action, livelihood – these are the twelve factors. Here, both kinds of intention, effort, and concentration are included by the terms 'thought', 'effort', and 'concentration'. And by the words of the Sutta (Saṃ. Ni. 5.18) such as, "Indeed, friends, this is the ignoble eight-fold wrong path, unholy conduct, namely: wrong view... (and so on)... wrong concentration," the designation of 'path factor' is established even for wrong speech, action, and livelihood. Together with these, the twelve factors, both those found here and those not found, are stated by the general term 'path factors'. In this way, the Suttanta usage is also shown. However, by showing it in this way, by quoting "path factors in the exposition of the path condition," these twelve factors should not be shown as the meaning of the word 'path factors' in the text. For in the Pāli, the meaning of the word 'path factor' should not be stated as wrong speech, action, and livelihood. The volitional states that are opposed to right speech, etc., are called "wrong path factors" in the Sutta precisely because they are opposed to them, not because they are path conditions. The path factors, which are also path conditions, are called "path factors" here in the Pāli, and one should not quote one thing and state the meaning of another. However, if one wishes to show the path factors both directly and indirectly, another word for 'path factor' that is a counterpart to the word 'path factor' in the Pāli, having both meanings, should be quoted, just as "there are four kinds of legal questions" (Pārā. 386, 405). But here, the word 'path factors' as it appears in the Pāli, "path factors in the exposition of the path condition," is quoted, and not having shown by way of explanation, further... A determination of meaning has been made. Therefore, in Pāli, let there not be the meaning of wrong speech etc. for the term 'path-factors', so they recite: "Right view, right intention, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration, wrong view, wrong intention, wrong effort, wrong concentration – these are the twelve factors." But then, should it not be said "excluding rootless mind-arisings"? For in them, the right view etc. as stated, do not exist, which should be excluded? No, because it is for the purpose of determining the place of arising. These arise only in those excluding rootless mind-arisings, not in rootless mind-arisings. The meaning here is: the twelve factors arising there. The exposition of the Path Condition is concluded. 20. Exposition of the Disjoined Condition 20. "Because of the absence of the doubt of conjunction" – by this, it shows that the helpfulness which is the basis for the doubt of conjunction is the disjoined condition. The exposition of the Disjoined Condition is concluded. 21. Exposition of the Presence Condition 21. The presence condition is stated as fivefold in terms of wholesome etc., not Nibbāna. For that which, being unhelpful due to its non-existence, becomes helpful upon gaining existence, that is the presence condition. And Nibbāna, for those whose object is Nibbāna, does not become unhelpful due to its own non-existence and then helpful by gaining existence. Or, the helpfulness which is not contrary to the helpfulness of non-existence for those endowed with arising etc., is the presence condition, therefore Nibbāna is not the presence condition. And since the conditions for which they exist, arise together with them, or before, or after, and thus lack the nature of conascent etc. conditions, it is said: "Nutriment and faculty do not attain the category of conascent etc." And their non-existence should be understood according to the nature of these phenomena. The exposition of the Presence Condition is concluded. 22-23-24. Exposition of the Absence, Disappearance, and Non-Disappearance Conditions 22-23. "Only the characteristic of the condition is different here" – by this, it means that in the absence and disappearance conditions, and in the presence and non-disappearance conditions, there is only a difference in expression, not a difference in the meaning of "that which is a condition." there is not, but only in the collection of expressions, in the mere characteristics of conditions, there is difference. It is understood that this was said with reference to this meaning. The description of the exposition of the Natthi, Vigata, and Avigata conditions is finished. The description of the exposition of conditions is finished. The description of the discourse on miscellaneous determinations in the exposition of conditions. "Greed, hatred, and delusion are not also resultant conditions. By way of the remaining seventeen conditions, they are conditions." This is the initial reading. And here, the state of being a condition for greed, hatred, and delusion, individually by seventeen conditions, is stated. Not taking all roots together, for the purpose of showing one phenomenon having many conditions, because non-delusion, etc., are taken separately, thus, the state of hatred being a condition by seventeen conditions also arises. And if that is the case, the emphasizing of hatred should be stated in the Pāli text. "However, the unwholesome object-dominant condition is called a mind-arising accompanied by greed." (Paṭṭhāna Aṭṭhakathā 1.4) Even here, "mind-arising accompanied by greed and hatred" should be said, but it is not said. Therefore, the state of hatred being a dominant condition should also be denied. And the dominant condition is not denied by the word "remaining." Rather, it is included among the remaining conditions as stated, such as the pre-nascent condition. Therefore, to deny that, not taking hatred together with greed and delusion, and not taking it separately, they read: "Hatred is not also a dominant condition; it is a condition by way of the remaining conditions." By this method, by this (statement), the state of the tactile sense-base being a conascent, etc., condition, and the state of all phenomena being a root, etc., condition as appropriate, is shown. For this is not a showing of one condition having many conditions. Thus, the state of material phenomena, etc., being natural decisive support is also shown by this. This should be understood. The divisions of the four aggregates, such as the eye-consciousness element— not touching upon the division, but taking them themselves, it says: "in the four aggregates." Wrong speech, wrong action, wrong livelihood, and by those, and by kamma and nutriment conditions— thus, in nineteen ways. This cannot be said in this way. For wrong speech, etc., like wrong view, (are) path conditions... They are not, because volition does not have the condition of path. And if it were, in the question section, it would have to be said: "Karma conditions three in the path." Therefore, the path-condition nature of wrong speech, etc., should not be stated. This is an explanation of the Paṭṭhāna. And the remaining condition-nature, by the statement of volition having many conditions, is already stated, so they do not recite this as "this is to be recited." The reading beginning "Shamelessness... etc. ... sloth, restlessness, doubt" is a wrong reading. But doubt is not a predominant condition, so not reciting it there, they recite it here as: "doubt, envy, avarice, remorse, having removed the predominant condition from that." The former reading is: "The four great elements are object... etc. ... in ten ways as pre-nascent, dissociated, existent, non-disappearing conditions; again, so too the heart-base." But the great elements are not dissociated conditions, so they recite: "in nine ways as pre-nascent, existent, non-disappearing conditions, having included the dissociated condition, the base is tenfold." "Only this is unprecedented here" means that in this pre-nascent condition, only the sense-bases of form, sound, smell, and taste are unprecedented by co-nascent and support conditions. But these objects are stated in the many-condition nature of object-condition phenomena, so their unprecedented nature with respect to all surpassing conditions does not exist. "There is nothing unprecedented in the faculties, etc." means that the unprecedented nature was not stated by one who thought there was no unprecedented condition-nature of the physical life faculty from the non-physical life faculty. But its unprecedented nature is due to its pre-nascent condition-nature. And the sevenfold condition-nature of physical food should be combined with the pre-nascent. "Mode" means the mode of root, etc. "Meaning" means being helpful in that mode. Or the meaning-statement of "by which mode" is "by which meaning." "It is found only in resultant roots" means that the predominant condition-nature of the non-delusion resultant root is found only in supramundane results. Thus, what is found and not found should be noted everywhere. Not reciting "dissociated." "by six modes" is the earlier reading, but having read that, they read "by seven modes." Here, the highest classification is spoken of, and that which is an object-support is not disjoined. Among immediate and contiguous conditions, that which is a kamma condition is not a repetition condition. And that which is a repetition condition is not a kamma condition, so it should be understood. It is said, "Natural decisive support is natural decisive support," but it is also a kamma condition, therefore they read, "and a kamma condition." The meaning here is this: Natural decisive support is mostly natural decisive support, but sometimes it is also a kamma condition. It is said, "Here, in the case of pre-arising object, the conditionality of disjoined faculty is not found.