English
When compared, the enumeration obtained is shown. Even so, in comparison with lesser and equal enumerations, it is lesser and equal. It is not shown in this way for clarification, but rather shown thus by a reversed arrangement. For the clarification of a specific meaning is by word or by gender. Therefore, the intention here, "this clarifies," should be understood in the same way. Even in the case of opposites, etc., "one by non-object condition, by non-cause... one by non-disappearance condition, by non-cause," the root word is placed at the very beginning and the arrangement is made. And this characteristic is not found there. Therefore, the arrangement by placing the root word at the beginning is the method, not the wheel-binding. Thus, "three by object condition, by cause" is arranged. And when the meaning is known, there is no purpose in using a word or gender. The description of the Anuloma (Direct) Conditions is finished. The Paṭicca (Dependent) Section The Description of the Paccanīya (Opposite) Conditions 86-87. "That which is causeless, resultant, indeterminate is to be understood in terms of the origin of material form." This statement, however, cannot be applied in a universally comprehensive sense. 93. "Co-nascent and pre-nascent conditions go into inclusion." Here, the meaning should be understood as: co-nascent conditions like causes, and pre-nascent conditions like objects, go into inclusion. For the post-nascent conditions, when they arise, do not arise only by two, co-nascent and pre-nascent conditions, but by all except the post-nascent. 94-97. "In the non-nutriment condition, some material form is the condition-effect." This is stated by considering that the condition upon which it arises is material form itself. However, that from which the condition arises can also be immaterial, like kamma for kamma-born immateriality. 99-102. In the non-path condition, even though all parts of material form such as those arisen from mind are found, yet because that which obtains the path condition is abandoned, it is stated, "some material form is the condition-effect." And in the same way, in the non-cause condition, etc., some material form is the condition-effect. should be seen as not-self. 107-130. "Not-food, not-faculty, not-jhāna, not-path conditions are everywhere similar in their answers" – this is said with reference to the equality in enumeration of these, which stand as root causes. For here, the answer to the root causes is indeed enumeration, not the showing of their nature. The tetrad of "not-co-arisen" etc. is also omitted here, meaning it is omitted even in the root causes, as in the Suddhika method. The explanation of the Paccanīya (Opposite) conditions is finished. Explanation of the Paccayānuloma-paccanīya (Direct-Opposite) conditions 131-189. "When the root, dominant, and path conditions stand in the direct way... eight are not obtained in the opposite way" – this is said to include all those that are not obtained in the opposite way, being common to all three. Therefore, in the path condition, only seven, which are common with the others, should be applied. When the dominant condition stands in the direct way, the root condition is also not obtained in the opposite way, but it is not mentioned because it is not common with the path. It should be understood that those without which formless existence does not arise, being exclusive, are called "formless-standing" here. Thus, the pre-arisen and repetition conditions are excluded because formless existence can arise even without them. The mutual, food, and faculty conditions, which are "all-standing," are included because formless existence does not arise without them. "Only according to the lesser enumerations" – if the ones standing in the direct way, from one to twenty-two, are lesser enumerations, then the enumeration of that which is applied in the opposite way should be known according to them. If the one applied in the opposite way is a lesser enumeration, then the enumeration of that which stands in the direct way should be known according to it. However, from statements like "mutual condition is not in the object, one" (Paṭṭhāna 1.1.146), this characteristic is not exclusive. The explanation of the Paccayānuloma-paccanīya (Direct-Opposite) conditions is finished. Explanation of the Paccayapaccanīyānuloma (Opposite-Direct) conditions 190. "Everywhere" means not only in the root condition, but in all conditions when they stand in the opposite way. Showing the pre-arisen and repetition conditions as not obtaining anything, by way of example, it says "but rebirth-result..." He said this first. "When purejāta, pacchājāta, āsevana, vipāka, and vippayutta are in the negative, excluding one, the remaining are obtained in the affirmative." This was said referring only to the obtaining of the remaining ones. It should not be understood as the obtaining of *all* remaining ones. For although there is no implication in pacchājāta, as it is stated that "it is never obtained in the affirmative everywhere," if purejāta, when vippayutta is in the negative, were taken as "all remaining" in the sense that it is obtained in the affirmative, this too would follow. And what some say, "This was said to make known the possibility of ārammaṇa-purejāta even in the formless realms, which are devoid of vippayutta-condition," that too is merely their preference. For it is not shown that where vatthu-purejāta is not obtained, it becomes helpful in the form of ārammaṇa-purejāta. "By way of what is applicable" was said because what is in the negative must be excluded; the meaning is "by way of the applicable condition and its resultant." The earlier reading is: "When magga-condition is in the negative, hetu-condition is not obtained in the affirmative." But since adhipati-condition is also not obtained, they read: "Hetu and adhipati conditions are not obtained in the affirmative." It was not considered that when adhipati-condition is in the negative, there is no other condition besides pacchājāta that is not obtained in the affirmative. When aññamañña is in the negative, the nine mentioned as "only for the formless" are not obtained in the affirmative. This too, being similar to ārammaṇa-condition etc. in the negative, will not have been considered as easily understandable. From 191 to 195, everything is similar, not because the root connected with aññamañña is elaborated, but it was said with reference to the subsequent roots. For in those, the conditions to be applied in the affirmative, and the questions, are all similar. This "in this negative-affirmative" is connected with "the counting turn here, by way of these miscellaneous ones, should be understood without confusion." There, "here" should be understood as "in these conditions." In this, when in the opposing-favorable, among the conditions that are obtained, even among the resultant phenomena, it should be connected. There, by the word "even," this meaning is shown: not only among the conditions, when some are in an opposing state, some are not obtained favorably; but also among the resultant phenomena, one who obtains some particular condition does not obtain some other condition. There, one who obtains kamma condition mostly obtains faculty condition; one who obtains path condition mostly obtains root condition; and similarly, one who obtains jhāna condition obtains path condition. Thus, in these, the obtaining and not obtaining have been considered. "Where" means in the five-constituent existence and among the non-percipient beings. "Material phenomena" refers to the kamma-born material phenomena as stated. For not all material phenomena in the five-constituent existence do not obtain roots and so on. "They do not obtain root, dominant, result, and faculty conditions" is the earlier reading. But some read, "they do not obtain root, dominant, result, faculty, jhāna, and path conditions," because they do not obtain them even in jhāna and path. The intention is that among those conditions that are causes for material phenomena, excluding those that are in the immaterial realm, these very ones are not obtained. For even in post-natal, nutriment, and dissociated conditions, kamma-born material phenomena are obtained in existence. And this is merely a showing of conditions that are obtained and not obtained, not a showing of their arising or non-arising through those conditions. Thus, the non-obtaining of faculty condition might be stated with reference to the life faculty. For among the phenomena stated, there is no kamma-born material phenomenon that does not obtain even the three, post-natal and so on. What then of kamma in all realms? But there is something that does not obtain faculty, what is it? The life faculty. If so, with reference to the derived material phenomena, it should also be said that they do not obtain mutuality condition, but that is obvious, so it might not have been stated. Or it should be understood that the non-obtaining of faculty condition is stated with reference to the non-obtaining of immaterial faculties. 196-197. In the dyads and so on, based on the object, "five in root" (hetuyā pañca). Although this "five in root" is not found in the triads and so on, nevertheless, in the dyads and so on, Desiring to speak of what is not everywhere obvious, having spoken comprehensively, saying "in the dukkas, etc.," he determines what was said in the first dukka, "five by way of cause." But some say the reading is "five by way of cause, in the root of non-object." The former reading is "in mutual dependence, it is said with reference to only one fundamental material quality." But since a basis is also found, they read "it is said with reference to both fundamental material qualities and a basis." In "three roots," here too they say "two roots" is "three roots." 203-233. In "three by way of cause, in the root of non-kamma," etc.,