English
"ācaya" is said by way of distinct expression. By "they go having become accumulation," it means "they do not accumulate," thus "non-accumulation." This meaning, that they go and proceed having become non-accumulation, is shown by way of explanation. 11. "The non-attainment of the state of a learner among mundane individuals is to be understood." Why is this said? Is it not that – "He trains, O bhikkhu, therefore he is called a learner. And what does he train in? He trains in higher virtue, he trains in higher mind, he trains in higher wisdom. He trains, O bhikkhu, therefore he is called a learner." (A.N. 3.86) "Even a virtuous ordinary person, who fully practices the conforming path, endowed with virtue, with guarded sense-doors, moderate in eating, devoted to wakefulness, devoted to the development of the factors of awakening in the first and last watches of the night, dwelling with the thought, 'Today or tomorrow I shall attain some fruit of recluseship,' he too trains, therefore he is a learner." From the saying, the aforementioned virtuous Are the virtues and other qualities of one who is not an ordinary person called 'sekkhā' (trainee qualities)? No, because of their indirect nature. For, the direct state of 'sekkhā' and 'asekkhā' (non-trainee qualities) exists, as appropriate, only in the qualities of the path and fruition. Thus, since there is no doubt of 'sekkhā' status in worldly things, the non-applicability of 'asekkhā' status is stated. Therefore it is said, "virtue and concentration," and so on. The qualities of Arahantship fruition, since they proceed as the fruit of training, might be 'sekkhā' like the lower fruition qualities, in the sense of "born in the trainings," and so on. Or, considering the objection that the lower fruition qualities, since they proceed as the fruit of training, might be 'asekkhā' like the qualities of Arahantship fruition, it is said, "because the training task is completed," and likewise, "but in the lower fruitions," and so on. In phrases like "I eat that very rice," "that very partridge," "those very medicines," and so on, the use of 'that' (taṃ) should be understood in the sense of 'similar to that'. And by this, others say, 'asekkhā' are similar to 'sekkhā', just as it is said, "not human." Elsewhere, in phrases like "ariṭṭha" (unfortunate), and so on, the 'a' syllable is seen even in the sense of growth. Thus, this meaning is also stated: 'sekkhā' who have attained growth are 'asekkhā'. 12. "By the ability to suppress defilements" this should be understood as merely an example. The ability to suppress thoughts and so on is also obtained here. Or, to show the especially important function of wholesome qualities in destroying unwholesome qualities, and of exalted qualities compared to limited qualities, it is said, "by the ability to suppress defilements." In results and functional consciousness, there is only a long continuity, not the ability to suppress defilements and abundant fruitfulness. This is the meaning. However, if the meaning is taken as "abundant fruit is abundant fruit," then abundant fruitfulness is indeed obtained in results. That too should be understood as stated in the commentary by way of ekasesa (retention of one term). "Attained and practiced by the great ones" this meaning is common to all three. The gross defilements are called "measurers" because they act as if measuring beings, saying, "this is so much in quality." "Parittā" (limited) means they are cut off, circumscribed by them. Even though they are circumscribed by some, because of their great measure, Gone, arisen, thus become great. Because even subtle defilements that limit are beyond their scope, they are not limited in any way by them, they are surpassed, thus unlimited, immeasurable, because they are also called "unincluded." 14. They do not generate satisfaction, due to their extreme peacefulness, being unmixed. And here, the interpretation of meaning beginning with "by those who make measure" is written in many books after the explanation of the word "hīnattika" (inferior triad) beginning with "by not tormenting", but it should be brought and stated in its proper place. 15. Even among ordinary good people, the occurrence of extremely repulsive things like immediate karma and nihilistic views does not happen without a strong perversion, therefore it is said "due to the strength of perversion." By this, it is said with a doubtful statement regarding the arising of results, even when there is a fixed time, beginning with "when giving results." Therefore, because an over-extension is unavoidable due to the fixed nature in the manner stated, therefore. By "strong... and occurrence", it shows the unpreventable result of dissimilar types, and for similar types, even if results do not arise, the invincibility of immediate actions due to their ability to produce results immediately. Because their fixed immediacy is inherent, like their nature of producing results. By "of another... and giving", it also clarifies the unpreventable result from dissimilar types and so on. The questioner, not knowing the intention, raises an over-extension beginning with "is it not so?". The other explains his own intention beginning with "it does not occur". Absolutely means inevitably. By "being firmly fixed" means due to the fixed nature in accomplishing and generating. Those in which the doubt about the nature of not ripening has ceased are "ceased, not ripening... doubts", that state is "ceased... doubtfulness", therefore. By "because the ability is not destroyed", it means that even by a strong immediate action, it is not to be harmed. Supporting factors provide additional strength, because the continuum of arising is distinguished. Therefore, it states their unfailing nature even when results do not arise. 16. The function of the path is full understanding, etc. The right view of the eightfold path... By the path-causes, such as non-greed and non-hatred, associated with the path; and of the aggregates associated with the path, and the remaining path-factors, right view, from showing their causal nature; by way of gathering what was not gathered by the three methods, thus it is said. By way of abundance of causes, immediately after the first method of many causes, by the commonality of having many causes, the third method mentioned in the Nikkhepa-kaṇḍa Pāli is here stated as the second in the commentary. In phenomena that proceed by their respective conditions, without desire, the followable nature of some is not merely due to the nature of the phenomena themselves, but also due to the specific mode of occurrence of previous phenomena, thus it is said: "by way of prior volitional formations." For the specific mode of occurrence of earlier and earlier mental states and mental factors, the imparting of distinctions in successive stages is the prior volitional formation of development. "Following along" means "making weighty" or "respecting." "By way of example" means by way of illustration, not by way of showing exhaustively. "Since..." and so on, establishes the meaning as stated by another reading. For there, because it stands as an opponent to the dominant condition, the path is dominant; thus, "path-dominant" this meaning is obtained. "By way of the same word-meaning" is said with reference to the non-difference in the meaning of the word "maggādhipati," even though there is a difference in the meaning of the compound as a co-referential compound with another word's meaning. 17. The word "arisen" (uppanna), when it refers to the beginning of arising, and also to having reached and ceased, is a designator of both of these two kinds of meanings, not only of the former; to show that meaning, he said "not arisen" and so on. There, the state of having arisen is the attainment of the beginning of arising. By that, even past ones are included. Therefore he said: "all that has arisen." The state of arisen phenomena is the state of phenomena grasped by the phrase "arisen phenomena"; the meaning is the state of present phenomena. Or that which, having attained the beginning of arising, holds its own nature, and is held by conditions, that is an arisen phenomenon; thus, the state of being present is the state of arisen phenomena; this meaning should be understood here. Having spoken of arisen phenomena, the statement "not arisen" is not a negation of what has been understood; how is this? What is to be understood? He says, "If indeed," and so on. Some here say: "By the word 'arisen,' past things are also included. If they are not included, it would have to be said that they are not to be spoken of, like Nibbāna, and it is not said thus." But that is merely their opinion. This triad, however, will be shown in the commentary as being completed by means of two periods of time. If that is so, why is it not said that past things are not to be spoken of? Because they are not excluded by way of phenomena. For Nibbāna, being excluded by way of phenomena, becomes not to be spoken of there. And there are no phenomena called 'past' by necessity, which, being excluded here, would be not to be spoken of. The prior arising of the cause from the manifestation of the result is here called by the word 'completed,' not its having been and ceased to be. Therefore, he says, "or in the future." Because even the arising result of the Lord Metteyya is called "arisen." 20. By "having risen from absorption," and so on, he shows the underlying Pāli passage by way of meaning, from "Therefore, Ānanda," and so on. For this is the Pāli passage there: "And how, Ānanda, does a monk settle, compose, unify, and concentrate his mind internally? Here, Ānanda, a monk, quite secluded... (and so on) ... enters and abides in the fourth absorption. Thus indeed... (and so on) ... he concentrates. He attends to internal emptiness. As he attends to internal emptiness, his mind does not leap into emptiness... (and so on) ...