English
because the aggregate is designated by the nature of its parts, just as "powder is smooth," or "Devadatta is adorned." Non-production is the absence of production, the state of being uncaused. But for that which is unable to produce, even if thousands of other conditions come together, there is no ability to produce, thus it is said, "for that which is capable of producing." And here, because the production of results depends on co-operative causes, the mutual dependence of conditional states is said, thus 'dependence' should be seen as 'as if dependence'. Among the inactive, the unengaged. In "in each one," the commentary shows the elided repetition of the word. And when repeated, the plural state is established. And "a hundred blind men see" is a singular expression, which, for determination, transformed into the locative plural, becomes "among a hundred blind men," thus it is said. Similarly, by "in each one," individual inability is indicated, thus "a hundred blind men see" is an aggregate. He says, "He sees a hundred blind men together," meaning, "The intention is that he sees a hundred blind men together." Otherwise, if the meaning is taken according to the literal sense, since it is not accomplished in carrying a palanquin, etc., this meaning should not be established. Now, showing its unestablishability due to the clarity of that meaning, he says, "Visu," etc. By this method, it indicates the rarity of the arising of wholesome states, which is the moment. Regarding "its own rarity," the word "moment" here means "the moment called a moment." By this method, by this way. The connection should be made. Here is the connection: "Conjunction," etc., indicates the occurrence by itself being a collection of conditions, or the word "moment" means "the moment called a conjunction." It indicates the occurrence of phenomena from many causes by revealing the meaning that "there is a collection of conditions." "Time," etc., indicates its extreme brevity by its own extreme brevity. "Collection," etc., indicates their co-arising by itself being a collection of phenomena. "Cause," etc., indicates its occurrence by "when it exists, its own fruits arise in it." And in the sense aspect and in the word aspect, it indicates the difficulty of understanding, the co-arising of many, and the dependent arising of wholesome states, which are based on and dependent on that, by making known the meaning of "in which extremely brief time, in which collection of phenomena, when which cause exists." Strong-willed archers are those with strong bows. A strong bow is said to have a strength of two thousand. "Having a strength of two thousand" means that when a load of iron heads, etc., tied to the string of a strung bow, is held by the stick and lifted to the length of an arrow, it is released from the ground. "Trained" means those who have learned their craft in the teacher's household for ten or twelve years. "Skilled" means those who have practiced mastery in archery. Some learn the craft but are not skilled, but these are not like that, he shows. "Practiced" means those who have displayed their craft in royal courts, etc. Standing in the four directions. “Let them be!” means, relying on a single pillar or tree or whatever single thing in one place, they should stand facing the four directions. The meaning is thus. Regarding “such a swift man” as mentioned, there was no such man in the past, except the Bodhisatta. For he did such things in the time of the swift goose. But in the Sutta, it is merely an analogy brought forth by way of an imaginary supposition. Regarding “dependent on that,” it means, by reason of being dependent on that, by its nature, it is entirely engaged in demonstrating the dependent existence of time, which is a cause. For those who read “tapparabhāvo” (dependent on that), the explanation is: time, which is a cause, is dependent on that, because it demonstrates existence dependent on conditions; therefore, its demonstration of dependent existence is stated. In demonstrating dependence on an aggregate, it is dependent on that; in demonstrating dependence on a part of that, it is not dependent on that, so it says, “because it is not dependent on that.” Now, is not time, which is designated by taking this or that, merely a conventional term? How can it be a support for the phenomena mentioned therein? He says, “For time also,” and so on. If the characteristic of an action is the interval between actions, the characteristic of existence is non-existence, what is the characteristic action here? He says, “Here too,” and so on. “Endowed with the characteristic existence” – the word “iti” (thus) has the meaning of cause. This is what is said: because time is endowed with the characteristic action, which is existence, therefore there is a designation of ground therein. Regarding “by way of summary,” if it means by way of brevity. Now, is not sensual desire, like the remaining defilements, etc., included in objective sensuality as something to be savored, like knowledge is included in the knowable? So, should sensuality be only one, by way of summary? Referring to this question, he says, “sensual desire,” and so on. Regarding “of that which is associated,” it means that which is established by way of subject and object. Although all sensual desires are enumerated in “by way of summary, two kinds of sensuality,” because the object is specified by “of the four lower realms,” etc., the sensual passion that is a defilement belonging to the lower fetters is taken here as sensual desire. So he says, “therefore,” and so on. The questioner, not knowing his intention, asks, “Now, is it not?” and so on. The other, however, states his own intention by “of the abundant defilement,” and so on. opens. In the sense of kāmāvacara phenomena, such as celestial wish-fulfilling trees, or in the sense of minor wholesome deeds. But is it not the case that since the sphere is specified as "of the four woeful states," the inclusion of the rūpa and arūpa realms is impossible? No, because the kāmā are enumerated exhaustively as "two kāmā in the summary." Even in the enumerated aggregate of kāmā, only a part of it is taken, and to show this, it is said, "of two kinds," and so on. Kāmarāga is the desire associated with the five sense pleasures. Kāmataṇhā is the craving whose object is kāmāvacara phenomena. Nirodhataṇhā is the desire accompanied by the view of annihilation. Here, it means in the elevenfold region. If complete occurrence is intended, it should not be said, "this too is of two kinds," because a part of vatthukāma does not occur here. Or, to show that the meaning should be taken as "as if complete" due to the predominance of the question, it is said, "vatthukāma also," and so on. The similarity to completeness here is due to the completeness of something inherently different. And having done so, the meaning is that it is characterized by the complete and full nature of defilement-kāma and object-kāma. The shortening of the letter "cā" is done to show that the meaning of the causative agent is included in the word "kāmāvacara." In the sense of object, meaning in the sense of the referent. In the absence of a mark, it shows that in conventional usage, action is for differentiation, not for self-action. Wholesomeness means the state of being wholesome as taught in the Jātaka, Bāhitika Sutta, and Abhidhamma methods. Its (meaning of wholesomeness) is the state of having a pleasant result. To say that its manifestation is desirable, it shows that the word "sukha" (pleasant) in "characterized by blameless pleasant result" is used as a synonym for "desirable." The function of saññā and paññā is recognizing and penetrating. The apprehension of an object devoid of both of these is called "vijānāti" (knows), and so it says, "saññā... and so on... apprehension." But is the function of citta not more distinguished than the function of phassa and so on? That is true, but that distinction is not as difficult to understand as saññā, paññā, and viññāṇa. Thus, the characteristic of viññāṇa is distinguished by the function of saññā and paññā. He said: Because it acts as the cause for the fully developed and strong nature of subsequent phenomena, it is called ‘gathering the continuity’. Such an occurrence is the condition of repetition, so he said: “It gathers by the condition of repetition.” “It is mind-made” means it is made by volitional consciousness. “The determination of diversity, etc.”: here, “determination” should be applied to each. Determination is delimitation, non-confusion. And by that, a phenomenon is said to be ascertained, so he said: “ascertainment.” “Diversity of gender, etc.”: here, diversity of gender is in terms of male and female forms. The distinctness of the female gender in terms of gods, humans, animals, etc., and similarly for the male gender. In the female gender, among the divisions of gods, etc., the subdivisions should be understood in terms of the diversity of bodies inherent in each, which means their mutually dissimilar nature, and in terms of distinctions divided by country, etc. Similarly for the male gender. Or, the diversity of gender, etc., should be applied to the gender in terms of the aforementioned diversity, etc., of the kamma that produces the gender. The diversity of perception, etc., arises due to the diversity of gender, etc. Therefore, he said: “For these are produced by the diversity of kamma, etc.” The diversity of gender is shown by showing the diverse making of feet, etc. And when that is shown, the diversity of perception, etc., are shown. Thus, indicating that the cycle of existence revolves, he said: “Not yet… (etc.)… joining.” The female gender, male gender, etc., are specific arrangements of the form aggregate supported by consciousness. With perception as the head, the four aggregates are mentioned. And by the term “designation,” the occurrence of the five aggregates