English
"Internal" is one's own self; "external" is what is outside of that. "Compassion" means pity; this is said, considering that the word "dayā" denotes both loving-kindness and compassion, and also the question that will be raised. For he was urged on by it, not by loving-kindness—this is the intention. He states the meaning of the word "ta" (that) as a reference back to what was said before. "That" (ta) specifies wisdom, being distinguished by its metaphorical nature, and by its having fulfilled its purpose. It does not deserve to be referred back to, because its function is seen in the principal among principals and non-principals. Of the two words... and so on... "vatoti" (it is said): the intention is that the word "ta," being spoken in apposition with the word "dayā" which means compassion, is not appropriate to refer to another quality. Apposition of non-synonymous words occurs when there is a qualifier and a qualified, not otherwise; thus, it says, "similar... and so on... occurs." Here, the state of being a qualifier and a qualified is established by apposition, and since that apposition does not occur with different cases, it is also established by having the same case; thus, "dayā... and so on... cidaṃ" (this) is the reason for "dayā" being the qualified. For by its principal nature and its generality, it became the qualified. Here, generality should be understood by its denoting the compassion of the Blessed One and of others. And of that (tassa ca) means of the word "dayā." By "and wisdom is principal," and so on, it shows that although wisdom is principal in the previous verse, yet because it is said as a qualifier of compassion, without merely saying "by that" (tāyā), a reference back to compassion, even though it is not principal, is appropriate. And the non-principal nature of compassion in the former... spoken in verse, but here they are primary. And so it is said, “‘Compassion-arising’ means primary.” How then… …should it be known? He raises an objection, keeping in mind the meaning that is about to be stated. If so, if you take only the literal meaning, without grasping the intention of the commentary. And ‘loving-kindness’ would not be fitting, just as, “one who has attained a mind of loving-kindness” – according to this commentary, compassion is not pity; similarly, “one who has attained mercilessness” – according to this commentary, compassion is not loving-kindness. He shows a contradiction even in the commentaries if only the literal meaning is taken. Having said, “It should be connected according to the intention,” he explains that very intention with “the word ‘dayā’ (compassion) means…” For grammarians read the word ‘dayā’ in the sense of giving, going, and protecting. And protection is a common function of loving-kindness and compassion, which manifest as bringing benefit and removing suffering. Therefore, it is said that the word ‘dayā’ operates in both. ‘Included within’ means contained within, just as the meaning of ‘tree’ is common to dhava and khadira, so the meaning of protection is common to loving-kindness and compassion. But the intention is, in “one who is compassionate,” it is understood that the word ‘dayā’ is a synonym for loving-kindness, because compassion is mentioned immediately after as “sympathetic to the welfare of all beings.” For loving-kindness, like compassion, is a cause for abstaining from taking life. In “one who is merciless,” however, it should be understood that mercilessness is shown as taking life, because a compassionate person, due to their non-harming disposition, does not cause even the slightest harm to others, let alone taking life. Referring to this very meaning, he says, “Thus there is no contradiction among the commentaries.” If the word ‘dayā’ denotes both loving-kindness and compassion, then the question, “How then should compassion be known as ‘dayā’?” remains unanswered. Considering this objection, he states the reason for taking only compassion, with “and compassion is in the teaching…” By “Is it not by that?” etc., he shows that the subject of compassion is known through the context, as the context is stronger than the potential. As is fitting. "How did it arise?" This is the reason for the previous verse's embrace of compassion, which is both specific and universal, concerning beings. For, arising according to one's liking, it is a manifestation according to desire, in one and in many. When it is established by "Here, however, let us take the universal scope of beings," the commencement serves as an indicator. Thus, the word "among beings" again shows that it signifies this particular meaning. Even when the ability to effect compassion and exertion is gained in relation to beings, as in "not only among devas," the word "among beings" indicates that its universal scope concerning beings is intended, thus showing this particular point. The exposition of time, place, country, assembly, etc., is an external cause. Thus, determining time and so on, he said, "At what time..." By the phrase "dwelling in the abode of the thirty-three at the end," it shows that his miracle is limited by the proximity of another sound. And it is not possible to say that by the common usage there, even in the continuum of ordinary people, due to the absence of the removal of opposing defilements like lust, the term "being" for those without desire or lust, or that which occurs in the continuum of ordinary people by way of removing opposing defilements like lust, even in its absence in the continuum of the Blessed One, is conventionally called a miracle. This is the intention. By way of removing wrong views, those who became of right view, like Acelaka Kassapa and others; or those who, by their inability to express their views, attained a state of dullness, like Saccaka and others. 3. The mountains named Sīta are the mountains thus described: "Yugandhara, standing surrounding Sineru... and the great mountain" (Visuddhimagga 1.137; Pārājika Aṭṭhakathā 1.1, Verañja-kaṇḍa commentary). 4-5. "From all thousands of world-systems, having come from all, having settled down from all" – three interpretations are appropriate in terms of connection. But "from all thousands of world-systems, ten by ten" is rejected as leading to an undesirable conclusion. Those to be avoided are those that can be avoided, such as "too close, too near, an elevated place." But others, due to the greatness of that assembly... by whom it cannot be avoided. "Having said 'All-knowable... capable'," the statement "capable of knowing the method of teaching them" was spoken because even the Master of Dhamma, having penetrated it himself, could not teach it to others. Otherwise, all beings would have seen the truth. The power as stated is precisely the capability of knowing all knowable things as they are. It shows their capability of grasping them, and the intention is that the additional words convey another meaning. 6. By 'The Tathāgata is worthy of veneration,' etc., it states that specific actions like 'having paid homage,' etc., were performed in accordance with those respective suttas. By 'beauty of body,' etc., the word 'etcetera' includes excellent speech, sovereignty, and the attainment of a retinue. 7. Antaradhāpetvā means having ceased. And cessation here should be understood as causing their non-arising by avoiding the causes of their production. The connection 'I will illuminate the meaning' is stated because the past participle 'having heard' expects a subsequent action. 8. To show the difficulty means that what is not difficult would not need to be requested in such a way. Because Pārājika and Saṅghādisesa are failures in morality (sīla), and Thullaccaya and others are mostly failures in conduct (ācāra), the connection of conduct and morality was made in that way. And because the morality of conduct (cārittasīla) is of the nature of conduct, the other (morality) is taken by its very nature as the second. Asakkuṇeyya (impossible) means that it is not easy to turn away from one who is endowed with virtues like pure conduct, who is a fellow renunciant, who has been earnestly requested for the long-lasting of the true Dhamma, and who has been truly certified as capable of expounding the meaning of Abhidhamma. 9. The meaning of the word 'Devadeva' (God of gods) is elaborated in the commentary on Paṭṭhāna, so we have not expanded upon it here. 13. By the statement 'the commentary was recited at the First Council,' it is understood that the commentary existed even during the Buddha's lifetime. Therefore, it is known to be rooted in the Buddha, just like the text. The word 'of the Abhidhamma' expects 'I will illuminate the meaning,' meaning 'of what then...' having asked, "What is that commentary?" he draws out that very Abhidhamma-pada by way of its authority. Or, this meaning should be clarified by way of repetition and so on. 16. The view of the Elder Tipiṭaka Cūḷanāga, which proceeds by way of the principle that the foundational jhāna itself determines the special qualities of the path factors, the enlightenment factors, and the jhāna factors of the Noble Path, includes, by the word "ādi" (and so on), the views of the Elder Mahādatta of Moravāpi and the Elder Tipiṭaka Cūḷābhayatthera, such as "the aggregates, which are the object of insight, determine," and "the disposition of the individual determines," and so on. "Tappakāsaneneva" means "only by the exposition of the meaning of the Abhidhamma." "So" refers to the decision of the Mahāvihāra residents. "Tathā" means "in an unmixed and unconfused manner." Or, the decision, being unmixed and unconfused, belongs to the Mahāvihāra residents. By this, it shows that the decision of the Mahāvihāra residents is accomplished here only by the exposition of the meaning of the Abhidhamma. Alternatively, "tappakāsaneneva" means "only by the exposition of the unmixed and unconfused nature."