English
"that which has momentary kamma-condition" means "momentary...etc....which," and "its state...etc....state," thus is the word division. should be seen. It is not possible to prevent it, for without a cause of karma acting at different moments, the result does not arise. Now, to show that the results of the process of existence are spoken of directly as having a cause of karma acting at different moments, it is said, "And it has been said..." and so on. Thinking that the giving of results is the nature of rebirth-results, it is said, "If development..." and so on. The other says that even without the giving of results, the nature of results is established, as it is found in others of that kind, saying, "Of the supernormal knowledges and thoughts..." By the word "and so on," it includes what is experienced in this very life and what is experienced in future lives, which have passed their time. "It might be said" means that the production of results of agitation accompanied by agitation, occurring in the continuum of an ordinary person due to the acquisition of a supporting cause, and the non-production of its results in the continuum of a trainee due to its absence, would be appropriate. Therefore, it is said, "This point, however, should be thoroughly investigated," and so on. And so it will be said, "The production of results of thoughts accompanied by agitation, such as desire and attachment to one's own possessions, arising in ordinary people, is not possible to deny, because the three fetters and the defilements associated with them are not cut off, and their supporters are not exhausted. Therefore, the result of states accompanied by agitation is stated in the Vibhaṅga." The statement about the production of results when there is such a supporter, and the statement about the non-production of results when there is no supporter, are contradictory. Or, having considered agitation accompanied by agitation as giving rise to process-results, it is said, "It might be said." Some explain, "It is said in the Paṭisambhidā Vibhaṅga (Vibh. 725-726), 'Knowledge of their results,' referring to process-results." Thus, there is no agitation-volition either; that too should be removed from the condition of consciousness. This too is said referring only to rebirth-consciousness. The explanation of the unwholesome section is finished. The Indeterminate Section Explanation of the Ahetuka-Kusala-Vipāka (Rootless Wholesome Results) 431. "Kāmāvacara... etc." Here, by the word "etc.," the phrase "upacitattā" (because accumulated) is included, as it is said, "by way of an uncommon karma-cause." "Upacit Some say, "because it is obtained and repeatedly practiced." This does not apply to the first impulsion, because it is not repeatedly practiced. If that were the case, it would not yield results. Therefore, showing a different meaning, he says "just as," etc. There, "facing the result" means "facing the giving of the result, having made an opportunity." And the making of an opportunity occurs by warding off another's result, due to the existence of many deeds done in beginningless transmigration. Thus it is said, "having warded off the result of another," etc. And "growth" is the conditioning of one's own causes, in the sense of being capable of giving strength to the kamma. The name is drawn by something uncommon, just as "the sound of a drum, a barley shoot." "Of consciousnesses" means of eye-consciousness, etc. "Because of being a special condition" means "because of being an additional condition." Showing by this that the compound has the same referent, "eye-dependent" and "form-cognizing," he says that the two terms "eye-dependent," etc., are mutually qualifying and qualified, like the words "blue lotus," etc. "Another consciousness" means mind-consciousness whose object is form. But in the sense of "form is the only object," divine eye-consciousness should be understood, applying that designation to similar things, just as "that very partridge, those very medicines." "Even if there is no jhāna-condition, there is no absence of jhāna-factor" — by this, he establishes the figurative jhāna-factor status of equanimity, etc., in the five consciousnesses. For it is not that by saying jhāna-factors are jhāna-conditions, their being jhāna-conditions is rejected. If so, equanimity, etc., in the five consciousnesses should not be called jhāna-factors. Thus he says "even if there is no jhāna-condition," etc. "Because of the nature of equanimity, etc." means "because of the nature of equanimity, pleasure, pain, and one-pointedness." "Because of the absence of another basis" is said with reference to mental stability itself. 436. The unwholesome is called "white" by the flow of the life-continuum. If the life-continuum is not white, how can the unwholesome, rooted in it, be white? Thus it is said, "and of the unwholesome." The reason for its whiteness should be stated. If its whiteness is due to another cause, or if it is its nature, then the mind is undefiled... It is said by its nature, and here, contact and so on do not become pure. Because the Blessed One, who knows the specific functions of phenomena by nature, thus designated consciousness alone. 439. By development without transgression. The striking of the sensitivity is the object's standing in the appropriate place. Thus it is said, "having struck the sensitivity, having gone to the range." Here, regarding "it is struck in the great elements," it itself is not struck by anything, nor is it struck by anyone, because its nature is intangible. But that which has become object and subject, by attaining the state of facing, by being the cause of the arising of consciousness, having attained a distinguished state, is spoken of as having the nature of being struck and striking. Therefore, the term "with resistance" is used for them. "It strikes the derived form" and so on should be understood as merely metaphorical. But some say, "When the great elements, which are the support of the body-sensitivity, are struck by a great-element-object, the sensitivity itself is also said to be struck; this should be investigated." From the statement of comparison by a partial commonality as intended, even though there is a prior and posterior state of the striking of the supported and the support, showing that it should be taken as a comparison in terms of similarity, he said, "for the purpose of showing the striking of both." 455. By the nature of its occurring as seeing and so on. Because mind-element and mind-consciousness-element are not seeing and so on, that is indeed their distinction. By its not having another support as a preceding mind. Because there is no preceding mind with another support. By the absence of another-supported consciousness as an immediate condition. By this, a distinction from functional mind-element is also stated. Thus it is said, "by the absence of the state of being an exit-door for the mind." It is not said, "by the absence of the state of being an exit and entrance door." Thus, the distinction of mind-consciousness-element from the three kinds of mind-element and consciousness-element is shown. For that very reason, it is merely the absence of a specific knowing. If mind-element is not called "mind-consciousness," then how is mind-element included there in "six consciousness-groups"? It is included because it is a teaching by way of synonym. For there is this synonym: "consciousness that is merely minding is mind-consciousness." just as “the element of mind is the mind-element.” Moreover, because of its nature as mind-consciousness, due to its functions in the base, and because of its arising and ceasing, and its being at the beginning and end, the mind-element is included in the mind-consciousness group, not in the other consciousness groups, as it is not of their nature. But here, because of its directness, and because mind-consciousness is a specific mental function arising from the mind, and because of its absence, it is said, “it is not called mind-consciousness” to establish this very meaning, and it is stated, “for that consciousness is not from the mind,” and so on. Thereby, it shows the absence of the mind-consciousness function in the mind-element in a direct sense. By “seeing and so on,” it shows the nature of the mind-element as being devoid of other consciousnesses. If similarity to the generator means the production of right resolve and so on by initial application and so on in great results, let right resolve and so on be produced by triple-rooted from triple-rooted, and by double-rooted from double-rooted. But how about double-rooted produced from triple-rooted? He says, “therein,” and so on. That falling into the stream would not be, as it is not immediate. Therefore, by “for that very reason,” and so on, he supports the mentioned falling into the stream with the immediate statement. If, even for existing initial application and so on in the mind-element and so on, there is a state of not being counted, like in the five consciousnesses, then how is their condition as jhana in the Patthana stated? For it is said, “the indeterminate phenomenon is a condition for the indeterminate phenomenon by way of jhana condition” (Patthana 1.1.431), “resultant indeterminate and functional indeterminate jhana factors are a condition for the associated aggregates and mind-originated forms by way of jhana condition” (Patthana 1.1.431). In the negative, too, “dependent on an indeterminate phenomenon, an indeterminate phenomenon arises, not by way of jhana condition; dependent on one aggregate accompanied by five consciousnesses, three aggregates,” and so on (Patthana 1.1.98), only the five consciousnesses are singled out, not the mind-element and so on. He says, “only by way of the jhana condition function,” and so on. Here, the strength or weakness of the jhana factors is not emphasized, but