English
of eye-sense-base, eye-element, eye-faculty, and so on. And just as in the pairs of objects, so too in the five pairs of form-sense-base, form-element, and so on, there is a triple combination. The pairs of female faculty, male faculty, and life faculty, and the pairs of subtle forms, are combined with all other pairs; thus, this triple combination should be understood. But is it not the case that this combination also was not taught by the Blessed One, and therefore should not be done? This is not absolute. Why? Even a combination made by the method given by the Blessed One is the teaching of the Blessed One himself. For thus it is said in the commentary on the mātikā (Dhammasaṅgaṇī Aṭṭhakathā 1-6): "Conditions and phenomena are unconditioned, and... this too comes into being,” and so on. For coming into being is the cause of grasping. The description of the collection of three kinds of form is finished. The description of the collection of four kinds of form, and so on. 586. “It arises only from mind,” thus, “mind-arisen.” Taking this very meaning, it is said, “the mind-arisen pair, having the same course as the pairs of intimation, and so on.” For when commonality is eliminated, the form that arises from mind among the generative conditions, that arises only from mind. By “pairs of intimation, and so on,” the word “and so on” includes the pairs co-existent with mind and following after mind. “Being obtainable,” means that the form that is grasped, some of it is mind-arisen, some is not mind-arisen. The form that is not grasped, some of it is mind-arisen, some is not mind-arisen, thus being obtainable. By “pairs with manifestation, and so on,” the word “and so on” includes the pairs of resistant great elements, and so on. “By that” means by the mind-arisen pair. “Of that” means of the mind-arisen pair itself. “Others, however,” means other miscellaneous pairs, besides the pairs of intimation, mind-arisen, co-existent with mind, and following after mind. Since the sound-ayatana is entirely ungrasped, it is said, “excluding the pairs of objects of ear-contact, and so on.” “Tetrads are obtainable” means that the form that is grasped, some of it is an object of eye-contact, some is not an object of eye-contact. The form that is ungrasped, some of it is an object of eye-contact, some is not an object of eye-contact. Thus, by connecting with the pairs obtainable from all objects, external sense bases, and so on, tetrads are obtainable. “By the remaining ones” means by the remaining ones from the stated group of pairs, from the pairs obtainable from object, external sense base, form element, and so on. “Of these” means of the pairs grasped, ungrasped, graspable, and mind-arisen. “Of others” means of other pairs, besides the grasped pair, and so on, such as the grasping pair, and so on. By “pairs of bases, and so on,” the word “and so on” includes the pairs of eye-ayatana, and so on. Here too, by the remaining ones, tetrads are not obtainable by connecting these and others. This is the connection. The description of the collection of forms, beginning with the fourfold, is finished. The description of the outline is finished. Division of Form Description of the Single Category 594. Just as the nature of the elements such as earth is to be afflicted, so too they are not common in terms of being causes, etc. Therefore, it is said, "where there is no division," that they should not be divided into causes. The definition is simply showing the nature of the absence of division. And having done so, because Nibbāna is also without division, it is said by way of definition, "the unconditioned element," and no more. Although "hetu" (cause) refers only to non-greed and other wholesome states, because they are that by which one abandons or establishes wholesome states, etc., yet because of the commonality of being a condition, the great elements, etc., are also referred to by the word "hetu." Therefore, the author, using the second word "hetu" which signifies "root," specifies it as "root-cause." The wholesome states, etc., are called "three wholesome roots" (Dhs. 1059-1060) because they are the root-causes that support the establishment of wholesome states. In the Paṭṭhāna, these very same are called "hetu-paccaya" (root-condition). Therefore, it is said, "This is the meaning: root-cause or condition-cause." "Hetu" means that by which or from which a result arises. "Paccaya" means that from which something arises or proceeds. Thus, considering that the words "hetu" and "paccaya" are not different in meaning, the word "paccaya" is used as a synonym for "hetu." Therefore, it is said, "because the words hetu and paccaya are synonymous." All form, whether dependent on the three elements or the derived forms dependent on the four great elements, is always, everywhere, and in every way caused by the four great elements. And the great elements are taken in general, without specific distinctions. Therefore, it is said, "the cause of the aggregate of form." Of the undertakings of kamma: of the kamma that are undertaken, or of the kamma performed after undertaking. In other conditions, in craving, ignorance, etc., for the result. "It is impossible, monks, it is not possible, that a pleasant, lovely, agreeable result should arise from bodily misconduct. This is not possible. But it is possible, monks, that an unpleasant, disagreeable result should arise from bodily misconduct." an undesirable, unpleasant, disagreeable result might arise. This is a possibility. Of speech… (etc.)… of mind… (etc.)… is a possibility… (etc.)… “This is not a possibility, monks, it is an impossibility, that for one who has practiced good conduct, an undesirable, unpleasant, disagreeable result might arise.” (M.N. 3.131; Vibh. 809) “Action divides beings, that is to say, into low and excellent.” (M.N. 3.289) – From such statements, it is said that action determines the desirability or undesirability of the result, thus it is stated “because it determines desirable and undesirable results.” The conditions of destiny, substratum, time, and successful or unsuccessful application are the basis for the result’s arising. For without these, no result arises. When the aforementioned conditions exist, the desirable and undesirable objects to be attained are described as “destiny… (etc.)… produced.” Since a result cannot exist without an object, the object is also a primary cause for it. “Because it is not of another nature” means because it is not of the nature of cause, etc. Ruppanaṃ is rūpa. In “This has that,” the word “this” refers to the earth element, etc., which is said to be ruppati, thus it is stated “because only that which possesses the characteristic of being afflicted is material form.” “This nature” means that when this nature arises, it determines in rūpa the nature of being knowable by the six consciousnesses, because only rūpa has that nature. “Not rūpa in this” indicates that because rūpa can exist even when it does not possess that nature due to temporal differences, rūpa is not to be restricted to that. “For there is…” (etc.) further clarifies the absence of restriction of rūpa to that. “This very…” (etc.) connects the designation with the definition. Here, the word “eva” in the definition restricts or ascertains that this very aforementioned nature is to be restricted to rūpa. The aforementioned restriction, which is the state of being knowable by the six consciousnesses when it arises, is called “restriction” because it is to be restricted; this exists in rūpa, because only rūpa has that nature. Or, the aforementioned restriction is the ascertainment of the specific time in the manner stated; this exists only in rūpa, it is possible, unlike in non-material things where it is not possible, this meaning should be understood. “Temporal difference” means k to touch. Not having touched, means not having grasped. All that, means all form, which, not having been touched, is of the nature of being knowable by the formless, just like that, in terms of time. Arisen, by this, he specifies by touching the time, “arisen… …indeed.” All present form is of the nature of being seen, heard, smelled, tasted, touched, and known. That, each according to its own, is of the nature of being knowable by the six consciousnesses, and not unknowable by them. Nor is it that only what has arisen is of the nature of being knowable by the six consciousnesses, as that would lead to the absence of a definitive characteristic. Thus, even when the meaning is explained without distortion, the questioner, not understanding the intention, raises the objection, “Is it not the case that…?” implying that everything would then be an object for everything. The other person, “Having gathered all form together,” explains his own intention. Here, “having taken as one,” is the explanation of the meaning of “having gathered together.” The definitive characteristic is precisely the nature of being knowable by the six consciousnesses. This is what is meant: Although there is no universal objectivity for all, because the five consciousnesses do not operate in other spheres, yet, since all form is an object for the six consciousnesses, and is knowable by the six consciousnesses each according to its own, there is indeed knowability by the six consciousnesses. That, taken in the sense of being collected as one, is why it is said, “All arisen form is knowable by the six consciousnesses,” just as it is said, “The fifth jhāna, attained through supernormal knowledge, has six objects.” Just as, to show the distinction from the first jhāna and so on, in terms of objects, it is said, “The fifth jhāna, attained through supernormal knowledge, has six objects,” even though it is not universally objective for the divine eye, divine ear, and other supernormal knowledges individually, but is taken as one in terms of a definitive characteristic; similarly, to show the distinction of form