English
For the question follows the enumeration. Thus, in an enumeration with a specific number, such as "which are the three?", the question is also made with a specific number. With the intention that when the enumeration merely states the existence of qualities, a numerical specification should not be made, just as a specification of nature, ground, cause, or fruit, etc., it is said: "in an unspecified enumeration," etc. However, from the phrase "unconditioned qualities," the qualities, divided into many kinds below, are enumerated by the plural without a specific number, and they are similarly enumerated above. Therefore, due to that falling into the ear, even if there is no division in ultimate reality, it would be appropriate to say that the enumeration is made by the plural without a specific number, because there is some division in the two words, the unconditioned quality and the uncompounded quality, taken as having a figurative division by being spoken of as the destruction of passion with substratum remaining and without substratum remaining, etc., and as uncompounded, etc. The questions and conclusions follow the enumeration, so they also proceed in that way. The explanation, however, It should be understood that this is done to show that there is no ultimate difference, as the element of the unconditioned is stated to be such, by means of distinguishing and clarifying its nature as intended. When someone asks out of a desire to explain, the question is made by the one to whom it is explained, and thus the question is asked following an ignorance or doubt regarding that matter. Therefore, it is said, "the question is made on account of one who is ignorant of the nature..." The commentary's connection of questions, mentioned in "before the exposition" and so on, is thus clarified. 1101. "Having divided" means having distinguished. "Form... knowable" means that sensory-sphere wholesome and great functional consciousness, by way of contemplating great-extent phenomena as appropriate, by way of reviewing great-extent measure phenomena, by way of attachment and enjoyment of great-extent phenomena with unwholesome mind-consciousness accompanied by form-attachment and formless-attachment, and by way of attention that operates with respect to each designation and each convention, and which precedes the aforementioned consciousnesses, sensory-sphere phenomena are not knowable. "By others" means by those with a limited object. "Of sensory-sphere objects alone" is a genitive of determination. By consciousnesses with form-objects and so on, there is unknowability of sounds and so on by form-object consciousness, and knowability of form. Thus, the application should be seen in the remaining cases too. It should be applied by distinguishing doors, such as the unknowability of sounds and so on by eye-door, and the knowability of form. "Other" means agreeable-neutral, disagreeable, and disagreeable-neutral. "Form-sphere and so on by sensory-sphere results and so on" should be applied as: form-sphere, formless-sphere, and supramundane designations are unknowable by sensory-sphere results, by supramundane, by wholesome and functional consciousness disjoined from knowledge, and by unwholesome consciousness from the sensory-sphere. The nature of not knowing Nibbāna is its own origin. 1102. "Attachment free from wrong view in the existence of rebirth due to form-sphere and formless-sphere karma is the defilement of existence." It is said that attachment with wrong view, having the aforementioned scope, and attachment having the scope of all sensory-sphere phenomena, is fit to be the defilement of sensuality. "Defilement of existence..." he will himself speak of the absence of craving, which is freed from the canker of sensuality and the canker of existence. In the Pāli, that is, in the Pāli of the commentary section. There, just as it is said, "The canker of sensuality arises in the eight consciousnesses accompanied by craving," so, without saying, "The canker of existence arises in the eight consciousnesses accompanied by craving," it is said, "It arises in the four consciousnesses accompanied by craving, dissociated from wrong view" (Dhs. 1465). Therefore, it is said with emphasis in the Pāli, "The canker of existence... ...arises only in those dissociated." And so it will be said, "The canker of existence arises in the four consciousnesses dissociated from wrong view, together with the canker of ignorance, as one and the same" (DhsA. 1473). That too is craving, that is, craving accompanied by the eternalist view. It is appropriate to say that the desire for sensual existence is the canker of sensuality. For there is also a way of speaking of the desire for sensual existence, which is craving accompanied by the eternalist view, as the canker of existence. Therefore, it is said, "Craving accompanied by the eternalist view, desire in the sense of craving for existence, is called the canker of existence," not to show that they have the nature of the canker of existence intended here. This is the meaning to be understood in the commentary. For it is said, "The canker of existence is the canker in both kinds of existence, namely, existence as form and formless, due to kamma and due to rebirth." There, let the desire for sensual existence have the nature of the canker of sensuality. But what about the craving accompanied by the eternalist view in the existences of form and formless? That too, when it arises in the aforementioned sphere due to desire, is indeed the canker of sensuality. For all phenomena of the three realms are called sensuality because they are desirable. And there is no undesirable consequence here, because craving dissociated from wrong view is separately extracted as having the nature of the canker of existence. And this must necessarily be understood in this way, otherwise, craving accompanied by the annihilationist view in the existences of form and formless would also fall into the nature of the canker of existence. The cankers of sensuality and so on are spoken of in two ways, as cankers pertaining to this life and cankers pertaining to the next life. 1103. Here, even in the Pāli, it is not impossible to connect the craving freed from the canker of existence with the nature of the canker of sensuality. The word 'bridge' is said in the 'Description of the Taint of Sensual Desire' and so on. Some say, 'Desire for Dhamma is faith'. 1105. It operates only in the aggregates of clinging, because in ultimate truth, there is no phenomenon apart from them that is an object of grasping as a living essence. Or it does not become established in form... and so on... in consciousness, because of clinging to some aspect that is merely conceived in them, superimposed by oneself, having stood only in the non-perverted nature of form and so on. Therefore it is said, 'having made it other than that'. That means, from the aggregates of clinging. Indeed, some holding wrong views see even feeling and so on as impermanent. Or 'from that' means from the aggregate of form, which is the body. Indeed, it is said, 'the life-principle is one thing, the body another'. 'It is' means 'the self exists eternally'. 'Other' means other than Brahmā, Īsvara, and so on. Just as the formless existence, which is attained by abandoning desire for form, the form existence is to be attained by abandoning desire for sensual pleasures. And for the Brahmās with form, the desire for the five strands of sensual pleasure is abandoned, but not the desire for mansions and so on. Thus, considering that [the desire for mansions] is not a sensual desire, it is rejected in the commentary that it is not a taint of sensual desire. However, by the sub-commentators, by showing the absence of greed apart from the taint of sensual desire and the taint of existence, and because even the desire for mansions and so on of the Brahmās with form is of the nature of sensual desire and so on, it is shown that all greed apart from the desire for form and formless existence, unaccompanied by wrong view, is the taint of sensual desire. What is appropriate there should be considered and taken. It may be associated with taints in its co-arising with desire for sensual pleasures or desire for existence, it may be dissociated from taints in its co-arising with other desires. And by showing the absence of greed apart from the taint of sensual desire and the taint of existence, through the Pāli passage 'in the four wrong views' and so on, and by showing the Pāli passage 'the taint of sensual desire' and so on, it establishes the nature of wrong view-desire as the taint of sensual desire. 'For the purpose of showing what is to be abandoned' means for the purpose of showing abandonability. 'Abandonment' means the sign of abandonment. 1121. 'By birth' means by the attainment of birth such as the nature of a warrior. 'By clan' means by a distinguished clan such as the Gotama clan. 'By being a son of a good family' means by being of a great family. 'By beauty of complexion' means by having a body endowed with beauty. Indeed, 'pokkhara' is said to mean body. Do not He makes it arise, he makes it happen. Arisen conceit, arising. A specific individual, meaning a specific individual of the type "superior to the superior" and so on. Conceit that arises by breaking down the superior, is superior-conceit. Of the three, meaning of the three "superior to the superior" and so on, which are spoken of without relying on another individual, such as "I am superior." The grasping, the conceit, of oneself in terms of being superior and so on, the making of that, is just the arising of "I am superior" and so on, thus it is said, "the doing of the act of 'superior' and so on." 1140. All greed is of the nature of covetousness, thus covetousness is of the nature of the two cankers, and sensual passion is of the nature of the canker of sensuality;