English
unobstructed in the requisites of enlightenment, without a teacher, and is a suitable premonition for the arising of a Great Bodhi. Indeed, it arose with the basis of being a human male and so on. Pure in its object, by the perception of impurity in the body and so on. Showing the meaning of the word "aññathā" as determined by the context, he says "līnatā." "Līnatā" means shrinking, loss of energy, as the commencement of energy is intended. Therefore it is said, "this is my perfection of energy." The commentary on the Nidāna story is finished. 1. The Chapter on the Arising of Consciousness Commentary on the words of the Tika Mātikā 1. "By that" means by the word "vedanā." "By all terms" means it receives its name from the three terms, because the whole can be designated by a part, just as "equal powder." The questioner, not accepting the intended meaning, and noting that only the case-ending is a word, questions with "Is it not for sukha?" and so on. The other (replies) "the intended..." He explains his intention with phrases like, "for the purpose of explanation." Thereby he shows, "here, 'word' is said to be 'term'." By "hetupada, sahetukapada," etc., the word "etc." includes nahetupada, ahetukapada, hetusampayuttapada, and even hetuvippayuttapada. By "in terms of both and one term," the connection of the pair of causes is in terms of both terms, the connection of the pair of with-causes is in terms of one term. Similarly, by "in terms of both and one term." Here, by phrases like "the pair of with-causes and cause-associated," he shows the method: just as in the group of causes, the second and third pairs are connected to the first pair; the fourth and sixth pairs are connected to the first and second pairs; the fifth pair is connected to the first and third pairs; so too in the groups of defilements, etc. Indeed, by this very method, the connection between other pairs in those groups can be understood, except that in the groups of defilements, etc., the final pair is connected to the second and third pairs, and in the group of corruptions, it is connected to the second and fourth pairs. The terms "sappadesa" and "nippadesa" for the triads and pairs are stated in terms of the remaining and non-remaining states of phenomena. That part of the unincluded phenomena where the triads and pairs are seen or not seen as remaining, that is the "apadessa" (unspecified). If so, what is the purpose of the qualifier "unincluded"? It should be understood as making this very meaning clear. Or, "padesa" means a part, that by which a whole is indicated. As "general illumination rests on the specific," he says "unincluded" to show the intended specific meaning. "Anavajja" means blameless, the absence of fault. "Nāma" is designation, "kiriyā" is action, "payojana" is purpose, the explanation of a chariot and its parts in terms of their kind. "Kusala" means "to be grasped by wisdom (kusa)." Let this meaning apply to those associated with wisdom; how about those dissociated from wisdom? He says, "even for those dissociated from wisdom," etc. For even those dissociated from wisdom are driven by wisdom, as their activity, leading to welfare and happiness, is the practice of the wise. For there is no arising of wholesome states without proper attention. "If the wholesome has both aspects..." If someone were to say, "The defilement-cutting, the manifest, like kusa grass, they cut, therefore they are wholesome" —this meaning would be suitable," fearing such a thought, he said, "like the two right efforts." With "Na ca" and so on, it is shown that in "they bear their nature," there is no ultimate distinction between agent and object; the distinction is merely conceptual. Here, it is said in reference to what is known and unknown by name: those natures that are unknown by the term "dhamma" but known by the term "they bear their nature." Here, the first meaning is stated in terms of conditioned and unconditioned dhammas; the second, in terms of conditioned; the third, in terms of conditioned, unconditioned, and conceptual dhammas. The negation of wholesome is simply the absence of wholesome. For absence negates existence. "Dhamma" means intrinsic nature. The intention is that the word "unwholesome" does not denote any intrinsic nature. Now, if the word "unwholesome" were to denote some non-intrinsic nature, as in "conceptual dhammas" and so on, then "undetermined" should also be said. And from that, a tetrad would arise, not a triad. Therefore, because there is no dyad or tetrad, and no term "undetermined," and that arises from merely stating absence in the manner described, therefore. "Bearing intrinsic nature" and so on: by "and so on," the meaning "they are borne by conditions" is included. But by the term "dhamma" in the sense of "knowable," this is a fault. Is there no fault in the term "dhamma" even in the sense of "unknowable"? No, because it does not escape the stated fault. In "by elimination," is this "a" not merely an indicator of the three meanings of "not"? Rather, it is by the negation of that connection, as in "unconditioned dhammas," "a monastery without monks." By the negation of that relation, as in "unconditioned dhammas." For what is condition-arisen is related to conditions; thus, being uncondition-arisen, unrelatedness is here indicated. By the negation of that nature, as in "undemonstrable dhammas." For demonstrability is visibility. Now, eye-consciousness a demonstration, by the cessation of that particular state, and similarly, "untainted states." "States without impact, states without object" by the cessation of that function. "Formless states, non-mental states" by the cessation of that nature. For here, otherness is revealed. "Not human" by the cessation of that very nature. The mere state of being human is not similar to anything else, thus similarity is indicated here. "Not a recluse, one claiming to be a recluse, not a son" by the cessation of that potential quality. For here, reproach is understood. "Is it well with you, sir, a girl without a womb?" by the cessation of that lack of potential. "Unarisen states" by the cessation of that similar state. For past states, having arisen previously, and for dependent states, due to the partial completion of their causes, and their having begun to arise, and the existence of what is free from time, there is suitability for what has arisen, let alone for present states, thus their absence is understood here. "Learned states" by the cessation of that incompleteness. And their completion is revealed here, thus it illuminates many meanings. Why is it said that only two meanings are stated and the rest are left out? Because the others are very far removed here. For the unwholesome nature of states such as those dissociated from wholesome states is not appropriate. Immediately after uttering the word "unwholesome," for those to be trained, it is seen to be established in the meaning that is opposed to wholesome states, due to their practice. It is said "due to their conflicting nature," because the opposition of functions, etc., is also included within it. Even in conflicting nature, the nature of destroyer and what is to be destroyed is fixed in wholesome and unwholesome states, to show this, he says "due to their being abandonable." Otherwise, if wholesome states were also to be abandoned by unwholesome ones, then beings would be entirely filled with evil destinations, due to the complete uprooting of wholesome roots. But what is said, "Even states, monks, are to be abandoned" is said figuratively, as in "Form, monks, is not yours, abandon it," etc., in the sense of abandoning defilement that has that as its object. As it is said, "For not wholesome to be abandoned by the unwholesome." By words like 'contact', which indicate it. By being expressible by them, that is, by being expressible by those words like "states associated with pleasant feeling." Just as the meanings like blameless and pleasant-result are indicated by words like 'wholesome', so too the meaning of 'without result' is indicated by the word 'indeterminate', as it says, "and by the word 'indeterminate' itself." Without stating the reason, that is, without stating the reason because it is understood by what is said here. "Other... to be prevented" - by this, it shows that the word 'indeterminate' indicates those states of being wholesome and unwholesome, and those states that are contrary to both, just like the words 'wholesome' and 'unwholesome'. For the word 'without result' is not stated, and the word 'unwholesome' is also not stated. Since the word 'without result' might be in excess, and the unwholesome might not be stated as expressible by it, therefore, this is the application to the unwholesome not being indeterminate, that is, the unwholesome are not indeterminate. To avoid that, it speaks of the cessation of the indeterminate. If so, it should be said "pleasant-resultant and blameless." For blamelessness should be specified due to its variability, should it not? No, because the word 'pleasant-resultant' is not taken as a qualifier. For by the word 'pleasant-resultant', the state of being wholesome is fully understood, and the word 'blameless' here indicates some specific quality of the wholesome, namely, their not being censurable. And for that reason, it will itself explain that when it is stated as a qualifier, it shows the state of pleasantness of occurrence, and so on. The resultant states, which are specific forms of mental conduct, are especially called 'cessation of blame'. And since blameless states are mentioned in that Sutta in terms of the three kinds of conduct, to encompass and show them completely, it is said "devoid of blame." The state of destroying blame is shown, because the state of being a slayer of the vulnerable is fixed for dark and bright states. 'Savipākatā' means the state of having a result.