English
Homage to the Blessed One, the Accomplished, the Perfectly Self-Enlightened. In the Abhidhamma Piṭaka The Sub-commentary on the Five Treatises The Sub-commentary on the Dhātukathā Treatise Description of the Commencement of the Work To show the time-reference, saying that the assemblies and places for the teaching of the Dhātukathā treatise are as already stated, it begins with "teaching the Dhātukathā treatise." For by "He taught it immediately after that," the time of its teaching is indicated as being after the Vibhaṅga. As for those who say, "The Kathāvatthu treatise was taught immediately after the Vibhaṅga," refuting their view, it says, "immediately after the Vibhaṅga... to show." From the saying "Lusts are your first army" (Sn 438; Mahāniddesa 28; Cūḷaniddesa, Nandamāṇavapucchāniddesa 47), it is possible to say that the destruction of defilements is also the breaking of the strength of Māra, the son of a deity. However, since it is said "of the Māras of defilements and formations by making them non-arising," the breaking of the strength of Māra, the son of a deity, should be seen as the breaking of the strength of zeal and the strength of the assembly through the power of patience, faith, and so on. Transcending the sense-spheres is the transcending of the sense-sphere. By means of the comprehension of the abandonment of origination means by means of the comprehension of the realization of abandonment and the comprehension of the realization of penetration. Having considered the objection, "Is not this breaking of the five Māras also found in disciples?" it says, "without dependence on others," and so on. Having taken "the state of a hero is heroism," it is said, "Mahāvīriya (great heroism) means Mahāvīra (great hero)." Great heroism should be understood by the perfection of the pāramitā of heroism, by the fourfold foundation of heroism, and by the attainment of the four kinds of right effort, which are not common to others. For from that alone comes the success of his unflagging heroism. Saying that Abhidhamma discourse proceeds by establishing, relying on, and making the aggregates and so on as its object, it says, "or by way of being the foundation of Abhidhamma discourse." "Because they are spoken of" means because they, the aggregates and so on, are the subject of discourse. By this, it is said that a collection of expressions that is dependent on a specific meaning is a treatise. Or else, dh Elements are spoken of here; by this, it is called Dhātukathā, a collection of words and meanings thus proceeding. If so, the state of being Dhātukathā would apply to all seven treatises— referring to this objection, he says "although..." and so on. There, "sātisaya" means "with distinction," in a special, varied, and abundant manner, and because the teaching proceeds without remainder. For thus it is said: "All of the Dhammasaṅgaṇī is a matrix for the Dhātukathā." (Dhātu. 5). Therefore he says: "Indeed, only a partial exposition is made elsewhere." Now, in the teaching, where the word 'dhātu' is established, in accordance with those, showing the unique state of this treatise as Dhātukathā, he says "or by aggregates, sense-bases, and elements," and so on. There, "there" refers to aggregates, sense-bases, and elements. "Great is the scope, followed by distinctions, of these" means the elements have a great scope, not the aggregates and sense-bases, due to their lesser extent. Or by whatever nature phenomena, through inclusion and non-inclusion, association and dissociation, obtain their designation and detailed explanation, that nature is an element (dhātu). That element is taught here with distinction, because of the special exposition of elements, this treatise is called "Dhātukathā." Indeed, this word 'dhātu' has the meaning of 'nature,' as in "By nature, monks, beings associate," and so on (Saṃ. Ni. 2.98). "Dhātubheda" means the division of elements. "Pakaraṇa" is the remaining part of the statement. As to where the word 'pakaraṇa' is obtained, he says, "because the commentary proceeds in order for the seven treatises." "Having made the connection by that" means by that word 'pakaraṇa', having made the connection "the Dhātukathā is indeed a treatise, hence Dhātukathāpakaraṇa." "That elucidation" means that elucidation of the meaning of the Dhātukathāpakaraṇa, a commentary proceeding in the manner of elucidating meaning. Having said "I shall elucidate the meaning," and saying "listen to that," he engages them in attention through the ear-door, so he says, "the meaning is: attend by listening to the words of that elucidation." The commentary on the introduction to the text is finished. 1. Commentary on the Matrix 1. Commentary on the Matrix of Methods 1. "By fourteen kinds" means by fourteen types. The meaning is: by fourteen terms. Therein, “Inclusion, non-inclusion” this is one term. Similarly, “Association, dissociation.” But “associated with what is included, dissociated” and so on, three terms each, are each one term. In the others, the division of terms is very easy to understand. By these: by these modes of inclusion and so on. Leading is bringing, and that is both causing to occur and making known, thus the meaning is stated in two ways: “is caused to occur and is made known.” The ways themselves, when enumerated, are the matrix. In both meanings, the modes of inclusion and so on are called “ways” because they are the means of the actions of causing to occur and knowing. Therefore, it is said in the commentary: “by this way of inclusion and so on.” Of terms: of words that illuminate meaning. For a term is that by which meaning is attained. And “of terms” is the genitive case in the sense of possessive relation, but “of the treatise” is in the sense of part-whole relation. 2. Description of the Inner Matrix 2. Their meanings: the meanings of dependent origination. For dependent origination is that from which formations and so on arise dependently; individually, ignorance and so on are the causal phenomena. Thus it is said in the Saṅkhāra Piṭaka: “twelve causes, twelve dependent originations.” Of these: of aggregates and so on. As shown in that way: shown merely by way of enumeration and division. Why is dependent origination taken here only in its twelvefold aspect? Is it not the case that becoming there is divided into kamma-becoming and so on, and sorrow and so on are taken here in the Pāli text in their own nature? Referring to this question, he says: “therein” and so on. Therein, therein: in that commentary statement where it is said: “by one hundred and twenty-five terms.” Kamma-becoming by way of causing to be, rebirth-becoming by way of being. From the perspective of the meaning of the term, kamma-becoming is that from which one becomes, thus it is becoming; the other becomes, or is becoming. By way of suffering rooted in that: by way of suffering rooted in old age and death. “The entire Dhamma-saṅgaṇī is the matrix of the Dhātukathā.” This too is merely the declaration of the matrix of the Dhātukathā, thus “the entire… and so on… is the matrix.” He, not accepting the statement “spoken outside the Mātikā of Dhātukathā,” says “or else,” and so on. The meaning is: spoken within another treatise, not as the Mātikā of Dhātukathā. Although it is spoken here not as the Mātikā, yet being included in another treatise, it is to be taken from elsewhere, and thus is considered external. The five aggregates, and so on, taken in their own form, are internal. Therefore, he says, “because they are shown and established in their own form.” “Not included in the Mātikā” means not included in the Mātikā in its own form, not otherwise. For there is no concept not included in the Mātikā. “In a scattered manner” means in a dispersed, spread-out manner in the aggregate analysis, and so on, separately. 3. Description of the Nayamukhamātikā The exposition of the modes of collection and other specific methods, that is the door, as it is the place of their emergence. The previously mentioned phenomena, namely the aggregates, sense bases, and elements as appropriate, and the formless aggregates— their enumeration is the Nayamukhamātikā. Therefore, he says, “of the modes,” and so on. They are prone to separation, or separation exists for them, thus they are 'separators'; likewise 'associators'; and phenomena of collection and non-collection are 'separators' and 'associators'; and phenomena of collection... and so on... meaning, they are of a nature to operate by way of collecting and not collecting, and by way of separating and associating. By “all fourteen,” and so on, he makes that very meaning clearer. “By which” means by which aggregates, and so on, and by which formless aggregates. “Those four” means those four, collection, and so on. “Even with truths,” and so on, means even with truths, faculties, dependent origination, and so on. “As far as possible” means according to what is possible, that is, whichever term is suitable to be called collected or not collected. That collection and non-collection. “By those that are agents of collection” means by those that are agents of the act of collecting. “By them” means by truths, and so on. “Not by those that are objects of collection” means collection and non-collection are not stated by truths, and so on, which are the instruments of the act of collecting. For even there, he shows that the aggregates, sense bases, and elements alone are the instruments. “Only by the aggregates, and so on, as collectors” means only by the aggregates, and so on, as instruments for the act of collecting. by the elders, “Those phenomena which are included in the aggregate classification, are not included in the sense-base classification, are not included in the element classification, those phenomena are not included in the four aggregates, nor in the two sense-bases, nor in the eight elements.” Thus, inclusion and non-inclusion were defined and stated.