English
should be investigated, it is not fitting, is the meaning. For the state of being an agent in a sequence of persons is a succession of agents. 170. “One extreme” means the extreme called the grasping of eternity. 176. “It might be another, it might be not another, it might not be describable as ‘another or not another’,” since it is similar to the doctrine of the Nigaṇṭhas that proceeds in this way, that very one is not that, nor is it another, is merely a view. Therefore he said, “But this does not exist at all.” “According to the wish of another” means according to the view of the opponent. “For one who does not wish for one” means for one who rejects the grasping “he acts, he experiences” due to fear of the eternalist view, the other, the annihilationist grasping, has arisen. And for one who rejects that, another mixed grasping of permanence and impermanence, and a grasping of distraction, has arisen. “Having stood in the desire for an agent and an experiencer” means having stood in this acceptance that he himself is the agent and the experiencer. “By not wishing for this or that” means by not accepting that or that view. “Even by way of what has arisen” means this inquiry is stated by way of the grasping that has arisen, is the connection. “Because all have arisen” means because all the alternatives have arisen in sequence in the manner stated below, this inquiry is not made, is the connection. “Of each one individually” means because each one of them individually has arisen. “But by way of the system, those alternatives are shown together,” is the intention. It should be connected as one, because all four questions were asked together. The description of the inquiry into human effort is finished. The chapter on wholesome things is finished. 14. Description of the Inquiry into Supernormal Knowledge 193. In “he transforms,” the word “iti” has the meaning of “etc.” or “manner.” By that, it includes “he hears sounds with the divine ear element,” etc. “The inquiry into supernormal knowledge should be seen,” is the connection. “Of one possessing that supernormal knowledge” means of one possessing the supernormal knowledge of the destruction of defilements. “Proof of an Arahant” means of the Arahant, the non-existence of a person is established by the ultimate truth. “Of its existence” means of Arahantship. For the aggregates of those who possess Arahantship are indeed a person, and that too exists. The explanation of the section on higher knowledge is finished. 15-18. Explanation of the section on relatives, etc. 209. “Being of the third category” means having the nature of the third category, having a nature free from the conditioned and the unconditioned. “Of nature” means of a natural phenomenon. “Having concealed the view” means without revealing the view that a person is neither conditioned nor unconditioned. The explanation of the section on relatives, etc., is finished. 19. Explanation of the section on penetration, etc. 218. “Understanding” does not exist because dispassion, etc., are not causes. The connection is “and it shows the ability to delineate.” 228. “Being with form” is being endowed with form; “being without form” is being separated from it. Thus, both of these are the going inward and the coming outward of form. Therefore, it is said that these two are the characteristic phrases for “being with form” and “being without form.” 237. “Gross” means coarse. “Self” is that in which the conceit “I am” is placed; it is existence. That very existence, being obtainable by one’s own kamma, is “acquisition.” By both terms, the existence in the sense-sphere is stated. “Mind-made acquisition of self” is the existence in the form-sphere. For it is mind-made, being produced by the mind of jhāna. “Formless acquisition of self” is the existence in the formless-sphere. For it is formless, being unmixed with form. Thus, this meaning should be understood here. However, the worldly usage “self” is established in the sense of a living being. Showing that even the Perfectly Enlightened Ones use such an established worldly usage, even when there is no living being, having said, “These are the designations of the world, by which the Tathāgata speaks,” now, explaining how they speak, he says, beginning with “without grasping.” “By way of individual and common characteristics” means by way of individual characteristics such as hardness and touch, and by way of common characteristics such as impermanence, etc. “By this” means by the statement of the non-existence of a person in the ultimate sense, as stated by “by way of individual and common characteristics,” etc. “Before this” means in various places, each. The explanation of the rejection of disputes and so on, which is presented by way of clarification, is prior to this explanation of the meaning. Or, by this, it means the statement made in the commentary, "Just as phenomena like material form," and so on. The word "ca" (and) in "yathā ca" (and just as) is used in the sense of conjunction. Thereby, it summarizes the non-transgression of conventional terms. This is what is said: Just as there is no clinging, because one should not cling to regional dialects, and just as there is no transgression of conventional terms, so too should the preceding explanation of meaning be applied. For if there were transgression of conventional terms, there would be an interruption of all worldly discourse. Therefore, "true" means that because one speaks merely by worldly convention, without imposing the ultimate aspect there, and without transgressing the conventional term, it is true, because it does not deceive others. "Having a true cause" means that which has the true, the unvarying nature of phenomena, as its cause, as its reason for arising, is "having a true cause." It is an ultimate statement, meaning it is concerned with the unperverted nature of phenomena. Therefore, it is said, "It arises from the suchness of phenomena." The explanation of the practice of penetration and so on is concluded. The explanation of the discourse on individuals is concluded. 2. Discourse on Decline 1. Explanation of the Discourse on the Decline of Arguments and Justifications 239. This Sutta should be understood as merely a characteristic. For this Sutta too: "Monks, these five things lead to the decline of a bhikkhu who is temporarily liberated" is a basis for the decline of non-returners and so on, not of an Arahant. "Temporarily liberated" is a name for a trainee who has attained the eight attainments. As it is said: "And what kind of person is temporarily liberated? Here, a certain person from time to time, from occasion to occasion, dwells having touched the eight liberations with the body, and having seen with wisdom, some of his defilements are destroyed. This person is called 'temporarily liberated'." And "subject to decline" refers to an ordinary person and a certain trainee, not an Arahant. Therefore, because the Suttas shown are a basis for the doctrine of decline for non-returners and so on, not for an Arahant, therefore. Relying on that, that a Looking at it, since here, in "even for an Arahant," there is decline even for an Arahant, what then to say of Anāgāmins and others? This meaning is taken. Therefore, showing the meaning condensed by the word 'pi' (even), he said: "even for an Arahant... etc. ...should be applied." Or, since here, although the second discourse came in the way of a Sekkha (learner), the first and third discourses came also in the way of an Asekha (non-learner), this is their doctrine. Therefore, "even for an Arahant" is stated in the commentary. Thus he said: "This discourse is for an Arahant," and so on. In the third, concerning the question: "Is there decline for all Arahants?" Indeed, it is the third question among those that came with "Are all Arahants," and so on. "Of them" means of those with dull faculties. In "even in the third," the word 'pi' (even) is a collection of stated meanings. By it, he collects the first question: "There too, those with keen faculties are intended." "He himself does not decline" means a Stream-enterer does not decline from the state of a Stream-enterer. And here, the ceasing of the state of a Stream-enterer by attaining the state of a Once-returner is not a decline, because it is an attainment of distinction. For decline is from a state of distinction. "The others" are Once-returners and so on. "For the sake of the higher path" means for the attainment of the three higher paths, without taking the meaning stated as "fixed." The explanation of the discourse on the decline of logical arguments is concluded. 2. Explanation of the discourse on the decline of the comparison of Noble Individuals. 241. "From that" means from Arahantship. "There" means in the fruit of the path of insight. "By effort" means by the exertion of insight. "Immediately after that" means immediately after the fruit of Stream-entry. First, one attains Arahantship immediately after the fruit of the path of insight. Then, having declined, if one strives again, one does not attain Arahantship immediately after that. What is the logic here? This is the intention. It should be noted that an opponent speaks both logically and illogically, so why seek logic in his argument? The path of development, being of the nature of non-decline, is like the path of insight, being a Noble Path. And here, there is no doubt of non-establishment, because the supramundane path is established as a Noble Path even for others. Nor is there non-exclusivity with the mundane path, for the Noble... because it is distinguished by a specific condition. Similarly, there is no contradiction, as the state of the path of development for the second path and so on, and the abandonment of gross defilements and so on, are established by the arrival of another. The explanation of the decline of the noble individual's connection is finished. 3.