English
or in this... Regarding the description of the six. The meaning is that six are stated, not nine. Therefore it says, "by the past," and so on. These three, however, are said with reference to what was shown separately by oneself immediately after. "As shown" means the present, past, and so on, which are directly stated in the Pāli, and which are to be determined and shown in the commentary. The statement "they are not found separately" is made clearer here by "there, there," and so on. There, by reverse questions, such as "But for whom the feeling aggregate arose, for him did the form aggregate arise?" these are questions that proceed in reverse of what was stated in the first section. For that very reason, because it can be connected by method. And in mixed time divisions, the meaning is not only in unmixed time divisions, but also in mixed time divisions. Showing that the previous non-connection was not merely for ease of connection, but also for ease of understanding, it says, "unmixed... and so on... stated." By which reason, by the reason of the arising and cessation of aggregates, which are encompassed by a single pair of terms, in the sense of acquisition. The names "prior question" and "posterior question" are stated in order. The word "ca" (and) should be connected by determining that the name "prior and posterior question" is stated. There, however, "encompassed by a single pair of terms" should be taken as a single unit. The same meaning is explained by "for whom," and so on. There, "for whom" refers to which question. Here, "question" should be understood as a statement that proceeds by way of asking. Therefore it says, "because it encompasses the meaning to be answered completely." That answering by showing its nature is "that answering." Or, "that answering" is that for which there is the aforementioned answering. Of that answering. By the former part, by the former indicative term. For in this case, the synonymity of the answering term means similarity of meaning. By one term, by one primary or secondary pair of terms, not only by the first term, is the meaning. Merely by the commonality of arising and cessation. or of cessation, by the mere sameness of being obtainable. The concluding term…etc.… is said to be appropriate in the commentary, because the previous question was shown with phrases like “where the form aggregate does not arise.” Although it is said there that the arising of the feeling aggregate is obtainable, because it was answered with “arises,” the meaning is that the previous question is appropriate on account of the non-arising of the form aggregate, which is included in the concluding term and stands as authorized in the Pāli. Thus, there is a similarity in meaning with the former part. In “For whom the form aggregate did not arise, for him the feeling aggregate did not arise,” the rejection of the latter is made by way of rejecting the non-arisen-before-ness of the form aggregate; thus, the aforementioned rejection of the form aggregate itself is stated as primary. The same method applies in other similar instances, so it says, “Rejection is the denying of the meaning of the concluding term itself.” But in “For whom the form aggregate arises, for him the feeling aggregate ceases,” the cessation of the feeling aggregate is questioned by making the arising of the form aggregate a characteristic; thus, that very thing is denied with “no.” The same method applies in other similar instances, so it is said, “Denial is the prevention of the meaning of doubt.” By “devoid of the particle ‘na’ (not),” it states that denial is denied. If so, what is the difference between the Pāli, the course, the denial, and the answers? It says, “There, the arising…” etc. By way of inserting a part of them, meaning, by way of inserting a part of those four questions and five answers. Therefore, the commentary says, “In the first instance, by showing the nature of the complete question in the former part…” etc. To show that which, among the questions and answers, obtains insertion in twenty-seven instances, it is said, “It is indeed a complete question…” etc. In “from showing the Pāli arrangement,” etc., the word “etc.” refers to the division of questions, the answering instances, and the method of applying them in a single question. should be understood. The word from the Pāli text, "for the Suddhāvāsas," etc., is extracted to show its meaning. The answer to "For whom, where, the form aggregate did not arise, for them, there, the feeling aggregate did not arise" is "for those in the Suddhāvāsas, there." Here, it means that in one realm, there is no second rebirth, meaning for one noble person, there is no second conception in one realm. Regarding the third time, etc., there is nothing to say. To show how this meaning is made known, it is said, "for from conception onwards...pe...occurred." This shows that this teaching occurred in terms of the past and present. When it is questioned how, in the case of non-kamma-born wholesome states, etc., it is spoken of in terms of arising and ceasing, taking the kamma-born continuum, defined by taking and depositing, as one, he shows that these too are dependent on it here, saying, "for in that...pe...shown." "By that very means" means by the kamma-born continuum. "Therefore" means because the vipāka continuum born of one kamma is taken as one. "Of that" means of the kamma-born continuum. To raise a question and answer it himself, as to why, if in each of the five Suddhāvāsas it is understood from the aforementioned Pāli text that "there is no second rebirth in one realm," it is not understood from the general statement "for the Suddhāvāsas" that it is not in all Suddhāvāsas, he says, "But why," etc. Here, in the Suddhāvāsas, if there is no maturation of faculties for one in a lower realm, the arising in a higher realm cannot be denied, due to the statement about the "upwards-streamer." For "upwards-streamer" means one whose stream of craving and stream of existence are upwards. Therefore, he says, "due to the existence of the Pāli text on the upwards-streamer." "Should be harmonized" means should be led so that they do not contradict. And it has been commented upon in that way. By this conclusion, it means by the certainty of the non-arising of form in the marked space. "Are distinguished" means those who are of such a nature of form. "Even the non-percipient beings" means not only the five-constituent beings, but also Indeed, even the non-percipient beings. The intention is to take these very non-percipient beings and place them in the former category. Therefore, those who are devoid of the aforementioned conclusion, it means they should not be spoken of in that way. Now, it shows starting with "they from that." "From that" means from the state of non-perception. Regarding "those of the last existence," to show the nature of the last existence, it is said "what, the five-constituent existence, etc." Just as for those who are not of the last existence, in the formless realm, the form aggregate does not arise, so too for those of the last existence there, the feeling aggregate also does not arise, he says, "because it is included by this conclusion." Therefore, he says, "for them... etc.... he says." There, "for them" means for those of the last existence. "There" means in the formless realm. And the non-arising state of the other, meaning the non-arising of the feeling aggregate. It should be understood that for the Pure Abode beings who have rebirth, the breaking of the aggregates, which is a term for final Nibbāna, is spoken of in common with the calming of defilements, due to the abandonment of gross faults. "Indeed, for all of them" means for all the Pure Abode beings residing in their respective planes. And by "just as," etc., he makes the stated meaning clearer. "Infinite are the world-elements" is said to show the boundlessness of space. Impossible in terms of individuals due to having the same support and being simultaneous, but possible in terms of space, they become as if mixed, he says, "there is a mixed state." The explanation of the mode of occurrence is finished. 3. The explanation of the mode of full understanding 206-208. "Of that also" means of the individual-space mode also. "Of the individual in space" means of that very individual qualified by space, the individual in the space as understood. And just as when the individual mode is obtained, the individual-space mode is also obtained, so too the space mode might be obtained—referring to this objection, he says, "and the space mode." "Therefore" means because even when space is spoken of, it is spoken of as a qualification of the individual, not separately, therefore. "Otherwise" means like in the mode of occurrence, a single karmically produced continuum, defined by taking and depositing... taken by that, in the sense of full understanding through its arising and ceasing. To show the absence of the other, by showing the absence of meaning contained in the conclusive phrase “Whoever fully understands the aggregate of form,” it is said, “because of the absence of fully understanding the aggregate of form.” And “Yes, sir” was said. Therefore, it means that here the three times are obtained only in the sense of present mind-moments. The connection of the two phrases, “one endowed with the highest path and an Arahant,” is with the two phrases, “they do not fully understand the aggregate of form, and they did not fully understand the aggregate of feeling,” respectively. However, “the remaining individuals, excluding” should be applied to each. “Highest path…etc…is not” shows that the act of full understanding is pre-eminent, reaching its peak only with the knowledge of the Arahant path, and not with others due to its absence. Because its diamond-like nature is stated, and the lightning-like nature of the others. By that: by that statement as explained. All other individuals: