English
What is to be avoided is that which is dissociated from a cause. Even so, even if it is taken by the second word "cause," it does not follow. Even though causes are many, and this is a general designation, the intention is that it is designated as a qualifier to illuminate the generality. Therefore, it is said, "individually... etc.... stated." Even without the second h Even though by 'cause' the associated state with cause is established, what was said by this, "this is not exclusive," that very thing is indicated. But it was not said with reference to one who suspects that 'causes' is not appropriate to be taken as effect-produced, because the cause itself is taken as a condition. Therefore, it is said, "it could be taken even so." That is the second word 'cause'. Others, however, in "of those associated with causes," analyze the compound as "of causes and of those associated." "Independent in terms of mere establishment, etc." means the states of cause, jhāna, and path, merely by establishing, contemplating, and leading forth, independent of other states, perform the function of cause, jhāna, and path conditions. "Dependent indeed" means dependent on others indeed. "To be brought, to be sought" means states to be supported by the nutrition-faculty conditions. "Therefore" means because those on which they are dependent, having delimited their own effect-produced states as conditions, stand; therefore. Therefore, it is said, "even without them...etc....not done." They delimit, they distinguish. That is the second mention of the nutrition-faculty. "There" means in the explanation of the nutrition-faculty condition. And not only there, but here too, in the explanation of the cause condition, by the second mention of 'cause', there is no further distinguishing function for the effect-produced, why? Because the causes associated with the cause that is the condition, and other causes, are not separated. "Dependent on the previous statement" means an explanation of what has been said, thus it states the referential nature of the word 'that'. It operates only in a manifest meaning, and its manifest nature is to be understood as being revealed by a word independent of others. Not to be depended upon, because it is engaged in another meaning. "Other" means other than the word 'cause'. No indicator of what is to be explained has been stated, which could receive a reference by the word 'that'. If so, how in "of those arisen from that"? It says, "but by 'of those associated with causes'," etc. There, the word 'but', even though there are causes in the explanatory nature of those associated with causes, (performs) the clarification, called making manifest, of what is to be explained, obtainable in the word 'associated with causes', (which is) the cause... It illuminates a special meaning. He says "by the word 'conditioned by cause'" that the latter part of the compound word "associated with causes" is predominant in meaning. And because only a part of the intended meaning is stated, namely, the qualifying nature of phenomena, he says "due to incompleteness." A qualifier, he says, requires something to be qualified, so he says "requiring the word 'conditioned by cause'." There is no reference without being stated, so it is said "by what was stated previously." What is to be indicated by that word? He asks, "What is it that is evident in the word 'associated with causes' that should be indicated by the word 'that' in 'those arisen from that'?" The connection is: "Those causes and… (etc.)… those associated with causes are evident in the word 'associated with causes' and should be indicated by that word." Otherwise: "In a way other than that stated by 'by which causes' and so on." Showing that other way, he says: "Those causes… (etc.)… when there is a connection." Here: He refers to the connection just mentioned by means of the locative case. By that very word: By the very first word 'cause'. To be indicated by the word 'that': Just as they are evident, those to be indicated by the word 'that' in "those arisen from that," similarly, in the objection previously stated "of those associated with that," they should likewise be evident to be indicated by that very word 'that'. And if that were the case, it would not be appropriate for what is to be indicated… (etc.). Or, removing both kinds of 'cause' apprehension: He objects to the referability by 'that' word by saying "without saying 'of those associated with that'," without considering the two kinds of 'cause' apprehension made in "causes of those associated with causes," and he refutes it by saying "due to the obscurity of what is to be indicated" and so on. Causes are conditions: This is said because this is a discourse on cause-condition. That is not stated: The statement about mind-arisen (matter) is not stated. Of that: Of the conascent condition. The conditionality of kamma-born matter would not have been stated; it is stated thus: "One aggregate of vipāka-abyākata is a condition for three aggregates." because of the made-up nature of forms by way of co-nascence condition, the three aggregates for one aggregate, and the made-up nature of forms, and so on. Therefore, the made-up form conditionality of mind and mental factors cannot be denied. Therein, in the description of co-nascence condition. For there, "mind and mental factors are a co-nascent condition for mind-originated forms," only mind-originated forms are described. Here too, in this description of root condition. It should be so, it should be described as "mind-originated." If so, why was it not said thus? He says, "but 'mind-originated'," and so on. It is specified as originating from all mind and mental factors. By the statement, by the statement of co-nascence condition shown. For there, in the description of condition, only the conditionality of mind and mental factors is stated, not the origination of mind and mental factors, this is the meaning. And he shows their connection with roots and so on: to the extent that they are connected with mind, to that extent they are also connected with the factors associated with them. This becomes an object, that which is the intention in the mind-door by way of wholesome and unwholesome volitions, and the intention in the other doors by way of bodily and verbal application, and the latent defilements like sensual lust, this is the object, this is the condition for the stability, for the establishment of kamma-consciousness. Established, when kamma-consciousness, having caused kamma to ripen, has attained the establishment of being able to draw forth rebirth, it grows, from that very kamma-consciousness, when the seed of rebirth-consciousness has grown, it grows, this is the meaning. Or, establishment for consciousness arises, when the object, the condition for the stability, for the occurrence of kamma-consciousness, called defilements and formations, is rejected, there is establishment for future rebirth-consciousness. When that rebirth-consciousness is established, when it is establishing itself by way of the arising of renewed existence, when it is growing as a seed, there is the descent of mind-and-matter. Thus, the meaning here should be understood. Therefore, he said "The dependence of rebirth-linking mind-and-matter on consciousness is stated." "Already arisen" means already arisen, like the earth, in the sense of a field's production. And here, the acquisition of self is the establishment, not the remaining of acquired states, as shown by the statement: "Establishment means the arising of kamma, having been done." "Of the remaining forms" refers to the remaining forms such as the earth element at the moment of rebirth-linking, but in the course of existence, it also refers to the thirty-two forms. Or it merely indicates co-existence. For there is some special quality even in co-existence. "In some places" refers to specific times and states, such as in the natural state. For in the third state, and in the time of the first eon, there is no aggregate of states, and in the form realm, there is no aggregate of body. By the word "etc.," the aggregates of nose and tongue are included there, and in the sense realm, the aggregates of eye, etc., for the blind, etc. "From the absence of absence in some places" means from the absence of absence anywhere in the sphere of mind-and-matter. "Of these" refers to the kamma-born forms, etc., in the course of existence. For a cause is not a condition for kamma-born form in the course of existence, and there is no possibility of those born of temperature and food. Therefore, it is said: "There is no occasion for the conditionality." But it is not obtained because such a turn is not brought up in the counter-condition. This statement, "from the obstruction of the conditionality of kamma-born forms, etc., in the course of existence," is a refutation of the teaching "causes are co-arisen." But to show that such a question is out of place, it is said, "But the Blessed One," etc. For a dhamma, as taught by the Blessed One, should be understood in that way. The explanation of the exposition of the root condition is finished. 2. Explanation of the Exposition of the Object Condition 2. "At the moment of arising" here, "arising" means moving upwards, going, proceeding, from production up to dissolution. "Its moment" means "at that moment of arising." This is how the meaning should be understood. For in this way, by the word "arising," just as by the word "arisen," all existing states are included, not merely production. Therefore, of eye-consciousness, etc. at the very moment of mind-grasping due to sights and so on being object-conditions. "Not being grasped" means "not being grasped at all." Otherwise, when there is no object-conditionality for the aforementioned sights and so on, then there is the state of not being grasped. "All sights" means all sight-fields, as many as are within range,