English
those of the immediate-action type are hindrances of defilements; those phenomena of fixed wrong view, here, their belonging to the side of defilement-hindrance should be seen through the associated volition, just as the aversion associated with immediate-action volition belongs to the side of kamma-hindrance. Direct access is without immediacy, it is said, "even for the sense-sphere deities who have direct access to heaven." Therefore, among them, like immediate actions, are impossible, and also things like groundless adherence, etc., thus it shows. In "the three kinds of functional-object-dominant," is this functional-object-dominant intended as an internal object? Or an external object? Showing that it is not possible in either way, he says, "but due to the distinction of the sense-sphere, etc." There, for object-having phenomena belonging to other mental continuums, there is no adhipati-conditionality, this is the connection. Because it is not said to be non-existent. For non-existence, in the Dhamma-discipline, in the Abhidhamma, is indeed non-existence. Thus, it should be understood that it is not brought up, because it is not stated. Since there is no conscious phenomenon that is free from both internal and external objects, it is understood as "there is not." In saying this, to make that very understanding possible, he said, "even when it is understood as 'there is not'." Therefore, it was said, "external aggregates," etc. The intention is that it can only exist in material form in such instances, it cannot exist in immaterial form. And it should be understood that it is in accordance with the Pāli text as stated. Why was "investigated" said? Is it not true that from statements like "he makes the past object, the future aggregates, heavy and enjoys them," etc., the word "aggregate" is used even in immaterial forms in such instances? But the presence of the act of adverting is said with the intention of avoiding contradiction with the Pāli text as shown. However, non-statement occurs sometimes due to the disposition of the trainee, and sometimes due to the display of method. So where is the occasion for contradiction? The explanation of the Adhipati-paccaya (Dominance Condition) is concluded. 4. Explanation of the Anantara-paccaya (Contiguity Condition) 4. The aforementioned cessation-contiguity-emptiness is the attainment of cessation, a special kind of giving space, the ability to produce a mind-moment suitable for oneself, the cause of mental regularity. And the ability to produce immediately thereafter, and the ability to produce continuously without interruption due to the absence of a gap, and the special cause of mental regularity should be understood. By way of elements: by way of the consciousness element, the mind element, and the mind-consciousness element. Only these elements, being of distinct natures, should be spoken of as determined by the contiguity condition. But those of non-distinct natures, due to the absence of distinction, should be spoken of by prioritizing only the former distinction. Thus, they are stated in terms of wholesome, etc. Therefore, he said, "and by way of wholesome, etc." However, where the contiguity condition is to be spoken of by way of the mind element and the mind-consciousness element, if it were said that the mind-consciousness element is conditioned by the mind element through the contiguity condition, there would be confusion. First, the mind element is conditioned by the contiguity condition. If stated in that way, then the distinctions of cause and effect between the mind-consciousness element and the mind element would not be understood. But if the mind element is said to be the immediate condition for the eye-consciousness element and so on, there is no fixed rule. Therefore it is said: “and the mind element for the eye-consciousness element.” “Just as it is” means that there is no fixed rule. Therefore, because if taught otherwise, these faults would arise: lack of distinction between cause and effect, interruption in the showing of mind distinctions, and lack of fixed rule. By way of example, by an example in terms of elements. Having shown the method, having shown the method of grasping immediate conditionality such as: “The mind-consciousness element and its associated phenomena are conditioned by the mind element and its associated phenomena through immediate condition.” For the purpose of showing completely, for the purpose of showing completely the mind-arising that is an immediate condition. Of similar wholesome states, of wholesome states that are alike; this similarity here is to be understood as being included in the same thought-process. Therefore it is said: “the conditionality of even those of different planes is stated.” And since states in the same thought-process are of the same feeling and have the same roots, therefore it is said: “of similar wholesome states by feeling or by roots.” The word ‘or’ here means unfixed. Thereby, even distinctions such as knowledge and formations are to be seen as included by way of alternative. Death is also included because it is of that nature. For the life-continuum consciousness itself is called ‘death’ at the end. And since it sometimes arises immediately after wholesome or unwholesome states, the apperception is also included, the meaning is that apperception arises immediately after functional javana. Of the advertence of functional kamavacara, intending to show that this is the meaning here, it is said: “by the inclusion of advertence, it specifies functional kamavacara.” Indeed, to make that meaning clearer, it is said: “kamavacara resultant” and so on. Determining is also included, the meaning is that it is immediately after investigating. The explanation of the immediate condition is finished. 6. S A Commentary on the Description of the Unarisen Condition 6. "Ancient text" means the ancient commentary text. "Of this" means of this word. "Of the unstated" means of what is unstated in the Pāḷi. Although, in the explanation of the meaning of the word "sahagata" (co-arisen), the meaning of another word, even if synonymous like the word "saṃsaṭṭha" (intermingled), is sometimes stated to indicate a specific nuance, it does not mean that the meaning of the root word has been clarified, thus it says "not indeed... and so on... is." And "aññamañña" (mutually) is a designation made by adding the syllable "ma" where it should be "aññaañña" (one another); this word is in the sense of reciprocal action, therefore "itaretara" (each other) is meant. Since the state of being a condition and a conditioned phenomenon is desired for both the condition and the conditioned phenomenon in the same moment, the mutual conditionality here is that if one is a condition for another in a certain moment, then that other is also a condition for the first in that same moment. Thus, in the commentary, after saying "one to another," it is said "by this... and so on... indicates." "Okkamana" means entering. For at the moment of conception, phenomena are as if entering this existence from a previous existence. Therefore, it is said "it arises as if coming from the other world and entering this world." Therefore, with the intention that rebirth is indiscriminately denoted by the word "okkanti" (conception), it is said "okkanti... and so on... intends." "For its prevention" means for preventing the co-arisen conditionality of material phenomena in another moment, by saying "in some cases, it is not conditioned by a co-arisen condition." By those two words, it shows the distinction of the latter from the former among co-arisen conditioned phenomena and conditions. And thus, after showing the first alternative with the intention that the meaning of the word "kañci kāle" (in some cases) should be taken by a reversal of case as "keci kāle" (in some cases) or "kismiñci kāle" (in some case), now, to show it in another way, it says "kañci kāle means kecikismiñci kāle or in some case." By this, it shows that "kañci" is a general designation. For this meaning which is denoted by the plural "keci" (some), and which is in "kismiñcī" which is in the locative singular, when both are present, in the division of time and non-time, to show that "kañcī" was said in the Pāli by generally taking the meaning of "kiṃ" together, it is said "keci kismiñcī" to differentiate it. However, in the Commentary, "kismiñcī" is only stated in the locative sense. Therefore, by the word with the meaning explained. "Vatthubhūtā" means having the nature of a basis. It refers only to the heart-base. "Rūpantarānaṃ" means other material forms than the heart-base. The statement "nivāretīti yojanā" means it prevents the co-nascent conditionality of immaterial things, which was not prevented earlier in "nāmarūpa at the moment of conception." Similarly, it prevents immaterial things in a different time from the time of rebirth conception. And having done so, by the explanation of meaning as stated, it states the figurative nature of the case ending designation in the Pāli. Again, to show a distinction by an increase from the former to the latter, "purimena ca" and so on is said. There, "purimena" refers to the statement of condition designation "nāmarūpa at the moment of conception." "Eko khandho vatthu ca tiṇṇaṃ khandhānaṃ" and so on refers to the dependent origination section. The explanation of meaning of the condition designation Pāli includes all seven great sections. When the basis is said to be unmentionable, "what is the condition for its name?" is the connection. "Etena" refers to the statement "material phenomena are conditions for immaterial phenomena." "Kevalassa" means of the basis without a name. "Tathā" means as a condition for the name. "Katthaci" refers to the designation "material phenomena are conditions for immaterial phenomena for some time by co-nascent condition." Here, the mutual co-nascent conditionality is obtained.