English
but they have been shown in the method, and by a part of that, the other is also shown. Showing this meaning, he said, "object... ...should be understood." "Because of having the same movement as them" means because they are conditions only for non-material things, having the same movement as those proximate ones. "That" means the pre-nascent condition. "Therein" means having been recited among the proximate ones and so on. The commentary on the miscellaneous determinations of the exposition of conditions is finished. Inquiry Section 1. Exposition of the Anuloma of Conditions "Each triad and dyad" means each triad and dyad among the twenty-two triads such as the wholesome triad, and the hundred dyads such as the root dyad. "Not a triad or dyad" means not a triad or dyad of equal application. However, a dyad qualified by a triad, and a triad qualified by a dyad, as in the case of a triad qualified by a triad and a dyad qualified by a dyad, the teaching proceeds by relying on them above. "Relying on those wholesome and other phenomena" means those wholesome and other phenomena mentioned in passages like "Relying on a wholesome phenomenon, a wholesome phenomenon arises by way of root condition," permeating the meaning of "relying," establish the meaning of root condition and other conditions. This is the meaning: because they are causes such as wholesome states. Therefore he said: Because the pervading of the meaning of condition of the conditioning phenomena in the conditioned phenomena occurs when both are together, and not otherwise. For that reason he said: "And these are co-arisen." "These" refers to causes and other conditions. Among these, cause-co-arisen, mutual-support, and dependence are co-arisen. Anantara and samanantara are not co-arisen conditions. What is achieved by the teaching that proceeds by explaining the meaning of each other in these two ways? He said: "Thus, skill in etymology is generated." Having raised those questions: "Is a wholesome phenomenon a condition for a wholesome phenomenon by way of the cause condition?" and so on, whatever questions receive an answer, having raised those questions. This is a careless writing: This refers to what is written: "A wholesome cause for phenomena associated with the cause." He said that in the earlier sections, the co-arisen condition in the co-arisen sections, the dependence condition in the condition-dependence sections, the associated condition in the conjoined-associated sections is considered absolute. In those six earlier sections. They are not understood because their nature is not brought out. By such questions. In the cause-and-other-conditions and the conditioned phenomena: In the cause and other conditioning phenomena, which are distinguished as associated aggregates and so on, in their conditioned phenomena. And this is the locative of determination. Because there is no certainty about the cause and other conditions: Because there is no certainty "These are those cause and other conditioning phenomena," because their nature is not determined. Just as a tangled thread, hidden within a bush, and similar to it, whose nature is not seen, cannot be determined as "this is a thread," similarly, a meaning that one wishes to know, whose nature is not determined, is not free from tangles or bushes due to the lack of certainty. But when its nature is determined, by means of certainty regarding that subject, the person does not remain ignorant, and that question becomes free from tangles and bushes. Therefore he said: "Due to the lack of certainty, those questions..." having made them unentangled and unconfused, not divided. Or, no one is included in the question... ...divided. Thus, in reference to the answer to the question, unentangledness is not stated, but rather, the intention is to produce a definite conclusion. Establishment here means establishment in the mind-stream of the one to be trained. And that is the showing and illuminating of its meaning, thus it says, "because it is revealed." "By ways" means by ways of cause and other conditions, or by ways of wholesome and other conditions and their results. 25-34. Having made "conjecture" to mean "arrangement," it says, "a conjecture-question is a method-question." "Siyā" means "it might be." The meaning is, "Is this method present?" With this, "siyā" is the verb in the method. The question, however, should be understood as implied by the sentence. Indeed, to show that very question implied by the sentence, it is also said in the commentary, "Might it be that wholesome dhamma arises dependent on wholesome dhamma?" "A consultation is a conjecture-question" means that in that case, the question is clarified by the verb itself. In "Might wholesome dhamma arise dependent on wholesome dhamma by way of a cause condition?" "dependent on wholesome dhamma by way of a cause condition" this is both the condition-statement. "wholesome dhamma might arise" is the conditioned-statement. When the condition-nature of the condition-dhamma is clarified, the arising of the conditioned is also clarified by implication. Therefore, only the condition-dhamma should be questioned. And in that, either the meaning of "dependent on" specified by the condition-dhamma or the meaning specified by the condition might be questioned. Thus, two kinds of question-alternatives are stated in the commentary. Showing that the first of these questions is flawed, it says, "whatever wholesome dhamma might arise," and so on. There, "it proceeds for all questions" means from the proceeding of the seven questions for wholesome roots and so on, wholesome dhamma that is arising. "By those conditions" means the arising is allowed by post-natal and resultant conditions, and that is not appropriate, is the intention. "From that condition" means from that wise attention and so on. from the past. The existence of a state is not asked here, thus he states the fault in the explanation given by "what would it be?" And having done so, because it was asked about arising. There, in the other meaning stated by "or else," and so on. Would arise: having allowed arising, as in "would arise," having allowed the arising of the wholesome condition mentioned here. Its, of the arising. Asking about existence: the asking about existence through a causal condition is not proper, this is the connection. Again, its, of the arising through a causal condition. Asking about existence: merely asking about existence. Therefore, because in both cases, in the manner stated, asking about existence through the allowance of arising is improper, therefore. And the allowance, which is implicitly contained in the two alternative meanings stated in the commentary, he, not allowing it, says "not having allowed," and so on. Merely asking: by this, he shows that "would arise" is the verb in the asking. If so, how is "would be" explained? He says, "would be... asks." This method, the method of meaning just stated by "would be," and so on. Is not understood, due to its unexamined particularity. Both questions: the question of possibility and the question of its particularity, both kinds of questions are just one question, due to being an inquiry and due to having one basis. The statement of eagerness to go: the statement of eagerness for going. Just as one's agent for the action of going is fit for the action to be done later, so too, the place is the eagerness to go, the statement that makes it known. And since such an action is, in essence, dependent on another action, therefore it is said, "of going... meaning." How, then, in this section on co-arising conditions, in the dependent clause, does the word "dependent" imply a later action? Having considered this objection, he says, "even if," and so on. By this, he shows, "even if there is no difference in time for things that arise dependently, the anterior and posterior time, seen elsewhere in causes and effects, is superimposed here too, by way of commonality of cause and effect, by convention." no mention of past or future time is made. Therefore, it is said, “in the manner of grasping and arising… …is to be understood.” Here, self-attainment means arising. “Going” refers to the act of movement implied by “dependent on” (paṭicca), using another term. In essence, it is arising, and the arising of phenomena is simply their origination due to conditions. Indeed, all worldly discourse of action and agency arises with the origination of inherent phenomena. Therefore, the “going back” or “moving back” implied by “paṭicca,” which in essence means “arising back,” occurs with respect to the one going, and so it is said, “going back for the one going, arising back for the one arising.” This going back and forth, this arising back and forth, are the same action. How so? Because “paṭi” means “back” or “in relation to.” Therefore, since “arising back for the co-arising” is the meaning in “arises dependent on,” therefore, “with that dependent origination” is an instrumental case for co-existence, in the sense of instrument or cause, meaning, “having gone back together with the origination that is dependent on, bound to, that wholesome phenomenon arising.” This shows the simultaneity of the “back-movement” and “attainment.” Therefore, it is said, “it means ‘having made it a co-arising condition,’” and so on. But surely, such a word usage does not exist for simultaneous actions, but only for prior actions? This is not an absolute rule, as it is desired by some even for simultaneous actions. For example, “Having dispelled darkness in the world, the sun with a thousand rays has risen; This sun, the sole eye of the world, is setting.” “With the form of glorious beauty, illuminating all splendor; The Buddha, having first illuminated, is like another sun with a thousand rays.” Such usages are seen. 35-38. “Among these” refers to the forty-nine questions in the root-pair method, in the root-object pair.