English
"For whom the aggregate of form does not arise, For them will the aggregate of feeling not arise?" "For those attaining final Nibbāna in the five-aggregate existence, For those in their last existence in the formless realm… …will not arise," and so on. "Where the aggregate of form does not arise, There will the aggregate of feeling not arise?" "It will arise!" and so on. "For whom, where the aggregate of form does not arise, For them, there will the aggregate of feeling not arise?" "…For those attaining final Nibbāna in the five-aggregate existence, For those in their last existence in the formless realm, For those passing away from the mindless beings, For them, there… …will not arise," and so on, in the reverse order. "For whom the aggregate of form arose, For them the aggregate of feeling…" Will it arise? It will arise for those in their final existence," and so on. "Where the aggregate of form arose, will the aggregate of feeling arise? ...in the five-aggregate realm it will arise," and so on. "For whom, where the aggregate of form arose, will the aggregate of feeling arise there? In the five-aggregate realm, for those in their final existence, for the non-percipient beings... it will arise," and so on. In the past and future times, in the direct method. "For whom the aggregate of form arose, will the aggregate of feeling arise? No," and so on. "Where the aggregate of form did not arise, will the aggregate of feeling not arise? It will arise," and so on. "For whom, where the aggregate of form did not arise, will the aggregate of feeling not arise there? ... For the Pure Abodes, in the immaterial realm, for those in their final existence, for them there, the aggregate of form did not arise, and the aggregate of feeling will not arise," and so on. In the reverse method, clear distinctions of meaning are found. However, fearing the expansion of the text, we will not show everything exhaustively. The question and answer can be understood by the wise in the manner shown everywhere. This is the method in the arising section. And just as in the arising section, in each of the six divisions of time, with the distinction of individuals and so on, with the direct and reverse methods combined, there are six variations each. In each variation, counting ten each, there are sixty yamakas. All of them are three hundred and sixty yamakas. Then there are twice as many questions, and twice as many meanings. Thus, it should be understood in the cessation section and the arising and cessation section as well. There, "For whom the aggregate of form ceases, does the aggregate of feeling cease? ... For those passing away from the five-aggregate realm... it ceases," and so on. "For whom the aggregate of form does not cease, does the aggregate of feeling not cease? ... For all those arising... it does not cease," and so on. In the cessation section, "For whom the aggregate of form arises, does the aggregate of feeling cease? No. For whom... "A form aggregate does not arise, but its feeling aggregate does not cease"... ...For those arising in the formless realm, and those passing away from the non-percipient beings, for them, the form aggregate does not arise, and the feeling aggregate does not cease." Thus, in the origination-cessation section, the method of question and answer should be understood everywhere, according to what was said below. This is the method in the occurrence section. In the comprehension section, however, in the three sections beginning with the person section, only the person section is found, not the space-person-space sections, because of similar answers. For whatever person comprehends form, etc., wherever they cease, they are the same. Therefore, in the six divisions of time, there are two sections each in direct order according to person, ten each in each section, making twenty yamakas, thus two hundred yamakas, double that for questions, and double that for meanings should be understood. And there, "Whoever comprehends the form aggregate, do they comprehend the feeling aggregate?" "Yes." And, "Whoever does not comprehend the form aggregate, do they not comprehend the feeling aggregate?" "Yes." Thus, in direct and reverse order, in the first three times, the answer to all questions is "Yes, yes." But in the other three mixed times, "Whoever comprehends the form aggregate, did they comprehend the feeling aggregate?" "No. Or rather...no." Thus, in the other two times as well, in the direct method, the answer is "No, no." In the reverse method, however, "Whoever does not comprehend the form aggregate, did they not comprehend the feeling aggregate?" "An arahant does not comprehend the form aggregate, but they did not not comprehend the feeling aggregate. Except for one endowed with the supreme path and the arahant, the remaining persons do not comprehend the form aggregate, and they did not comprehend the feeling aggregate." "Whoever does not comprehend the form aggregate, will they not comprehend the feeling aggregate?" "Those who will attain the path, they do not comprehend the form aggregate, but they did not not comprehend the feeling aggregate." "Those arahants and ordinary people who will not attain the path, they do not fully know the form aggregate, and will not fully know the feeling aggregate," and so on. "He who did not fully know the form aggregate, will he not fully know the feeling aggregate?" "Those who will attain the path, they have fully known the form aggregate, but will not fully know the feeling aggregate. Those endowed with the highest path and those ordinary people who will not attain the path, they have fully known the form aggregate, and will not fully know the feeling aggregate," and so on. The method of question and answer should be understood. Here, the three times, past, future, and present, are not obtained in terms of the cycle of existence, in terms of death and rebirth, but are obtained only in terms of the moment of consciousness in the cycle of existence. For in the moment of the supramundane path, with the consciousness having nibbāna as its object, due to the accomplishment of the task of full knowledge in the five aggregates, when one fully knows any one aggregate, the answer "yes" is given in the direct question, referring to one endowed with the highest path who has reached the peak of the task of full knowledge. In the reverse question, "does not fully know," it should be understood that the answer "yes" is given referring to ordinary people and so on. But in this past tense, "fully knew," even one standing in the highest fruition immediately after the path, because the task of full knowledge is completed, is indeed said to have fully known. And one endowed with the highest path is called "fully knows," and ordinary people and so on are called "will fully know," therefore, because one cannot say, "he who does not fully know, has fully known," or "will fully know," and so on, the answer "yes" is given. But in the reverse method, "except for one endowed with the highest path and an arahant," this is said because it is not possible to say of one endowed with the highest path, "does not fully know," and of an arahant, "did not fully know." "And those ordinary people who will not attain the path," with this, as in the past, even in the future, the ana It shows that beings exist, who are not freed from death. And they are equal to the arahants, whose task of full knowledge is finished, or who are liable to be said, "they will not fully know." And everywhere, one who fully knows one aggregate, fully knows all. And one who does not fully know, does not fully know all. This is to be understood as the explanation of the method of the Aggregate Yamaka Matrix. Explanation of the Āyatana Yamaka Matrix In the Āyatana Yamaka Matrix, everything, beginning with the arrangement of the text, is to be understood in the same way as said in the Aggregate Yamaka Matrix, except for the distinction. Here is the distinction: This Āyatana Matrix, starting with the phrase "twelve āyatanas," and continuing up to "neither āyatana nor mind," is called. Therein, having stated the twelve āyatanas, and placing the aggregate term in the questions in the manner of pairs, first the five internal āyatanas, beginning with the eye, etc., are stated. Afterwards, the five external āyatanas, beginning with form, etc. At the end, the mind āyatana and the dhamma āyatana. Thus is the question in the arrangement of the text. In the answer, however, "Is the eye the eye āyatana? The divine eye, the wisdom eye, is just the eye, not the eye āyatana. The eye āyatana is both the eye and the eye āyatana. Is the ear the ear āyatana? The divine ear, the ear of craving, is just the ear, not the ear āyatana. Is the nose the nose āyatana? Yes… Is the body the body āyatana? The name-body, the mind-body, etc., is just the body, not the body āyatana. Is form the form āyatana? The elements, etc., and beloved form, etc., are just form, not the form āyatana. Is sound the sound āyatana? Yes. Is smell the smell āyatana? The smell of virtue, etc., is just smell, not the smell āyatana. Is taste the taste āyatana? The taste of meaning, etc., is just taste, not the taste āyatana. Is dhamma the dhamma āyatana? The dhamma of learning, etc., is just dhamma, not the dhamma āyatana. Is the dhamma āyatana dhamma? Yes." This is the distinction in the conceptual designation section. In the occurrence section, however, "To those for whom the eye āyatana arises, does the ear āyatana arise? For those who are with eyes and without ears, who are being reborn, to them..." The eye-base arises, but for those, the ear-base does not arise. For those who are being born, possessing eyes and ears, for them, the eye-base arises, and the ear-base also arises... If the form-base arises, does the mind-base arise for them? For the mindless, the form-base arises, but for them, the mind-base does not arise.