English
The eighth person does not abandon the underlying tendency to sensual desire, but not the other; except for the person possessing the path of non-returning, and the eighth person, the remaining persons do not abandon both," and so on in the reverse method. Everywhere, the method of questioning and answering should be understood. There, "abandons" means abandons with abandonment-understanding by that particular path. "A single instance" is said with reference to the singularity of abandonment. For by the first path, not only are wrong views and the like abandoned, but also those tendencies of sensual lust and aversion that lead to lower realms are abandoned. Sensual lust is to be abandoned by the first path, and pride and ignorance, which lead to lower realms, are to be abandoned by the third path, thus they are abandoned as a single instance of abandonment. "No" is said with reference to the one established in the path of arahantship. For he has already abandoned the underlying tendency of sensual lust, so he does not abandon it. "Because he abandons the underlying tendency of sensual lust" means because he abandons the underlying tendency of sensual lust that is capable of arising, the eighth is the one established in the path of stream-entry. For he is called the eighth when counted in the reverse order, starting from the one established in the fruit of arahantship. In the reverse order, excluding the one endowed with the path of non-returning and the eighth, the remainder are ordinary people, those with remaining defilements, trainees, and those who have completed training. Among them, ordinary people do not abandon due to the absence of abandonment-understanding, while the rest have already abandoned them. In this way, the decision should be understood everywhere. This is the method in the case of abandoning. The case of understanding, however, is similar to the case of abandoning, beginning with "Whoever understands the underlying tendency of sensual lust, understands the underlying tendency of aversion." This, too, like the case of abandoning, is explained only in terms of those established in the paths. There, "understands" means understands with the three kinds of understanding. This is the method in the case of understanding. In the case of abandoning, however, beginning with "For whom the underlying tendency of sensual lust is abandoned, for him is the underlying tendency of aversion abandoned? Yes... and so on... is the underlying tendency of pride abandoned? For the non-returner, only the underlying tendency of sensual lust is abandoned, but for the arahant, the underlying tendency of pride is also abandoned," is in terms of individuals. "Where the underlying tendency of sensual lust is abandoned, there the underlying tendency of aversion is abandoned? It should not be said whether it is abandoned or not abandoned. Or where... and so on... it should not be said... and so on... there the underlying tendency of pride is abandoned? Yes. Or where... and so on... is abandoned? In the realms of form and formlessness, here the underlying tendency of pride is abandoned, but sensual The tendency to lust is not to be spoken of, in the realm of desire, in the two feelings, here both are abandoned, and so on, in the occasion section. In the person-occasion section, thus in the direct order, "For whom the tendency to sensual lust is not abandoned, for them is the tendency to aversion not abandoned?" "Yes." "Or rather…pe… yes…pe… Or rather, for whom the tendency to conceit is not abandoned, for them is the tendency to sensual lust not abandoned?" "For the non-returner, only the tendency to conceit, for three persons, both are not abandoned," and so on, in the reverse order, the method of question and answer should be understood in the manner stated. Here, the meaning should be taken only in terms of those established in the fruits, not those established in the paths, because of the absence of abandoned defilements. For their tendencies are indeed being abandoned, but not yet abandoned, therefore, only those established in the fruits, such as the non-returner, should be taken. However, in the occasion section, "is not to be spoken of," this is said because of the distinctness of the place of origin of the two. For the place of origin of the tendency to sensual lust is different, the place of origin of the tendency to aversion is different. And for one whose path has not been cultivated, where a tendency arises, when the path is cultivated, there it is said to be abandoned, therefore, it is not to be spoken of as abandoned or not abandoned there, but in all cases, due to its absence, it is not to be spoken of as not abandoned there. However, with reference to a common place for both, "yes" is said. For the tendency to conceit, in the realm of desire, in the common place counted as the two feelings, is said to be abandoned together with sensual lust. "For whom the tendency to sensual lust is not abandoned," the meaning should be taken in terms of the ordinary person, and those established in the fruits of stream-entry and once-returning. For "for three persons" is said. The rest is indeed easily understood, this is the method in the abandonment section. In the arising section, however, "For whom the tendency to sensual lust arises, for them does the tendency to aversion arise?" and so on, everywhere it is like the tendency section, this is the method in the arising section. In the element section, however, "For one who passes away from the realm of desire, and is reborn in the realm of desire, how many tendencies accompany, how many tendencies do not accompany, how many tendencies are broken? In the realm of desire…" Of one passing away from the Sensuous Sphere and arising in the Form Sphere…pe… how many are broken? Of one passing away from the Sensuous Sphere and arising in the Immaterial Sphere…pe… of one arising in the Form Sphere but not arising in the Immaterial Sphere…pe… how many are broken? Of one passing away from the Sensuous Sphere and not arising in the Sensuous Sphere, not arising in the Immaterial Sphere…pe… not arising in the Form Sphere, not arising in the Immaterial Sphere. Of one not arising in the Sensuous Sphere, not arising in the Form Sphere, how many are broken? Thus, these are nine questions rooted in the Sensuous Sphere, likewise nine rooted in the Form Sphere beginning with "Of one passing away from the Form Sphere," and nine of the Immaterial Sphere, making twenty-seven direct questions, and twenty-seven reverse questions beginning with "Of one not passing away from the Sensuous Sphere," and twenty-seven dual-rooted questions beginning with "Of one not passing away from the Sensuous Sphere, not passing away from the Immaterial Sphere, and arising in the Sensuous Sphere," thus in the question section, eighty-one questions should be understood. Therein, "anusenti" means: following along in the mind-continuum, how many follow along? "Bhaṅgā" means: how many are to be divided as both following along and not following along? "Na kāmadhātuṃ upapajjantassa" means: of one arising in the two spheres devoid of the Sensuous Sphere, the Form and Immaterial Spheres. "Na kāmadhātuṃ na rūpadhātuṃ" means: of one arising in the Immaterial Sphere. "Na kāmadhātuyā" means: of one passing away from the Form and Immaterial Spheres, thus in the remaining cases also, the meaning should be understood everywhere in terms of rebirth and in terms of the sphere; this is the method in the section of enumeration. In the section of exposition, however, "Of one passing away from the Sensuous Sphere and arising in the Sensuous Sphere, for some beings, seven tendencies follow along, for some, five tendencies follow along, there is no breaking of tendencies; of one passing away from the Sensuous Sphere and arising in the Form Sphere, for some beings, seven tendencies follow along, for some, five, for some, three…pe… there is no breaking," in this manner, the answer should be understood everywhere, this is the distinction here: of one passing away from the Form Sphere and arising in the Sensuous Sphere, only seven tendencies follow along, likewise "of one passing away from the Immaterial Sphere and arising in the Sensuous Sphere." Also in "upapajjantassā'tiādi," there is no rebirth in the Form Realm for one who has passed away from the Formless Realm; one who is reborn below is reborn only in the Sensual Realm. Only seven latent tendencies lie dormant. Thus, in other similar cases, the method of explanation should be understood in this way. This is the distinction; the rest is as previously stated. This is the Pali method here. There, "kassaci sattā" is stated in terms of ordinary people, and "pañca" in terms of Stream-enterers and Once-returners, for whom the latent tendencies of wrong view and doubt are abandoned. However, since there is no rebirth in the Sensual Realm for Non-returners, "kassaci tayo" is not stated in the first instance, but only in the instances of arising in the Form and Formless Realms... because for Non-returners, even sensual desire and aversion are abandoned, only three latent tendencies lie dormant. Here, the method is based on the arising of latent tendencies, without considering the dormancy of latent tendencies; even at the moment of rebirth, dormancy should be considered in terms of non-abandonment. "Satteva" means that for a noble disciple who has passed away from the Form or Formless Realm, there is no rebirth below in the Sensual Realm, etc.; it only happens for ordinary people. Therefore, it is stated definitively as "satteva." There is no rebirth in the Form Realm for one who has passed away from the Formless Realm. Why is there none? Because those in the Formless Realm lack the Form Jhana. They have completely transcended all perceptions of form and are reborn in the Formless Realm. The rest is easily understood from the method. This is the method of the element section.