English
will be clear here too in the method of analysis. In the methods of analysis... And these three, with the discrimination of Dhamma, of language, of ready wit, are also distinguished in various ways along with the distinctions of their objects, by way of the knowledges associated with sense-sphere javanas. But the discrimination of meaning is along with the distinctions of its objects, by way of those knowledges and those associated with the eight supramundane consciousnesses. For even supramundane knowledges are called "discrimination of meaning" because they have nibbāna as their object, which is the meaning by way of attainment of the paths. In questioning, however, there may be wholesome, there may be indeterminate; the three discriminations may be results, or states subject to result; or states not subject to result nor to non-result; the discrimination of meaning is in all three ways; the three discriminations are limited; the discrimination of meaning may be limited, may be immeasurable; the discrimination of language has a limited object, and an external object; the rest are in all three ways; the discrimination of language has only a present object, the discrimination of meaning is in all three ways and not to be stated; non-manifesting, non-resisting, a root, rooted; the three discriminations are surpassable, the discrimination of meaning is in two ways, and harmless. The rest is easily understood. The explanation of the topic of the Analysis of Discrimination is finished. Explanation of the Topic of the Analysis of Knowledge Now, as to the meaning of the topic of the Analysis of Knowledge – "in one way" means in one manner, or in one section. Here, in "objects of knowledge," knowledge and object are the objects of knowledge of various attainments. "The five consciousnesses" are the five, beginning with eye-consciousness. In "not a root, rootless," etc., the meaning should be understood everywhere according to the method stated below in the root dyads, etc. Moreover, in the root dyads, etc., the five consciousnesses are not to be stated as "states that are roots" or "states that are rooted," but are definitely only "not roots," only "rootless." Thus, there is a connection with what will be said above at the end of the section on the one way, with "wisdom is the understanding of things as they are." In this way, the meaning should be understood everywhere as appropriate. And there, "non-mental" means only the consciousnesses associated with the five consciousnesses. Because they are not clung to. Having arisen with a basis, having an arisen object, means rejecting the future in terms of the present moment. For they do not arise in the five future bases and objects. Having a pre-arisen basis, having a pre-arisen object, means rejecting co-arising. For they do not arise dependent on a co-arisen basis and object. Having an internal basis means arising making the five internal sense bases their basis. Here, the five consciousnesses are themselves internal, and have an internal basis, while mind-consciousness, dependent on the heart, is internal, and has an external basis, the three aggregates associated with the five consciousnesses are external, and have an internal basis, the three aggregates associated with mind-consciousness are external, and have an external basis, thus the fourfold division should be understood. Having an unmixed basis, having an unmixed object, means having an unceased basis and object. For they do not arise dependent on a ceased basis and object. Having diverse bases, having diverse objects, means that they, in due order, are of different bases and different objects, due to each having a specific single basis and object, such as eye and form. For eye-consciousness does not arise making one of the other sense bases, such as ear, its basis, and making one of the other objects, such as sound, its object, having abandoned eye and form, nor do the others arise in place of these. By saying "they do not experience an object that is the domain of another," he clarifies that they have diverse objects. "They do not arise without attention" means they do not arise without adverting, they do not arise in a field not adverted to by five-door adverting, is the meaning. "Not without attention" clarifies the same point with another term. "Not crowded" means they do not arise being uninterruptedly close to each other. "Not prior and not final" means they do not arise together even in one moment. And not only these, but other consciousnesses too, two or more, do not arise together, but only one consciousness arises at a time, it should be understood. As he said, "one mind arises, another mind ceases," and so on. Not immediately succeeding each other: this clarifies their non-intermingling. Without advertence: being without advertence, unable to perform the function of advertence while standing in the place of advertence. Not discerning any dhamma: meaning that no person discerns even a single wholesome or unwholesome dhamma, as it is said, "Mind precedes all mental states" (Dhp. 1-2), meaning they do not accomplish it with those consciousnesses. Except for mere impingement: except for the mere impingement, the mere coming into the range of the sense object such as form, meaning that even a more skillful person is unable to perform any wholesome or unwholesome discernment other than the mere discernment of a sense object that has come into range by the five sense consciousnesses. Even immediately succeeding the five consciousnesses: and also by the mind-element. Here, the word "api" has the meaning of combination, thus it should be understood that the meaning shown is that not only by the mind-element, but also by the five-door consciousnesses that follow it, at the end of their object, is no wholesome or unwholesome dhamma discerned. Although wholesome and unwholesome javanas arise at the five doors, they should be regarded as ineffective, like barren flowers. The same method applies to "not initiating any posture," etc. For the five-door consciousnesses do not initiate any posture in walking, etc., do not establish bodily or verbal action, do not produce any intimation, do not undertake any wholesome or unwholesome dhamma, do not attain any mundane or supramundane concentration, do not arise from it, do not decease from existence, do not arise in another existence; all this activity is done only by the mind-door consciousness. Just as these activities are not theirs, so too are entering the fixed course, etc. For no one enters the fixed course of wrongness or the fixed course of rightness by the five-door javanas, nor do these occur in relation to name and clan, or a kasina concept, or the three characteristics, etc. In "Na supatītiādi," with all the five-door consciousnesses, one does not enter sleep, nor does one see any dream. For one who is sleeping, when the senses are struck by gross five-sense objects such as loud drum sounds, etc., the initial five-door adverting consciousnesses are unable to turn back the life-continuum, only the mind-door adverting consciousness is able. And when that arises, the mind-door impulsion rushes forth and descends into the life-continuum. But the second time, whichever of the five-door adverting consciousnesses appropriately turns back the life-continuum, then, the respective sense-door process consciousnesses, ending with that object, arise in sequence and descend into the life-continuum. But the third time, mind-door adverting and impulsion consciousnesses arise, at that moment, there is determination of the five-sense objects, and the being awakens from sleep. Thus, one awakens with mind-door consciousness alone. Indeed, one sees a dream with that alone, not with the five doors. And one sees that dream for four reasons: due to disturbance of the elements, or from something previously experienced, or from divine influence, or from a premonitory sign. Moreover, they elaborate in many ways from the combination and confluence of these. Therein, the dream one sees due to disturbance of the wind, bile, etc., elements, and from something previously experienced, that is not true. The dream one sees from divine influence, that may be true or false. For angry deities show even the opposite. The dream one sees from a premonitory sign, that is absolutely true, like the five and sixteen great dreams of the Bodhisatta and King Kosala, etc. And that fourfold dream is seen only by trainees and ordinary people, not by non-trainees, whose minds are free from distortion. But while seeing this, does one see it asleep or awake? What is the point here? If one sees it asleep, due to the nature of the dream being wholesome, etc., and the absence of that in the life-continuum, a contradiction of the Abhidhamma arises. But if awake, since even the unprohibited transgression done by one seeing a dream is entirely blameworthy like the prohibited one, There is no offense, otherwise it would be a violation of the Vinaya. And there is no other way by which one might see a dream, so would it follow that there is no dream? It does not follow. Why? Because one overcome by monkey-sloth sees, "One overcome by monkey-sloth, O Great King, sees a dream," according to the saying. But that sleep, like a monkey's sleep, is repeatedly scattered with wholesome and other thoughts, and is a light shifting sleep; that is monkey-sloth. One asleep with that sees a dream. Therefore, a dream can be wholesome, unwholesome, or indeterminate due to the way of adverting and registering. And a wholesome or unwholesome act done in a dream, being weak, is not able to draw rebirth, but it can be felt in the course of existence. "Wisdom is the manifestation of things as they really are": here, that which is the 'as it really is' state of the five kinds of consciousness, which was not stated as the root-cause state, but as the non-root-cause state...