English
the question in the affirmative method is from the proponent, the acknowledgment relying on one's own view is from the opponent, the further investigation by the proponent from the ultimate perspective, without giving an opportunity to the view, the refutation by the opponent, because the person is not found from the ultimate perspective, then, to show one's own victory by means of the Dhamma, "Understand the counteraction," etc., all are the words of the proponent. There, the meaning of all four— counteraction, censure, application, and conclusion— should be understood in the way stated below. Thus, this set of five opposites, beginning with "the person is not found," etc., and the four of counteraction, censure, application, and conclusion, beginning with "is found," etc., are designated as the set of five opposites in the affirmative method. Thus, these two sets of five have been designated in the first truth-establishing argument. Therefore, it is said there: "Censure is for the opponent, pure in the first set of five; but impure for that same one, the victory of counteraction is there. "Censure is for the proponent, impure in the second set of five; but pure for that same one, the victory of counteraction is there. "Therefore, in both places, victory is for the proponent; for victory is by the Dhamma, how can there be victory by non-Dhamma? "As here in the truth-establishing argument, adorned with the two sets of five, victory and defeat are stated only by means of Dhamma and non-Dhamma. "In all the subsequent truth-establishing arguments, the wise one should discern in just this way both victory and defeat." (Kathā. Aṭṭha. 7-10); The first pure truth-establishing argument is concluded. Having thus expanded the pure truth-establishing argument, now... To expand on this further with other methods such as location, it begins again with "A person is found," etc. Here, the question is from the proponent, the assertion from the opponent. Again, "everywhere" refers to the body, the inquiry is from the proponent, and the opponent rejects it, seeing the fault of regarding the self in form, and the fault of incurring "the life is one thing, the body another." The rest here should be understood in the same way as stated below in the five categories of affirmation and negation. The text, however, is concise. There, because when it is said that regarding the body, "it is not found everywhere," it follows that it is found outside the body, therefore the proponent rejects it in the negation, and the opponent, on the grounds of deceptive speech, first assents and then disavows, the rest is obvious. In the second method, "always" refers to the time of past and future births, and the time of one who lives and is extinguished, the inquiry is from the proponent, and the opponent rejects it, seeing the fault of incurring "the same person is a noble and a brahmin," etc., and the fault of there being no distinction between those who live and are extinguished. The rest is similar to what was said in the first method. In the third method, "in all" refers to the aggregates, sense bases, etc., the question is from the proponent, and the opponent rejects it for fear of faults such as "the self is in form, the self is in the eye," etc. The rest is the same. Thus, these three approaches, having been divided in order into the five categories of affirmation and negation based solely on affirmation, are begun again with "A person is not found," etc., to divide them into the five categories of negation and affirmation based solely on negation. There, the meaning should be understood in the way stated below. Thus, it should be understood that this argumentative method, called the eight approaches, is designated in terms of two negations each, affirmation and negation, and negation and affirmation, in each of the four truths, three of these, and the truth of purity. Which is said in terms of one defeat in each approach. Therefore, here it is. It is called – "Thus, in this fourfold question, with its twofold division of five, This is the 'Eight-Headed' named, the art of debate made clear. "There are eight defeats therein, four of them righteous; And four unrighteous, for all who hold their own view; Victory and defeat as well, for all who hold another's view." This, for now, is a description, since the meaning is not obvious. But the determination of meaning here also, Is only in the way of showing the method of the instruction, Given by the Elder Moggalliputta Tissa. For the Elder, without making an instruction by extracting the terms, Of this matrix established by the Blessed One, But standing in the way of the eight-headed art of debate given by the Blessed One, By other methods, refuting the doctrine of the person, And other various kinds of wrong grasping, Thus, beginning with the discussion of the person, An instruction was made with two hundred and odd discussions. There, for the purpose of refuting the doctrine of the person, With each of the fifty-seven things, in terms of aggregates, sense-bases, elements, and faculties, "Is a person found in truth, in the ultimate sense? Is form found in truth, in the ultimate sense?... Is a person found in truth, in the ultimate sense? Is feeling also found in truth, in the ultimate sense?" Thus, in the way of questioning that proceeds by way of association with the person, A purification association; Just as the fifty-seven things, such as form, feeling, etc., are found, Distinct and different from each other, So is a person found distinct from form, etc., A comparison association that proceeds by way of questioning; "Is form the person? Is the person in form? Is the person other than form? Is form in the person?" Thus, with the fourfold method, by questioning with the fifty-seven things, A fourfold method association; Thus, three kinds of association methods are stated. There, since the person's nature is the same as form, etc., there would be the consequence of permanence, eternity, annihilation, etc., The refutation should be understood accordingly. For fear of excessive length, it is not further elaborated here. Then, "Just as form, etc., are with conditions, without conditions..." Such as, "Are aggregates the person? Is the person different from the aggregates?" Thus, the discussion of characteristics, prompted by questions, showing that your person also has the characteristics of conditionality, etc. The refinement of words, prompted by questions such as, "Is there a person? Is one found?" and "Whoever is a person is found. Or whoever is found is a person." The investigation of designation, prompted by the refinement of names, such as, "In the realm of form, one is formed." The investigation of rebirth, through the cycle of existence, with questions such as, "Is it the same person who transmigrates from this world to the next, or another? Or neither the same nor another?" The investigation of designation based on dependence, showing the undesirable consequences of considering the person as a real designation based on the aggregates, like shadows based on a tree, such as impermanence and being conditioned. The investigation of human action, showing the undesirable consequences of considering the person as the doer of good and bad deeds, such as the non-cessation of the round of suffering. The investigation of higher knowledge, distinguishing views such as, "Whoever has psychic power is the person." The investigation of relatives, distinguishing views such as, "There are mother and father, therefore there is a person." The investigation of caste, such as, "Thus, a noble." The investigation of practice, such as, "A householder, a renunciate." The investigation of rebirth, such as, "A god, a human." The investigation of realization, such as, "A stream-enterer." The investigation of the community, such as, "Eight types of persons." The investigation of truth, essence, and similarity, prompted by questions such as, "Is the person conditioned?" The investigation of feeling, such as, "Experiencing pleasant feeling." The investigation of duty, such as, "Contemplating the body in the body." Relying on the suttas that establish the nature of the person, such as, "There is a person who is practicing for their own benefit." All phenomena are not-self. Only suffering arises when it arises. What is this being you conceive? Mara, is this your adherence to views? It is merely a heap of pure formations. No being is found here. Only suffering arises, Suffering persists and ceases. There is no arising apart from suffering, no ceasing apart from suffering. Because, Ānanda, it is empty of self or anything pertaining to self… therefore it is called an empty world. "When, monks, there is self, there is the thought 'this is mine'... but when, monks, self and what belongs to self are not truly and firmly found, then this view arises: 'This is the world, this is the self, this I shall be after death, permanent, stable, eternal, not subject to change, I shall remain the same forever.' This, monks, is utter and complete foolishness." "There, Seniya, the teacher who does not truly and firmly declare a self in this very life, nor in the future… is called a perfectly enlightened teacher." Thus, the exposition of the suttas, which proceeds showing the non-existence of a person, and the application of the suttas: with this much discourse, the first discussion of the person is extensively explained. In this, just as phenomena such as form are found in terms of their individual characteristics and general characteristics, the person is not found in this way. However, when form and the like exist, it is merely by conventional usage that it is said, "There is a person." This was also said by the Blessed One: "These, Citta… are worldly usages, worldly designations." The speech of the Buddhas is twofold: conventional speech and ultimate speech.