English
like the reflection of a face in a mirror, due to the extreme weakness of results that arise solely from the power of kamma without one's own effort or strength, and because they are not grasped by such and such conceptualization, is established only according to the object, this should be understood. And not only for results. Rather, for the functional impulsion-moments that occur in the mind-stream of Arahants, who are free from perversion, the association of feeling is only according to the object, with this intention it is said, "even there, at the end of functional impulsion-moments accompanied by joy," and so on. "Even there" means even in those results. "At the end of functional impulsion-moments accompanied by joy" means at the end of functional impulsion-moments accompanied by joy, which occur with extremely desirable objects such as the Buddha's complexion. At the end of functional impulsion-moments accompanied by equanimity. This comes at the end of functional impulsions accompanied by equanimity, occurring in disagreeable, agreeable, and neutral objects. And this rule of registering consciousness at the end of functional impulsion is also stated in the commentaries. For it is said there: "The two functional consciousnesses of the sense-sphere, rooted in three causes, accompanied by joy, are the immediate condition for five resultant consciousnesses accompanied by joy, in the sense of registering consciousness," and so on. And this is said with reference to functional impulsions occurring in the ordinary way. However, for functional impulsions occurring with such a mental super-volition, there is indeed an association of equanimity-feeling even with agreeable objects, and an association of joy-feeling even with disagreeable objects. As it is said – And how, Ānanda, is a noble one with developed faculties? Here, Ānanda, a monk, having seen a form with the eye, an agreeable (perception) arises, a disagreeable (perception) arises, an agreeable-disagreeable (perception) arises. If he wishes: "May I dwell perceiving the repulsive as unrepulsive," he dwells there perceiving it as unrepulsive. If he wishes: "May I dwell perceiving the unrepulsive as repulsive," he dwells there perceiving it as repulsive. The entire Indriyabhāvanā Sutta from the Uparipaṇṇāsaka should be brought forth. There, by "an agreeable (perception) arises, a disagreeable (perception) arises, an agreeable-disagreeable (perception) arises," the association of joy with agreeable objects and equanimity with disagreeable objects for the sense-sphere functional impulsions of Arahants, in the ordinary way, is shown. However, by "If he wishes: 'May I dwell perceiving the repulsive as unrepulsive,' he dwells there perceiving it as unrepulsive," and so on, it is stated that when they have such a mental super-volition, there is an association of equanimity even with agreeable objects, and an association of joy even with disagreeable objects. But what is said in the Satatavihāra Sutta regarding Arahants, "Here, a monk, having seen a form, is neither joyful nor dejected; he dwells in equanimity, mindful and clearly comprehending," and so on, rejecting joy at the six doors, that too should be understood as said due to the prevalence of such mental super-volition in them. For Arahants too become joyful upon seeing the Buddha's form and upon seeing places suitable for striving, etc. so it is. Therefore, it is also fitting to say that this was said with reference to agreeable and disagreeable objects such as visual forms, etc., which are merely objects of lust, etc. And here, how does one dwell perceiving the disagreeable as not disagreeable? One pervades with loving-kindness towards a disagreeable object, or one brings it to mind as elements. Thus, one dwells perceiving the disagreeable as not disagreeable. How does one dwell perceiving the not disagreeable as disagreeable? One pervades with loathsomeness towards an agreeable object, or one brings it to mind as impermanent. Thus, one dwells perceiving the not disagreeable as disagreeable— by such a method of the Paṭisambhidāmagga, a mental formation of that kind is to be understood here. Others, however, say: When Arahants encounter an extremely agreeable object such as the beauty of a celestial nymph, they then pervade it with loathsomeness, or bring it to mind as impermanent. There, the disagreeable characteristic of loathsomeness or the characteristic of impermanence becomes the object of their equanimity-operative impulsion. Not the extremely agreeable object, such as the beauty of a celestial nymph. Similarly, when they encounter an extremely disagreeable object such as a body afflicted with leprosy and boils, they then pervade it with loving-kindness, or bring it to mind as elements. There, the agreeable characteristic of non-enmity, etc., becomes the object of their joy-operative impulsion. Not the extremely disagreeable object, such as a body afflicted with leprosy and boils. Therefore, those impulsions, like the results of kamma, are always accompanied by a feeling corresponding to the object. That is not logical. For those characteristics cannot be obtained separately from the beauty of celestial nymphs, etc. They are obtained only together with them. Therefore, just as the arising of joy even in extremely disagreeable objects like bloated corpses is stated in the commentaries through seeing their advantages and through seeing the distinctions of prior and posterior in meditation; and just as the arising of joy in the disagreeable form of a skeletal ghost is stated in the Pāli for the Elder Mahāmoggallāna through seeing the Buddha's perfect enlightenment and through seeing his own attainments; and just as for the Elder Mahākassapa, through such a mental formation, the leper's Even in receiving from the hand something undesirable, like rotten gruel, the arising of joy is stated in the commentaries. Similarly, here too, the mental formation of pervading with impurity, and so on, is to be understood as a condition for the arising of equanimity-impulsions in the extremely desirable, and joy-impulsions in the extremely undesirable. Indeed, this state of objects being desirable or undesirable is established by the wishes of ordinary people; it is not profound, and is the basis for perverted views and defilements. As it is said: "What form is inferior there? That form which is despised and disdained by those various beings." Here, by "those various beings," it is shown that the state of objects being desirable or undesirable is established by the convention of ordinary people. Therefore, that which is the perception of ordinary people, whose perversions are not abandoned, as extremely desirable in the extremely desirable, like the beauty of devas, and so on; and that which is the perception as undesirable in the extremely desirable, like the beauty of the Buddha, and so on; both of these occur due to their perversions. But that which is the perception of wise disciples of the Buddha as undesirable in the beauty of devas, and so on; and that which is the perception as extremely desirable in the beauty of the Buddha, and so on; both of these are to be known as occurring only by the power of wisdom. [134] But that which is to be clarified: "Indeed, in the mental continuums of those whose perversions regarding wholesome and unwholesome are not abandoned, there is a perception even in the extremely desirable as desirable, neutral, or undesirable; and even in the undesirable as desirable or neutral." — so it is said. And that which is said there: "For those whose taints are destroyed, due to the absence of mental perversions, even functional impulsion-moments occur just according to the object." That indeed should be investigated. Indeed, those who are without the eye of Dhamma, they alone, due to perversion, become subject to the mind and subject to the object. Thus, wholesome and unwholesome impulsions mostly occur according to the object. But not functional impulsion-moments. For those whose taints are destroyed are not subject to the mind or subject to the object in what ordinary people conventionally deem desirable or undesirable. As it is said: Forms, sounds, smells, tastes, tangibles... delightful. Things desirable and undesirable, The wise do not tremble. Therefore, after joy-producing impulsion, the apperceptional cognitions should be accompanied by pleasant or equanimous feeling. And similarly, after equanimity-producing impulsion. In the Mūlaṭīkā, in the Paṭṭhāna, it is said: "When wholesome and unwholesome [states] have ceased, resultant apperceptional cognition arises." Thus, apperceptional cognition is stated only after wholesome and unwholesome [states]. It is not stated after indeterminate [states], nor is there anywhere found a place where apperceptional cognition is stated after functional [states]. And if it exists, there is no reason for not stating it. It is appropriate that impulsion, like a boat going against the current of a river, follows the life-continuum, which is called "bhavaṅga," with its full force. But not the calm-natured functional impulsion of an Arahant who has attained the sixfold equanimity. Therefore, it is said that the provision for apperceptional cognition after functional impulsion should be examined. However, in the Paṭṭhāna, in the wholesome triad, in the problem-section, in the analysis of the condition of object, in the three concluding sections on indeterminate states, apperceptional cognition is primary for trainees and ordinary people. Not wholesome or unwholesome impulsion. Therefore, in both sections, whether trainees or ordinary people, it is said, "They discern the wholesome as impermanent, they delight in the wholesome," and so on. And again, it is said, "When the wholesome has ceased, when the unwholesome has ceased, resultant apperceptional cognition arises.