English
other than the present life, the next life, or the future life. But in the Sutta passages, a twofold reading is seen: "in another turn" and "in yet another turn." In that latter reading, the elision of one "apara" word in the middle here should be understood. But in the Saṅgaha books, with a long 'ā' and 'y' sound in the middle, the word "aparāpariya" is seen. That is not in many commentaries. And it does not agree with the Pāli. [148] And what is to be clarified: "In other, other (lives), kamma to be experienced in any other existence than the present life is called 'aparāpariya vedanīya'." So it is said. There, "from the present life" this, indeed, is not appropriate. Indeed, it is not suitable that only the first, the present life, having excluded the intervening rebirth existence, is taken as the third term here. [149] But in meaning and in expression, it all does not agree with the Pāli. Indeed, in the Pāli, it is said: "He experiences the result in another turn." Or "in yet another turn." Kamma called "ahosi" is "ahosikamma." "Ahosikamma. Future kamma. Existing kamma. There is no result for it." According to this stated reading, the designation thus taken by the teachers means kamma that has completely failed to produce results. Among the seven wholesome and unwholesome impulsion moments, the first impulsion volition is called "experiencable in the present life." For it, due to not having been repeated, being the weakest of all, is short-lived and has less result. Having obtained the condition, in this very life, it gives only a rootless result and ceases. It cannot even pass one death moment and continue the continuum. But not obtaining the condition, it is called "ahosika." And by "condition," that which gives opportunity for its own result to arise, such as the coming together of desirable and undesirable objects in various postures, any such condition is indeed appropriate. But in the commentaries, by "not being overcome by opponents," etc., making it great, the condition... It is said that it gives a more evident fruit, like that of the kākavali creeper, and so on. For there is no first javana volition among the javana series of the path of action, or any other, that, having obtained conditions through the conjunction of desirable and undesirable things, does not give a fruit according to its strength. Nor can it be said that all the fruit given by it would be evident to the general public or to the doer of the action. What is said in the Ñāṇavibhaṅgaṭṭhakathā, "One gives a fruit to be experienced in this very life; the rest are without fruit," should be understood as referring to the rest that have not obtained conditions. For it cannot be known that one present life is the occasion for only one fruit to be experienced in this very life. The javana volition that is the concluding one, which is the cause of success and the establisher of meaning, is called 'to be experienced in the next birth'. For, having been practiced repeatedly, it becomes somewhat substantial, and thus cannot ripen as quickly as the first volition. And being powerful, it can generate one existence. Among the fallen javanas, the last javana, like the middle volitions, is not long-lasting. So, having obtained conditions, it gives either rebirth or a resultant process in the very next existence and then ceases. But if it does not obtain conditions, it becomes an ineffective kamma. It cannot pass beyond the second moment of death. What is said in the Ñāṇavibhaṅgaṭṭhakathā, "One draws a rebirth to be experienced in the next birth; the rest are without fruit," should also be understood as referring to the rebirth fruit. For the rest, too, as long as the second passing away does not occur, if they obtain conditions, they certainly give process-result. Here, having performed mixed kammas, there are hundreds of stories to be told of vimānika petas experiencing mixed kamma-fruit in the next existence, and many other beings who, having performed such and such kamma, experience misfortune in a good destination as a result of that kamma in the very next existence, or experience prosperity in a bad destination as a result of that kamma. But that which is to be clarified: "And it, only after giving rebirth-linking, gives fruit in the course of existence. But when rebirth-linking is not given, there is no giving of fruit in the course of existence," it is said. That is not appropriate. Because it contradicts the aforementioned matters. And that which there: "Immediately after death, is the opportunity for fruit to be experienced in the next existence," the reason is stated. That too is not a reason. Because opportunity is possible starting from immediately after death, even throughout life. And that which there: "But when rebirth-linking is given, even for hundreds of births, it is said to give fruit in the course of existence." That too should not be accepted. Because of the fault of mixing kamma. And in the Aṅguttara commentary, that which is to be experienced in this very existence, that which is to be experienced in the next existence, and that which is to be experienced in subsequent existences, there is no transference among them. It is said that they remain in their respective places. And here it is not possible to say that it is said thus in terms of rebirth-linking. Because of the absence of a commentary passage, or a story, or a reason, that proves that meaning. But in the middle, the volitions of the five javanas are called 'to be experienced in subsequent existences'. For these are very powerful and are essential, so they cannot ripen quickly. But they are long-lasting. Therefore, starting from the third existence, when they get an opportunity, then, after giving rebirth-linking five times, if the cycle of existence continues, even for hundreds of thousands of eons, they give fruit in the course of existence. But these three kamma themselves, in their respective fields, not obtaining the opportunity for fruit at all, are called 'defunct kamma'. And their field, for the first, is limited by death in this very existence. For the second, by death in the immediately succeeding existence. For the third, by the death of final Nibbāna, it should be understood. [The Tetrad of Kamma to be Experienced in this Existence] 148. In terms of the place of ripening, that is, in terms of the place of ripening such as the lower realms, thus there are four kinds of kamma, this is the connection. Therein, among those four kamma, such as unwholesome kamma. In terms of the doors of kamma, that is, in terms of the doors of kamma such as body, etc., which are constituent parts for the accomplishment of kamma. They take life by this, therefore, living beings. killing of living beings. Here, "killing" should be understood as not allowing the living being to fall from its natural state, but causing it to fall by force, in between. "Taking what is not given" is that by which they take what is not given. "Sexual misconduct" is that by which they wrongly engage in sensual pleasures, which are called unsuitable objects. Here, "killing of living beings" is the murderous intention that instigates the bodily or verbal action which severs the life faculty continuum of another living being, perceived as a living being. There is no "killing of living beings" for one who himself severs his own life faculty. "Taking what is not given" is the intention to steal that instigates the bodily or verbal action which causes separation from another's property, perceived as another's property. "Sexual misconduct" is the intention to enjoy that instigates the bodily action which causes the path to be trodden in unsuitable objects. Some, however, desire the phrase "perceived as unsuitable objects" here as well. That does not accord with the commentaries. For there it is said: "the intention to engage in that unsuitable object." By this, it is established that if there is an unsuitable object, whether one perceives it as suitable or unsuitable, the path of action certainly occurs. Otherwise, it would have been said: "the unsuitable object, so perceived, and the intention to engage in it." Others say that even if there is an intention to engage, for one who enjoys the path being trodden by another, without himself performing the act, there is no breach of the path of action, due to the absence of the act. Some say that if there is an intention to engage, the act is not important. If this is so, sexual misconduct would be three-limbed, not four-limbed. Others say that in the commentaries, it is stated as four-limbed, together with the act of engagement. However, the act of engagement is mentioned because it is mostly found, not because it is an absolute limb. Otherwise, they say, since women mostly do not perform the act, sexual misconduct would be rare for them. The defilement of a bhikkhunī is also included here. For she is included among those who are protected. But in the sub-commentaries, she is not even protected by the Dhamma. i. How is she protected by mother, etc.? They say that "Dhamma" here is said in the commentary to be the doctrine of heretics. The Sasana-Dhamma is also not suitable. Her co-brahmacārīs, such as her preceptor, are in the position of her mother, etc. Thus, in the commentary on the training rules, even sexual misconduct by a woman of bad conduct, a novice, an ordinary bhikkhunī, a stream-enterer, a once-returner, or a non-returner is a great offense. But for an arahant, it is said to be an absolutely great offense. Why is drinking alcohol not included here? That too is said to be conducive to the lower realms. As it is said: "Monks, drinking intoxicating drinks, when practiced, developed, and frequently engaged in, leads to hell, to the animal realm, to the realm of hungry ghosts. And the lightest result of drinking intoxicating drinks is that when one is reborn as a human, one becomes insane." And in the commentaries, it is said that