English
"Musā" is a particle meaning "untrue." "Musāvāda" is that by which they speak untruth. "Pisuṇā" is that by which it enters among others, crushes and breaks the essence of their mutual harmony, and causes discord and division. Or, "pisuṇā" is that by which it causes one's own dearness and others' friendlessness. According to the rule of etymology: "Vācā" is that by which they speak. "Pisuṇavācā" is that speech which is divisive. "Pharusā" is that which, reaching the heart of the one who hears it, burns and scorches. "Pharusavācā" is that speech which is harsh. "Samphaṃ" is that which yields, spreads, and destroys the path of welfare and happiness, which should be attained by good people. Or, "samphaṃ" is that by which it yields and breaks. This is a name for speech that is devoid of meaning and Dhamma, or for a mind that is full of cleverness, like the story of the Mahābhārata war or the abduction of Sītā. Where there is no word of meaning, Dhamma, or discipline that points to welfare in this life or welfare in the next. "Sapphappalāpo" is that by which they speak in a rambling, meaningless way. Among these, "musāvāda" is the unwholesome volition that arises from bodily and verbal actions aimed at speaking poison to another, with the intention of speaking poison. This is a breach of the path of action, as it destroys the welfare of another. The others are merely actions. Here, "path of action" refers to the main path for the arising of actions that generate rebirth. Just as the place where dust arises is called the "dust path," similarly, among the actions of body, speech, and mind seen in beings in the world, the actions by which rebirth-generating actions arise, or in which those actions arise and occur, those actions of body, speech, and mind are called "paths of action" because they are the main paths for the arising of rebirth-generating actions. What are these? They are the ten kinds of actions, such as killing in the unwholesome, and abstaining from them in the wholesome, which are complete in their constituents. Actions themselves are the cause of good and bad destinations. And because they are the path for producing happiness and suffering, they are also called 'paths of action,' so they say. Slanderous speech is a defiled intention, arising from divisive bodily and verbal action, with the intention of causing division among others. That too is a path of action only when others are divided. If not divided, it is just kamma. Harsh speech is a malicious intention, arising from bodily and verbal action that cuts to the quick of another. And here, beings die, or experience suffering akin to death, when this 'mamma' is struck. A bad wound. One who cuts, breaks, or strikes the vital spot is a 'mammacchedaka'. The act of striking a wound. But here, 'mamma' is like a vital spot. Whatever among the ten grounds for abuse, such as birth. 'Mamacchedaka' means harsh bodily and verbal action that occurs by way of striking concerning birth and so on. This meaning should be understood according to the Sīlakkhandha commentary. Or, 'mamo' means 'mine,' a friend. The state of 'mamo' is 'mamma,' a mind of loving-kindness. One who cuts 'mamma' is a 'mammacchedaka.' Some say this too is a path of action only in the presence of the one to be abused. Others say even in absence. Just as, for one who has abused another and seeks forgiveness, the act of seeking forgiveness is accomplished even if the other is far away or dead, so too is the act of abuse, say the commentators on the Dīgha and Majjhima Nikāyas. With the intention of abuse, even for one who curses another, saying "May a fierce buffalo pursue him!" or "May thieves cut him into pieces!" or "May your head split into seven pieces!" or in similar ways, it is indeed a path of action, so they say. Frivolous talk is an evil intention, arising from bodily and verbal action that conveys what is not beneficial. That too is a path of action only in mere verbal expressions (as subject matter) concerning clever thoughts about the Mahābhārata war, the abduction of Sītā, and so on. And that is only when others take that unbeneficial thing as true. But if they do not take it, it is just kamma. Similarly, in talks about kings and so on, and in the thirty-two kinds of animal talks, it is just kamma. And that is only for one who speaks by way of enjoying it. But for one who speaks having based it on meaning, Dhamma, and Vinaya, all is... It should be understood that it is only for the purpose. As for "verbal action," here "speech" means voice itself. That is of four kinds: sound-speech, abstinence-speech, volition-speech, and communication-speech. Here, however, communication-speech, which is accompanied by sound and consists of verbal intimation, is intended; thus it is said, "consisting of verbal intimation." For communication-speech is sometimes made through the vocal organ for the purpose of making one's intention known to another; thus it is called "verbal intimation." And that itself is the door, being the channel for the arising of actions; thus it is the verbal door. For when it is active through various verbal applications, the success of deception and other acts is achieved, and the volitional mental state that gives rise to it accomplishes the act of exertion, and thereby gains the name "verbal action." Regarding that verbal door, what needs to be said here has already been said in the section on bodily action. [Verbal Action] 150. "Covetousness" (abhijjhā) is that by which one intensely covets and yearns for another's possessions, not merely delighting in them, but transforming them into one's own. "Ill-will" (byāpāda) is that by which one thinks of destroying other beings. In "wrong view" (micchādiṭṭhi), "wrong" (micchā) is a particle in the sense of contrary or perverse. "Wrong view" is that by which one breaks down the entire path of good people and what is taught by good people, which proceeds in the manner of "there is what is given," etc., and sees things in the contrary manner of "there is no what is given," etc. Here, seeing another's property, if one merely delights, rejoices, and is attached to it, the transgression of the path of action of covetousness occurs only when one thinks, "Oh, if only this were mine!" and mentally transforms it into one's own. If one merely keeps it as another's property, thinking, "How fortunate are those who enjoy such things! Oh, if only I could enjoy it for a while! I would make it my own by begging or buying it, or acquire something similar," this is merely an action. For it is said in the commentaries: "Even when greed arises regarding another's property, the transgression of the path of action does not occur until one transforms it into one's own, thinking, 'Oh, if only this were mine!'" Even regarding mosquitoes and gnats, if one thinks, "May these perish," Let them perish, let them be destroyed. Oh, may they perish, may they be destroyed. Or may they not grow, or may they not long endure. "When will they perish, when will they be destroyed?" Thus, for one who contemplates the destruction of the aggregates and life of another being, this is malevolence. The other is just kamma. For it is said that even when anger arises concerning another being, it is not yet a breach of the path of kamma. Until one thinks, "Oh, may he be cut off, may he be destroyed," contemplating his destruction. The three kinds of fixed wrong view, which completely reject kamma, its results, and the efficacy of action (nihilistic, causeless, ineffectual), are indeed a breach of the path of kamma. But the ten-fold wrong view is just a subdivision of the nihilistic view. They say that the views of Ariṭṭha, Kaṇṭaka, and others, which arose by rejecting the teaching of the Omniscient One, are also paths of kamma. And the twenty-fold personality view or the sixty-two wrong views are also kamma. Here, concerning "fixed": Just as, having seen the three characteristics to a certain extent, the mind-moment of one who arrives at a conclusion with faith and determination is fixed by the rule of yielding results immediately after itself. One who sees that much is said to enter the fixed path in wholesome states. Similarly, having seen the grounds for wrong view, the semblances of causes, to a certain extent, the mind-moment of one who arrives at a conclusion with wrong determination is fixed by the rule of yielding results immediately after itself. One who sees that much and arrives at a conclusion enters the fixed path in unwholesome states, and is called incurable. However, one who, without seeing thus, merely by wrong determination, arrives at the conclusion "it will be just so," and holds to his own teacher's doctrine, is not called incurable. Why? Because of the absence of the rule of yielding results. And this meaning should be explained by the triad of wrongness. For there, the acquisition of the designation "fixed" for both right and wrong states is said in the commentaries to be by way of the rule of yielding results. But in the Suttanta commentaries, its fixed nature is also said to be by way of the rule of apprehension. Also elsewhere, it is understood. It means, even without the two expressions. The meaning is, even without generating the two expressions. But by the word "api" (also), it shows that it is also with the two expressions. For when these three actions arise only in the mind, without moving the bodily limbs and parts, then they occur without expression. But when they arise by moving them through the bodily and verbal doors, then they occur together with expression. By this, it indicates their occurrence through all three doors. Even so, these mostly occur through the mind-door. But through the bodily and verbal doors, they occur only rarely, as stated by "mostly occurring only in the mind." There, "only in the mind" means only in the mind-door, which is reckoned as wholesome and unwholesome impulsion-consciousness.