English
accompanied by the misfortune of one born blind, which has overly confused conditions, as stated in "Tihetukamomakaṃ" and so on. It ripens into twelve results. This "twelve-fold karma" ripens only into results without roots. This is called "the rootless stick." Thus, having shown the occurrence of results according to the view of the Elder Cūḷanāga of the Tipiṭaka, now, to show the view of the Elder Mahādatta who lived in Moravāpi, he speaks a verse. For that Elder, having established the unpromptedness and promptedness of results by the power of karma itself, says that unprompted karma does not ripen into prompted results, and prompted karma does not ripen into unprompted results. Just as a facial mark settles when it is settled on the face, and moves when it moves, so the distinction of promptedness, which is a special quality of the sharpness and dullness of results that cannot be brought about by effort, should be spoken of by the power of karma itself, not by the power of effort. Otherwise, the attainment of dullness and sharpness by merely proximate conditions would occur for those (results) that have arisen as sharp or dull by a distinction of karma. But for results without roots, because of their extreme weakness, the distinction of sharpness and dullness is undeveloped, so the intention is that both types of karma produce them. However, since their prompted and unprompted nature is by way of rebirth, or by way of that object, it is proper to speak of the presence or absence of a specific condition, called a prior application, at the time of arising. Not by way of the arrival of kamma, for kamma in one existence is not fit to distinguish results in another existence. Therefore, some, making this a "certain view," say "some." In this "certain view," excluding results with co-efficients from kamma without co-efficients, and results without co-efficients from kamma with co-efficients, among the four kamma that are excellent and with two roots: for the two without co-efficients, two results at rebirth, twelve in the course of life. For the two with co-efficients, two at rebirth, twelve in the course of life. Among the four kamma that are inferior and with two roots: for the two without co-efficients, two at rebirth, ten in the course of life. For the two with co-efficients, two at rebirth, ten in the course of life. Similarly, among the four excellent and with two roots. But among the four inferior and with two roots, one without roots at rebirth, eight without roots in the course of life. Thus, the results are two groups of twelve, four groups of ten, and one group of eight without roots. To include and show all of that, the verse "of them" is said. "Of them" means in the view of some elders. In the Aṭṭhasālinī, however, rebirth from kamma with three roots is only with three roots. Not with two roots, nor without roots. Rebirth from kamma with two roots can be with two roots or without roots. But it is not with three roots. Thus, the view of the Elder Mahādhammarakkhita has also come down. There, just as rebirth without roots must necessarily be desired from inferior kamma with two roots, so too, rebirth with two roots must necessarily be desired from inferior kamma with three roots. Therefore, it should be understood that this view was not accepted by the Elder here. In the Paṭisambhidāmagga, however: "By the attainment of destiny, with knowledge-associated conditions, the arising of eight roots occurs. At the javana moment of wholesome kamma, three roots are wholesome. At the nikanti moment, two roots are wholesome. At the rebirth moment, three roots are indeterminate." And with the attainment of destiny, knowledge-disassociated... Rebirth arises from the condition of six inappropriate causes. At the javana moment of wholesome kamma, two causes are wholesome. At the craving moment, two causes are unwholesome. At the rebirth-linking moment, two causes are indeterminate. Thus, by three-rooted kamma, rebirth is said to be three-rooted. By two-rooted kamma, it is two-rooted. But not, by the condition of seven causes disconnected from knowledge, due to favorable destiny, is two-rooted rebirth said by three-rooted kamma. Nor, by the condition of four causes, is rootless rebirth said by two-rooted kamma. But there, in the three moments, by way of co-arising causes, this teaching method is rooted in causes. Thus, due to lack of opportunity, rootless rebirth is not mentioned there. But not due to its unavailability. Two-rooted rebirth, however, is not due to lack of opportunity. It is understood that it is not mentioned due to its unavailability. Therefore, considering that the Pāḷi itself is stronger in reasoning, the view of Mahādhammarakkhita Thera is said to agree with the Pāḷi in the Paṭisambhidāmagga Aṭṭhakathā. Commentators, however, desire that the remaining text was spoken by the Great Elder to show the result similar to kamma. And thus, in the Aṭṭhasālinī too, the view of Tipiṭakacūḷanāga Thera is stated as the authority. In the Vibhāvanī, now, the text states: "Twelve results from one volition, and here, the ten paths of kamma are also rootless," as coming from Mahādhammarakkhita Thera who resided in Moravāpi. But it should be said: "of Mahādatta Thera who resided in Moravāpi." However, the view of Mahādhammarakkhita Thera is also included here in part. For in that too, unprompted kamma gives only unprompted results. Not prompted. Prompted kamma gives only prompted results. Not unprompted, so it is stated. [Sense-sphere kamma] 154. In fine-material sphere kamma, "limited" is twofold: limited by defect or by inferiority. There, that which, even when endowed with excellent desire and so on, is undeveloped, is newly attained... That, because of its imperfection, is called 'inferior'. That, in reference to which, something is imperfect, cannot be a cause for jhāna above. This is called 'inferior', it is said in the Aṭṭhasālinī. But that which, even though well-developed, is associated with inferior desire and so on, that, because of its inferiority, is called 'inferior'. That, in reference to which, at the moment of exertion, the desire is inferior, or the energy, or the mind, or the investigation, that is called 'inferior', it is said in the same place. The 'middling' is also twofold. There, in reference to the 'middling' due to not being too perfect, 'not well-developed, middling', it is said in the Visuddhimagga. In reference to the 'middling' due to being associated with middling desire and so on, 'that in which, at the moment of exertion, those qualities are middling, that is middling', it is said in the Aṭṭhasālinī. The 'excellent' is also twofold. There, in reference to the 'excellent' due to being very perfect, 'well-developed, attained mastery, excellent', it is said in the Visuddhimagga. But in reference to the 'excellent' due to being associated with excellent desire and so on, 'that in which, at the moment of exertion, those qualities are excellent, that is excellent', it is said in the Aṭṭhasālinī. There, those which are called 'inferior' and so on, by way of imperfection and so on, are not intended here. But those which are called 'inferior' and so on, by way of being associated with inferior desire and so on, those alone are intended here. For these alone accomplish the threefold distinction of Brahma-births in the three kinds of planes. And here, the fact that women, even those who have attained mastery in jhānas, do not arise among the Mahābrahmās due to the non-excellence of their desire and so on, is the proof. And for this reason, in the commentary, having divided the 'inferior', 'middling', and 'excellent', established by way of desire and so on, into eighteen kinds, it is said: 'These are called the eighteen doors of action. Because of being produced by these, by way of these, eighteen Khattiyas, eighteen Brāhmaṇas, eighteen Vessas, eighteen Suddas, forty-eight lineages and conduct are to be understood.' For by this, it indicates the distinction of birth obtained by both devas and Brahmās. [161] But in the Vibhāvanī: "That which is merely attained, not cultivated, is inferior. This is said in the commentary, "That which is not special, not well-developed, a medium state of mastery over the full moon, and that which is very well-developed, a complete mastery, is excellent." All of that is not applicable here. For that was said with reference to whether it is capable or incapable of being a cause for higher jhāna, or with reference to distinctions like decline-partaking, etc., but not with reference to distinctions that generate differences in rebirth. [162] And what is said there: "Here, it appears that the teacher means even a little, slight practice and cultivation. Thus, regarding the decline in the discernment of mind and matter— When practice is gained in a similar way, and great strength exists, if such a cause is not gained, the supernormal knowledge does not ripen. It is said that the ripening of the exalted states, due to their strength from gaining practice on the same plane, gives results, and due to its absence, the supernormal knowledge does not ripen." That too should be considered. For just as it is not the case that the volition of the noble path, even without gaining practice from volitions on the same plane, does not give results, so too it is not possible to understand that the exalted volition, which occurs only once in the initial path-process, and which occurs for the first time in all absorption-path-processes, being weak due to not gaining practice from states on the same plane, does not give results. Here it might be said: "It is said that the first jhāna, as a result of that very rūpāvacara wholesome kamma being done and accumulated, is attained and dwelt in. But that volition is not accumulated, because it has not gained practice from states on the same plane." No, for then the volition of the path would also be without result.