English
But their indeterminate states do not cease. And in the five-constituent realm, at the moment of the arising of wholesome states, their wholesome states arise, and their indeterminate states cease. Thus, complete questions would be brought forth. But "Not so" is merely a rejection brought forth. Therefore, it cannot be said that this was spoken with reference to the formless existence. If it is said that it was spoken with reference to mind-born form, that too is not so. Because there is no alternative reading of the Yamaka that contradicts the analysis of kamma-born form. And because of its conformity. As it is said – "Or, for whom, or where, the mind-faculty does not arise. For him, or there, the life-faculty..." does not arise. For the non-percipient beings, there the mind-faculty does not arise. Nor for them there the life-faculty does not arise. For all those who are passing away, at the moment of the dissolution of consciousness in the course of existence, for them there the mind-faculty does not arise, and the life-faculty does not arise. Here, by "for the non-percipient beings," only the form-life-faculty is meant. If it were to arise even at the moment of the dissolution of consciousness, then in the former part, "for the non-percipient beings, at the moment of the dissolution of consciousness in the course of existence, their life-faculty does not arise," would have been said. And in the latter part, "for all those who are passing away," would have been said. But if it is said that in the latter part, it refers to the formless-life-faculty, no. Because there is no variant reading in the Yamaka to take it that way. And in a place within the Omniscient One's domain, the Pāli texts should be compared, and one should stand by the stronger Pāli reasoning. And because form-phenomena are slow in their arising, and formless-phenomena are swift in their arising, and there is no separate reckoning of their static moment. Therefore, the sequence of moments for form-phenomena is one thing, and for formless-phenomena, it is another. There, all form-phenomena, with their moment of arising, which is the measure of one moment of consciousness, arise continuously moment by moment. And because the two arise together from the moment of rebirth, their arising and so on, or their cessation, is together for as long as life lasts, this is also its intention. But the Yamaka Pāli texts have different meanings, different expressions, and the Teacher's intention is profound. Therefore, it should be thoroughly considered and understood. This is not the nature of the Yamaka, that is, "interpretation as one gets it," and by standing on one's own opinion, one can interpret every Yamaka passage as one gets it. The formless wholesome, which is a special kind of cultivation of dispassion towards form, does not generate a rebirth accompanied by form in that world. It generates only pure formless existence. Therefore, due to the complete absence of the continuum of form, all forty-six consciousnesses that arise there they are not able to generate matter. But the immaterial results are always produced right there, so only the immaterial result is taken. Therefore, in the commentary, it is said that "many other things produced in the immaterial realms, being without opportunity, do not generate matter." Here, "without opportunity" should be understood as the absence of a continuous series of matter from the very beginning of its production. [189] In the Vibhāvanī, however, "because it is produced by the cultivation of dispassion for matter, due to the absence of that cause," is also stated as a reason. That is not a reason. Because the supramundane result, produced by the path that is the cultivation of dispassion for matter and immateriality, does not show the generation of matter when there is an opportunity for matter. Due to the absence of jhana factors, even those with weak factors do not generate matter, so the two fivefold consciousnesses are taken. But the other fifteen kāma and rūpa rebirth consciousnesses and the parinibbāna cuti consciousness of Arahants— these consciousnesses do not generate matter. Even so, all of them generate matter during the bhavaṅga state and at the time of cuti for non-Arahants, so their non-inclusion here should be understood. [190] In the Vibhāvanī, however, it is said: "But the rebirth consciousness and the cuti consciousness are not separate consciousnesses, being included within the nineteen bhavaṅgas, so they are not excluded." Here, "within the nineteen bhavaṅgas" should not be said. Because the immaterial result is excluded by its very nature. Why then do the aforesaid fifteen rebirth consciousnesses not generate matter at the moment of rebirth? Because they are extremely weak. Consciousness, indeed, becomes strong by obtaining complete conditions at the moment of arising. And matter at the moment of its duration. Therefore, being produced at its strong moment, and having arisen depending on a weak object, it is itself extremely weak. So all of them do not generate matter at that time. And here, some conditions, such as immediate contiguity, affect consciousness at the moment of its arising. But the supporting factors for matter, such as temperature and food, and the post-natal conditional phenomena, affect it at the moment of its duration. Thus operating, for them, respectively, at the moment of arising and at the moment of presence, the obtaining of complete conditions should be understood. [191] But in the Vibhāvanī, "But that which is devoid of post-natal conditions, and not supported by food, etc., because it arises depending on a weak base, and because of its own adventitious nature, and because it stands having taken the place of kamma-born forms and mind-born forms," this reason is stated. There, "devoid of post-natal conditions" this should be investigated. At the moment of presence of the re-linking consciousness, because the nature of generating forms will be stated, even for that which is devoid of post-natal conditions. For indeed, a subsequent consciousness that does not exist by itself does not become a post-natal condition for any form existing at the moment of the preceding consciousness. There is a partial conditionality of that condition. But the death-consciousness of Arahants, because it proceeds in a continuum whose root of the cycle of existence is naturally calmed, it is more tranquil. Furthermore, due to the exhaustion of life-formations, and because it is dependent on a weaker base that has reached its end, it is even weaker. Therefore, it does not generate forms. But Acariya Ānanda Thera holds the view that the death-consciousness of all beings does not generate forms. As it is said, "the death-consciousness of Arahants" is stated with a specific qualification. At the moment of arising of the last consciousness of those in the sense-sphere, immediately after which consciousness the last consciousness of those in the sense-sphere will arise. For those who are last-existents in the form-sphere and formless-sphere, and those who, having arisen in the form-sphere or formless-sphere, will attain Nibbāna, for them, as they are passing away, their verbal formation will cease, but their bodily formation does not cease. But by this statement, it is understood that the death-consciousness of others also does not generate forms. For indeed, when there is no connection with going to the womb, etc., for a form-generating consciousness, there is no generation of bodily formations. And it is not appropriate that for one who has passed away, mind-generated forms still continue. Nor is there a Pāli text that says "the death-consciousness generates forms." But in the Anuṭīkā, In that passage, The statement that "When they are passing away, the bodily formation does not cease" does not merely prove the non-production of matter by the death-consciousness itself, but it also shows that it proves the non-production of matter by all the consciousnesses preceding it, those close to death. For when the cessation of the bodily formation in the death-consciousness is denied, its production in the interval from that point up to the seventeenth consciousness before it is also denied. All this should be considered. For "bodily formation" is said to be in-breathing and out-breathing. And since that is a very gross material phenomenon, it is not possible to say that by the statement of the non-cessation of it in the death-consciousness, the death-consciousness does not generate even the other subtle matters. [192] And what was said there: "For there is no non-production of bodily formation when there is no connection with going into the womb, etc., for the consciousness that produces matter." That also is not appropriate. For those very going into the womb, etc., can be proofs of this matter: that a consciousness which does not produce gross bodily formation still produces other subtle matter. [193] And what was said there: "And it is not fitting that the consciousness-generated [matter] should continue after death." That also is without reason. For there is no contradiction in the continuation of consciousness-generated matter for a few moments after death. And what was said there: "Nor is there a Pāli text that says the death-consciousness produces matter." Even there, it is not that "the death-consciousness does not produce matter," nor is it that "except for bodily formation," so it is not possible to say that. However, it might be appropriate to say that just as material phenomena are weak at the beginning, at the moment of rebirth-linking, due to the scarcity of conditions for a single mind-moment, or due to their slow activity, so too at the end, at the time of death, they are extremely weak due to the exhaustion of conditions or due to their proximity to cessation. Therefore, it can be understood that the rebirth-linking and death-consciousnesses,