English
rooted in that was included among the fruits of kamma and called 'pleasant voice'. It should not be understood that sound is exclusively kamma-born. Why is it said that the triad of lightness, etc., arises from season, consciousness, and food? Was it not said: 'This path, young man, leads to freedom from affliction, namely non-harming'? And this triad of matter arises from the condition of freedom from affliction. For indeed, its arising from conditions opposed to sluggishness, etc., and the disturbance of elements, was stated. It is said that kamma-born matter, like oils cooked a hundred times and put into water, are naturally light, soft, and workable, in accordance with kamma. Therefore, there is no separate modification of lightness, etc., for them. Because for them, only a single duration of present existence is obtained in one life. And thus, even in the case of twins, their difference in time is taken as being limited by the duration of the present existence, which is cut off at rebirth. But because consciousness, due to various kinds of hindrances, or due to pleasure, pain, joy, tranquility, faith, wisdom, and so on, is endowed with various states at various moments. Similarly, season... And foods are suitable or unsuitable, depending on their type. Therefore, the forms arisen from these three become endowed with various modifications, such as heaviness and lightness, at different moments. Because a distinction of time is obtained according to their continuity and occasion. And thus, even in the Yamaka, a distinction of time is taken for non-kamma-born things during their occurrence, according to their momentary continuity. Has it not been said that ailments are born of kamma-result? And if there is an ailment-form arisen from kamma, then a kamma-born quality like lightness, being a distinct arising from that, might also be obtained separately. No. For by means of which, in this body, ailments called kamma-result-born arise, those oppressive and destructive kammas, obtaining failures in destiny, time, and application, disturb the bodily elements like earth, and the humours like wind and bile, which are temperature-born elements, and thus produce various ailments. But when the temperature-born (elements) are disturbed, the others merely follow them. For this reason, it is said that the condition for the suffering of material phenomena is primarily temperature, as in "one suffers from cold, one suffers from heat, one suffers from hunger, one suffers from thirst," and so on. Therefore, there is no ailment that is solely kamma-born. Because the aforementioned kamma-born quality like lightness might be obtained separately. But because beings born of non-harmful kamma, due to the great distance from oppressive and similar kammas, and due to the dense and smooth constitution of their bodily parts, and their invulnerability to suffering, are free from ailments in their rebirth. Therefore, with that in mind, this path of the youth leads to few ailments. This is what is meant by non-harming, not because the triad of lightness, etc., which is the cause of few ailments, is kamma-born. And thus, it should be understood that in the section on form, this triad of forms is indicated only among the forms that are kamma-owned. Indeed, form-clusters, even in a single atom, occur in many varieties. Therefore, when the form-clusters of the four origins occur densely, the space element, which is between the clusters, also appears. Thus, among the four origins, its taken. Indeed, all unproduced forms are not produced by any condition. But among them, the characteristic forms are not like that. It is said that characteristic forms do not arise from anywhere, just as other forms, having distinctions appearing due to specific conditions like mind, do. "Forms like arising" means the aggregates of forms that are arising, decaying, and ceasing. "Merely having their own nature" means merely having the nature of characteristics such as birth, old age, and death. And in this section on forms, it is not stated that they arise from season or arise from food. It is stated only in the Paṭṭhāna. Here it might be said: Old age and impermanence are stated in the Pāli itself as not arising from anywhere. Therefore, here too, it is appropriate to include them among those not arising from anywhere. But growth and continuity are stated in the Pāli as arising from somewhere. In the commentary too, twenty forms born of kamma, seventeen forms born of mind, fourteen forms born of season, and thirteen forms born of food are stated along with them. Therefore, here, it should not be said that they do not arise from anywhere. It is said: The generative activity of form-generators affects only at the moment of arising of the forms generated by themselves. Not beyond that. Therefore, only the growth and continuity obtained at that moment are worthy of being called "arising from somewhere." Not old age and impermanence. Having considered this, in the Pāli and the commentary, their inclusion among those arising from somewhere is made. Moreover, there is the statement: "Things not arisen before, when there is a condition, arise. When there is no condition, they do not arise." But for things that have arisen, it is not the case that "when there is a condition, they decay and cease. When there is no condition, they do not decay and do not cease." Therefore, the occurrence of the former two is entirely dependent on conditions. But the occurrence of the latter two is entirely independent of conditions. By this method, their inclusion and non-inclusion should be understood. As for what is said in the Sutta passages: "Old age and death, bhikkhus, are conditioned, arising dependently." That means only when there is birth do both of those become manifest. When there is no birth, they do not become manifest. It should be understood as stated in a different way. But here, in the manner stated before, like other unproduced forms, these four also, due to specific conditions like mind, do not become manifest as distinct. Thus, it is said that the four do not arise from anywhere. Even so, it is as if one overruns the more essential Pāli method. Therefore, the inclusion of growth, continuity, and decay among those arising from somewhere is better. [The Method of the Arising of Form] 159. For these, the arising, called birth, is one and the same; thus, they are of single arising. For these, the cessation, called impermanence, is one and the same; thus, they are of single cessation. Here, the word "one" is used in the sense of number. Therefore, it shows that those forms which arise with a single birth and cease with a single impermanence, their aggregate here is called a "form-cluster." But for those who reckon the forms within a cluster and assume many births, etc., even in one cluster, it does not agree with the Mūlaṭīkā. Nor is there any reason for it. For it is said there: "Since the forms comprised in each cluster arise and proceed together, the arising, etc., of each cluster is single." Just as the life faculty of each cluster is called "form" in dependence on the cluster's maintainer. Thus, birth and so on, whose nature is the arising of the cluster, are indeed called dependent forms. Similarly, the forms of alteration and delimitation should also be applied. If it were said that "that which is the accumulation of sense bases is the growth of form," and "that which is the growth of form is the continuity of form," then those characteristic forms like birth, etc., would belong to individual forms, not to the cluster. And since it is said "the sensitive faculty, dependent on the four great elements, is the life of material phenomena," then eye, etc., and life, etc., would also become many in one cluster. Therefore, without making such an assumption, it should be concluded that in one cluster, like other dependent forms, the characteristic forms are also single. For these, the support, called the great elements, is one and the same; thus, they are of single support. Here, the word "one" is used in the sense of "same." Because the four elements can be the support. And those which are endowed with characteristics such as arising together. These are said to be necessarily co-existent. Thus it is said, "co-existent." Ten in number is the breath-decad. A group of ten is a decad. A decad characterized by the eye is the eye-decad. Or a decad with the eye as primary is the eye-decad. This method applies to the rest. However, since mental sound does not arise without the modification of intimation, and the modification of intimation does not arise without that sound, therefore, a mental sound-ennead or a verbal intimation-ennead is not possible. With this intention, it is said, "in sounds with verbal intimation, there is a co-existent verbal intimation-decad." Here, however, that the modification of intimation does not arise without sound is indeed appropriate. For that intimation, that making known, that being made known by speech, this is that form called verbal intimation. But a mental sound-ennead devoid of the modification of intimation is mentioned in the Commentaries. As it is said: "In the expositions of Dependent Origination, from the moment of rebirth onwards, from temperature and from mind, there is a sound-ennead." According to the method of the Great Commentary, a mental sound, the sound of thought-vibration devoid of intimation, which is not perceptible by ear, is accepted. But this is rejected by the Compilers. As it is said: "Even in the Paṭṭhāna, the sound-ayatana arising from mind is said to be a condition by way of object-condition for ear-consciousness." Therefore, there is no such thing as a sound of thought-vibration not perceptible by ear, arising without the friction of intimation. In the Visuddhimagga, a mental sound-ennead is mentioned for in-breaths and out-breaths. As it is said: "In the mental parts of in-breaths and out-breaths,