English
And when birth exists, old age and death certainly occur, Thus it is said: "From birth, old age and death." This is the method of 'that being, this comes to be' here. And the mention of sorrow, etc., here, Is to show the mass of danger Of the entire round of existence that proceeds by such 'that being, this comes to be'. 'Here' means in this collection of conditions. 'There' means in that method of dependent origination. 'Addhā' means 'time', because it holds the phenomena that have a long duration. It is time. For it appears as if holding the imperishable three-time phenomena Through the continuity of successions of aeons, Years, seasons, months, fortnights, nights, and days. Or, 'addhā' is that in which the three-time phenomena Burn, stand, and proceed abundantly. It is time itself. Though it is itself undivided, it is divided by taking the divided phenomena. It is proper to act as if it were not, thus it is said, "three times." [227] But what is to be clarified: "It goes, it moves, it proceeds continuously, thus it is called 'time' (addha)." That is not good. For if so, "times" (addhānaṃ) would not be formed, as in "one who has entered the path of time." "Limbs" (aṅgāni) means principal limbs, principal components, it is said. "Aspects" (ākārā) means parts, divisions. Here, the word "ākāra" means "division," as in "thirty-two aspects." They also say "ākārā" because they are as if scattered and placed here and there. "Joints" (sandhī) are the points of connection of two short sections. "Short sections" (saṅkhepā) are collections of principal phenomena. "Revolutions" (vaṭṭāni) are what revolve again and again. "Roots" (mūlāni) are where all revolving phenomena stand, dependent on them for their existence. Foundations. Sources, is the meaning. Because just as one person, taking water from the ocean with one finger and putting it into the mouth of a large crowd, makes them understand the saltiness of the water in the four great oceans, so too the Blessed One, by fully teaching one present existence, beginning with "ignorance conditions formations," made known the process of the entire beginningless cycle of transmigration. And by fully teaching, the cause of that one existence must be taught, and the result must be taught. Here, the causes are ignorance and formations, which were established in a past existence. The result is birth in a future existence. Thus, this teaching, though pertaining to one existence, is also common to the past and future in one part, and so it is said, "ignorance and formations are past time," and so on. And here, the statement as if making no distinction between time and those who travel through time shows the absence of time as a distinct entity apart from phenomena. It also refutes the prevalent wrong view that time itself causes the world to arise and cease. For time, being non-existent in itself, cannot properly be the cause of anyone's arising or ceasing. Why, then, does the Blessed One, when showing the process of each present existence, also teach the cause in a past existence, and in the future existence, it shows the fruit. To prevent the views of causelessness and wrong causes, the past cause is shown. To prevent the annihilation view, the future fruit is shown. To prevent the eternalist view, both are shown, it should be understood. Therein, the view that beings arise, cease, are defiled, and are purified without cause or condition, is called the view of causelessness. The showing of a non-existent cause such as Brahma, Prajapati, or Ishvara's creation, is called the view of wrong causes. The view that beings are annihilated at death, and there is no birth in the future, is called the annihilation view. The view that the self is eternal and permanent, and it transmigrates and wanders from one existence to another, is called the eternalist view. However, if it is eternal and thus transmigrates, it would not need to be brought about by ignorance and so on. Therefore, by stating the re-arising of consciousness in another existence through ignorance and formations, the eternalist view is prevented. Why are sorrows and so on not included as factors here? Because they do not necessarily arise when birth is present, thus lacking the characteristic of 'being present when that is present'. For even when birth is present, they do not arise in the form realm and the immaterial realm. And even in the sense realm, they do not arise for some. If so, why are they mentioned? To show the great mass of danger of the entire cycle of existence, of the kind described, whether of birth or of ignorance and so on, the mention of sorrows and so on is here said to be the showing of the resultant fruit. Therein, "showing of the resultant fruit" means the showing of the fruit of arising, which is the great mass of danger of birth. Why are only two past conditions, ignorance and formations, mentioned in the Pāli for this present existence? Are only these two its conditions? Others also exist. Then why are they not mentioned in the Pāli? Because even though unmentioned, they are obtained by implication. And how are they obtained even though unmentioned? Showing that they are obtained by the characteristic of 'being present when that is present' and by the characteristic of 'being inseparable from that', "By the grasping of ignorance and volitional formations," and so on, he said. This method applies elsewhere too. There, "by the grasping of ignorance and volitional formations" refers to the words "ignorance and volitional formations" stated at the beginning in the Pāli text. "Craving, clinging, and becoming are also included" means that because they exist when ignorance exists, and do not exist when ignorance does not exist, by the grasping of ignorance, craving and clinging are also included. And because it exists when volitional formations exist, and do not exist when volitional formations do not exist, by the grasping of volitional formations, kamma-becoming is also included – this is the meaning. However, in the Vibhāvanī, it is said: Due to the commonality of defilement-nature, by the grasping of ignorance, craving and clinging are included. Due to the commonality of kamma-nature, by the grasping of volitional formations, kamma-becoming is included. That too is appropriate. Similarly, the connection is that ignorance and volitional formations are included. This means that by the words "craving and clinging," ignorance is included due to their inseparability; and by the word "becoming," volitional formations are included. It is said that due to the inseparability of characteristic-phenomena from the phenomena they characterize, by that inseparability, birth, aging, etc., are included. "Therefore," means for this reason. The connection is that there are twenty aspects. The first five causes are one summary. The second five results are one. The third five causes are one. The fourth five results are one summary, thus there are four summaries. This means there are four collections. When these four summaries are established, then by the first, the second; by the second, the third; and by the third, the fourth – in this way, the three connections are also established, hence it is said there are three connections and four summaries. Here, "five causes" and "five results" are stated according to common worldly usage. However, the words "cause" and "result" are merely synonyms for "condition" and "conditioned phenomenon." Therefore, it is possible for the second five, taking the first as reference, to be "five results," and for the third five, taking the (second) as reference, to be "five causes." Similarly, for the third (five), taking the fourth as reference, it is "five causes," and taking the second as reference, it is "five results." If this were the case, then there would only be results from causes, not causes from results, and such an objection would have no room. But in the two sets of causes... The distinction between formations and kamma-becoming is stated in the Commentary. As it says: “Having generated the thought, ‘I will give a gift,’ for a month or even a year, for one preparing the requisites for the gift, the former volitions that arose are called volitions of exertion (āyūhana-saṅkhāra). But the volition that arises when placing the offering in the hands of the recipients is called becoming (bhava). In a single advertence, the volitions in the six javana moments are called volitions of exertion. The volition of the seventh javana moment is becoming. Or, any volition whatsoever is becoming. Those concomitant with it are called volitions of exertion.” It is said that kamma-becoming and rebirth-becoming are two becomings, parts of the single becoming factor among the twelve factors, as in “kamma-becoming is a part of becoming,” and so on. Here, the distinction between formations and kamma-becoming should be understood in the manner stated. [228] But what is to be clarified is: “It is said that ‘kamma-becoming is a part of becoming’ here, the volition that is a condition for future rebirth should be understood as formations.” This is not appropriate here. Because both of them are included in the two causal five-groups. Or, this should be seen as stated according to the literal Pāli text. And “the remaining ones” is said with reference to the five-group of results beginning with consciousness, together with birth, aging, and death. And here, what was previously taken as the five-group of results beginning with consciousness by the inclusion of birth, aging, and death, that is, in essence, rebirth-becoming itself. For there is no other rebirth-becoming apart from the five-group of results. Even so, for the sake of preserving the division of phenomena, it is appropriate that the fourth five-group is taken by the word “rebirth-becoming.” Among the twelve factors, ignorance is delusion. And that is a root of unwholesome kamma. Craving is greed.