English
For one wandering in the non-percipient realm, only the physical body occurs. That alone is counted as one being there. For one wandering in the formless realm, only the mental body occurs. That alone is counted as one being there. "Is counted" means it reaches a mere designation. Among these bodies, in the physical body, there is no immediate conditionality between decease and rebirth. In each existence, each one, having been one, breaks up at the time of decease. The continuity of form is cut off. The connection of condition and conditioned does not occur with the rebirth-form. In the mental body, however, decease and rebirth are mutually ...there is immediate conditionality. Even at the time of death, the continuity of mind does not cease. The connection of condition and conditioned, together with rebirth-linking mind, continues. Therein, a monk skilled in dependent origination, standing in the knowledge of dependent origination, seeing the arising of one being in one existence, does not see a being as such. He does not see a person as such. He does not see "I" either. He does not see "other" either. He does not see "I was in past existences" either. He does not see "I am in this existence" either. He does not see "I shall be in future existences" either. But rather, conditioned by ignorance, volitional formations arise. Conditioned by volitional formations, consciousness arises in another existence— in this way, he sees only the uninterrupted continuity of the cause-and-effect sequence of mental and material phenomena. When one sees the arising in one existence, the arising of that being in endless existences in the beginningless samsara is indeed seen, "there too it is thus, there too it is thus." Then his sixteen kinds of doubt are abandoned— this meaning is stated by "showing in beginningless samsara," etc. Therein, what are the sixteen kinds of doubt? Was I indeed in the past? Was I not indeed? What indeed was I? How indeed was I? Having been what, what indeed was I in the past?— thus, five kinds of doubt concerning the past are stated. Shall I indeed be in the future? Shall I not indeed? What indeed shall I be? How indeed shall I be? Having been what, what indeed shall I be in the future?— thus, five kinds of doubt concerning the future are stated. Am I indeed? Am I not indeed? What indeed am I? How indeed am I? Whence indeed has this being come? Whither indeed will it go?— thus, six kinds of doubt concerning the present are stated. These are the sixteen kinds of doubt. Therein, by these two phrases, "Was I indeed?" and "Was I not indeed?", one doubts one's existence or non-existence in the past. If there was, "What indeed was I?" he doubts. "By some cause or condition I was. By some powerful one I was created. Or without cause or condition, uncreated, I was self-born," is the meaning. If I was one of those kinds, "How indeed was I? Was I footless? Or two-footed? Or four-footed? Or many-footed? Was I material? Or immaterial? Was I percipient? Or non-percipient?" and so on. Then, "Among those, footless and so on, which one was I? Having been what, what was I? Having been what in the first existence, what was I in the second and subsequent existences?" This is said in terms of the succession of existences. This method applies to the future too. In the present, "Am I indeed? Am I not indeed?" as in the minor section of the analysis of the one hundred and eight modes of craving. "I am eternal," it is. "I am cut off," it is said. There, "I am eternal" means, "I am eternal." "I am cut off" means, "I am annihilated." And just as, "There is," is one extreme. "There is not," is the second extreme, it is said. There, "There is" means, "The self exists perpetually in existences and non-existences." "There is not" means, "It does not exist in that way, it is cut off. It does not exist after death," is the meaning. Similarly here too, "Am I indeed? Am I not indeed?" he doubts. There, "Am I indeed?" means, "Am I, this 'I' called, perpetually in existences and non-existences? Does my self, being eternal, exist at all times?" it is said. "Am I not indeed?" means, "Am I not so? Does my self not exist in that way?" is the meaning. And here, "in existences and non-existences" should be understood as encompassing the present, by taking the self existing in the present, so that past and present are included. "What indeed am I?" means, "Being born, what indeed am I? Am I indeed by some cause or condition? Am I indeed created by some powerful one? Or indeed, without cause or condition, uncreated by anyone, am I indeed self-born?" is the meaning. "How indeed am I?" Here, however, without connecting with footless beings etc., "What lineage, pray, am I? Am I of Gotama lineage, or Vāseṭṭha lineage?" and so on, should be connected. In the primeval age those lineages now become mixed. Therefore, doubting in them, one simply doubts. "Whence have I come?" I have come from what existence in the past. "Where shall I go?" That I, in a future existence, where shall I go? — thus he doubts. "Overcoming doubt": that monk, seeing the five past causes such as ignorance in dependent origination, sees the entire dependent origination in that existence. Seeing thus, there is no 'I' there, on account of which the five kinds of doubt regarding the past arise. "Only phenomena exist there" — thus, by seeing the absence of a basis for doubt in the past, there is an overcoming of the five kinds of doubt. But even for one seeing thus, "How, pray, am I? What was I, having been what?" this doubt still exists. For even one seeing thus, without the knowledge of past lives, "I was a two-footed being" or "I was a four-footed being" in a past existence, or "having passed away from there, I arose in such-and-such an existence," he does not know, he does not see. It is said. But that doubt, from the point of seeing the mere occurrence of phenomena, is not an obstructive doubt. It is merely a semblance of perplexity. For it is found even among the Noble Ones. Similarly, seeing the five future results, he overcomes the five kinds of doubt regarding the future. Seeing the five present results and the five present causes, he overcomes the six kinds of doubt regarding the present. All the rest is just as stated concerning the past. However, in overcoming the eight kinds of doubt, seeing dependent origination in direct and reverse order, he overcomes doubt regarding the teaching and regarding the supramundane states. Along with overcoming doubt in the Dhamma, and in the Teacher who teaches, and in the Saṅgha who practices as instructed, and in the three trainings, and in the past as stated, and And in the future, and in the past and future, and in phenomena arisen with dependent origination, all doubt is overcome. Therefore it is said, "by the natural arising of phenomena," and so on. There, "and by the natural arising of phenomena" means and by the successive arising of natural phenomena in the manner of a causal sequence. The "nature of phenomena" in phenomena is the beautiful nature of the teaching, due to the well-proclaimed nature of the Dhamma. It is the blameless nature. "Perfect enlightenment of the Buddha" is the omniscience of the Buddha who teaches that Dhamma. The suppression of arisen wrong views and doubts is accomplished below by way of discerning phenomena and by way of grasping causes. Insight practice, however, is done for the purpose of eradicating underlying wrong views and doubts, as it is said, "and for the eradication of underlying tendencies," and so on. "Therein, however," means in that path of analytical knowledge. "Divided" is the rest of the text. "Whose" refers to the yogi person. "What is far or near" means what form occurs far away, or what form occurs nearby, this is the rest of the text. "For that purpose, however," means for the purpose of extracting the contemplated phenomena. "Having firmly grasped with knowledge" means having made it very clear with the knowledge of discerning phenomena, this is the meaning. Now, whatever is to be firmly grasped, to show that in its own nature, it says "therein," and so on. Again, to show the impermanent characteristic of the firmly grasped form, it is said, "and that action," and so on. "They perish" means they break up. They go to impermanence. Here, "spreading action" means spreading in various ways. It means carrying, spreading in the direction of various directions. "And of these" means and of the four great elements. Because it is said "separately, separately," it is possible to grasp them among themselves and among co-arisen things, thus it is said "of water and so on." "Of water and so on" means and of the remaining great elements. Bodies by continuity are continuous bodies. "Having conceptualized in such and such a way" refers to form phenomena. The continuity of life is called a turning. For one going forward, it would be thus. For one going back, it would be thus. Likewise, for one bending, for one stretching, and so on, having conceived. "Also in the remaining aggregates, that continuity is diverse." In the aggregate of feeling, in the body, the diversity of the continuity of bodily pleasure and bodily pain. In the mind, of the continuities of joy and sorrow. But the continuity of equanimity is not manifest. It should be grasped by conceiving. When in the mind, joy and sorrow do not appear, then "now equanimity is my feeling that is occurring," or when they appear, then "that ceases." Thus, having reasoned, it should be comprehended, it is said. In the aggregate of perception, by way of perceptions of form, perceptions of sound, and so on. In the aggregate of volitional formations, by way of volitions of form, volitions of sound, and so on, by way of various thoughts and investigations, and so on, and by way of greed and non-greed, hatred and non-hatred, delusion and non-delusion, and so on. In the aggregate of consciousness,