English
"Equanimity of advertence" means equanimity, which is called advertence, having attained mastery. "Attachment" means attachment of craving. "Doing" means performing. "Subtle craving" means subtle craving that, due to being mixed with wholesome states, one cannot even recognize as unwholesome. "Not indeed for me" is to be construed as "it has not arisen for me before." "Accompanied by gratification" means accompanied by the craving for gratification in the light, etc. "By way of over-estimation" means by way of thinking oneself superior. No. "Just so much" at the very moment of craving's arising. "The mode of desiring" is the mode of wishing. The mode of enjoying. "The object of desiring" is the object of craving. "Certainly" absolutely. "Come now" is a particle for releasing the mind. I shall purify it right now, I shall not allow it to continue for long this meaning it illuminates. "In those very ones" in those very lights and so on. It does not agree with the Commentary. In the Commentary, craving is stated separately from suppression, this is the intention. The maturation of insight, is evident through the arising of a special distinction, to show this, he said "having attained the state of equanimity regarding formations" and so on. Having attained the state of insight that leads to emergence, it is said. "Two insight consciousnesses" are the proximate and conformable consciousnesses. For that is called emergence, this is the connection. Or it emerges from the sign of formations. Having Nibbāna as its object, it proceeds. If so, even the change of lineage would be called emergence. It would not be. Because it stands merely as an advertence to the path. And because of the absence of the function of penetration and the function of cutting off delusion. "Itself" the path itself. "Or that person endowed with it" or the person endowed with that path. "And because of the continuation of the round" or because of the continuation of the round of woe in future existences, or from the eighth existence onwards, because of the continuation of the round of sensual happy states. It certainly leads to emergence, it brings about, this is the meaning of the word "leading to emergence". "Certainly going to emergence" for those who stand here, there is no turning back from emergence, this is the intention. And this in the case of Paccekabuddhas and in the case of the Buddha's disciples should be understood. But omniscient Bodhisattas, having gone forth in the dispensation of previous Buddhas, and having begun insight practice, establish the conformable knowledge by striking, it is said in the Commentaries. There, "by striking" this for the knowledge of equanimity regarding formations to show the attainment of its peak, it should be understood as having been said. "Like advertence" in the preceding part, not grasped by any consciousness, advertence to Nibbāna as the object. of the people. "That" means the gotrabhu knowledge. It is gotrabhu because it overcomes, it cuts off the lineage. Or, it is gotrabhu because it attains, it reaches the lineage, this is the meaning of the word. But how can the gotrabhu consciousness, the gotrabhu knowledge, cut off the lineage of the ordinary person and attain the noble lineage? It would be fitting, for that person is at that moment still included in the lineage of ordinary people. True. But because it is cut off in oneself, it is said to cut off by itself. And because Nibbāna is the domain of the noble ones, by making it the object, it is said to attain the noble lineage, this should be understood. By the special power of its condition, it brings about, it makes manifest the noble lineage immediately after itself, therefore it is also fitting to say it is gotrabhu. "Having delimited" means having distinguished. It is said that one is freed from all wavering due to wrong views, doubt, and so on. The abandonment of delusion itself should be understood. It is not knowing those phenomena by making them an object. How can the path, without making those phenomena an object, be said to fully comprehend those phenomena? By the accomplishment of the function. For even the preliminary knowledges, which make delusion an object and abandon it, are not said to fully comprehend the truth of suffering because they do not accomplish the function of abandoning it. But the path, even without making it an object, is said to fully comprehend that truth because it accomplishes the function of abandoning it. Why? Because from that point onwards, the function of fully comprehending that truth is accomplished for that person for all time. Just as a man is blind because his eye is obstructed by bile, phlegm, and other impurities. He sees nothing. But when he obtains a powerful eye-salve and anoints his eye, he sleeps all night. While he is sleeping, all impurities in his eye disappear. His eye becomes clear. From that moment onwards, even while he is sleeping, he is said to see forms. Why? Because the function of seeing is accomplished by the disappearance of blindness. This should be understood in the same way. Or, partially in the lower paths, or, completely in the Arahant path. "Apacchāvattikaṃ" here, 'Turning back' is 'pacchāvattaṃ'. 'No turning back for it' Is 'apacchāvattikaṃ'. "Called cessation Due to non-arising again" - At the path moment, Those defilements Assume non-arising, They cease. Thus, called cessation. "By development Called production" - By this, it is said: Since the path Is one mind-moment, No chance for development Called growth. But preliminary development, Practiced for the noble path, Is also path-development. Reaching the noble path, It culminates. So the noble path itself, Culminated, Is unsurpassed development. In this way, "Development called growth" Is also fitting. What follows oneself Is 'immediate'. 'Immediate result for it' Is the analysis. Its connection: After that, Two or three Fruition-thoughts arise. 'Fire removed from it' Is 'fire-removed'. "As if extinguishing" - By this, it shows Path-conducive activity Through abandonment By tranquilization. "Of them" - Of those eyes. That form Is not yet clear to him - That's the connection. "Of him" - Of that person. "In the turns of reviewing" - Here, subsequent thought-processes Regarding what was seen By the sensitive eye Are also included. To be struck down, To be killed By the higher paths - Thus 'slain by higher paths'. "In divisions of defilements" - Meaning, in divisions of defilements Like 'by such a path, Such defilements are abandoned'. "In the Pāḷi" - In the Paṭisambhidāmagga Pāḷi. The connection: It is said to occur. Reviewing path-factors, Enlightenment-factors, etc., Is path-reviewing itself. Thus, it is established That it occurs afterwards. "It is not contradictory" - Meaning, even for those Who review, Not conforming to Visuddhimagga, It is possible According to their wish. "In commentaries On Adhimāna-niddesa" - In the Vinaya, The fourth Pārājika... Similarly, in the commentaries, regarding the explanation of the term 'adhimāna'. "He" means the noble bhikkhu. "Not to obtain is not proper" means "not to obtain is not proper." Or the interpretation is "to obtain is not not proper." The fourfold path-knowledge is taken. Because it is said to be "purification of knowledge and vision." "Abhinivisana" means a firmer establishment internally. "Like a firmly planted Mount Sineru" means like its occurrence. "Because the mere dependence on conditions for existence is not seen" – by this, it states the reason for grasping "this is my self, not another's self," thus making oneself the owner of the self. There, by the word "mere," reaching ultimate truth, due to the non-existence of a self, it refutes the notion of the five aggregates existing under one's own control. However, reaching conventional truth, due to the existence of a self (conceptually), people, considering their own five aggregates to exist under their own control, grasp "this is my self." "And because momentary dissolution is not seen" – by this, it means "this is my self in the sense of essence." This is my essence. This is my body. As long as for a hundred years, or even a thousand years, these five aggregates do not break up, do not perish. So long I do not die. When this breaks up, perishes. Then I die. It states the reason for grasping thus: "I and my five aggregates are not two, not diverse." There, "momentary dissolution" means the breaking up, the perishing, the dying of mind-and-matter phenomena moment by moment. This death, however, does not exist in conventional truth. It exists only in ultimate truth. Therefore, not seeing that, people, considering their own five aggregates to be their essence, grasp "this is my self." "Having clearly seen that duality" means having clearly seen with the eye of knowledge the mere dependence on conditions for existence of the five aggregates and their momentary dissolution. There, one who clearly sees the dependent origination of the five aggregates clearly sees their mere dependence on conditions for existence and their non-subjection to control. And whoever of one's own He is not self-reliant. Having attained ultimate truth, he cannot even say, "This is mine." How then, "my self"? Moreover, a being, by nature, does not exist. It is merely a designation. Who would grasp, "I," or "mine," or "my self"? And when there is no self, who would be "my self"? It is momentary dissolution. It breaks up moment by moment. But a being is born only once at the beginning of one existence. And dies only once at the end. In between, for a hundred years, or a thousand years, there is no death. The course of momentary phenomena is different. The course of a being is different. If this is so, how could momentary phenomena be the self of a being in the sense of essence? Therefore, they are non-self, due to not being subject to control, and due to being without essence.