English
The purpose, which is the collection of body adornments, Has already been shown, Because the Subodhālaṅkāra arises based on that. For that which is the aim of an arising, That is its purpose, And that is characterized by fame, renown, success, and so on in poetry, And ultimately, the collection of the Subodhālaṅkāra is for that purpose. The relationship of the treatise's purposes, Is characterized by the supported and the support, And has already been shown by the word "based on." As it was said: "The treatise and the purpose, Both are based on a relationship; By the statement of what is included, That which is based on it is also stated." And the statement of the subject matter and so on, Is undertaken because it is associated with the elements, Of a special investigation, Whereas that of another, such as the speech of a madman, Is to be rejected. For it has been said: "A means consistent with the relationship," designating a person. "A sentence comprehended by investigation, not comprehended by another's opinion." Here, "sentence" means the Teaching itself, which possesses the characteristics of a sentence, is a collection of internal sentences, and resembles a great sentence. 3. Because they adorn with various ornaments, therefore, may I please those who are devoid of ornaments, lacking specific decorations or elaborate compositions, with a pure Māgadhī style, a style conforming to the pure Māgadhī, being novel or resembling Māgadhī in its following form, or being agreeable due to its composition by the Ten-Powered One, with a suitable ornament, a specific decoration, or an elaborate composition, by causing satisfaction through adornment, or by causing the undertaking of learning, retention, etc., of elaborate compositions, thinking, "How wonderful it would be!" This is my effort, this is my application of the means of adornment. The word "iti" is understood in "apināma." "Devoid of ornaments" means either "ornaments are absent" or "ornaments are absent from whom." "Anurūpa" means "conforming to form" or "form is followed." By that conforming style. "Alaṅkāra" means that by which they adorn themselves, such as necklaces and bracelets in the case of ornaments, or in the case of compositions, it means that by which they adorn the structure of the composition. In this primary sense, verbal ornaments such as euphony and alliteration, and semantic ornaments such as natural descriptions, are referred to. However, in a secondary sense, the structural framework that is the basis of these two types of ornaments, as well as the Teaching itself, which reveals ornaments like auspicious verses and the Jewel Discourse, and which is named "Subodhālaṅkāra" (Easily Understood Ornament) with the meaning "by this, they understand the two types of ornaments well," is also called an ornament. As it has been said: "This word 'ornament' primarily refers to verbal and semantic ornaments; By its capacity, it also refers to the basis and the Teaching that possesses it." Here, "capacity" means the characteristic of being indispensable, as in, "If it does not lead to the understanding of that which is based on it through the usage of indicating that basis, then what else would it be?" 4. Those whose wisdom is not accumulated, of various Adorned with many scriptures; These are struck by delusion, they understand nothing at all. 5. What is the use of serving the feet of those, who have no teachers here; Those who are covered with the dust of their feet, they are truly discerning. 4-5. Having shown the subject matter and so on, preceded by rejecting the beginning of characteristics and refuting the people, now the discernment of virtues and faults everywhere is from the scriptures alone. Therefore it is said – "Everywhere, the discernment of virtues and faults is from the scriptures alone; What is more reckless than what is done without scripture?" Therefore, the consideration of the division of virtues and faults is for those who know it, not for the human beasts who are ignorant of the scriptures. Thus he said – "How can a person ignorant of the scriptures, distinguish virtues and faults; What authority does a blind man have, in perceiving differences in form?" Since it is so, therefore in showing virtues and faults here, it is attained only by one with the eye of many scriptures, not by one who is the opposite of that, showing by way of agreement and difference, he says the two verses beginning with "yesa". There, "yesa" is an indefinite designation, meaning "by whom". By whom it is not accumulated, not heaped up, though existing in various continuities, it is not cultivated or pervaded in one continuity in the manner of oneness, it is said. What is that? Wisdom, in the form of distinguishing what should be abandoned and what should be adopted. What kind is it? He says, "adorned with many scriptures". Adorned in many scriptures such as the Tipiṭaka, logic, grammar, rhetoric and so on, familiar by way of hearing, memorizing and so on, that wisdom is not accumulated by whom, is the subject. "Ete" is a statement of determination for those who have been mentioned. "Struck by delusion", because of the absence of the aforementioned exceedingly great wisdom, they are especially struck by delusion that has attained strength, this is the intention. Since it is so, therefore they do not understand anything at all, in the form of what should be abandoned and what should be adopted, whatever it may be, due to the attainment of exceeding great wisdom regained through reliance on serving the feet of a true teacher, such as one who does not employ unsuitable things, and so on. Because even the acceptance of faults such as laziness, and so on, and the sprinkling of the lotus-like dust of the feet of a true teacher due to constant service of the teacher, Even after a long time, an ignoble person does not attain such wisdom and intelligence through the power of familiarity with various scriptures. Therefore, the Blessed One said: "A person who associates with the inferior declines, One who associates with equals never diminishes; Approaching the superior, one quickly rises, Therefore, associate with those higher than oneself." Therefore, only such a wise person is qualified here to discern the division of merits and demerits, not another, a mere human animal, the opposite of that. This is the meaning here. It is a well-established special meaning. Therefore, he said, "What is the use of serving the feet of those who have no respect for their teachers?" Here, in this world, what is the use of those people who have no service to the feet of their teachers to do, no foot-care, in the manner described, those who are unacquainted with the essence of wisdom and intelligence? There is not even a trace of use. It is understood that they come here uninstructed. Now, he says in a contrasting way, "Those..." etc. Those who are endowed with the attainment of past merit, etc., covered, smeared, enveloped by the dust of the feet of those teachers, they alone are good, recognized by wisdom and intelligence in the manner described, they alone are the virtuous, the discerning, possessing the attainment of wisdom that regulates the division of what should be abandoned and what should be adopted, the merits and demerits, they alone are understood to be proficient in discerning merits and demerits here. And this service to the feet of the teacher should be done with special respect. He directs the virtuous to its practice with a crooked expression. 4-5. If those who are skilled in knowledge, familiar with all scriptures, find fault, showing with a crooked expression that the words of those conceited with their own wisdom should not be taken seriously without refuting their fault by merely understanding the passage, and showing that through that very means one's own unique reverence for the teacher should be accomplished with the utmost respect by the virtuous, he speaks these two verses, "Those...etc...know." Those by whom wisdom, consisting of learning, has not been accumulated, those who are not familiar, in terms of appropriate hearing, grasping, retention, etc., with the essence of truth, the inner meaning, within many scriptures, many texts such as the Tipiṭaka, logic, grammar, etc., Even though there is no occurrence in a single moment, due to the accumulated group nature, or due to the acquisition of conditions such as immediate association, through the wisdom of the past and the wisdom of the future, or due to the abundance of objects occurring, even what is accumulated is not a heap. These, devoid of such skill in wisdom, these, struck down by delusion, due to the absence of skill in wisdom, are especially struck by the powerful delusion, and do not understand anything about what should be abandoned or adopted. "Not one, and many," and "they and the teaching," and "the difference between them," and "appropriate in that," and "struck down by delusion," are the analyses. Therefore, it was said: "How can a person, knowing qualities, faults, and teachings, distinguish? What authority does a blind person have, in perceiving differences in form?" Its meaning: How can a person, not knowing the teachings, distinguish qualities and faults? Just as, in the perception of differences in form, in the understanding of specific forms such as blue and yellow, what authority, what making face, does a blind person have? It does not happen at all. Therefore, the discrimination of qualities and faults happens only through the eye of wisdom, which is very clear and contained in many teachings; in its absence, it does not happen at all. This itself is being said: "Everywhere, the discrimination of qualities and faults is only through the teachings; what is done without the teachings, what greater recklessness is there than that?"