English
This is a verb-in-the-middle illuminator. 230. "Dassana" etc. The sight of the Sage becomes ambrosia for the virtuous, because it is the sole cause of Nibbana, which is called ambrosia, and by transferred epithet, it is called ambrosia; but for beings other than those virtuous ones, it becomes ever-tormenting poison, because it constantly causes torment, and by transferred epithet, it becomes poison, because it is the cause of aversion, which is like poison. Because it stands in the middle of the verb, this is a verb-in-the-middle illuminator. "Virtuous people" is the resolution, and "other than them" is the sentence. End Illuminator 231. Of utterly lovely beauty, delightful as moonlight; The Jina's face is like the moon, and the moon too, for whom would it not be a joy? 231. "Accante" etc. Utterly lovely, pleasing, beauty, A pleasing state, that very thing, Or like it, the radiance of speech, moonlight, By that delightful, the Buddha's face-moon, The moon itself, for whom does it not bring joy? Kriyāntadīpakaṃ. 231. "Accanti" etc. Exceedingly lovely, charming with the beauty of moonlight, Delightful with a very pleasing state, Known as the charm of moonlight, Or, delightful with a charm like the very pleasing state, The Buddha's face-moon, The moon itself, the natural moon, For whom does it not bring joy? This is called Kriyāntadīpakaṃ, Because it stands at the end of the action. That which has gone beyond the end, And that which is lovely, The state of loveliness, sweetness, Because of its similarity, exceedingly lovely, And that loveliness, The radiance of the moon, The very lovely loveliness is the moonlight, And in the case of the moon, Like the exceedingly lovely loveliness, Is that moonlight, And by that delightful, The Buddha's face is the moon, Is the sentence. By these three types of kriyādīpaka, The unsaid jātidīpaka and guṇadīpaka should also be understood. Mālādīpaka 232. It leads to freedom from remorse, Morality is the cause of joy; That is the cause of delight, and that, For the attainment of tranquility and so on. 232. In the case of ādidīpaka and so on, There is another way of application, He says, "hoti" etc. Morality, the five precepts and so on, Leads to freedom from remorse, That freedom from remorse, Is the cause of joy, Of delight that arises immediately, That joy is the cause of delight, Of strong delight, And that delight, For the attainment of tranquility and so on, For the accomplishment of tranquility and happiness, Should be connected. 232. Now, in the nine dīpakas, He shows another way to be accomplished By the distinction of application, "hoti" etc. Morality, well-protected, The morality of the five and ten precepts, Leads to freedom from remorse, That freedom from remorse, Is the cause of joy, It is the cause of immediate, young delight, That joy is the cause of delight, It is the cause of strong delight, That And joy is the cause for the attainment of tranquility, etc., for the attainment of bodily tranquility, mental tranquility, etc. Non-remorse is non-remorse, the "na" particle functions as a prohibitive negation. "Of one who is joyful" and "its cause," and "tranquility, etc., of whom are happiness, etc.," and "their attainment" are the explanations. 233. Even if it is an "ādi-dīpaka," the preceding is dependent on the preceding; A garland of sentences proceeds, that is considered a "mālā-dīpaka." 233. What is this other way of yours? He says, "Iccādi, etc." This that is thus is considered a "mālā-dīpaka." But is this not a "kriyā-dīpaka"? He says, "Ādi-dīpakattepi." Although this is an "ādi-dīpaka," the preceding sentence, "Morality is for non-remorse," etc., depending on the preceding, a garland, a series of sentences, as stated, proceeds. That, as stated, is considered a "mālā-dīpaka," not an "ādi-dīpaka." 233. "Iccādi, etc." Even if it is an "ādi-dīpaka," even if it is a "kriyā-dīpaka," a garland of sentences, connected by many sentences, a series, depending on the preceding sentence, "Morality is for non-remorse," etc., proceeds. Thus, this kind of "dīpaka" that has gone without interruption is considered a "mālā-dīpaka." And "dīpaka" at the beginning, and by transferred epithet, "ādi" and that "dīpaka," and "a garland is indeed a dīpaka" is the sentence. 234. By this same method, for the remaining "dīpakas" also; The understanding of the alternatives should be established by those of pure intellect. 234. Concluding, extending to the unstated "dīpaka" alternatives, he says, "Aneni, etc." By this same method, by the method stated without interruption, in the matter of "dīpakas," in the subject of "dīpakas," for the remaining unstated alternatives, for the types of "jāti-dīpaka," etc., the understanding should be established by poets of pure intellect. 234. Now he extends to the unstated "dīpakas" also, "Anenevi, etc." By this same method, by the method of the "dīpaka" stated, in the matter of "dīpakas," in the subject of "dīpakas," for the remaining alternatives also, for the unstated types of "jāti-dīpaka," "guṇa-dīpaka," and "saṅkhyā-dīpaka," The understanding and application of simile-lamps, quality-lamps, etc., and the six garland-lamps, etc., should be done by poets with pure intellect, and should be done according to what has been said. Especially, it is said that they are suitable without confusion, and that they have pure intellect. 235. The desire to speak of a distinction, Or a statement of negation; This is called "Akkhepa," Threefold by division of time. 235. He introduces Akkhepa with "Visesi," etc. The statement, the expression of negation, of denial, in the desire to speak of some distinction, is called Akkhepa, meaning rejection, denial. And this Akkhepa is threefold, of three kinds, by division of time, past, etc. 235. Now he shows Akkhepa with "Visese," etc. The statement of negation, of denial, that exists in the desire to speak of some distinction of meaning, that denial is called Akkhepa, called the figure of speech Akkhepa. And this Akkhepa is threefold by the distinction of time, by the distinction of past time, etc. And the sentence is: the statement of some distinction, and the desire for it, and the statement of negation, of denial, and the rejection, the denial, and the distinction of time or action. 236. Alone, that one, of the Conqueror of Māra's army; How could that be, or of him, Such power of perfection? Past Akkhepa. 236. "Ekāki," etc. That Conqueror, being alone, single, conquered, defeated that Māra with his many armies, how does that fit? Or why does it not fit, since the power of that Conqueror's perfections, the thirty kinds of perfections, is such as it is, the cause of his victory? Here, due to the capability of being alone, the thought that the victory over Māra is impossible, "how does it fit that he conquered Māra with his army?" in this way, the past is rejected, therefore this is past Akkhepa. 236. Now he exemplifies with "ekāki," etc. That Conqueror, that All-Knowing One, alone, without help, without a second, conquered, defeated that Māra with his many armies, how does that fit? Or it does indeed fit, because of him, The power of a Jina's perfection, the power of thirty perfections, an army reckoned as thirty perfections, is such and such. And, relying on the Buddha's unexcelled state and Māra's state with his retinue, the perverse thought that arises in someone, "How could the solitary one conquer Māra with his great army?" is past, because it concerns the past victory over Māra. Because it is not rejected by the statement of how the meaning of "His power of perfection is such," with the word of prohibition "or else" being specified, it is called rejection of the past, because of the rejection of the past. 237. Why fret, mind, that you have not attained the uprooting of craving? Surely, that very reverence was done to the Well-gone One. Rejection of the present. 237. "Why fret, mind," etc. Why do you fret, thinking, "I have not attained the uprooting of craving, the complete non-occurrence of craving?" Your sorrow is empty. Surely, that very reverence done even once to the Well-gone One is indeed the uprooting of craving, because it is the sole cause of that. This is rejection of the present, because it rejects the present sorrow. 237. "Why fret, mind," etc. O mind, why do you fret, thinking, "I have not attained the complete abandonment of craving, reckoned as craving?" Your sorrow is empty. For surely, that very reverence done even once in the sphere of the Buddha is indeed the complete destruction of craving, because it is the sole cause of the destruction of craving, and because of the non-difference in understanding between cause and effect, why is that not indeed the uprooting of craving? It certainly is. Because the present sorrow of the mind is prohibited by the intention of stating the specifics, "reverence," etc., this is called rejection of the present. The phrase is, "the uprooting of craving." 238. The truth they will not reach, the peace, the realm of the virtuous; those very wicked ones whose minds are overcome by wrong view. Rejection of the future. 238. "The truth," etc. They will certainly not reach the peace, the state of peace, the realm of the virtuous. Those whose minds are overcome, overwhelmed by wrong view, such as eternalism, are to be understood as very wicked. This is rejection of the future. O, because of the future departure being rejected. "The hope for life is strong, the hope for wealth is weak in me; Go or stay, beloved, my state is declared." This is a rejection due to disregard, and such others are merely variations of it, hence overlooked. 238. "Truth" and so on. The peaceful state, accessible to the good, within the realm of the virtuous, that truth they will certainly not reach. Who? Those whose minds are enveloped by wrong views, the very wicked.