2.

The Second Chapter

1.

Commentary on the Offering to Others

307. Now there is the discussion called "bringing about for another." Therein, those who, having seen the emission of semen of those who claim arahantship but have not attained it, who perceive as attained what is not attained, who have overestimation, or of cheats who claim arahantship, imagine "deities belonging to Māra's retinue bring about semen for a Worthy One"; just as the Pubbaseliyā and Aparaseliyā do at present; with reference to them, "there is for a Worthy One" is the question of the proponent of one's own doctrine, the acknowledgment is of the other. Now, because emission of semen is originated by lust, therefore the pursuit "there is lust for a Worthy One" was begun. All that too is clear in meaning.

In the question beginning with "do the deities belonging to Māra's retinue bring their own," because there is no emission of semen for those deities, nor do they take the semen of others and bring it about, and moreover for a Worthy One there is no semen at all, therefore he rejects saying "that should not be said."

But in the question "neither their own," he acknowledges according to the view that they bring it about having created it. In the question "through the pores," having seen the impossibility of bringing it about through the pores as with ghee and oil, he rejects.

308. "Well then, because" (handa hi) is an indeclinable particle used in the sense of an expression of intention. The meaning is that, having made the expression of intention thus - "we will cause doubt thus: 'Am I indeed a Worthy One or not?'" - they bring it about. When asked "Is there doubt for a Worthy One?" he rejects with reference to sceptical doubt with eight bases; when asked the second time, he acknowledges with reference to the absence of ascertainment regarding the names, clans, and so on of women and men.

309. "Is there a dwelling place for it" - he asks whether there is a place of establishment for that semen, as for faeces and urine.

312. "Skilled in one's own teaching" means skilled only in the very matter of one's own teaching of arahantship. He says this with reference to one liberated by wisdom. "Skilled in other teachings" means skilled also in the teaching of the eight attainments, which is other than one's own teaching. He says this with reference to one liberated-in-both-ways. The remainder here should be understood following the canonical text itself.

Commentary on the Treatise on Offering to Others.

2-3-4. Commentary on the Treatise on Not Knowing and So On

314. Now, there are three discussions named not knowing, uncertainty, and dependence on others' explanations. Therein, for those whose view is "for a Worthy One, due to the absence of the occurrence of knowledge regarding the names, clans, and so on of women, men, and so on, there is not knowing; and due to the absence of ascertainment regarding those very same, there is uncertainty. And because others explain, make known, and inform them about those subject matters, therefore for them there is dependence on others' explanations" - these are the views, just as of the Pubbaselīyas and others at present; To break those views of theirs, in all three discussions the questions are of the proponent of one's own doctrine, and the acknowledgment and the rejecting are of the other. Therein, in all the questions and answers, the meaning should be understood by following the canonical text itself.

Commentary on the Treatise on Not Knowing and So On.

5. Commentary on the Treatise on Verbal Expression

326. Now comes the discussion called the talk on verbal expression. Therein, for those whose view is "at the moment of the path of stream-entry, for one who has attained the first meditative absorption, speech expressing 'suffering' breaks forth," just as of the Pubbaselīyas and others at present; with reference to them, "Is there verbal expression for one who has attained?" is the question of the proponent of one's own doctrine, and standing on the view, the acknowledgment is of the opponent. Again, "everywhere" - when asked with reference to the three existences, he rejects with reference to the immaterial. "Always" - when asked by way of time, he rejects with reference to all times of attainment other than the attainment of the first meditative absorption at the moment of the first path. "Of all those who have attained" - when asked, he rejects with reference to those who have attained mundane attainments. "In all attainments" - when asked, he rejects with reference to the supramundane from the second meditative absorption onwards and all mundane attainments.

"Bodily movement" means bodily intimation occurring by way of stepping forward and so on. This asks for the purpose of challenging: "Whatever consciousnesses produce verbal intimation, those very same produce bodily intimation. This being so, why is there not also bodily movement?" The other, by the influence of his view, both rejects and acknowledges. Now, if he speaks the words "suffering" at the moment of the path, he should also speak "origin" and so on. Or if he does not speak that, he should not speak the other either - for the purpose of challenging, the questions beginning with "one who knows 'suffering'" were stated. The other, however, by the influence of his own view alone, both acknowledges and rejects. For his view is that one who has attained the supramundane first meditative absorption sees with insight that suffering is suffering.

328. "Knowledge" means supramundane knowledge of the four truths. "The ear" means ear-consciousness is intended, by which one hears that sound. "Of the two contacts" means of ear-contact and mind-contact.

329. "Then indeed sir, it should not be said" means if without distinction there is no verbal expression for one who has attained whatever, then it should not be said without distinction "there is verbal expression for one who has attained." The remainder here is clear in meaning together with the establishment by discourse. But as for the discourse brought forth by him at the conclusion beginning with "Of the Blessed One Sikhī, Ānanda," therein, by whatever attainment consciousness that verbal expression arose, bodily movement also arises by that very same consciousness, and that is not a supramundane first meditative absorption consciousness, therefore it is not a proof.

Commentary on the Treatise on Verbal Expression.

6. Commentary on the Treatise on the Nutriment of Suffering

334. Now there is the discussion called the nutriment of suffering. Therein, "one speaking the word 'suffering is suffering' brings knowledge of suffering; that is called the nutriment of suffering. And moreover, this is a path factor, included in the path" - this is the view of those, just as the Pubbaselīyas hold at present; with reference to them, "the nutriment of suffering" is the question of the proponent of one's own doctrine, the acknowledgment is of the opponent. "Whatever" - in the first question he rejects with reference to those without insight, in the second question he acknowledges with reference to those with insight, but that is merely his view. Therefore, for the purpose of breaking the argument "all of them," he said beginning with "ignorant worldlings." That is of manifest meaning only.

Commentary on the Treatise on the Nutriment of Suffering.

7. Commentary on the Treatise on the Stability of Mind

335. Now comes the discussion called the duration of consciousness. Therein, for those whose view is "one and the same consciousness lasts for a long time," having seen the attainment consciousness and the life-continuum consciousness occurring by way of continuation, just as the Andhakans of the aforementioned classification hold at present, for the purpose of purifying that view, "Does one consciousness last for a day?" is the question of the proponent of one's own doctrine, the acknowledgment is of the opponent. "Half a day is the moment of arising" - here, without touching upon the moment of presence, the question was made only by way of arising and fall, according to the method of the Teaching: "Impermanent indeed are activities, having the nature of arising and falling."

When asked "Are those phenomena more quickly changing than consciousness?" not seeing phenomena more quickly changing than consciousness, he rejects. When asked the second time, he acknowledges with reference to that consciousness whose long duration he wishes. In the question "Does it last as long as life lasts?" by the force of the statement beginning with "Eighty-four thousand cosmic cycles, those gods remain," he rejects except for the immaterial, and acknowledges in the immaterial. In the question "Does it arise moment by moment?" the opponent acknowledges out of fear of contradicting the discourse beginning with "having the nature of arising and falling." But he wishes for duration by the influence of his view. The remainder here is clear in meaning.

Commentary on the Treatise on the Stability of Mind.

8. Commentary on the Treatise on Hot Ashes

338. Now comes the discussion called the hot ashes discussion. Therein, for those whose view, having unwisely taken discourses beginning with "All, monks, is blazing" and "all activities are suffering," is "without distinction all activities are hot ashes, mixed with faded flames and embers, similar to an ash-hell," just as the Gokulikas hold at present; to dissuade them from that view by showing various kinds of happiness, the question is of the proponent of one's own doctrine, the acknowledgment is of the opponent. Therein, "having made no limit" means without having made a limit, a boundary, a portion; the meaning is without distinction, all without exception. All the remainder should be understood according to the method of the Pāḷi text itself, together with the discourse proofs.

Commentary on the Discussion of Hot Ashes.

9. Commentary on the Discussion of Gradual Full Realisation

339. Now there is the discussion called gradual full realization. Therein, for those who -

Having unwisely taken discourses beginning with these, the view of different full realizations arose thus: "One practising for the realisation of the fruition of stream-entry abandons certain mental defilements by the insight into suffering, certain by the insight into origin, cessation, and path, likewise the rest too - thus having gradually abandoned mental defilements in sixteen portions, there is the attainment of arahantship," such a view arose, just as the Andhakas, Sabbatthikas, Sammitīyas, and Bhadrayānikas hold at present. For the purpose of discriminating their view, "gradual full realization" is the question of the proponent of one's own doctrine, the acknowledgment is of the other. But when asked "gradually the path of stream-entry," he rejects through fear of one path becoming many. When asked the second time, he acknowledges by way of the insight into suffering and so on. Or he acknowledges that those four knowledges are just one path of stream-entry, but he wishes for only one fruition, therefore he rejects. In the case of the path of once-returning and so on too, the same method applies.

344. In the question "when the path is seen, one is established in the fruit," because through the seeing of suffering and so on, the seeing is not fully accomplished, but through the seeing of the path it is called fully accomplished; then he goes by the term "established in the fruit," therefore he acknowledges.

345. "When suffering is seen, are the four truths seen?" is the question of the opponent; the acknowledgment is of the proponent of one's own doctrine by way of a single full realisation. Again, "Is the truth of suffering the four truths?" - in the pursuit, the rejecting is of that very one, because of the different intrinsic nature of all four.

"When the aggregate of material body is seen as impermanent" is the question of the proponent of one's own doctrine; just as when the flavour of a single drop from the ocean is penetrated, there is penetration of the remaining water, so when one phenomenon is penetrated beginning with impermanence, all too are penetrated - by this view, the acknowledgment is of the opponent.

"By four knowledges" means by knowledge of suffering and so on. "By eight knowledges" means by the knowledges of the truths common to disciples and by the knowledges of analytical knowledge. "By twelve knowledges" means by the knowledges of the twelve-factored dependent origination. "By forty-four knowledges" means by the knowledges stated in the chapter on causality thus: "Knowledge of ageing and death, knowledge of the origin of ageing and death." "By seventy-seven knowledges" means by the knowledges stated right there thus: "Ageing and death, monks, is impermanent, conditioned, dependently arisen, subject to destruction, having the nature of falling, subject to fading away, having the nature of cessation." All the remainder here should be understood according to the method of the Pāḷi text itself, together with the discourse proofs.

Commentary on the Discussion of Gradual Full Realisation.

10. Commentary on the Discussion of Conventional Expression

347. Now there is the discussion called the conventional expression. Therein, the view of those who hold that the Buddha, the Blessed One, expresses by supramundane conventional expression, just as the Andhakans hold at present; with reference to them, the question is of the proponent of one's own doctrine, the acknowledgment is of the opponent by the influence of his view. "Against the supramundane ear" and so on are stated for the purpose of illustrating his state of being one who argues inappropriately. For this is the intention here: "Is it only the sound sense base that is supramundane for you, or the ear and so on as well?"

"If the Buddha, the Blessed One's conventional expression strikes against the mundane ear" - here, if it were to strike against the supramundane. The meaning "it would be supramundane" should not be taken thus. But for that which strikes against the mundane, there is no such thing as supramundane status - this is the intention here. "By mundane consciousness" - here too the meaning is "by mundane only." Otherwise there would be inconclusiveness. For the supramundane is known even by mundane knowledge. Thus all should be understood according to what is appropriate. In the questions "do all of them develop the path," with reference to those who do not obtain the path, he rejects. With reference to those who obtain, he acknowledges.

351. "Sovaṇṇamayāya" means made of gold. This is the example of the opponent.

"Eḷaṇḍiyāya" means made of castor-oil plant. This is the example of the proponent of one's own doctrine. "The conventional expression of one expressing the mundane is mundane" - this too is one view. That is at present the view of certain Andhakans. The remainder here is clear in meaning.

Commentary on the Discussion of Conventional Expression.

11. Commentary on the Discussion of Cessation

353. Now there is the talk on cessation. Therein, for those whose view is that cessation without reflection and cessation with reflection, having combined both together, constitute the truth of cessation, just as the Mahiṃsāsakas and the Andhakans hold at present; with reference to them, "Are there two cessations?" is the question of the proponent of one's own doctrine, the acknowledgment is of the opponent. In the questions "Are there two cessations of suffering?" since he does not wish for two truths of suffering, therefore he rejects. Since he wishes that suffering ceases in two ways, therefore he acknowledges. In the questions "Are there two truths of cessation?" not wishing for the cessation of two truths of suffering, he rejects. He acknowledges because suffering ceases in two ways. In "Are there two shelters?" and so on too, the same method applies.

In the questions beginning with "Is there between the two Nibbānas?" not seeing highness and lowness and so on, he rejects.

"Ceased without reflection" means those activities which, not having ceased by reflection through supramundane knowledge, are said to have ceased either because of being of purely natural character or because of not being practised by way of recitation, interrogation, and so on. "By reflection they bring about cessation" means: They bring about cessation through supramundane knowledge; they bring them to the state of non-arising. "Surely activities that have ceased without reflection?" is the question of the opponent. Therein, because what has been destroyed is not destroyed again, or because when the noble path has arisen, those that have ceased without reflection cease in just that way, the proponent of one's own doctrine acknowledges their being absolutely destroyed. The remainder here is clear in meaning.

Commentary on the Discussion of Cessation.

The second chapter.