4.

The Fourth Chapter

1. Commentary on the Discussion of "There is a Worthy One who is a Layman"

387. Now there is the discussion named "There is a Worthy One who is a layman." Therein, for those whose view is "a layman may be a Worthy One," having seen the attainment of arahantship by Yasa the son of good family and others while standing in the marks of a layman, just as the Uttarāpathakas hold at present; with reference to them, the question is of the proponent of one's own doctrine. Therein, "of a layman" means whoever is a layman by being associated with the mental fetter of the layman, he may be a Worthy One - this is the meaning. But the opponent, without observing the intention, seeing merely the marks of a layman, acknowledges. Now, for him, "a layman is so called by the mental fetter of the layman, not by the mere marks. As the Blessed One said -

To show this method, beginning with "is there a Worthy One" was begun. All that is of manifest meaning.

Commentary on the Discussion of "There is a Worthy One who is a Layman."

2. Commentary on the Discussion of Rebirth

388. Now there is the discussion called the rebirth discussion. Therein, for those whose view is that one is a Worthy One through rebirth in the Pure Abodes, having unwisely taken the statements "one of spontaneous birth, attaining final nibbāna there," or for those whose view is that one is a Worthy One together with rebirth, having changed the term "attainer of final nibbāna after the interval" and learning it as "attainer of final nibbāna upon rebirth," just as the Uttarāpathakas hold at present; with reference to them, the question is of the proponent of one's own doctrine, the acknowledgment is of the other. Therein, because rebirth consciousness is mundane, by that even stream-enterers and others do not come to be, how much more a Worthy One. Therefore, to show this method, beginning with "a stream-enterer together with rebirth" was begun.

389. Beginning with "Sāriputta" - among these great elders, who even one is called a Worthy One together with rebirth? This was stated for the purpose of challenging.

390. "By rebirth-seeking" means by the consciousness of conception. For that seeks, searches for rebirth, therefore it is called "rebirth-seeking." The remainder here is clear in meaning.

Commentary on the Discussion of Rebirth.

3. Commentary on the Discussion of Without Mental Corruptions

391. Now there is the discussion called "without mental corruptions." Therein, the view of those who hold that whatever phenomena belong to a Worthy One who is without mental corruptions, all of them are without mental corruptions, just as the Uttarāpathakas hold at present; with reference to them, "of a Worthy One" is the question of the proponent of one's own doctrine, the acknowledgment is of the other. Then, since those without mental corruptions are namely the paths and so on, for the purpose of challenging whether those very things arise in him, the passage beginning with "the path, the fruit" was begun. When asked "Is the eye without mental corruptions?" he rejects it because of its being with mental corruptions. When asked the second time, he acknowledges that it is of one without mental corruptions.

392. In the question on robes, he rejects out of fear of contradiction of characteristics that only one phenomenon is both without mental corruptions and with mental corruptions. When asked the second time, he acknowledges that having been without mental corruptions, it becomes with mental corruptions. In both questions "is that very thing without mental corruptions" too, the same method applies. But the proponent of one's own doctrine, because "that very thing" has been acknowledged, accuses with "does the path, having been without mental corruptions" and so on. By this method the meaning should be understood everywhere.

Commentary on the Discussion of Without Mental Corruptions.

4. Commentary on the Discussion of Endowed With

393. Now comes the discussion called the Discussion on Being Endowed With. Therein, there are two kinds of being endowed with: being endowed with in the sense of possessing at the present moment, and being endowed with in the sense of attainment through having reached a certain plane among the fine-material-sphere and so on. That is obtained only so long as one does not decline from the attained distinction. But for those whose view is that, setting aside these two kinds of being endowed with, there is another single kind of being endowed with by way of the principle of rebirth, just as the Uttarāpathakas hold at present, for the purpose of making them understand that there is no such thing as a principle of attainment, "Is a Worthy One possessed of the four fruits?" is the question of the proponent of one's own doctrine, and the acknowledgment of the other is with reference to attainment. Then, for the purpose of the accusation "if for you a Worthy One is possessed of the four fruits just as of the four aggregates, this being so, the four contacts and so on that are in the four fruits - by those the state of being endowed with of your Worthy One would be reached," the passage beginning with "Is a Worthy One possessed of four contacts?" was begun. All that was rejected by the opponent because of the absence of four contacts and so on at one moment. In the question of the non-returner and so on too, the same method applies.

395. "Has passed the fruition of stream-entry" - not like one who has obtained the second meditative absorption in relation to the first meditative absorption; rather, he asks whether one has passed it through non-attainment again. "The path of stream-entry" and so on was begun to show that which he has passed, and therefore his non-possession of that again.

396. In the question "and he has not fallen away from them," because just as mundane meditative absorption states decline through the practice of opposing conduct, supramundane states do not thus decline. For whatever mental defilements are abandoned by the path, and become tranquil by the fruit, they remain just so abandoned and just so tranquil; therefore "Yes" was acknowledged by the proponent of one's own doctrine. And this meaning is explained further on in such passages as "the four paths have been attained by a Worthy One" and so on. The remainder is of manifest meaning only.

Commentary on the Discussion of Endowed With.

5. Commentary on the Discussion of Endowed With Equanimity

397. In the discussion "A Worthy One possessed of six equanimities" too, the meaning should be understood by this very method. For the Worthy One is said to be possessed of them because of the capability of equanimities to arise at the six doors, not because of the arising of all of them at one moment.

Commentary on the Treatise on Being Endowed with Equanimity.

6. Commentary on the Treatise on "Enlightened at Enlightenment"

398. Now there is the discussion called "Enlightened by Enlightenment." Therein, "enlightenment" is a designation for both the knowledge of the four paths and omniscient knowledge. Therefore, for those whose view is that just as one is white by white colour, brown by brown colour, so one is enlightened by enlightenment, just as the Uttarāpathakas hold at present; with reference to them, the question and the pursuit are of the proponent of one's own doctrine, and the acknowledgment and the rejecting are of the other.

Regarding "past" - in the question he rejects because of its absence at that moment. When asked the second time, he acknowledges with reference to the attainment. Again, when asked by way of function, he rejects because of the absence of function. When asked the second time, he acknowledges the absence of confusion regarding what was to be done by him through that which was done. But without giving opportunity for the pretext, when asked by the method beginning with "does one fully understand suffering," he rejects because of the absence of that function.

In the question concerning the future, he rejects because of the absence of path knowledge at that moment. When asked the second time, thinking of the state of being a Buddha by future enlightenment as in "The Buddha went to Rājagaha," he acknowledges. When asked "does one do what is to be done for enlightenment," he rejects because of the absence of function at that moment. When asked the second time, if one were not to do it, one would not be called a Buddha. Since one will inevitably do it, therefore one does indeed do it - thus he acknowledges. Again, when asked without giving opportunity for the pretext, he rejects. The question concerning the present, together with the correlation, is of manifest meaning only.

399. When asked having combined the three enlightenments together, he acknowledges because of the state of being properly said "enlightened by three" with reference to omniscient knowledge. Again, when asked "by three," he rejects because of the absence of all at one moment. When asked the second time, he acknowledges by virtue of omniscient knowledge of the past, future, and present. Again, without giving opportunity for the pretext, when asked "constantly and continuously," he rejects.

"Should it not be said 'by enlightenment'" is the question of the opponent; the acknowledgment is of the proponent of one's own doctrine because of the attainment of the state of not being enlightened at the moment of the absence of enlightenment. But regarding the question "Is it not by the attainment of enlightenment," in whatever continuity the path knowledge reckoned as enlightenment has arisen, therein one is enlightened - the acknowledgment is his alone because of the existence by convention. Not knowing his intention, "if" is the establishment of the view of the opponent. Now, to make his non-discernment evident, "enlightened by the attainment of enlightenment, enlightened by enlightenment" is the question of the proponent of one's own doctrine. Its meaning is - "Is it that because one is enlightened by the attainment of enlightenment, therefore one is enlightened by enlightenment?" The other, "the attainment of enlightenment means the state of having arisen in the continuity even when enlightenment, having arisen, has ceased. Enlightenment means knowledge at the moment of the path" - not discerning this distinction, he again acknowledges. Thereupon, when asked by the proponent of one's own doctrine "Is the attainment of enlightenment enlightenment?" not finding opportunity for a statement, he rejects.

Commentary on the Treatise on "Enlightened at Enlightenment".

Thus these three discussions also are of the Uttarāpathakas alone.

7. Commentary on the Treatise on Characteristic

400. Now there is the discussion called the characteristic discussion. Therein, the view of those who, having unwisely taken this discourse "a great man possessed of which has only two destinations," hold that one possessed of the characteristics is just a Bodhisatta, just as the Uttarāpathakas hold at present; with reference to them, the question is of the proponent of one's own doctrine, the acknowledgment is of the other.

In the questions "a being destined to be a universal monarch," since a universal monarch is both a being and also a Bodhisatta, therefore he rejects with reference to a non-Bodhisatta. He acknowledges with reference to a Bodhisatta.

402. The discourse on the thirty-two was said with reference to the Bodhisatta only. For he, in the final existence, becomes a Buddha, in the others a universal monarch, therefore even what is brought is as if not brought.

Commentary on the Treatise on Characteristic.

8. Commentary on the Treatise on Entering upon the Fixed Course

403. Now there is the treatise called the entering upon the fixed course. Therein, for those whose view is, with reference to the going forth of Jotipāla in the Ghaṭikāra Sutta, "the Bodhisatta entered the fixed course and lived the holy life in the Scriptures of the Blessed One Kassapa," just as the Andhakans hold at present; with reference to them, "the Bodhisatta" is the question of the proponent of one's own doctrine, and standing on the view, the acknowledgment is of the other. Then, since "fixed course" or "holy life" is a name for the noble path, and for Bodhisattas, setting aside the fulfilment of the perfections, there is no other entering upon the fixed course. If there were, the Bodhisatta would become a stream-enterer, a disciple. But this is not so. For the Buddhas, standing on their own power of knowledge, merely declare "This one will be a Buddha," therefore "the Bodhisatta" is again the pursuit of the proponent of one's own doctrine. With reference to the final existence, the rejecting is of the other. In the second question, the acknowledgment is his alone with reference to the time of Jotipāla. In those beginning with "having been a disciple" too, the same method applies. "One who has learned by hearsay" means one who has penetrated the Teaching by oral tradition. Having rejected with reference to the final existence, he acknowledges with reference to oral tradition during the time of Jotipāla.

404. "Another teacher" was said with reference to Āḷāra and Rāmaputta. "The Venerable Ānanda" and so on was said to show that "only those who have entered the fixed course are disciples, not others who have entered the fixed course are of such kind."

"A disciple who has passed beyond birth" - he asks whether one who was a disciple in a certain birth, having passed beyond that, becomes a non-disciple in another existence. The other rejects on the ground that stream-enterers and so on have the status of disciples as stream-enterers and so on. The remainder here is clear in meaning.

Commentary on the Treatise on Entering upon the Fixed Course.

9. Another Commentary on the Treatise on Being Endowed With

406. Now comes another discussion called the Discussion on Being Endowed With. Therein, for those whose view is "a person established in the fourth path is possessed of the three fruits by virtue of the attainment phenomena," 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 other. The remainder here should be understood by the very method stated above in the Discussion on Being Endowed With the Four Fruits.

Another Commentary on the Treatise on Being Endowed With.

10. Commentary on the Treatise on the Abandoning of All Mental Fetters

413. Now comes the discussion called the abandoning of mental fetters. Therein, for those whose view is "the abandoning of all mental fetters is without distinction arahantship," 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 other. Again, when asked "all mental fetters," he rejects with reference to those abandoned by the triad of paths stated above. When asked the second time, he acknowledges because of the absence of anything not abandoned by that path. Regarding identity view and so on too, he rejects with reference to the state of abandonment by the first path, and acknowledges with reference to the complete abandoning by the fourth path. The same method applies everywhere.

Commentary on the Treatise on the Abandoning of All Mental Fetters.

The fourth chapter.