COMMENTARY OF THE.2.VIETNAMESE TRANSLATE ENGLISH BY=VIETNAMESE BUDDHIST NUN=THE WOMEN OF THE SAKYA CLAN CHAN TANH. BRAHMAJĀLA SUTTA ANNOUNCEMENT 1. I HAVE HEAR THIS… A [*]: This is the opening words of the Brahma Vong Sutra spoken by Ānanda at the first concluding session. The word "Thus" indicates that the sutra has a teaching. The phrase "I have heard" means that the sutra is heard. The phrase "Once upon a time" indicates that the sutra has a special time. The word "World-Honored One" proves that there is a master who preaches this sutra. [*] A: Atthakathā Of the four bases for preaching a sutra: 1. Personal orientation. 2. Mind directed to others. 3. Someone raised a question. 4. A special situation occurs. - What sutras the Blessed One preached completely through his mind, without the request of others of the first kind. Like Ākankheyya Sutta (M.6), Vattha Sutta (M.7), Mahā satipatthāna sutta (D.22)… - The sutras taught by the World-Honored One, after discriminating the mind towards others, such as aspirations, roots, etc., are of the second type. Such as Cūlarāhula sutta (M. 147), Mahārāhula sutta (M. 62), Dhammacakkappavattana (Sam) and Dhātuvibhanga sutta (M. 140). - When the four groups, the dragon, the golden bird, the gandharva, the asura, the yaksha, the gods, and the brahma approached the Blessed One and asked a question. The Blessed One preached a sutra in response, of the third kind. Like Sakkapanha (D.21), Cūlavedalla (M. 44), Mahāvedalla (M. 43), Sāmannaphala (D. 2)… - The sutras preached by a particular event are of the fourth kind. Such as Dhammadāyāda (M. 3), Cūlasīhanāda (M. 11), Candūpama, Puttamamsūpama sutta, Dārukkhandhūpama sutta, Aggikkhandūpama, Phenapindūpama sutta and Pāricchattakūpama sutta. The Pham Vong Sutra belongs to the fourth category. The Blessed One preached this sutra on the occasion of the arising of a special situation, i.e. defamation and praise. A: 2. "The wanderer Suppiya ": student of Sanjaya. He is a robed wanderer (not a naked ascetic). The wanderer Sanjaya was the teacher ofand Moggallāna before they followed the Buddha. There are two reasons why the wandering wanderer Suppiya slandered the Three Jewels: When the Buddha appeared in the world, the profits and fame of the pagans declined drastically, just as the light of a firefly is dimmed when the sun rises. form. Again, when Upatissa and Kolita ( Sāriputta and Moggallāna ) ordained under Sanjaya 's tutelage , the assembly of this group flourished. But by the time these two characters abandoned Sanjaya (to follow the Buddha), that congregation almost disintegrated. Supiya was a student of Sanjaya, was just as resentful about these losses as his teacher. But in contrast, the young Brahmadatta , a student of the wanderer Supiya , opposed his teacher's views and enthusiastically praised the Three Jewels. Because Brahmadattais an intellectual, not as blind as the teacher. He thought, "If my teacher slanders the praiseworthy Three Jewels, he will surely fall into the same position of destruction and destruction as swallowing fire, lying down with a sharp sword. There is no reason for a disciple to follow in his footsteps. Because sentient beings are masters of karma, everyone follows their own karma. Parents do not inherit their children's karma, nor do children inherit their parents' karma; teachers do not inherit their students' karma, nor do students inherit their karma. not inheriting the teacher's karma. This is my teacher's very bad sinful act, which is to slander the Three Jewels - to attack the saints." 7. CHRISTMAS, ONLY RELATED TO SMALL, MEDIUM ISSUES, NOT EXCEPT THE SMALL DETAILS ABOUT PURE LAW. A: Is morality the noble adornment of a practitioner? And the Blessed One himself extolled the precepts in many hundreds of sutras. As the sentence "Bhikkhus, if a bhikkhu has the wish: 'May I be loved and respected by my companions in the holy life', he must be perfect in virtue" etc... So why is morality here being said? is petty? A: Precepts are petty when compared to noble virtues. Because morality does not enter the perfect field of concentration and concentration does not enter the perfect field of wisdom. Therefore, when compared with the noble virtues, the inferior virtues are called "Mediocrity". Morality does not enter the perfect sphere of concentration. Why? As was the case with the Exalted One's practice of dual communication, due to his exquisite mastery in the meditations. The Blessed One used the kasiṇas so quickly that they seemed to be at the same time, but in reality the two cittas are still separate. All the above capacity, gender cannot be completed. Only the intention can be completed. Concentration does not enter the sublime range of wisdom. Why? As is the tradition of the Buddhas, the great Bodhisattva, after defeating all the demon armies, in the first watch he attained enlightenment, in the middle watch he attained divine vision. In the last watch he turned to the wisdom of the dharma of contemplating dependent origination. According to the tradition of the Buddhas, he entered the fourth jhāna on ie mandarin and used that as the basis for contemplation. He continuously witnessed the four supramundane paths, when the Arahant path was enlightened, he excavated all defilements and penetrated all the Buddha's virtues. All is accomplished only by wisdom, concentration does not reach the power of wisdom. Therefore, morality is considered petty, insignificant in the sense of "When compared with concentration and wisdom." 29. Bhikkhus, there are some samanas and brahmins who are speculators about the past. A: "Past speculators": they take (their views) after thinking and speculating about the past. Ṭī [*]: They first think about the past with long-formed thoughts of craving and wrong views, then speculate about the past as their thoughts become stronger through repetition and directing. take many forms, and ultimately embrace their views through the then-formed misconceptions of craving and wrong views; accordingly they cling to these wrong views and cling deeply to them. Or thinking and misperception can be understood in terms of craving and clinging, since craving conditions clinging (as thinking conditions misunderstanding). [*] : Tīkā SASSATAVĀDA (SASSATAVĀDA) 30. Bhikkhus, there are some samanas and brahmins who are ordinary houses, OVER FOUR STATES DECLARATION AND THE WORLD IS PERMANENT. A: After mistaking one of the five aggregates, such as the aggregate of form, etc., as self and the world, they declare that aggregate to be permanent, immortal, permanent and solid. Ṭī: Here refers to the five types of body view: that is, considering form, feeling, perception, formations, or consciousness as self. In each case he misunderstands the four aggregates as self and declares the fifth aggregate as the world. Again, after perceiving one aggregate as self, he declares the remaining four aggregates to be the world. Or he misunderstands his aggregates as self and the outer aggregates as the world. 31. He said like this: "THE WORD AND THE WORLD IS PERMANENT, UNBORING, stalwart like a mountain, STANDING like a stone pillar." A: "Unborn": as oxen are not born or the earth is unborn, the self and the world do not bear fruit and do not produce anything, he denies that the jhānas, etc. the world creates anything like form, etc... Ṭī: He denies that the jhānas produce anything, because if they were capable of creating, they would exist depending on conditions, like form, etc... and so there would be birth. But if they do arise, they will also have their inevitable cessation and leave no room for their permanence. A: "Standing like a mountain" and "Standing like a pillar", he illustrates the indestructibility of the world. AND WHY THIS BEING IS cyclical, death, and birth. A: Here, our theorist sabotages his theory, because before he said: "The self and the world are eternal", now he says: "These beings are cyclical". The theorist's point of view is contradictory. It is erratic, like a stake in a pile of rice husks. Good mixed with bad like morsels, human excrement, and cow dung in a madman's basket. HOWEVER WORD AND THE WORLD STILL STILL AS A STANDARD. A: He imagines the self and the world to be like the earth, Mount Meru, the sun, or the moon because of their constant existence. Imagining the self as like these, he asserts, "They are the same as permanent things." (Remembering past lives is evidence of a permanent self.) WHY? BECAUSE I… REMEMBER MUCH OF MY PAST LIFE… FOR THIS REASON I KNOW: LANGUAGE AND THE WORLD IS PERMANENT. A: Now, to prove his assertion that the self and the world are permanent, the theorist gives his reason. With the words "For this reason I know" he expresses remembrance of past lives. I know this from firsthand experience. I do not speak from mere faith. Ṭī: "If you give your reason": the theorist gives the reason for his assertion to those who before whom he declared the self and the world to be permanent. Due to the fact of being directly experienced by himself (i.e. recollection of past lives). This is his argument: During many hundreds of thousands of lives, my self and this world are one, as proved by the fact of recollection. For the person who recalls an experience is the same as the person who experienced it in the past, no one else. There can be no fact that one person remembers something experienced by another. Example: Dhammarakkhita cannot remember anything experienced by Buddharakkhita. Hence the self and the world are permanent. BIRTHDAY, THIS IS THE FIRST CASE A: This is the first of four cases referred to by the word "Stand" in the phrase "Above four positions". Meaning: the first cause consists in the recollection of several hundred thousand past lives. Ṭī: Causes ( kāraka ) are of three types: 1. Human success: for example the holy path is the cause to achieve Nirvana. 2. Growth kernel: for example, a seed is the kernel to produce a sprout. 3. Human transmission: for example, the dependent origination of the Dharma, etc... is the cause to transmit the truth of impermanence etc.... Here, only the transmitter is used. Because wrong views are the cause for imparting omniscient wisdom. (Second and third cases of permanentism). 32-33. A: The same method of explanation applies to the following two parts: Where the first part deals with the recollection of many hundreds of thousands of past lives, the following two sections deal with the recollection of ten and forty past lives and past lives. life. It is due to the ability to recall according to weak wisdom, medium wisdom and subtle wisdom. 34. HAS A SURVIVAL OR A BRAMONY IS A THEORYER, A SURVIVAL. A: "Inferor" is an identifier for the theorist who asserts his inferences in terms of inference and range ( vitakka ). The "explorer" is one who considers, painstakingly, approves and affirms his point of view, just as one enters the water after examining the depths with a stick. A: There are four classes of speculators: 1. People deduce from hearing transmissions. He heard about King Vessatara and reasoned: "If World-Tun were Vessantara (in a previous life), there would be a permanent self." He then affirms his point of view. 2. One who infers from the recollection of a few past lives. He remembers two or three lives and reason: "I myself was something in the past, therefore there must be a permanent self." 3. People deduce from luck. He reasoned on the basis of luck: "Since my self is happy now, it will be the same in the past and in the future." He then affirms his point of view. 4. Pure reasoner. A pure inferentialist is someone who asserts his or her point of view as a result of mere logic, like this: "If this exists, that is." 35. NO THEORY OUTSIDE THESE STATEMENTS. A: The Buddha roared the lion's roar that no one could reverse: "Apart from these positions, there is not even a single cause to claim permanence." Ṭī: Question: Are these four positions the theorist's reason for clinging to his permanence, or for putting others in his or her own opinion? If they are his reasons for clinging, why is only recollection and inference mentioned, and not perversion, etc.? Because perverted thoughts, irrational attention, bad friends, and listening to false doctrines are also grounds for the arising of wrong views. If they are a means of imposing one's views on others, the sutras should be mentioned with recall and inferential evidence, for, like them, they are also a means of imposing others. In each case it is misleading to say "There is no theory beyond these positions." Answer: Not so. Why? First of all, with regard to his adherence to the doctrine of permanence, the theorist clings to the aggregates as a self and to the eternal world through the foregoing recollection and inference only after he has interacted with him. with bad friends, listen to false doctrines that arise from phi such as rational attention, thereby acquiring a perverse perception, far beyond the scope of inferential evidence due to not understanding the instantaneous cessation of the aggregates and wrong application consolidation method. Recollection of past lives and inference are mentioned here exclusively because they are proximate and major causes for permanence and because when they are mentioned, other conditions are implicitly included as well. along with them. Then, for the imposition of others, the canon classifies under inferential evidence, was designed solely to give a special case of the use of inference (i.e. because the heathens did not perceive the scriptures). So recollection and inference are mentioned separately as the bases for these wrong views. Again, there are two types of signs that belong to the sublime dharmas: 1. Real nature general ( sabhāvalakkhana ) 2. Universal generals ( sāmannalakkhana ) The understanding of the true nature of the sign is direct experiential wisdom ( paccakkhanāna ); General understanding (including impermanence, suffering and not-self) is inferential wisdom ( anumānanāna).). The sutras are a means to acquire knowledge, generating only inference knowledge, but by thinking on learned dhammas, one is placed in favorable thought, generating volition, and by developing contemplation. gradually attain direct experiential wisdom (wisdom). Thus, the scriptures do not go beyond the scope of inference, and are therefore implicitly included when it comes to inference through hearing transmissions in the commentary. So it is correct to say: "There is no theory outside of these four positions". On the basis of the sentences: "They assert wrong views" and "they claim the self and the world are permanent", the meaning here is, these positions are intended to put others in their own perspective. 36. Bhikkhus, THIS IS LIKELY UNDERSTANDED AND HE UNDERSTANDED: "THIS OPINION, SUCH MYSTERIOUS AND SUCH WRONG ACTION, LEAD TO SUCH AN ANIMAL BEING, TO SAME RESULTS... HERE. A: "Such misconceptions": first of all, views belonging to wrong views that promote self and the world are often misunderstood, i.e. accepted and brought about. "Such evil grasping": holding on to it with a blind mind and coming to the conclusion: "Only this is the truth, other than this point of view is wrong." "Leading to such a being": they lead to hell, animal or hungry ghost. The phrase "To such a result in the next life" is synonymous with the above sentence. HOW DO YOU UNDERSTAND THIS? That is, understanding: morality, concentration and omniscience ( sabbannutānāna ). Ṭī: Omniscience is mentioned because that is the subject of analysis here. But when omniscient wisdom is mentioned, its basis - all the wisdom of the Buddha - and all the ten powers of the Buddha's wisdom, etc., which cannot be separated from omniscient wisdom is also implied. UNDERSTANDING THIS HE IS NOT KEEPING WRONG A: Although he understood such incomparable dharmas, he did not think: "I understand this", etc., but wrongly grasped the knowledge by means of craving, wrong view, and conceit. Ṭī: This is to say: The Tathagata doesn't even hold those wondrous dharmas, such qualities as precepts, etc... which goes beyond speculative views, nor does he hold the bait of rotation (vattàmisa). "I understand this": here "I" refers to the wrong grasping by way of wrong views (and conceit), while "etc..." implies the wrong grasping by way of craving as "mine" ". "Wrong grasping" is holding things in a way that is contrary to reality, going beyond their true nature. For nothing in the aggregates can be grasped as "I" or "mine". AND BECAUSE OF THE WRONG ACCEPTANCE HAS BEEN AWARDED, HE HAS ENROLLED Himself TO THE PERFECT SECURE STATE. A: Without wrong attachment as a condition, he himself realized the perfect state of tranquility, that is, the absence of defilements caused by wrong attachment. He declared: "Bhikkhus, Nirvana has become clear to the Tathagata." AFTER UNDERSTANDING AS REALLY, THE BEIRING AND ENDORSEMENT OF DASHES, DANGERS, DANGERS AND DEVELOPMENT OF THEM, AS LAI FOR liberated without Clinging. A: In order to show that the practice by which he attained the perfect state of tranquility, the Tathagata now interprets the subject of meditation in terms of the very sensations that are so captivated by them, the pagans stray into the evil forest. view and think: "Here we will be at peace! We will be at peace here!" Ṭī: "The sensations themselves": in many of the Buddha's sutras referring to the Four Noble Truths in the form of aggregates, bases, etc. wrong view due to wrong practice (for the feeling); Thus, life alone is inferred to indicate the basis for full wisdom. The meditation subject mentioned is the subject of the four truths. A: "After understanding as it really is": He understood as actually arising of sensations by means of the following five signs: He saw the arising of the aggregate of feeling, in the sense of its conditioned arising, thus: "Through the arising of ignorance, feelings arise; through the arising of craving... of kamma... of contact, the Life arises. He also sees the appearance of creation, he sees the arising of the aggregate of feeling. He understood as the actual cessation of sensations by means of the following five signs: He saw the cessation of the aggregate of feeling, in the sense of its conditioned cessation, thus: with the cessation of ignorance, feelings cease; with the cessation of craving…of karma…of contact, the cessation of feelings. Also seeing the change of appearance, he saw the cessation of the aggregate of feeling. He understood as it really was the sweetness in feelings like this: "Pleasure and Joy arise based on feelings, this is the sweetness in feelings." He understood as really dangerous in feelings like this: "Those feelings are impermanent, painful, and subject to change, this is the danger in feelings." He understood as truly renunciation of sensations thus: "The abandonment, relinquishment of sensuality and craving for sensations, this is renunciation of feelings. After understanding all this the Tathagata has no grasp of attachment. through the cessation of desire and greed, and being liberated from attachment." Since one can cling to anything as long as clinging is present, through the absence of clinging and of any aggregates that may exist as a result of past clinging, the Tathagata is liberated without clinging to anything. Ṭī: "After understanding as it really is": after knowing, i.e., after comprehending the arising of feelings, etc... with insight insight by penetrating the object ( ārammanapativedha ), and with path wisdom by penetrating non-delusion ( asammohapativedha ). "In the sense of conditioned origination": their arising because they are not extinguished by the noble path, and through the arising of their conditions such as ignorance, etc., as described in the theorem: "The This exists, that exists; through the arising of this, that arises. General artifact is the general arising ( uppādalakkhana ); i.e., their arising ( jāti ). "In the sense of conditioned cessation": the meaning should be understood as the opposite of the method stated for the arising part. (That is, their cessation because they are extinguished by the noble path, and through the cessation of conditions as described in the theorem: "When this ceases, that ceases; with the cessation of that This and that pass away." The sign of dissolution is the sign of cessation ( nirodhalakkhana ); that is, their cessation ( bhanga ). "Sweet taste": a force of feeling (before) that serves as a condition for rapture (after), or bliss itself. This is the summary meaning: when pleasure has arisen which is the object of a previously born feeling, this feeling is a condition that provides sweetness and the search for sweetness - this is sweetness (in a previously born feeling). "Danger": by the word "Impermanent", he indicates the danger in feeling free, or in all feeling, by way of suffering inherent in formations. By two other words (i.e., suffering and perishing) He indicates the danger in painful and pleasant feeling, by way of the other two. Or all three words can be applied to all feelings without distinction. This is the danger in sensations: their impermanence in the sense of not having been after; their painful slavery in the sense of oppression by birth and death; their fickleness grows old and dies. "Renunciation of feelings": as long as one does not renounce sensuality and greed, but is firmly attached to feeling, one remains bound to feeling, but having abandoned sensuality and greed, then he is freed from feeling. Here, when feeling is mentioned, the rupa and immaterial dharmas which are co-arising conditions, y indicating conditions and object conditions for feeling are also included. Hence all five aggregates of clinging are included. The five aggregates of clinging are included by the mention of feelings to establish the truth of suffering. Ignorance etc. is included by mentioning the arising of feelings to establish the truth set. The words "Extinction" and "Renunciation" refer to the cessation of truth. Understanding sensations "As they really are" refers to truth. Thus the Four Noble Truths can be found in this passage. "There is no clinging through the cessation of desire and greed": mentioning this because sensual desire is the root of the remaining types of clinging, and when craving is abandoned, the remaining clingings also end. "(The Tathagata) is liberated without clinging": The Blessed One revealed his realization of the path and fruition. By this whole passage on feeling, the Dharma King points to the basis for the arising of His omniscience along with the preliminary practice; for it was his complete insight into the dharma-realm that could enable him to analyze in detail these speculative views along with their positions and creatures. 37. Bhikkhus, THIS IS THE DEPRENCY, HARDWAYS.. THE REALITY OF VALUES OF AS THE FUTURE WILL DISCOVER. A: The dharmas are profound, hard to see, difficult to understand... belonging to omniscient wisdom. For these dharmas, not ordinary people, stream-enterers, or anyone else can praise the Tathagata as it is. Only the Tathagata is capable of doing that. EKACCASASSATAVĀDA ( EKACCASASSATAVĀDA ) 38. Bhikkhus, there is a recluse, and a brahmin who are ordinary people for some things and not others… A: Ordinaryists have a one-sided view of two types: with respect to living beings and with regard to formations. Two categories are included here. Ṭī: One -sided equanimity is the theory that something in beings and formations is permanent. The first three theories are analyzed in terms of sentient beings, the fourth concerning formations. When expressing the phrase "one-sided ecclesiastics," this refers to dharmas that are misinterpreted as permanent in their own right, not just dharmas in the way that the one-sided ordinaryists themselves imagine. Because in his theory, dharmas that are imagined as permanent are considered unconditioned. Therefore, he says: "That which is called "Mind"... is an eternal, enduring self...". For it is impossible for a right thinker to postulate that some entity he posits is created by conditions to be eternal and permanent. The one-sided views of sentient beings are theists, who advocate that God is eternal and that other beings are impermanent. The one-sided ordinaryists towards formations are followers of Kanāda , who propose that atoms are permanent and solid, molecules... are impermanent. (That is, combinations of atoms are impermanent.) Proponents that the eye and other physical senses are impermanent and consciousness are permanent, are also ephemeralists with one-sided views of formations. 39. Most sentient beings are reborn in the CAI QUANG AM THIEN. A: "Mostly": that is, except for those who are reborn in the higher Brahma realms, or the formless realms, or (elsewhere). Ṭī: The word "Or" (at the end of the sentence) means "Or in worlds other than those in decay". Since one cannot imagine that it is possible that all beings in the miserable realms will then be reborn in the formless or formless realms, since the beings with the longest lifespan cannot be reborn in the formless realms. people. Sā : [*] They cannot be reborn in the higher realms from suffering without having first been reborn in the human realm. People with definite wrong views will not escape hell when the world perishes. According to the commentaries, this being is then reborn in another part of the world. [*] Sā: Sādhuvilāsinī THEY LIVE HERE, CREATED IN THE MIND A: "Mind-made": because they are reborn through mind meditation. Ṭī: Although for all beings rebirth takes place through mind-kamma, rupa-sphere beings are called "Mind-made" because they are reborn through mind alone, without external conditions. If so, one might ask whether the mind-created state should also apply to beings born in the sense world? No, it shouldn't. Because the expression "Created by the mind" only applies to sentient beings who are reborn through the higher mind. To indicate this, the commentator says, "Because they are reborn through mind meditation." Does the state of "Mind-made" also apply to the formless realm? No, because it is unnecessary to emphasize that they are reborn through the mind only, because there is no doubt that they can be reborn here through external conditions. In general usage, the expression "Mind-made" is applied to material beings. Hence the Vedic teachers speak of a self of five types: "Self-made, breath-made, mind-made, rapture-created, consciousness-created." 40. An Empty Pham Cung Does Not Appear A: The Brahma world of the first meditation is created. It was empty at first, because at that time no living beings were born there. It has no creator, but is a karmic realm. At that time, a sentient being, due to the end of his life span, or the end of his blessings, renounced Quang Tam Thien and was reborn in the empty palace. Ṭī: How are beings living in the higher realms of the second jhāna (ie Quang Am Thien) reborn in the lower realms of the first jhāna? The commentator said: A: At that time a wish for abode arises automatically in those beings. After developing the first jhāna, they are reborn in the first jhāna realm. "Due to the end of life": beings who have done noble good deeds and are reborn in a heavenly realm with a short lifespan are no longer there solely because of their meritorious power, but die together because of their length (term death) of longevity in that realm. This being is said to be a common life due to the end of its lifespan. "Or out of good fortune": beings who have done lowly good deeds and are reborn in a heavenly realm with a long lifespan cannot last the entire lifespan of that realm, but die in the middle of their life. This is called the common net due to the end of the blessing. Ṭī: "due to the "limited" length of life in that realm": due to the limited length of the maximum lifespan. Q: But what is this "maximum lifespan"? And how does it belong to a limited length? Answer: Longevity is the special continuum of the aggregates of maturation (i.e. bhavanga) of living beings. Devas and hell beings, lifespans often have fixed limits; the same goes for humanity in Beikuu Luzhou. Animals, pretas, and the rest of humanity have no fixed limit on lifespan. So the commentary says: "They share a common network because of the limited length of life." 41. THIS ONE IS BROTHER AND STRONGER. A: "Depressed": longing for another being to come. But dissatisfaction associated with aversion ( Paṭigha ) does not exist in the Brahma realm. Ṭī: "Discontent" is sorrow about the lack of a favorite object. It manifests a feeling of sadness ( domanassa). A: "Frustrated": anxious, agitated. There are four types: 1) Anxiety due to fear: this is "Fear, panic, terror, insecurity, arising from birth, old age, illness, and death." 2) Agitated by craving: This arises from aspiration: "May other sentient beings come to this place!" 3) Agitation due to wrong view: This is agitation and perversion. 4) Agitated by wisdom: Arising by contemplating the arising and passing away of nama-rupa. Ṭī: "disturbed" here refers to craving and wrong views based on his discouragement that arise when he enjoys the pleasures of the jhānas over a period of time and become causes for misunderstandings about "mine" and "me". In the passage: "May other sentient beings come to this place!" cited to illustrate the agitation caused by craving, but not that of wrong views, is absent in such a case. 42. I AM… GOD, CREATOR AND CREATOR… A: "I am the lord of the world, I am the Creator and Creator of the world: the earth, the Himalayas, the Mount Sumeru, the worlds, the oceans, the moon and the sun made by Me. create." "... FINAL DEAD..." A: I am the one who designates the status of sentient beings: "You are the king-slayer, the brahmin, the vesa, the head-dad. You are the householder, the monastic. You are the camel. , cow." WHY? A: Now, after declaring "These beings are created by me", he tries to confirm this with an argument. Ṭī: Although this Brahma had possessed the mind of non-possession of karma in previous lives, due to the fragility of worldly understanding he had lost his mind. Tempted by the creation of sentient beings by means of a single thought and possessed by divine powers, he made his own decisions and formulated a theory about the creative role of God, thinking: "I am God, the Creator. world and the Creator", he is placed in that view as his prejudice. But this sentence has no use to put others (in this view), for it is said: "He thinks for himself", to indicate that this prejudice expressed is also a means to establish people. different in his opinion, the commentary states "After declaring" and "Wanting to confirm this with an argument. WE ARE CREATED BY HIM A: Although they pass away and are reborn due to the cause of their own karma, they imagine that they were created by him, worshiping and kneeling at his feet (i.e. becoming disciples). Ṭī: Question: Aren't the gods right after being reborn with wisdom: "After passing away from such a rebirth, we were reborn here as a result of such kamma"? A: This is true in the case of people whose inclination in previous lives is based entirely on knowledge of karmic possession. But these beings also cling to the view of God's creative role. So they think: "We are created by him." 44. HE IS PERMANENT, SUSTAINABLE, PERMANENT, UNCHANGED. A: After not seeing him reborn, they say he is "Permanent". Not seeing him die, they say he is "Endurable". "Eternal" means to last forever. He is not changed due to the absence of shifting in the old way. 45. BIRTHDAYS, GODS ARE CALLED TO HAVE HAPPENED FROM HAPPY. A: They are corrupted, that is, they are ruined by having fun. THIS GOD WASTE A LOT OF TIME DRINKING IN JOY, SO THEY FORGET TO EAT AND HAVE TO GET AVOID. A: They forgot to eat. These Gods are so absorbed in wonderful pleasure that they don't even know if they have eaten or not. But when they passed their mealtime, even though they ate and drank soon after, they died together and disappeared in that realm. Why? Because of the power of the karmic fire element and their delicate bodies. In the case of humans, the karmic fire element is subtle and the body is strong. Because of the subtlety of the fire element and the strength of the body, they can live even for seven days on warm water, porridge, etc. But in the case of the gods, the fire element is strong and the celestial body is subtle. If they skipped even a single meal, they couldn't continue to survive. Just as a red or green lotus placed on a hot rock at midday in summer will not be able to recover to its original condition in the afternoon, Even if one pours a hundred jars of water on it, it will wither. Likewise, even though they ate and drank immediately after (remembering the meal) these gods died and disappeared from that plane. 47. BIRTHDAYS, GODS ARE CALLED TO HAVE A DIFFERENT PROBLEM. A: They are corrupted, that is, destroyed by will. Ṭī: Because the mind is corrupted through jealousy. Or the meaning can be understood as depraved; that is, the corruption of the mind due to jealousy is the cause of their destruction, so they are "Descended by the will". A: These are the Four Heavenly Kings. It is known that one young devas was angry because he was jealous of the merits of other gods, and in return, he found that the former was angry for no reason. If one of these gods is angry, but the other is not angry, the latter protects the former (from perishing). But if both get angry, one's anger will become the condition for the other's anger, and both will die. This is a natural law. Ṭī: If one of the gods is not angry, the anger of the other, without any fuel, will arise unilaterally and then calm down. It will be extinguished like fire dipped in water, and cannot cause his death. But if both get angry, their anger will grow stronger and stronger, intensifying the other's anger, and erupting violently, capable of burning life force. Their anger will then burn their minds and destroy their extremely delicate bodies. "Fixed law": they die from that plane due to their subtle bodies and the force of anger that has arisen, as well as to the true nature ( sabhāva ) of their rupa and formless dhammas. DOUBLE DISCUSSION ABOUT THE DURABLE BODY AND PERMANENT MIND. 49. A: The speculator sees the cessation of the eye, etc., but because each citta arises first, when the cessation is a condition for the subsequent arising of citta, he does not see the cessation of citta, although the cessation of consciousness is more obvious than the cessation of consciousness. The cessation of the eye, etc. Because he does not see the cessation of the mind, he misunderstands that when the body passes away (at death) the mind goes elsewhere, like a bird leaving a tree and perching on another tree. He declares this as his point of view. Ṭī: "He sees the cessation of the eye, etc....": due to the coarseness of the cessation of rupa, he sees their destruction when he sees them being altered through access to the adversarial conditions and eventually disfigured (with death). "As a condition for arising": to become an uninterrupted condition, etc... "The cessation of the mind is more obvious": because the cessation of the mind is faster. For during the time a rupa dhamma exists, sixteen moments of citta pass away. "He does not see the cessation of citta": although citta ceases moment by moment, every citta moment, on cessation becomes unbroken condition for the citta moment to follow. Because each successive citta-moment arises latent, it would seem that, in the absence of the preceding citta, only the aspect of presence is strong and clear, not the aspect of absence. Thus he does not see the dissolution of the mind. Because the one-sidedly speculative layman is very far from wisdom and the application of the differential method, and the incorrect application of the method of identification, he comes to the conviction: "It is this mind that always arises with one nature, it is a permanent self." THEORIES ABOUT THE LIMITED AND UNbound World (ANTĀNANTAVĀDA) 53-57. A: "The finite and the boundless" are those who claim theories of finite or boundless, i.e. theories that arise in relation to finite, boundless, finite and boundless, or not. must be finite nor boundless. Ṭī: Boundary or boundless about what? Regarding the self, which is here called "World" because "Threshold" is said by theorists who want to escape samsara, or because merit, evil and their effects are observed in that case ( i.e. when applied to such a self by those theorists. Therefore, the Blessed One said: "They declare the world to be finite or infinite." But what is thatself ? cognitive theory is the world So it is mentioned below: "After holding that as the world." But some say that meditation itself along with co-existing dhammas is grasped as self or world. Q: It is correct to describe the first three theories as forms of the theory of being-infinite, since these theories deal with finite, boundless, and finite and boundless (of the world). But how can the last theory be expressed as a form of being-infinity, when it rejects both terms (i.e., finite and boundless)? A: It can be expressed like that precisely because it disproves both terms. For the theory that refutes the finite and the boundless of the world, when it deals with that, has finite and boundless as its object. Referring to this, the commentary states: "Rising in relation to..." Or: just as, in the case of the third theory, both the finite and the boundless of the same world are included by a distinction in spatial direction, similarly the speculative theory includes the two by time differences, talking about them in terms of mutual incompatibility. The infinite is indicated by the finite refutation, and the boundless by the boundless refutation. However, the finite and boundless inclusion here is not the same as the inclusion of the third theory, or in the present case the distinction of time is indicated (in contrast to the third theory which deals with the spatially distinct). This means: - Because through tradition he has heard that great seers who have reached a high spiritual level sometimes observe that the self (here called "World") is boundless. , Speculators conclude that it is not finite. And when he has heard that those seers sometimes observe the self as finite, he concludes that it is not boundless. What is stated here concerns speculators whose inference from tradition can be applied, with appropriate modifications, to those who infer from memories of past lives and past lives. other types of speculation. After expanding the light sign ( paṭbhāganimitta) has not been expanded before, the speculator is (in each case) not experienced directly (falls are positioned as experienceable), before or during that champion expansion. So alluding to the time when that sign is extended, he declares the view through mere transmission, etc., and rejects (the finiteness of the self), objecting: "It is not finite." . Alluding to the time when that sign is not extended, he rejects (the infinity of the self), objecting: "It is not boundless". This position does not assert the complete absence of finite and boundless, but rather, should be used in the same way as the term "Non-non-perception". His own refutation of the first three theories is based on the contradiction of the signs involved in each case. Surely this must be understood in such a way. On the other hand, the fourth theory must be classified as a fallacy. For there is no concept of self that is completely separate from the finite, the boundless, or a combination of the two; and a speculator is one who searches for a speculative argument; and it is not warranted to ascribe both terms to the same world by distinction of time. But some explanations of the fourth theory arise through the following speculative process: "If the self is finite, its rebirth in distant places cannot be recalled. If it is boundless, one is living. in this life will be able to experience the happiness of the heavens and the suffering of the hells, etc. If one holds the self to be both finite and boundless, he will bear the error of both positions first. self cannot be declared as finite or boundless. Q: It is correct to describe the theories of the last two theorists as forms of finite and infinite theory, since these theories have both the finite and the boundless of the world as their objects. But how can the first two views be expressed separately as forms of finite and infiniteism when such views have only one of two possibilities as their object?" Answer: Due to the use of images. For the word "boundary-boundary" which exists in relation to the last two theorists by way of the whole (object) in their views (i.e. the finite and the boundless of the world) is also its own conventional application of linguistics to the first two theorists (because their theories take part in that whole as their field), just as the term "Method of the eight liberations" applies. used separately for each formless meditation, or as the term "Abode of Beings" applies to the world. Or the idiom (boundary-unlimited house) is given to them by the way it has applicability at times before they cling. For these theorists, before the attainment of concentration, were " Those who are boundless-boundary, to the extent that their speculations are suspended between two positions, (when they think): "Is the world finite, or is it limitless?" But even after they made a definite hypothesis by remembering past lives, the previous idiom still applied to them. (The origin of the four views) A: After there is no extension of light to the world lines, grasping that light sign as the world, he abides and imagines the world as finite. But he who extended the general kasiṇa to the boundaries of the world imagined the world as boundless. Not extending the sign in the upper and lower directions, but expanding it horizontally, he imagines the world as finite in the upper and lower directions, and boundless in the width. The above speculative theory is understood according to the stated method. These four theories are included among speculators of the past because they accept their views as the result of what they have seen before. Ṭī: "As a result of what has been seen before": ie, due to finite recollection, etc... which is first experienced by the mind, here called "Seeing". After this has been clarified, speculators who deduce from tradition and pure speculators are implied to be included. For these four theories come about as wrong grasping of an eternal self that is declared finite, and so on. they are included in conventionalism. THEORIES OF THE ENDLESS DISCLAIMER (AMARĀVIKKHEPAVĀDA) sixty one. A: "Endless fallacy" ( amarā , literally immortality). Meaning: The views and words of this theorist, which continue to fence without limits. "The fallacy": Over and over in different ways, "Endless fallacy": the fallacy of opinions and words with no end. Another etymological meaning: amāra is the name of a type of fish (perhaps eel). Because they hover around in the water, sometimes hiding or appearing, it is impossible to catch them. Also, this theory wanders here and there and cannot be grasped, hence the name "Wandering like an eel". 62. HE DOESN'T UNDERSTAND AS WHAT IS FRANCE AND WHAT IS WRONG. A: He does not understand as they really are the ten wholesome paths of karma and the ten unwholesome paths of karma. "That will make me sad": it can upset me by regretting saying the wrong thing. Meaning it will cause suffering. "That affliction will be an obstacle for me": that is, an obstacle to reaching heaven or the path. "From being afraid and disgusted to say the wrong thing": do good and precious. "I didn't say that": this is a vague fallacy. "I don't say it that way": he rejects the permanent theory that the self and the world are permanent. "Nor do I say otherwise": ie in a way other than universalism; by this tree he rejects the doctrine of one-sided views. "I do not say that it is not": he rejects the theory of annihilation that "the Tathagata does not exist after death." "I do not say that it is neither this nor that": he rejects the speculative theory that "The Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist after death." (Another method): When asked he does not himself declare anything as wholesome or unwholesome. When asked: "Is this wholesome?", he said: "I do not say so". Asked: "Then is it unwholesome?", he said: "I don't say that way." Asked: "So it is something other than kusala and akusala?" he said, "I wouldn't say otherwise." Asked, "If it's not the three above, what do you mean?", he said, "I don't have to say it isn't." Asked: "They do you mean it's neither this nor that?", he said, "I'm not saying it's neither this nor that." Thus, he resorted to the fallacy, Ṭī: Sophists are not intelligent enough even to know the difference between wholesome and unwholesome qualities and dhammas that are superior to the human person. They don't understand the words "Good" and "Unwholesome" in the way of wholesome and unwholesome karma. The first explanatory method (of the five types of squirming) serves to illustrate the endless fallacy as a vague fallacy, the second to illustrate the similarity between the fallacy and the eel's wiggling . 63. SEX AND LOVE CAN BE GENERATED IN THE MIND A: Without fully understanding, he suddenly declares wholesome as wholesome and unwholesome as unwholesome. Then he asked other wise people: "I've made such an explanation of something. Is my explanation correct?" If they say: "You have interpreted it right", he may think: "There is no wiser like me", - thus "Sex and greed can arise in my mind". Here "lust" ( chando ) is weak craving, "Greed" ( rāgā ) is strong craving. OR HATE AND HATE CAN BE GENERATED IN MY MIND A: If he declares kusala as akusala and akusala as kusala and asks wise people about his explanation, they will say: "You misinterpret". At that time, he thought: "I don't even know much about this matter," - thus "Anger and hatred may arise in my mind." Here "Hate" ( doso ) is weak hatred ( kodho ), "Hate" ( paṭigho ) is strong hatred. THAT WILL BE CREATED BY ME. THIS MANUAL WILL MAKE ME UP LATE. A: "The pair of lust and greed will be self-inflicted; the pair of anger and hatred will cause us trouble." Or both pairs are defensive because they are gripping forms, and both cause distress. Because the mind clings to the object like a disc, not wanting to let go. And anger clings to the object like a poisonous snake, wanting to destroy the object. Both pairs cause sorrow, in the sense of causing grief. Hence they are called both "Capital" and "Depression". Ṭī: The pair of sex and greed, in particular, is to adhere to the Abhidharma. For in the Abhidhamma only craving ( taṇhā ) and wrong views are described as clinging. But in the Sutta Pitaka, anger is also sometimes called guarding. 64. THEY CAN INTERVIEW ME A: "They may ask my opinion: What is good? What is unwholesome? State what you mean." THEY CAN FORCE ME TO EXPLAIN A: "If we say, "This is my view," they might force us to explain: "Why do you advocate this view?" THEY CAN refute MY STATEMENT A: "If we say: 'Because of this argument', they will point out the errors in our arguments and will question us like this: "You don't understand this. Let's admit this. Please answer this." These four endless sophists are included among the speculators of the past, because they take their point of view as a consequence of some dharma existing in the past. Ṭī: Although the first three sophists are stupid in so far as they do not understand the nature of wholesome and unwholesome dhammas, they at least clearly understand that they do not understand these dhammas. But the fourth sophist does not even have that minimum intelligence, and is therefore said to be stupid and stupid (see also PC: 63). Question: But does he, on the basis of the fallacy, understand his ignorance about these things? A: Although he understands, unlike the previous three sophists, he has no fear or aversion to false statements, etc., when he declares things he does not understand. So he was utterly deceived. Or not understanding his ignorance about these things is manifested by the way he asks the question, "If you ask me, is there another world?" etc.. to fallback by answering: "But I don't say so," etc.. Thus the theorist himself is distinguished as "Dumb and stupid". Therefore, Sañjaya Belaṭṭhaputta is considered the stupidest of all these recluses and brahmins. Among the questions: "Is there another world?" asked from the point of view of permanentism, or from the point of view of right view; "Is there no other world?", from the point of view of nihilism ( natthikadassana ), or from the point of view of right view; "Is there both the other world and the absence of it?", from the point of view of annihilation ( ucchedadassana), or from the point of view of right view; since there is no other possible way when the previous three are rejected, "Is there neither nor is there no other world?" asked from the point of view of right view, when it means that the afterlife cannot be described in terms of being or not being, or from preferring fallacies. The remaining three sides should be understood according to the method stated. For just as the three factors of merit are included by mental formations through body, speech, and mind, so the meaning of the latter three is included by the former. These three terms have the same meaning by wrong grasping for a self and commenting on the fruitlessness of merit, etc. Since the endless sophist disagrees with the permanent view of a self (or of any other point of view), he practices the fallacy as follows: "I don't say so", etc. This expression falsifies by refuting each of the views he is asked about. Question: Is it possible that to the extent that he takes a stance on the fallacy side, a positive claim of the fallacy position has been made? A: No, because he is also completely deceived about that, and because the fallacy only happens by rebuttal. For example, when sañjaya belaṭṭhaputta was asked by King A Xhāgata about the immediate visible retribution of a recluse, he made excuses by denying the three views of the afterlife, etc. Question: All the endless sophists resort to the mere fallacy when asked about this and that, because they do not understand as they really are wholesome dhammas etc.. and the other three aspects of the other world, etc. How can they be described as theorists? As one would not say, he cannot be called exactly a theorist simply because he does not understand the problem one is asking. A: He is not called a theorist just because he uses the fallacy when asked about a problem, but because he has acquired a mistaken prejudice. Because this class actually acquires a wrong view of the doctrine of permanence, but because of his poor position he cannot understand the wholesome dharmas as they really are, etc., or the three aspects of the other world, etc.. So he is afraid to speak out. wrong and because he cannot advise people on a matter that he does not understand himself, he resorted to the fallacy. So the commentator then classifies him with the ordinary seers. Another possible explanation: The endless fallacy theory can be considered a separate point of view, like Jain theory (nigaṇṭha).) about seven spectrums. It arises when someone who does not understand, or does not believe in, merit, sin, and corresponding results will resort to fallacies in response to a question that has these problems as its category. Accepting and accepting such a fallacy is fine, he clings to it. Hence the commentator says: "This theorist's views and words know no bounds." But how is the sophist's point of view included under permanentism? Because he has not acquired the preconception of the doctrine of annihilation. THEORIES OF RANDOM GENERATION (ADHICCASAMUPPANNAVĀDA) 67. THEY STATE LANGUAGE AND THE WORLD GENERATE RANDOMLY A: "Random arising": arising without a cause. 68. There are gods who have sent them as Utopian beings. A: "Thoughtless beings": this is the title of the teaching. Because they are born without mind, their selves consist of rupa-dhamma alone. There are people who have ordained in a sect, doing preparatory practice on kasiṇawind and develop meditation practice. After leaving the meditation he found errors in his mind like this: "When there is a mind, one falls into the suffering of having one's arms amputated, etc., and falls into all kinds of calamities. How boring to have a mind! the state of mindlessness is peace." After seeing the fault in his mind, if he dies without abandoning jhāna, he is reborn among non-perceptive beings. When cultivating the mind to cease, the mind process stops here in the human realm and only the rupa aggregates arise in the non-perception realm. Just as the arrow, shot by the thrust of the bowstring, pierces space to a distance commensurate with the thrust of the bowstring, so this being, reborn (among non-perceptive beings) through the force of the bowstring. impulse of meditation and stay in that plane for a time commensurate with the power of meditation. When the power of meditation is exhausted, the rupa aggregates disappear in the realm of non-perception and mundane perception arises here (in the human realm). Since cessation from the realm of non-perception is realized through arising and perceiving here, the sutra says, "When perception arises, these gods leave that realm. The rest is clear." Ṭī: "Title of the teaching": thought to be mentioned as the main element in the teaching. So this religious doctrine makes itself thought of as a means ( dhura; literally means carrying), but he did not intend to imply that other formless dhammas exist there. Therefore, he said: "Because they are born without a mind." Because when the Blessed One taught the supramundane dharmas. He makes concentration or wisdom the means, and when he teaches mundane dhammas, he makes mind or perception the means. This is illustrated by the following quotes. About supramundane: "Once when one developed supramundane meditation", "Right concentration has the five factors", "After seeing with wisdom, one's outflows of learning were eradicated", etc. Regarding the mundane: There was a time when a wholesome mind belonging to the sensual world was born", "Mind takes the lead in dharmas", "There are sentient beings who differ in body and who differ in perception", and "The base of neither perception nor non-perception". "One sect": in belief systems outside of Buddhism. As these pagans imagine liberation (achieved through) the remembrance of past lives, or seeing danger in perception and the benefits in the cessation of perception, develop jhāna attainment of non-perception and rebirth. into a disadvantageous realm (akkhaṇabhūmi) [*] [*] The realm of disadvantage: From the Buddhist point of view, the realm of non-perception is seen as a disadvantageous realm because it is not in itself a real liberation from samsara's suffering, nor is it a suitable realm for spiritual practice. the collection of noble virtues that can produce true liberation. Especially at the stage when the Buddha appeared in the world, the realm of non-perception was disadvantageous, because the beings of this realm did not have the opportunity to meet him or hear his dharma. He does the preparatory practice of wind kasia : having attained the first three jhānas on the precept kasia , having mastered the third jhāna, he emerges from the third jhāna and practices preparation for the attainment of the fourth jhāna. Q: why is the preparation (parikamama) on wind kasiṇa mentioned alone? A: Just as the special immaterial attainment meditation called the "Training of Formless Extinction" (rūpavirāgabhāvanā) is realized by the removal of rupa in the particular kasiṇa that serves as the paibhāganimitta of rupa, so too is the realization of solid matter. The so-called "cultivation of immaterial cessation" (arūpavirāgabhāvanā) is realized by the removal of immaterial elements in the special kasiṇa (i.e. kasiṇa ).wind) which, because it lacks distinct form, serves as the sign of formlessness. Here, the determination of material attainment is established by seeing the danger in the arising of formlessness through contemplation: "Perception is a disease, perception is a boil," etc. or "Shame on the mind, the mind is despicable", etc. And by holding the conviction that a state of peace and nobility is found in the absence of formlessness. "Destruction of form practice" consists in the formless meditations along with their approach; especially the first formless meditation. Q: If so, is the limited spatial kasiṇa also mentioned? Because this is also a formless general. A: This is actually accepted by some people. But because it wasn't told by the mages before, it's not discussed here. There is nothing wrong, however, if it is said that the cessation of formlessness can be accomplished in accordance with the fact that formless dhammas can be destroyed, and it becomes evident in whatever particular category one uses. as the generals of those dharmas. But because this is the practice that the pagans themselves must perform in order to attain this attainment and because they practice the fourth jhāna on wind kasiṇa which is closely related to the object (of the immaterial attainment), the magicians have insight before mentioned only preparation on kasiṇa wind as the practice for the cessation of formless practice. Again, it is quite common that meditation on the first three elemental kasiṇas (earth, water, and fire), like meditation on the color kasiṇa , serves as its conceptual object—the sign of a color; so Visuddhimagga describes the earth kasiṇa with similes of the mirror and the moon. But the kasiṇa of the wind element approaches jhāna as the sign of that element. Thus it is correct to call it the formless light and to mention the preparation on the wind Kasiṇa only. Q: If, as the commentary says, only the rupa aggregate becomes evident in the realm of non-perception - how can rupa dhamma arise there without relying on immaterial factors? (i.e. does the aggregate of form have to arise based on immaterial factors, since it is never seen to arise independently here, in the realm of the five aggregates?) A: (This is not objectionable, and it cannot be applied to other cases). (Since one could also ask the opposite), how do the immaterial elements in the immaterial realm arise without relying on rupa? This situation belongs to the same category. Why? Because say never seen here. Accordingly, there is no rupa that arises in the rupa world without the real thing. Why? Because it was never seen here. Again, with respect to the cause and effect of continuum citta there is no cessation of craving for form, because it arises together with rupa, which arises based on rupa. As for the cause and effect of the continuum citta, which ceases to be craving for form, because of its indifference to rupa, this citta arises without form. In the same way, for the arising of the rupa continuum there is cessation of formless craving, which arises without formless dhamma. [*]. [*] The cessation of craving for form and formlessness mentioned here is the temporary control of craving through these concentration forces and has not completely eradicated it, but can only arise through supramundane path wisdom. Sā: In the realm of the five aggregates, due to the absence of meditative power, rupa and immaterial dharmas arise together; in the realm of the four aggregates, by virtue of meditation, formlessness arises alone; and in the realm of non-perception, also by the power of meditation, rupa arises alone. Ṭī: Question: How can one believe that the mere continuum of rupa dhammas continues there (in the realm of non-perception) for such a long time without contemporaneous conditions to raise it. help it? And how long does it last? Answer: In anticipation of such a question, the commentary says: "It is like an arrow is shot by the thrust of the bowstring" etc... By this verse he expresses not only the Suttas, but also the fractions. this point, explain that point. The non-perceptive beings stay in that realm for a maximum of five hundred aeons. "The thrust of meditation" is the karmic force accumulated in the attainment of non-perception meditation. Q: How, after a period of many hundreds of aeons, can citta arise again from a mental process that ceased so long ago? In the past, no eye-consciousness had arisen when the eye had ceased. A: This point should not be considered one-way. For if mindlessness of the same kind has arisen in the distance, even citta that stopped a long time ago can manifest as an uninterrupted condition for samsara-consciousness. It is not a seed; karma alone is the seed, when sentient beings share their lives from the realm of non-perception, a fettered birth consciousness with its conditions such as scene conditions etc... arises in the sense world. So the commentary says: "A worldly perception arises here." When a seedling is separated from the tree, according to the law of weather ( utuniyāmena ), flowers at a fixed time, due to the force of differentiation, unnecessary flowering occurs at the same time as the mother plant has manifested. . Likewise, when due to the practice of cessation of form, or to the practice of cessation of formlessness, a distinction is made in the dhammas and formless arising inseparability in the realm of the five aggregates, by reason of subtle force. on the attainment of the aggregates in the formless and in the non-perceptive realms occurring without their formless and formless appearances. Question: Is it possible to divide the house of random arising according to the way of the permanent seer, according to his existence in the realm of non-perception lasting for a hundred thousand lifetimes, ten perishing kalpas, etc... or in a period between the this time? Answer: That's right. But because existence in the realm of non-perception occurs without interruption, the incidental generator is only used as an individual part to give the method. Or, because the theory of random arising is included in the doctrine of permanence. One must admit that the theory of random arising is included in the doctrine of eternalism, since the defilement of sentient beings has dual view of permanence and annihilation, and the present case is not annihilation. Q: But is it not correct to include the theory of random arising in the doctrine of permanence? Because the theory of random arising proposes: "I didn't have before, but now I have. From the place of not having I exist in the world." In promoting this treatise, he misunderstands the manifestation of a being that did not exist before, while the doctrine of the opposite, misinterprets the ever-present existence of self and the world, proposing that: "They exist just like permanent objects." A: Not so, because the theory of random arising does not perceive any future endpoint. For even though this theory, when propounding its thesis that "There was none before me", etc., perversely misunderstands an primordial beginning with respect to self and the world, it still perceives no end. for them from the present to the future. And because it perceives no end to them either now or in the future it is a special permanentism. When the ordinary ants say, "They are still the same as permanent objects." Q: If so, isn't it correct to include this theory, as well as permanentism etc. in "speculations about the past", since they imply a wrong perception of the future? A: No, because they begin with concerns about the past. They arise through knowledge of life, which belongs to the past, and through speculation based on transmissions etc... are in accord with such knowledge. Furthermore, these views were preached by the Dharma King, after he had personally discerned with wisdom the things that fall within the realm of those views and completely eliminated them. Therefore whatever point of view the Blessed One has explained, along with the means employed by him, should be accepted with firm conviction along that line. Here, the examination is not appropriate, for this is the domain of Buddha Wisdom and inconceivable.END=NAM MO SHAKYAMUNI BUDDHA.( 3 TIMES ).WORLD VIETNAMESE BUDDHIST ORDER=BUDDIST DHARMA WHEEL GOLDEN MONASTERY=VIETNAMESE BUDDHIST NUN=THE WOMEN OF THE SAKYA CLAN CHAN TANH.AUSTRALIA,SYDNEY.10/2/2022.