Chapter 22

(Tape 45 / Ps: 1- 46)

Change-of-Lineage is actually next to the enlightenment, next to the Path consciousness. Change-of-lineage comes next. Its position is to advert to the Path, and so it belongs neither to Purification by Knowledge and Vision of the Way nor to Purification by Knowledge and Vision.” There are seven stages of purity in vipassanÈ and they are given in this chart. So Knowledge of Change-of-Lineage does not belong to any of these purifies; it is just in between the one purity and the other. “Its position is to advert to the Path, and so it belongs neither to Purification by Knowledge ad Vision of the Way (that is the previous one.) nor to Purification by Knowledge and Vision (the succeeding one), but being intermediate, it is unassignable.” We cannot say that it is included in the previous purity or the succeeding purity. So it is free from both purities. “Still it is reckoned as insight because it falls in line with insight.” That is because it falls in the flow of insight vipassanÈ, so it is called ‘vipassanÈ’. But strictly speaking, it is not vipassanÈ because it does not take formations as object; it takes NibbÈna as object.

“Purification of Knowledge and Vision (the last purification), properly consists in knowledge of the four Paths, that is to say, the Path of Stream Entry, the Path of Once-Return, the Path of Non-Return, and the Path of Arahantship.”

“[Change-of-Lineage Knowledge and Knowledge of the First Path]

Herein, nothing further needs to be done by one who wants to achieve, firstly, the knowledge of the First Path.” Now he is very, very close to the Path consciousness or enlightenment. So he doesn’t have to do anything more. “For what he needs to do has already been done by arousing the insight that ends in conformity knowledge. As soon as conformity knowledge has arisen in him in this way, and the thick murk that hides the truths has been dispelled by the respective force peculiar to each of the three kinds of conformity, then his consciousness no longer enters into, or settles down on, or resolves upon any field of formations at all.” So his consciousness does not want to be on the formations at all. That is because he has seen formations as impermanent, as painful, and as not self. So his mind “does not cling to anything, cleaves, or clutches on it, but retreats, retracts and recoils as water does from a lotus leaf, and every sign as object, every occurrence as object, appears as an impediment.” At that moment he doesn’t want to dwell on the formations, on mind and matter which he has been observing all through vipassanÈ meditation.

Paragraph 5 “Then while every sign and occurrence appears to him as an impediment, when conformity knowledge’s repetition has ended, change-of-lineage knowledge arises in him.” After the conformity knowledge, the consciousness which is called ‘conformity knowledge’ disappears. Then it is followed by the consciousness called ‘change-of-lineage’.

“Change-of-lineage knowledge arises in him, which takes as its object the signless, no-occurrence, no-formation, cessation, NibbÈna, (So it takes NibbÈna as object.) - which knowledge passes out of the lineage, the category, the plane, of the ordinary man and enters the lineage, the category, the plane, of the Noble Ones.” Now there is the meaning of the PÈÄi word ‘gotrabhu’. In that word ‘gotra’ means lineage and ‘bhu’ has two meanings. One meaning is ‘to overpower or to go beyond’. The other meaning is ‘to reach into, or to go into, or to enter’. So the word ‘gotrabhu’ means going beyond the lineage of the ordinary persons (puthijjana) or reaching into the lineage of Noble Persons. So ‘change-of-lineage’ really means overpowering one lineage and then entering another lineage. So ‘passes out of the lineage’ means to overcome or to go beyond the lineage of ordinary persons and enter into the lineage of Noble Persons because, after this, Path will arise. As son as Path arises, he becomes a Noble Person; he is no longer an ordinary person. At this point he has not yet changed, but he is prepared to change into another person. That is why it is called ‘change-of-lineage’.

Student: Does he know this is happening?

Teacher: After the enlightenment there will come the process of reflection on the Path, Fruit and so on. At that time he knows. These moments are very brief you know. Gotrabhu is just one moment of consciousness. And then Path consciousness he has never experience this in his life before. So it is like an overwhelming experience although it lasts for only one brief thought moment. After this brief thought moment he is a changed person, changed mentally.

“Being the first adverting, the first concern, the first reaction, to NibbÈna as object, fulfills the state of a condition for the Path in six ways.” So it is condition for the Path in six ways - as proximity, contiguity, repetition, decisive support, absence, and disappearance conditions. You have to go back to PaÔÔhÈna in order to understand these conditions. PaÔÔhÈna conditions are described in the chapter on the Dependent Origination. So it serves as conditions for the Path consciousness.

“How is it that understanding of emergence and turning away from the external is change-of-lineage knowledge?” and so on. These are quotations. In this quotation there is footnote #1 ‘away from the external’. He misunderstood the Sub-Commentary. “It is the understanding of the turning away that is being effected, which turning away is emergence from the field of formations; it is termed external because the unformed element’s existence is external’.” That is not correct. Now here the formations are called ‘external’. ‘Turning away from the external’ means turning away from the formations. Actually formations are not necessarily external. If you are watching your own breath, or watching your own consciousness, or watching your own feelings, how could they be external? They are actually internal. But here they are called ‘external’ here. So “It is termed (‘It’ means the formations.) ‘external’ because it is external to the unformed element.” That means they are not the unformed element. ‘Unformed element’ means what? NibbÈna. So they are other than NibbÈna. So they are called ‘external’. In fact they are not external; they are internal. You are watching your own mind and matter. They are internal. But they are here called ‘external’ because they are out of NibbÈna. It is something like that. So the footnote should be: “It is termed external because it is external to the unformed element.” Stop there. Then there is a note. “The unformed element (= NibbÈna) is classed as ‘external’ under the ‘Internal triad of the Abhidhamma MÈtikÈ” is not necessary. Although it is not wrong, it is not necessary here.

In the first book of Abhidhamma NibbÈna is described as ‘external’. Although the yogis realize NibbÈna, it is external, not internal. That is described in the first book of Abhidhamma. So NibbÈna is external there, but here formations are called ‘external’ just because they are not NibbÈna; they are out of NibbÈna.

Paragraph 6 “Here is a simile that illustrates how conformity and change-of-lineage occur with different objects though occurring in a single cognitive series with a single adverting.” As a rule, one thought process must have only one object. If you look at the seeing thought process, there are 17 moments of consciousness in that thought process. All 17 moments of consciousness take the present visible object as object. There should be no difference of object in one given thought process for different consciousnesses in that one given thought process. But here it is different. Here some types of consciousness take formations as object and some others take NibbÈna as object. Although it is called one thought process, there is difference of object for some types of consciousness in this thought process. This thought process begins with mind-door adverting, and then there are three moments of impulsion. After that there is change-of-lineage. So three moments plus change-of-lineage, these four are javana (impulsion) moments. Now mind-door adverting and then the three moments immediately following take formations as object. But change-of-lineage takes NibbÈna as object. Then Path takes NibbÈna as object. And then Fruition takes NibbÈna as object. In this particular thought process there is difference of object. “Here is a simile that illustrated how conformity and change-of-lineage occur with different objects though occurring in a single cognitive series (That means one thought process.) with a single adverting.” Each thought process has one adverting at the beginning of it. Sometimes if the object is through the five senses, then there is five-sense-door adverting. If the object is through mid-door, then there is mind-door adverting. So each thought process has one adverting. So this is said here ‘with a single adverting’. With a single adverting, then ordinarily the object must be the same. But in this particular thought process of enlightenment, there is difference of object. Some moments take formations as object and some others take NibbÈna as object.

In this paragraph the author explains this: “Suppose a man wanted to leap across a broad stream and establish himself on the opposite bank, he would run fast, and seizing a rope fastened to the branch of a tree on the stream’s near bank and hanging down, or a pole would leap with his body tending, inclining, and leaning towards the opposite bank, and when he had arrived above the opposite bank, he would let go, fall on to the opposite bank, staggering first and then steady himself there; so too this meditator, who wants to establish himself on NibbÈna, the bank opposite to the kinds of becoming, generation, destiny, station, and abode, runs fast by means of the contemplation of rise and fall, etc., (That is he is running fast at that time.) and seizing with conformity’s adverting to impermanence, pain, or not self the rope of materiality fastened to the branch of his selfhood and hanging down, or one among the poles beginning with feeling, he leaps with the first conformity consciousness (So the first conformity consciousness is like leaping.) without letting go and with the second he tends, inclines, and leans towards NibbÈna, like the body that was tending, inclining, and leaning towards the opposite bank; then, being with the third next to NibbÈna, which is now attainable, like the other’s arriving above the opposite bank (Now he is on the opposite bank.), he lets go that formation as object (He no longer takes formations as object.) with the ceasing of that consciousness, and the change-of-lineage consciousness he falls on to the unformed NibbÈna, the bank opposite; but staggering, as the man did, for lack of previous repetition, he is not yet properly steady on the single object. After that he is steadied by path Knowledge.”

He crosses over to the other bank and on the other bank he lets go of the rope or lets go of the formations. Then he falls on the bank which is NibbÈna. The first fall he was not yet steady and next moment when the Path consciousness arises, he was steadily established on the other bank or on NibbÈna.

Paragraph 7 “Herein, conformity is able to dispel the murk of defilements that conceals the truths, but it is unable to make NibbÈna its object.” It is the difference between conformity and change-of-lineage. So conformity can dispel the defilements that conceal the truths, but it is unable to make NibbÈna its object. Change-of-lineage is only able to make NibbÈna its object, but it is unable to dispel the murk that conceals the truths. That is because they have different functions. Then the smile follows. We will skip the simile.

In paragraph 12 there is another simile. “here is a simile for this. An archer, it seems, had a target set up at a distance of eight usabhas (about 100 yards), and wrapping his face in a cloth and arming himself with an arrow, he stood on a wheel contrivance (a revolving platform). Another man turned the wheel contrivance, and when the target was opposite the archer, he gave him a sign with a stick. Without pausing after the sign the archer shot the arrow and hit the target.” Now in PÈÄi the word ‘one hundred’ was used so it is not one target, but 100 targets put 100 or 200 yards away. And the man is on a wheel contrivance or revolving platform. The other man turns the platform and the archer was blindfolded. When he is face to face with one target, then the man will give him a sign, maybe something like a bell. With that sign he shoots the arrow and the arrow hits the target. There is not one target, but 100 targets. So the PÈÄi word used here is ‘lakkha sataÑ’. It is not one but one hundred. The reason why he took it to be one may be the use of the singular number here. In PÈÄi the number one hundred is a singular number. So you say ‘a hundred man’ when you use PÈÄi. You use the singular number, not the plural number. You say a hundred men? I don’t know if there is an equivalent in English. The word used ‘lakkha sataÑ’ is singular in number. Although the grammatical number is singular, the meaning is plural. It is many, one hundred. In PÈÄi grammar such peculiarities abound and so you have to understand that too. An archer had a hundred targets set up at a distance of eight usabhas and so on.

Let’s go to the First Fruition. “Immediately next to that knowledge, however, there arise either two or three Fruition consciousnesses, which are its result. For it is owing to this very fact that supramundane profitable [consciousness] results immediately that it is said: ‘And which he called the concentration with immediate result’, and ‘Sluggishly he reaches what has immediate result for the destruction of the cankers’ and so on.” Now the Path consciousness is immediately followed by how many Fruition consciousnesses? Two or three. Path consciousness is the cause and Fruition consciousness is the result. So here the result follows the cause immediately. There is no interval between cause and effect in this particular case. In the description of dhamma there is a word called ‘akÈliko’. And that word ‘akÈliko’ is misunderstood by many persons. ‘A’ means ‘not, ‘kala’ means ‘time’ and ‘ika’ means ‘having, so having no time. So that is translated as timeless. But the real meaning or the real interpretation of the word is not that it is timeless, but that it gives immediate results. That is the correct meaning. That means there is no interval of time between cause and its result. Because of that it is said in the Ratana Sutta ‘that which is called the concentration with immediate result’ or something like that.

Paragraph 16 “Some, however, say there are one, two, three, four, or five Fruition consciousnesses.” So there is difference of opinion among TheravÈda Buddhists also. The common opinion is that there are two moments or three moments of Fruition consciousness. But there are some who say that there are only one Fruition consciousness, or two, or three, or four, or five Fruition consciousnesses. “That is inadmissible. For change-of-lineage knowledge arises at the end of conformity’s repetition, so at the minimum there must be two conformity consciousnesses (In order for it to be repetition there must be at least two. Right? Not one. If it is only one, we cannot call it repetition. So repetition means at least two. There must be two moments of conformity.) since one alone does not act a repetition condition. And a single series of impulsions has a maximum of seven (impulsion) consciousnesses.” When javana arises, it arises seven times. Right? Mostly seven times. But at the moment of death it arises only five times or when someone has fainted only five times.

“Consequently, that series which has tow conformities and change-of-lineage as third and Path consciousness as fourth has three Fruition consciousnesses.” So three conformity moments plus one change-of-lineage, we get four. Path consciousness is five, so how many remain? Two. In that case there must be two Fruition consciousnesses. Sometimes there are only two conformity consciousnesses instead of three. For those who have quick intelligence there are only two conformity moments. When there are two conformity moments, the third is change-of-lineage, the fourth is Magga, and so there must be three Fruition consciousnesses. So there are either two or three Fruition consciousnesses immediately following the Path consciousness. There cannot be four Fruition consciousnesses, or five Fruition consciousnesses, or one Fruition consciousness.

In paragraph 17 we have another difference of opinion. “Some say that that which has four conformities and change-of-lineage as fifth, and Path consciousness as sixth has one Fruition consciousness. But that is refuted because it is the fourth or the fifth [impulsion] that reaches [the Path], not those after that, owing to their nearness to the life-continuum.” When you are going towards a steep cliff, when you are close to this cliff, you cannot stop there because you are going with force. You simply fall into the precipice. In the same way, the thought moments are going very fast, so they cannot stop at Magga in the sixth moment. That is why it is refuted that there is one Fruition consciousness only. So it is inadmissible when you say that there is only one Fruition consciousness because there cannot be one Fruition consciousness. That is because the thought process comes too close to bhava~ga. When it comes too close to bhava~ga, it cannot stand as Magga consciousness at the sixth moment. And if the Path is known at the sixth moment, there can be no Fruition consciousness at the seventh moment. That cannot be accepted as correct.

Paragraph 18 “And at this point this Stream Enterer is called the Second Noble Person.” So he is called the Second Noble Person. Now at the moment of the Path consciousness he is called the First Noble Person. At the next moment he is called the Second Noble Person, just in one sitting, in a very, very brief succession of thought moments. At the Path moment he is the First Noble Person and at the Fruition moment he is the Second Noble Person. That is why there are eight Noble Persons. I believe that we can only meet four Noble Persons, those who have reached the Fruition stage. “However negligent he may be, he is bound to make an end of suffering when he has traveled and traversed the round of rebirths among deities and human beings for the seventh time.” This is because he has become a SotÈpanna (a Stream Enterer or Stream Winner). However negligent he may be - that means if he does not practice more meditation; it does not mean that he may be breaking the five precepts. If he gives up meditation and he does not meditate to reach the higher stages, then he is bound to make an end of suffering when he has traveled and traversed the round of rebirths among deities and human beings for the seventh time. So he will be reborn only seven times, and at the seventh life he will surely become an Arahant and then he makes an end of suffering. So a SotÈpanna has seven more rebirths.

Paragraph 19 “At the end of the Fruition his consciousness enters the life-continuum.” So after Fruition period there is life-continuum. That means at the end of that thought process. “After that, it arises as mind-door adverting interrupting the life-continuum for the purpose of reviewing the Path.” Now immediately after becoming a Noble Person, he reviews the Path, the Fruition, NibbÈna, defilements abandoned and defilements remaining. These five things a person who has reached enlightenment reviews or reflects upon.

Student: So enlightenment here is different from NibbÈna?

Teacher: Yes. Enlightenment is the consciousness here and NibbÈna is the object of that enlightenment moment. At the moment of enlightenment the Path consciousness arises and the Path consciousness takes NibbÈna as object. So NibbÈna is an external object. It is taken as an object by the Path consciousness and also the Fruition consciousness. Immediately after the enlightenment, a person reflects upon or reviews the five things. What are the five? Path, Fruition, NibbÈna, defilements abandoned, and defilements remaining. What defilements I have abandoned and what defilements are remaining this also the meditator reflects upon. Then among these five “ Trainers may or may not have the reviewing of the defilements abandoned and those still remaining.” So the last two they may or may not review. Therefore, the first three, they definitely review, that is the Path, Fruition and NibbÈna. But defilements abandoned and defilements remaining they may or may not review. “In fact it was owing to the absence of such reviewing that MahÈnÈma asked the Blessed One ‘What stage is there still unabandoned by me internally owing to which at time states of greed invade my mind and remain’?” Now Venerable MahÈnÈma was an enlightened person, but sometimes he had thoughts of greed, thoughts of fear, thoughts of anger. He didn’t review the defilements when he became enlightened. So he did not know which defilements he had abandoned or which remained to be abandoned. So he asked the Buddha about this. The Buddha told him that because he did not review the defilements, therefore, he did not know. “All of which should be quoted” - it is from the Majjhima NikÈya.

[Knowledge of the Second Path - Third Noble Person]

Paragraph 22 “However, after reviewing in this way, either while sitting in the same session or on another occasion the Noble Disciple who is a Stream Enterer makes it his task to reach the second plane by attenuating both greed for sense desires and ill will” and so on. A person may proceed to get the second stage in that one sitting or he may stop practicing after he reaches the first stage. He may take a rest or he may not practice meditation for any length of time. That is up to him. In the same session or on another occasion he will continue his practice. Sometimes a person becomes a SotÈpanna and then he may remain a SotÈpanna for maybe months or years. And then he practices meditation and he reaches the second stage. Or some people reach the four stages, or three stages, or two stages at one sitting. So it depends upon his wish to reach the higher stages.

“He brings to bear the Faculties, the Powers, and the Enlightenment Factors, and he works over and turns up that same filed of formations, classed as materiality, feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness, with the knowledge that they are impermanent, painful, not self, and he embarks upon the progressive series of insight.” So after reaching the first stage, if he wants to reach the second stage, he must practice vipassanÈ meditation again. But at that time his vipassanÈ becomes swift, not like vipassanÈ of ordinary persons. Still he must practice vipassanÈ again to reach the second stage, and to reach the third stage, and to reach the fourth stage. Before every stage he must practice vipassanÈ. That is why we say that there can be no enlightenment without vipassanÈ. So vipassanÈ must precede all enlightenment or all arising of Path consciousness. So we have the Second Path and the Third Noble Person, the Second Fruition and the Fourth Noble Person and so on.

[The Second Fruition - Fourth Noble Person]

Paragraph 24 “The Fruition consciousness should be understood to follow immediately upon this knowledge in the same way as before. And at this point this Once-Returner is called the Fourth Noble Person (who has reached the second stage).” So it is the Fourth Noble Person. “He is bound to make an end of suffering after returning once to this world.” Now what is meant by ‘to this world’? To this human world. After reaching the second stage, he may be reborn as a celestial being, and from there he will be reborn as a human being again. So he is the one who returns here once, thus a Once-Returner. So ‘to this world’ means ‘to this human world’.

The Third Path is Non-Returner. Right? And then the Third Path is immediately followed by Third Fruition. So after Third Fruition he is called a Non-Returner. And so he is called the Sixth Noble Person.

Paragraph 27 “[After death,] he reappears apparitionally [elsewhere] and attains complete extinction there without ever returning, without ever coming to this world again through rebirth-linking.” There we find the words ‘to this world’. Here ‘to this world’ means ‘to this sensuous world’. That means to the world of human beings and to the world of lower celestial beings. There is a difference between the two. There ‘to this world’ means ‘to this human world’, but here ‘to this world’ means ‘to this human and lower celestial worlds’. That is because after reaching the third stage of enlightenment and after becoming a Non-Returner, he will be reborn in the brahmÈ world, not in the world of human beings nor in the worlds of the lower celestial beings. He will be reborn as a brahmÈ in what are called ‘the abodes of pure persons’, the five realms up in the scale of the 31 planes of existence. So he will be reborn in one of the pure abodes. So ‘to this world’ here means not only this human world but this kÈmÈvacara world.

Paragraph 28 “Now after reviewing in this way, either while sitting in the same session or on another occasion this Noble Disciple” and so on, he becomes an Arahant. So the Fourth Magga and the Fourth Fruition arise. After the Fruition he is called the Eighth Noble Person or an Arahant. We say that there are eight Noble Persons, eight kinds of Noble Persons. But in actual practice we can meet only four Noble Persons because the first, the third, the fifth and the seventh persons exist only for one thought moment. So how can we catch that one thought moment? So in practical terms there are four Noble Persons, but we say that there are eight Noble Persons. That is because they are different at the Path consciousness moment and at the Fruition consciousness moments.

Paragraph 32 ‘States associated with Path’ means states at the moment of Path consciousness or states accompanying the enlightenment. There are said to be 37 of these states. They are the four foundations of mindfulness, the four right endeavors, the four roads to power, the five faculties, the seven enlightenment factors, and the Noble Eightfold Path. If you add them all up together, you get 37. In reality there are not 37 states. There are how many? Do you Abhidhamma students remember? There are only 14 states actually. That is because, for example, mindfulness (sati) is one mental factor, but here it is described as four (the four foundations of mindfulness). And the second the four endeavors, is just viriya. The one viriya is described here as four. So in reality there are only 14. I think it is described somewhere.

Paragraph 34 “Foundation (paÔÔhÈna) is because of establishment by going down into” and so on. This is a description of the PÈÄi words ‘paÔÔhÈna’, ‘upaÔÔhÈna’, ‘sati’, and so on. “Mindfulness itself as foundation is ‘Foundation of Mindfulness’.” So ‘Foundation of Mindfulness’ means firm establishment of mindfulness. “It is of four kinds because it occurs with respect to the body, feeling, consciousness, and dhamma objects, taking them as foul, painful, impermanent, and no self, and because it accomplishes the function of abandoning perception of beauty, pleasure, permanence, and self. That is why ‘Four Foundations of Mindfulness’ is said.” So one mindfulness is described here as four because it occurs with respect to body, feeling, consciousness and dhamma objects, taking them as foul, painful, impermanent, and not self, and at the same time abandoning the perception of beauty, pleasure, permanence, and self. So these are the four aspects. That is why there are four foundations of mindfulness.

Paragraph 35 The next one is the four endeavors. “By it they endeavor, thus it is endeavor” and so on. These are word explanations. So one viriya is described here as four because it has different functions. “It accomplishes the functions of abandoning arisen unprofitable things, preventing the arising of those not yet arisen, arousing unarisen profitable things, and maintaining those already arisen.” With regard to akusala there are two aspects and with regard to kusala there are two. There is endeavoring to get rid of akusala which are past, endeavoring not to have akusala or not to have fresh akusala arise, endeavoring to make kusala not yet arisen arise, endeavoring to develop kusala which has arisen. So there are four aspects. That is why there are four kinds of right endeavor or right effort.

Paragraph 36 is about the iddhipÈda. They are called in PÈÄi ‘iddhipÈda’, ‘the Roads to Power’ or ‘the Basis for Success’. I think they are mentioned somewhere else in chapter 12, paragraph 44. What are the four iddhipÈda? “It is fourfold as zeal (desire) and so on.” What are the other three? Zeal, effort, consciousness and inquiry (That means paÒÒÈ.) ‘Inquiry’ really means understanding correctly, not just inquiring, not just investigating. So these are the Roads to Power. “These are supramundane only. But because of the words ‘If a bhikkhu obtains concentration, obtains mental unification by making zeal predominant, this is called concentration through zeal’, etc., they are also mundane as states acquired by predominance of zeal, etc., respectively.” At the moment of enlightenment they are supramundane, but at the moment of practice of vipassanÈ meditation they are mundane.

Paragraph 37 “ ‘Faculty’ is in the sense of predominance, in other words, of overcoming, because [these states, as faculties,] respectively overcome faithlessness, idleness, negligence, distraction and confusion.” So there are five faculties. What are the five? Faith, effort, mindfulness, concentration and wisdom. Their opposites are faithlessness, idleness, negligence, distraction and confusion. “ ‘Power’ is in the sense of unwaveringness because these states, as power are incapable of being overcome respectively by faithlessness, and so on.” They are strong factors. they cannot be overcome by their opposites. That is why they are called powers’. “Both are fivefold as consisting in faith, [energy, mindfulness, concentration, and understanding.] That is why ‘Five Faculties’ and ‘Five Powers’ is said.”

Paragraph 38 “Mindfulness, [investigation-of-states, energy, happiness, tranquillity, concentration, and equanimity,] as factors in a being who is becoming enlightened, are the ‘Seven Enlightenment Factors’.” They are called ‘Seven Factors of Enlightenment’. And the seven are sati (mindfulness), investigation of states (That means paÒÒÈ actually.), viriya (effort), happiness (pÊti), tranquillity (passaddhi), concentration (samÈdhi), and equanimity (upekkhÈ). These are called ‘Seven Factors of Enlightenment’. And Right View, right Thinking, Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood, Right Effort, Right Mindfulness and Right Concentration are the eight factors of the Noble Eightfold Path.

Paragraph 39 “so there are these 37 states partaking of enlightenment. Now in the prior stage when mundane insight is occurring, they are found in a plurality of consciousness as follows.” When you are practicing vipassanÈ meditation, these factors or these states arrive in your mind, but with different kinds of consciousness. At one time you may be dwelling on body contemplation or mindfulness of the body. At another time the mind may be on the feelings and so on. So there is plurality of consciousness which goes along with them. But at the moment of Path consciousness it is said that they all arise. They are found in a plurality of consciousness as follows and so on. “At the time of arising [of any one] of these four kinds of [Path] knowledge, [all these states] are found in a single consciousness.” All these states arise together with that single Path consciousness. So that is the difference. When they are mundane, they arise with different kinds of consciousness, but when they are supramundane, they arise with one type of consciousness which is Path consciousness. “In the moment of Fruition the 33 excepting the Four Right Endeavors are found.” Actually the Four right Endeavors also accompany Fruition consciousness, but their function is prominent at the moment of Path consciousness. That is why they are excluded. In fact Path consciousness is also accompanied by viriya. Viriya is a mental factor which accompanies many types of consciousness. Fruition consciousness is also accompanied by viriya.

Paragraph 40 “When these are found in a single consciousness in this way, it is the one kind of mindfulness whose object is NibbÈna that is called ‘the Four Foundations of Mindfulness’” and so on. So when they arise with one consciousness at the moment of Path consciousness, then they do not take different objects at that time because Path consciousness takes NibbÈna as object. They also take NibbÈna as object. That is the difference. The we have nine in one way, one in two ways, then in four ways, in five ways and so on. It is making you more familiar with these states.

Nine in one way - that means nine states have only one function, one name. There are 37. So let’s call them 37 names. So nine have only one name. It is something like that. “These nine are zeal, consciousness, happiness, tranquillity, equanimity, thinking, speech, action, and livelihood, and they are found ‘in one way’ as road to power consisting in zeal, etc. since they do not belong to any other group.” So those have only one name. “(2) One in two ways: faith is found ‘in two ways, as a faculty and as a power. (3) Then in four ways and (4) in five ways: the meaning is that another one is found in four ways and another in five. Herein, concentration is the ‘one in four ways’ since it is a faculty, a power, an enlightenment factor, and a Path factor; understanding is the ‘one in five ways’ since it is these four and also a road to power.” These just make you more acquainted with these mental states. “(5) In eight ways, and (6) in nine ways, too: the meaning is that another is found in eight ways and another in nine ways. Mindfulness is the one ‘in eight ways’.” That means mindfulness has eight names among these 37. That is there is mindfulness as the four foundations of mindfulness, as a faculty, as a power, as an enlightenment factor and as a Path factor. “Energy is the ‘one in nine ways’ since it is four Right Endeavors, a road to power, a faculty, a power, an enlightenment factor, and a Path factor.” So endeavor has the most or the greatest causenumber of names or functions.

Paragraph 44 “[(2) Emergence:] mundane insight induces no emergence either from occurrence [of defilement internally], because it does not cut off originating, which is the act of causing occurrence, or from the sign [of formations externally], because it has the sign as object.” Now there is emergence from occurrence and emergence from sign. Some emerge from occurrence, some from sign, or some from both.

“Change-of-lineage does not induce emergence from occurrence [internally] because it does not cut off originating.” At the moment of change-of-lineage no mental defilement is eradicated, so it does not induce emergence from occurrence. It emerges from occurrence of mental defilement. “But it dçes induce emergence from the sign.” That is because it does not take formations as object. ‘Sign’ here means sign of formations. It takes NibbÈna as object. So it emerges from the sign, but not from the occurrence. “Hence it is said ‘Understanding of emergence and turning away from the external is knowledge of change-of-lineage” and so on. “These four kinds of [Path] knowledge emerge from the sign be cut off because they have the signless as their object and also from occurrence because they cut off origination. So they emerge from both.” Now Path consciousness emerges from both sign and occurrence. Since they do not take formations as object, then they emerge from sign. Since at the moment of Path consciousness mental defilements are eradicated, they emerge from the occurrence of mental defilements. So the Path emerges from both sign and occurrence.

Paragraph 45 I want to point to one thing on page 797, about 9 lines down. You see there “Right Thinking in the sense of directing emerges from wrong thinking.” Sometimes we describe the Noble Eightfold Path as being present during vipassanÈ meditation. We say when you practice vipassanÈ meditation, all these factors are working harmoniously in your mind. How? Let us say you try to concentrate on the breath. Now you need mental effort to keep your mind on the object. So there is Right Effort. And then when you make effort, your mind as it were hits the object or hits the target, something like that. So that is Right Mindfulness that hits the object. And then your mind sticks to the object for some time. That is Right Concentration. After Right Concentration you see the true nature of things. You see that they are impermanent, and you see their arising and disappearing. That is Right Understanding. So how many do you get? Four. And the three, Right Speech, Right Action and Right Livelihood, are already accomplished when you take precepts before the practice of meditation. So they are also said to be accomplished. Now we have seven. What about Right Thought? ‘Right Thought’ really means the mental factor which is called ‘vitakka’ or ‘initial application of mind’. So right Thought does not mean thinking of NibbÈna or thinking of formations. It is that mental factor which directs the mind to the object or that takes the mind to the object.

Student: So it could be intention?

Teacher: No. Not intention. It is something that takes the mind to the object. When you shoot an arrow, maybe the force of the bow, it is something like that. Without vitakka mind will not take an object. So we need vitakka (initial application) to take our mind to the object. so applying the mind to the object is effected by Right Thought or the initial application. So here we see that. ‘Right Thinking in the sense of directing’ means the mental factor pushing the mind to the object, taking the mind to the object. If initial application doesn’t take the mind to the object, then mind cannot see anything at all. That is why it is grouped with Right Understanding. So Right Understanding and Right Thought belong to the group of understanding. Right Effort, Right Mindfulness, and Right Concentration belong to the group of concentration. And the other three belong to the group of sÊla or moral purity. So ‘Right Thought’ really means that mental factor or that mental state which takes the mind to the object or which pushes the mind to the object. That is described here.

Paragraph 46 And then ‘Coupling of Powers’, I think we will have to do it next time. Oh, we may as well do it. “At the time of developing the eight mundane attainments the serenity power is in excess.” When we practice jhÈnas, the ‘eight mundane attainments’ mean the eight jhÈnas. When you develop eight jhÈnas, the serenity power is in excess. “While at the time of developing the contemplations of impermanence, etc., the insight power is in excess.” So when you practice vipassanÈ meditation, vipassanÈ meditation is in excess and when you practice samatha, samatha is in excess. “But at the Noble Path moment they occur coupled together in the sense that neither one exceeds the other.” At the moment of Path consciousness both are present, samatha and vipassanÈ. “So there is coupling of the powers in the case of each one of these four kinds of knowledge, according as it is said” and so on. So there is serenity power and insight power. During the mundane stage one or the other is in excess, but at the moment of Magga, they are equal, neither one exceeds the other. “So serenity and insight have a single nature in the sense of emergence, they are coupled together, and neither exceeds the other. Hence it was said: He develops serenity and insight coupled together in the sense of emergence. Emergence and coupling of the power should be understood here in this way.”

In paragraph 47 we have (4) the kinds of states that ought to be abandoned, (5) also the act of their abandoning. They are important. According to this explanation we know what kinds of mental defilements are eradicated by which stages - first stage, second stage, third stage and fourth stage. So after a person reaches to the first stage, he must have abandoned or eradicated certain kinds of mental defilements. Then after the second stage, he must have eradicated other kinds of mental defilements and so on. They are described in the following paragraphs. We will do them next week.

SÈdhu! SÈdhu! SÈdhu!

(Tape 46 / Ps: 47 – 103)

Paragraph 47 “ 4. The kinds of states that ought to be abandoned, 5. also the act of their abandoning” - so which kinds of states these four Paths abandon and the act of abandoning. “Now which states are to be abandoned by which kinds of knowledge among these four should be understood, and also the act of abandoning them.”

“For they each and severally bring about the abandoning of the states called fetters” and so on. ‘Each and severally’ is not a correct translation. The PÈÄi is yathayogaÑ. It means ‘as is proper’ or ‘as the case may be’. That means each of them abandon defilements and others differently. “For as is proper they bring about the abandoning of the states called fetters, defilements, wrongnesses, worldly states, kinds of avarice, perversions, ties, bad ways, cankers, floods, bonds, hindrances, adherences, clingings, inherent tendencies, stains, unprofitable courses of action, and unprofitable thought arisings.” The mental defilements are given different names. All of them are mental defilements.

The first one is fetters. “Herein, the fetters are the ten states beginning with greed for the fine material, so called because they fetter aggregates [in this life] to aggregates [of the next], (they fetter) kamma to its fruit or (they fetter) beings to suffering.” That is why they are called ‘fetters’. They are like ropes.

“For as long as the ones exist there is no cessation of the others.” As long as there are fetters, there is no cessation of aggregates, no cessation of kamma, no cessation of fruit, and no cessation of beings and suffering. They are called ‘fetters’.”

“And of these fetters, greed for the fine material, greed for the immaterial, conceit, agitation, and ignorance, are called the ‘five higher fetters’ because they fetter beings to aggregates, etc., produced in the higher [forms of becoming], while false view of individuality, uncertainty, adherence to rites and rituals, greed for sense desires, and resentment, are called the ‘five lower fetters’ because they fetter beings to aggregates, etc., produced in the lower states of existence. The other five fetter beings to the higher forms of existence. There are higher and lower fetters. All together there are ten. Which fetters are abandoned by which Path will be explained later. Right now the author is giving the lists of these states. The first is the ten fetters.

The second group is the ten defilements. “The defilements are the ten states, namely, greed, hate, delusion, conceit, [false] view, uncertainty, stiffness [of mind], agitation, consciencelessness, shamelessness.” These ten are called ‘defilements’. “They are so called because they are themselves defiled and because they defile the states associated with them.” They are themselves impurities and they make others also impure. So they are called ‘defilements’. In PÈÄi they are called ‘kilesas’.

“The wrongnesses are the eight states, namely, wrong view, wrong thinking, wrong speech, (They are the opposite of the Noble Eightfold Path.) wrong action, wrong livelihood, wrong effort, wrong mindfulness, wrong concentration which with wrong knowledge and wrong deliverance come to ten.” That means with wrong knowledge and wrong deliverance they are ten.

Footnote 14 “ ‘Wrong knowledge’, which is wrong because it does not occur rightly [i.e. in conformity with truth], and is wrong and mistaken owing to misinterpretations, etc., is just delusion. ‘Wrong deliverance’ is the wrong notion of liberation that assumes liberation to take place in a ‘World Apex’.” People think that when a being reaches the highest existence, there will be liberation. That is called ‘wrong liberation’. There are eight wrongnesses or there can be ten wrongnesses. When we take them to be ten, we add wrong knowledge and wrong deliverance.

The next one is the worldly states. They are the states which people meet or experience in their worldly life. There are said to be eight of these states, namely, gain, loss, fame, disgrace, pleasure, pain, blame, and praise. The PÈÄi words used for gain and loss are lÈbha and alÈbha. ‘AlÈbha’ means non-gain, not getting. For fame the word used is ‘yasa’ and for disgrace the word used is ‘ayasa’. The word ‘yasa’ can mean two things. One is fame and the other is followers. We interpret this here not as fame, but to have followers or to have students or pupils. For disgrace we say to be alone, not to be with followers or having few followers. We do not say ‘fame and disgrace’ because they are the same as the last two, praise and blame. So our interpretation is that instead of fame it is having friends, or followers, or having students. Instead of disgrace we say not having many followers. Pleasure, pain, blame, praise - these eight are to be met with in a life and nobody can escape them. “They are so called because they continually succeed each other as long as the world persists.” At times there is gain and at other times there is loss and so on. Sometimes you get what you want and sometimes you don’t get what you want or you lose what you have.

“But when the worldly states are included, then by the metaphorical use of the cause’s name [for its fruit], the approval that has the gain, etc., as its object and the resentment that has the loss, etc., as its object should also be understood as included.” Here the translation is a little different than the original. What is said in the original is that by the metaphorical use of the causes named for its fruit the approval and the resentment are to be understood as meant by worldly states. When we say ‘worldly states’, we mean gain, loss and so on, but here we do not mean gain, loss, etc., but approval or resentment or our reactions to these conditions. These are the eight conditions of life. When we have gain, then we have approval. That means we are attached to gain. When we have loss, we have aversion. That approval and resentment or that attachment and aversion are what are meant by these worldly states, not just the gain, loss, etc. The approval or the resentment is taken to be meant by worldly states by the metaphorical use of the causes named for its fruit. That means the name is really the cause’s name, but we must take the fruit of it.

There is gain. Because there is gain there is approval. That means there is attachment. Attachment is caused by gain. When we say ‘gain’, gain is the name of the cause. What we must really understand is the effect of that cause. It is like saying sugar is diabetes.

“The kinds of avarice are the five, namely, avarice about dwellings, families, gain, Dhamma, and praise, which occur as in ability to bear sharing with others any of these things beginning with dwellings.” The Pa4l0I word for the kinds of avarice is macchariya. Macchariya is one of the mental factors. ‘Macchariya’ really means inability to bear sharing with others. I have this thing and I don’t want to share it with other persons. If other persons come and make use of it, I am angry. That is what is meant by avarice here. It is not just stinginess. We have two mental factors issa and macchariya. Avarice here is not stinginess because stinginess is lobha. It is attachment. This mental factor is accompanied by dosa. It is intolerance of sharing things with others. There are five, namely, dwellings, families, gain, Dhamma and praise. Sometimes we don’t want people to come to our place and live with us. That is avarice with regard to dwelling. ‘Family’ has meaning for monks, not particularly for lay people. Monks always depend upon lay people for their living. So we may have attachment. Let us say that he is my supporter. So I do not want other monks to be acquainted with my supporter’s family. It is something like that. Gain is what one gets. Dhamma - that means you practice meditation and you may have some results and you don’t want those results to happen to other persons. If other persons get the same results, you are not happy. And then the last one is called ‘praise’. The PÈÄi word is ‘vaÓÓa’. That is interpreted to mean two things. One is appearance or you may say beauty, and the other is praise. Let us say you have a beautiful face. Then you don’t want other people to have a beautiful face. It is something like that. So ‘vaÓÓa’ can mean both beauty or appearance and praise.

“The perversions are the three, namely, perversion of perception, of consciousness, and of view, which occur apprehending objects that are impermanent, painful, not self, and foul, as permanent, pleasant, self, and beautiful.” If we take things as permanent, as pleasant, as self, and as beautiful, it is one of these kind of perversions. There are three - perversion of perception, perversion of consciousness and perversion of view.

“The ties are the four beginning with covetousness, so called because they tie the mental body and the material body. They are described as ‘the bodily tie of covetousness’, ‘the bodily tie of ill will’, ‘the bodily tie of adherence to rites and rituals’, and ‘the bodily tie of insisting or misinterpreting that “this [only] is the truth”.’ This alone is true and others are false. It is something like that. That is called ‘tie’ here. There are four ties.

“Bad ways is a term for doing what ought not to be done and not doing what ought to be done, out of zeal (desire), hate, delusion, and fear.” The PÈÄi word is ‘agati’. It is actually bias. So we should say out of attachment or out of desire, not zeal. If I am attached to someone, then I may have a favorable bias towards him. I am not just towards other people. That is what is called here ‘bad ways’. Sometimes we hate somebody and so we do not act justly towards him. Sometimes we are afraid. If we do this, a person will do something back to me. So we are afraid of him. So we may practice favoritism towards him. Sometimes there is just delusion. Because I am ignorant I favor one over the other. These are called ‘bad ways’.

“Cankers (Èsavas): as far as change of lineage [in the case of states of consciousness] and as far as the acme of becoming [in the case of the kinds of becoming (Here ‘becoming’ means realms or existences.), that is to say, the fourth immaterial state,] there are exudations owing to the [formed nature of the] object.” The real meaning here is that these cankers exude or drip like pus or something dripping from a sore. The PÈÄi word is ‘Èsava’. ‘Œ’ means ‘as far as’ and ‘sava’ means ‘to drip’ or ‘exude’. Here ‘to drip’ should be understood as taking as an object. ‘Exude’ actually means these take something as objects and they exude as far as change of lineage, as far as the highest existence or highest realm. These cankers are what? Lobha, diÔÔhi (wrong view), moha (ignorance). These can take objects up to change of lineage as objects and they can take the highest realm as object. It is to be understood by way of taking object. ‘They exude’ means they take them as object.

There is a footnote. I don’t think he really understood what he was referring to here. ‘As far as’ - I don’t know whether it can be explained in English. The PÈÄi word ‘Œ’, here translated as ‘as far as’, can mean two things. Let us say one is as far as change of lineage. It may mean as far as change of lineage, but excluding change of lineage. It just reaches up to that dhamma. Sometimes it may mean ‘including’. There are two meanings for the PÈÄi word ‘Œ’ or ‘as far as’. That means for example the fields extend as far as the mountain. They stop when there is a mountain. The fields do not include the mountain. When we say the Buddha’s fame goes as far as the highest realm, that is including the highest realm. Here inclusion is meant. So ‘as far as change of lineage’ means up to change of lineage. ‘As far as the acme of becoming’ or ‘as far as the highest realm’ means including the highest realm. I think you say ‘through’ or something like that. Right? So ‘Monday through Friday’ means Monday and the rest including Friday.

“This is a term for greed for sense desires, greed for becoming, wrong view, and ignorance, because of the exuding [of these defilements] from unguarded sense doors like water from cracks in a pot in the sense of constant trickling, or because of their producing the suffering of the round of rebirths.”

The next one is the floods. It is the same thing. They are called ‘floods’ “in the sense of sweeping away into the ocean of becoming, and in the sense of being hard to cross.”

“The bonds are so called because they do not allow disengagement from an object and disengagement from suffering. Both ‘floods’ and ‘bonds’ are terms for the cankers already mentioned.” The same states are sometimes called ‘cankers’, sometimes ‘floods’, sometimes called ‘bonds’.

“The hindrances are the five, namely, lust, [ill will, stiffness and torpor, agitation and worry, and uncertainty,] in the sense of obstructing and hindering and concealing [reality] from consciousness.” These are the five hindrances that we often encounter during meditation.

“Adherence (misapprehension - parÈmÈsa) is a term for wrong view, because it occurs in the aspect of missing the individual essence of a given state (That means going beyond the individual essence of a given state.) and apprehending elsewise an unactual individual essence.” That means taking something wrongly.

The clingings are the upÈdÈnas. “The clingings are the four beginning with the sense desire clinging described in all their aspects in the description of Dependent Origination.”

“The inherent tendencies are the seven, namely, greed for sense desire, etc., in the sense of inveterateness, stated thus: the inherent tendency to greed for sense desires, the inherent tendency to resentment, conceit, [false] view, uncertainty, greed for becoming, and ignorance.” There are seven all together. “For it is owing to their inveteracy that they are called inherent tendencies since they inhere as cause for the arising of greed for sense desires, etc., again and again.” ‘Inherent tendencies’ really means seven of the defilements. However when they are called ‘inherent tendencies’, they are not the real defilements, but they are those that can arise when there are conditions for their arising. When they really arise we call them ‘defilements’ or ‘kilesas’.

I am liable to get attached to things. But right now I am teaching Dhamma and there is no attachment in my mind. I am free from attachment now. But if I see something which I like and I am attached to it, then attachment arises. There is a liability of attachment to arise in me. That is what is called ‘an inherent tendency’. When attachment really arises, it is defilement. Before reaching the stage of defilements, they are called ‘latent tendencies’ or ‘inherent tendencies’. It is like being under the surface. When it surfaces, it is called ‘defilement’. When it lies dormant underneath, it is called ‘anusaya (inherent tendencies)’. There are seven. We will talk more about them later.

“The stains are the three, namely, greed, hate, and delusion. They are so called because they are themselves dirty like oil, black, and mud, and because they dirty other things.”

“The unprofitable courses of action are the ten, namely, killing living things, taking what is not given, sexual misconduct; false speech, malicious speech, harsh speech, gossip; covetousness, ill will, and wrong view. They are so called since they are both unprofitable action [kamma] and courses that lead to unhappy destinies (unhappy rebirths).”

“The unprofitable thought arisings are the twelve consisting of the eight rooted in greed, the two rooted in hate, and the two rooted in delusion.” They are, the twelve unwholesome types of consciousness. The PÈÄi word ‘cittuppÈda’ is translated here as thought arisings. Actually they are types of consciousness. They are the twelve types of unwholesome consciousness.

“So these [four kinds of knowledge] each and severally (or as is proper) abandon these states beginning with the fetters. How?”

“The five states eliminated by the first knowledge in the case of the fetters, firstly, are: false views of personality, doubt, adherence to rites and rituals, and then greed for sense desires and resentment that are [strong enough] to lead to states of loss.” With regard to defilements or these unwholesome states they have two or three layers. There are some defilements that are strong enough to lead to rebirth in woeful states. There are some defilements that are not strong enough to lead to rebirth in woeful states, but still they are defilements..

The first Knowledge or the first Path eliminates false views of personality, doubt, adherence to rites and rituals, and then greed for sense desires and resentment that are strong enough to lead to states of loss. The first Path eradicates false view of personality, doubt, and adherence to rites and rituals all together, once and for all. Greed for sense desires and resentment it cannot eradicate all together, but it destroys the stronger forms of sense desire and resentment which lead to states of loss. That means which lead to the four woeful states. That means a being after becoming a SotÈpanna may still have lobha and dosa. A SotÈpanna only eradicates diÔÔhi (wrong view) and vicikicchÈ (doubt). There are other mental defilements remaining, but these mental defilements are not strong enough to give rebirth in the four woeful states.

“The remaining gross greed for sense desires and resentment are eliminated by the second Knowledge. Subtle greed for sense desires and resentment are eliminated by the third Knowledge. The five beginning with greed for the fine material are only [actually] eliminated by the fourth Knowledge.” We have to understand the eradication of defilements in this manner. The first Path eliminates the ability of some mental defilements to lead us to the four woeful states.

Then there is a note. “In what follows, we shall not in every instance specify the fact with the expression ‘only’, nevertheless whatever we shall say is eliminated by one of the [three] higher Knowledges should be understood as only the [residual] state eliminated by the higher Knowledge; for that state will have already been rendered not conducive to states of loss by the preceding Knowledge.” Do you understand this?

Student: No.

Teacher: “In what follows, we shall not in every instance specify the fact with the expression ‘only’.” You see the word ‘only’ in the paragraph above. “The five beginning with greed for the fine material are ONLY eliminated by the fourth Knowledge.” If the author says ‘only’, we have to understand in one way. If the author does not use the word ‘only’, we have to understand in another way. That is what is meant. The translation is not so understandable.

Let us look at the next one. “In the case of the defilements, [false] view and uncertainty are eliminated by the first Knowledge.” They are eliminated totally. “Hate is eliminated by the third Knowledge (totallÿ). Greed, delusion, conceit, mental stiffness, agitation, consciencelessness, and shamelessness, are eliminated by the fourth Knowledge.” Here it doesn’t say ‘fourth knowledge only’. Right? There is no ‘only’ here. We have to understand that greed, delusion, conceit and others are eliminated by the preceding Paths. The elimination of the preceding Paths is of the stronger forms of greed, delusion and so on. What the fourth Knowledge eliminates is the subtle forms of greed, delusion and so on. The grosser forms of greed, delusion and so on are eradicated by the first Path, by the second Path and by the third Path. There is no ‘only’ here. They are eliminated by the fourth Knowledge and it does not say that they are only eliminated by the fourth Knowledge. We have to understand in this way.

“In the case of wrongness, wrong view, false speech, wrong action, wrong livelihood are eliminated by the first Knowledge. Wrong thinking, malicious speech, and harsh speech are eliminated by the third Knowledge.” The third Knowledge is the AnÈgÈmÊ (the Non-Returner). Right? The AnÈgÈmÊ can eradicate anger all together and the grosser forms of attachment. “Wrong thinking, malicious speech, and harsh speech, are eliminated by the third Knowledge. And here only volition is to be understood as speech.” Although the word ‘speech’ is used, we must understand it to mean volition. “Gossip, wrong effort, wrong mindfulness, wrong concentration, wrong deliverance, and wrong knowledge, are eliminated by the fourth Knowledge.” Here also since there is no ‘only’, we must understand that the stronger ones are destroyed by the previous Knowledges or previous Paths.

“In the case of the worldly states, resentment is eliminated by the third Knowledge, and approval is eliminated by the fourth Knowledge. Some say that approval of fame and praise is eliminated by the fourth Knowledge.” He didn’t say whether it is to be accepted or not. Maybe the author doesn’t like it. Maybe he just gives it as information.

“The kinds of avarice are eliminated by the first Knowledge only.” The five kinds of avarice are eliminated by the first Knowledge.

“In the case of perversions, the perversion of perception, consciousness and view, which find permanence in the impermanent and self in the not-self, and the perversion of view finding pleasure in pain and beauty in the foul, are eliminated by the first Knowledge. The perversions of perception and consciousness finding beauty in the foul are eliminated by the third Path. The perversions of perception and consciousness finding pleasure in the painful are eliminated by the fourth Knowledge.”

“In the case of ties, the bodily ties of adherence to rites and rituals and of the insistence (misinterpretation) that ‘This is the truth’, are eliminated by the first Knowledge (because they are all wrong views). The bodily tie of ill will is eliminated by the third Knowledge. The remaining one is eliminated by the fourth Path.”

“The bad ways are eliminated by the first knowledge only.” When a person becomes a SotÈpanna, he will not practice favoritism.

“In the case of the cankers, the cankers of view is eliminated by the first Knowledge (because it is wrong view). The canker of sense desire is eliminated by the third Knowledge. The other two are eliminated by the fourth Knowledge.”

“The same thing applies in the case of the floods and the bonds.”

“In the case of the hindrances, the hindrances of uncertainty is eliminated by the first Knowledge (because it is doubt). The three, namely, lust, ill will and worry, are eliminated by the third Knowledge.” ‘Lust’ means desire for sensual things. “Stiffness and torpor and agitation are eliminated by the fourth Knowledge.”

“Adherence is eliminated by the first Knowledge.” ‘Adherence’ just means wrong view. Wrong view is eliminated by the first Knowledge.

“In the case of the clingings (upÈdÈna), since according to what is given in the Texts all worldly states are sense desires.” That means objects of sense desires. I would like to put “all worldly states are objects of sense desires”, not ‘sense desires as object’. “All worldly states are objects of sense desires, and so greed both for the fine material and the immaterial falls under sense desire clinging.” You remember the clingings. Right? Sense desire clinging, wrong view clinging, and the others are also wrong view. Although the word ‘sense desire’ is used here in PÈÄi kÈmupÈdÈna, we must understand that sense desire for both the material and the immaterial states are taken as sense desire here because they are lobha or attachment. So here ‘sense desire clinging’ just means attachment (lobha).

“In the case of the inherent tendencies, the inherent tendencies to [false] view and to uncertainty are eliminated by the first Knowledge. The inherent tendencies to greed for sense desire and to resentment are eliminated by the third Knowledge. The inherent tendencies to conceit (pride), to greed for becoming, and to ignorance are eliminated by the fourth Knowledge.”

“In the case of the stains, the stain of hate is eliminated by the third Knowledge, the others are eliminated by the fourth Knowledge.”

“In the case of the unprofitable courses of action, killing living things, taking what is not given, sexual misconduct, false speech, and wrong view, are eliminated by the first Knowledge. The three, namely, malicious speech, harsh speech, and ill will, are eliminated by the third Knowledge. Gossip and covetousness are eliminated by the fourth Knowledge.”

“In the case of the unprofitable thought arisings, the four associated with [false] view, and that associated with uncertainty, making five, are eliminated by the first Knowledge. The two associated with resentment are eliminated by the third Knowledge. The rest are eliminated by the fourth Knowledge.”

Do you find mention of the second Knowledge? No. Right? Why? Did you ever wonder? The second Knowledge does not eliminate any mental defilements all together. It makes the remaining mental defilements more subtle. That is why it is not mentioned here.

For your knowledge or information the first Knowledge or Path eliminates what? Wrong view and doubt. The second Knowledge eliminates what?

Student: It just weakens the defilements

Teacher: It does not eliminate mental defilements, but it weakens the mental defilements. The third Knowledge eliminates what? Attachment for sensual things, the kÈmÈvacara and aversion (dosa) or ill will. Then the fourth Knowledge eradicates the remaining mental defilements.

Now we come to an interesting discussion. “And what is eliminated by any one of them is abandoned by it. That is why it was said above ‘So these [four kinds of Knowledge] as is proper abandon these states beginning with the fetters’.”

“The act of abandoning: but how then? Do these {Knowledges] abandon these states when they are past, or when they are future, or when they are present?” It’s very interesting. We say that Path Knowledge eradicates mental defilements. The question here is do these Knowledges abandon these states (‘These states’ means the defilements.) when they are past, or when they are future, or when they are present. In PÈÄi the sequence is past, future and present. “What is the position here? For firstly if [they are said to abandon] when past or future, it follows that the effort is fruitless.” That is because the past is already past and you don’t have to do anything about it. It has already gone. And the future has not come. So you cannot do anything about it either. So there is no question about the Path Knowledges abandoning the past defilements or the future defilements. But what about the present ones? Does the Path eliminate the present mental defilements or the mental defilements that are existent at the moment? No. That is because if they are present, there can be no Path at all. Path and mental defilements do not arise together. Then the Path eradicates nothing.

“Then if it is when they are present, it is likewise fruitless because the things to be abandoned exist simultaneously with the effort, and it follows that there is development of a Path that has defilement, or it follows that defilements are dissociated [from consciousness] though there is no such thing as a present defilement dissociated from consciousness.” There are three things here. If you say that the defilements are abandoned when they are present it is fruitless because the things to be abandoned exist simultaneously with the effort. That means the things to be abandoned would arise simultaneously with the effort. The ‘effort’ here is Path consciousness. “It follows that there is development of Path (That means arising of Path.) that has defilement.” If you say that the present defilements are eliminated, then that amounts to saying the Path and defilements arise together. No defilements can arise with Path. Defilements are unwholesome mental states and Path is a wholesome mental state. Unwholesome mental states and wholesome mental states cannot arise at the same time. “It follows that defilements are dissociated.” Then you may say at the moment of Path there are no defilements. The Path eradicates the defilements. If you say this, then it amounts to saying that defilements can arise without consciousness. That is not so. Defilements are mental factors and as mental factors they can only arise when there is consciousness. They are never dissociated from consciousness. But if you say at the Path moment defilements are eliminated, then you are saying that they can be dissociated from consciousness. Path consciousness does not eradicate the past defilements, nor the future defilements, nor the present defilements. If there are defilements in the mind, there can be no Path at all. It eradicates nothing.

“That is not an original argument.” Here ‘original’ means this argument or this discussion is not peculiar to this book only. This discussion has appeared already in other books. “For in the Texts first the question is put.” He quotes the Texts. The Texts are the same as what we have said. Magga eradicates neither the past, nor the future, nor the present defilements.

Then what does it eradicate? What does it abandon? Go to paragraph 80. “What does that show? It shows abandoning of defilements that have soil [to grow in].” It is difficult here, the use of the PÈÄi word ‘bh|mi???’. “But are defilements that have soil [to grow in] past, future or present?” Are those defilements that have soil to grow in past, future, or present? The answer is: “They are simply those described as arisen by having soil [to grow in].” They are just that. We cannot say that they are present, or that they are future, or that they are past. They are just those that have arisen by having soil to grow in.

“Now there are various meanings of ‘arisen’, that is to say, (1) arisen as ‘actually occurring’”, and so on.

Student: Is this close to saying they are empty?

Teacher: No. We will explain later. Then the Commentator brings in four kinds of what are called ‘arisen’. The PÈÄi word is ‘uppanna’. On the handout I gave you the PÈÄi word also. There are four kinds of uppanna (that which has arisen). There are four things which are called ‘uppanna’ in PÈÄi. The word ‘uppanna’ means that which has arisen.

The first meaning is arisen as actually occurring. That means all that is reckoned to possess the three moments of arising, aging and dissolution. That means it is the real present things. Because when we say something is present, we mean that it possesses the three stages of arising, staying and disappearing, or arising, aging and dissolution. Thus it is the real present. This real present is sometimes called ‘uppanna (that which has arisen)’.

The next one is ‘arisen as being and gone’. That means they have arisen and now they are no more. They have arisen and gone. They are also called ‘arisen’. There are two of them. Wholesome and unwholesome dhammas (cittas and cetasikas) which have experienced the stimulus of an object (That means which have tasted the object.) and disappeared. They are also called ‘arisen as been and gone’. Here ‘been’ means ‘experienced’. The second is anything conditioned that has reached the three moments beginning with arising and has ceased. Something conditioned which has come into being and then disappeared is meant. That is also called ‘arisen’. It is having been and gone.

The third is arisen by opportunity made. Past kamma is called ‘arisen by opportunity made’. It is really past. Although it is past, it is called ‘arisen’. That means it is still with us or something like that. Because it has stood (That is the direct translation), it has existed inhibiting the result of other kamma and has made opportunity for its own result to arise in the future. When there is kamma and then it disappears, it leaves something like a potential in the continuity of beings to give results in the future. When it makes opportunity for its results to arise in the future, it inhibits the results of other kammas. The second is the future result. The future result is also called ‘uppanna’. Although it has not yet arisen, it is called ‘arisen’. That is because when opportunity to arise is made, it is sure to arise in the future. When kamma is accumulated, when kamma is done, then the fruit is sure to arise. The future result can be called ‘arisen’, although in fact it has not yet arisen.

The fourth one is arisen by having soil to grow in. We are concerned with this. Arisen by having soil to grow in - that means unwholesome kamma which has not been eradicated with respect to any given soil. What is ‘soil’ here? ‘Soil’ here means the five aggregates in the three planes of becoming, which are the object of vipassanÈ, and ‘what has soil’ means mental defilements which are capable of arising with respect to those aggregates. So what the Path eliminates is this kind of defilement ‘arisen by having soil to grow in’. Here ‘soil’ means the five aggregates in the three planes of becoming. They are the object of vipassanÈ meditation. ‘What has soil’ means the mental defilements which are capable of arising with respect to those aggregates.

Suppose I see an object, a desirable object. And I do not practice vipassanÈ toward that object. So I take it to be beautiful. Although at that moment I may have no attachment, since I have taken it to be beautiful, I can have attachment with regard to that thing in the future. That kind of attachment or mental defilement is what is called ‘which is the soil to grow in’.

With regard to objects we have to practice vipassanÈ meditation in order to see their true nature so that we see that they are impermanent and so on. When we have seen that, when we have practiced vipassanÈ towards them, then the defilements are not said to be inherent in these objects. But with regard to objects with which we fail to observe by vipassanÈ, there is always the possibility that the defilements will arise with regard to those things. Defilements which can arise through not having observed objects by vipassanÈ are called ‘having soil to grow in’. Actually what the Path eradicates is not the present mental defilements, not the past mental defilements, not the future mental defilements, but it is something like future. There is some liability in our continuity. When there are conditions, defilements can arise. That liability is what is eradicated by the Path consciousness. That liability is called here ‘those having soil to grow in’. That means in my continuity of consciousness they can arise. They have my continuity as a soil to grow in. Because I have taken that object to be beautiful, to be permanent, to be pleasant, to be substantial or self, since I have taken this thing to be permanent and so on, then at any time the defilement can arise. Those defilements which can occur through not being observed by vipassanÈ are what are called ‘those that have soil to grow in’. It has obtained or it has got my continuity to grow in, to arise in.

“And that is not meant objectively.” That means having the soil to grow in. ‘Having the soil’ means having the soil not as an object, but as a place to grow in, as a base. That is also important because if we say it is by way of taking an object that it has got the soil, then it can mean, say, there is an Arahant. He said to be beautiful. A man saw the Arahant and he had sexual desires for that Arahant. He wanted that Arahant to be his wife or something like that. And so even with regard to the body of an Arahant, mental defilements can arise in other persons by taking the body of an Arahant as an object. If we mean that ‘having the soil’ means having the soil as an object, then it will mean that an Arahant can eradicate the mental defilements of another person. Because that person has taken the Arahant as an object and then he has attachment arise in his mind. So ‘having the soil’ does not mean having soil taken as an object. ‘Having the soil’ means having got somewhere or some place to grow in or grow out of. “Like those that arose in the rich man Soreyya with respect to the aggregates in MahÈ-KaccÈna” - he had wrong desires for Venerable MahÈ-KaccÈna. “And in the brahman student Nanda with respect to UppalavaÓÓÈ” - Venerable UppalavaÓÓÈ was an Arahant, a nun. Nanda fell in love with her. One day when she came back from the sun, he raped the nun. So ‘having soil’ does not mean having soil taken as an object. It is by way of having a place or having a base. If we say the defilement which has the soil to grow in by way of taking object, then we mean the defilement in another person also. Nobody, even the Buddha, can eradicate defilement in another person. I can eradicate defilements in my mind but not the defilements in another person’s mind. So it is to be understood as ‘having soil’ means having soil not as an object, not as being taken as an object. It is having it as its location or something like that.

“And if that were what is called ‘arisen by having soil [to grow in]’ no one could abandon the root of becoming because it would be unabandonable.” That means because it belongs to another person. “But ‘arisen by having soil [to grow in]’ should be understood [subjectively] with respect to the basis [for them in oneself].” That means they should be understood as having the place to live or to exist. “For the defilements that are the root of the round are inherent in [one’s own] aggregates not fully understood by insight.” If we do not practice vipassanÈ towards things, then we do not fully understand these objects. ‘Fully understand’ means seeing their arising and disappearing, their characteristics, and also being able to get rid of mental defilements with regard to them. “For the defilements that are the root of the round are inherent in [one’s own] aggregates not fully understood by insight from the instant those aggregates arise. And that is what should be understood as ‘arisen by having soil [to grow in]’, in the sense of its being unabandoned.”

In brief what the Path abandons or eliminates is the mental defilements which would arise when there are conditions, which would arise because one has not seen them correctly, one has not fully understood them. That liability is what the Path consciousness eradicates and not the real mental defilements arising at the moment. That is because when there are mental defilements, there can be no Path consciousness and when there is Path consciousness, there can be no mental defilements. I think if you understand this, the other passages are not difficult.

Then the author gives another set of four kinds of uppanna. Paragraph 89 “Besides these there are four other ways of classing ‘arisen’, namely, (5) arisen as happening, (6) arisen with apprehension of an object, (7) arisen through non-suppression, (8) arisen through non-abolition.”

“Herein, ‘arisen as happening’ is the same as (1) ‘arisen as actually occurring’.” That means it is rightly in existence lasting for three moments.

“When an object has at some previous time come into focus in the eye, etc., and defilement did not arise then but arose in full force later on simply because the object had been apprehended (That means taken firmly as permanent and so on.), then that defilement is called ‘arisen with apprehension of an object’. Like the defilement that arose in the Elder MahÈ-Tissa after seeing the form of a person of the opposite sex while wandering for alms in the village of KalyÈne.” (It is KalyÈne, not KalyÈna.) Before there was no defilement in the Elder MahÈ-Tissa. Then he saw a person of the opposite sex and then the defilements arose in his mind.

“As long as a defilement is not suppressed by either serenity or insight, though it may not have actually entered the conscious continuity, it is nevertheless called ‘arisen through non-suppression’.” That means it has not really arisen, but it is called ‘arisen’ because it has not been suppressed.

“Because there is no cause to prevent its arising [if suitable conditions combine]. But even when they are suppressed by serenity or insight, they are still called ‘arisen through non-abolition because the necessity for their arising has not been transcended unless they have been cut off by the Path.” That is those that have not been cut off or abandoned by the Path consciousness. They are called ‘arisen through non-abolition’. Abolition and suppression are different here. ‘Suppression’ means keeping them at bay for some time. ‘Abolition’ means eradicating all together.

“Like the Elder who had obtained the eight attainments and the defilements that arose in him while he was going through the air on his hearing the sound of a woman singing with a sweet voice as she was gathering flowers in a grove of blossoming trees.” He had obtained the eight attainments. That means he had suppressed the mental defilements by the eight attainments. The defilements arose in him while as he was going through the air. He was going through the air and he heard a woman singing as she was plucking flowers. Defilements arose in him. Such defilements are called ‘those arisen through non-abolition’. Because they are not abolished, because they are not eradicated, they may arise when there are conditions. So there are these four kinds.

“And the three kinds, namely, (6) arisen with apprehension of an object, (7) arisen through non-suppression, and (8) arisen through non-abolition, should be understood as included by arisen by having soil [to grow in].” The fourth of the first list corresponds to three of the second list.

“So as regards the kinds of ‘arisen’ stated, the four kinds, namely, (1) as actually occurring, (2) as been and gone, (3) by opportunity made, and (5) as happening, cannot be abandoned by any [of these four kinds of] knowledge because they cannot be eliminated by the Paths. But the four kinds of ‘arisen’, namely, (4) by having soil [to grow in], (6) with apprehension of an object, (7) through non-suppression, and (8) through non-abolition, can all be abandoned because a given mundane or supramundane knowledge, when it arises, nullifies a given one of these modes of being arisen.” When we say that the Path abandons, then we mean the second four. ‘The second four’ here means one of the first and three of the second list - so ‘by having soil’, ‘with apprehension of an object through non-suppression and non-abolition’. So what the Path eradicates is the inherent tendencies or the latent tendencies, not the ones that have arisen in the consciousness. When they are in the consciousness, we cannot eradicate them simply because they are there. That is why in the Suttas, especially in the Commentaries, it is said ‘anupÈdÈ nirodha’.

That means non-arising in the future. It is called ‘cessation’, so cessation of mental defilements, the non-arising of them in the future. The mental defilements arise and disappear by themselves. We cannot do anything about them. They arise and disappear.

‘The cessation of mental defilements’ really means not letting them arise again. Non-arising in the future is what is called ‘the cessation of mental defilements’. Here also when there is Path, it has the power to render them inactive or to render them unable to arise.

Now we have the four functions in a single moment. It is said that the Path does the four functions simultaneously. What are the four? “Now at the time of penetrating to the Truths each one of the four [Path] Knowledges is said to exercise four functions in a single moment. These are full understanding (of the First Noble Truth), abandoning (the Second Noble Truth), realizing (the Third Noble Truth), and developing (the Fourth Noble Truth).” At one moment the Path consciousness or the Path Knowledge exercises these four functions, not one by one, but simultaneously these four functions are done.

Then the simile of a lamp is given here. In paragraph 95 “another method: as the sun, when it rises, performs four functions simultaneously” and so on is another simile. Then “Another method: as a boat performs four functions” is another simile. These similes are given to illustrate the four functions done by Path consciousness simultaneously.

Paragraph 97 “So when his Knowledge occurs with the four functions in a single moment at the time of penetrating the Four Truths, then the Four Truths have a single penetration in the sense of trueness (reality) in sixteen ways.” There are sixteen ways or sixteen meanings mentioned here, four for each Truth.

“How is there single penetration of the Four Truths in the sense of trueness? There is a single penetration of the Four Truths in the sense of trueness in sixteen aspects: suffering has the meaning of oppressing, meaning of being formed, meaning of burning (torment), meaning of change, as its meaning of trueness.” These are the four meanings of the First Noble Truth. Then the four meanings of the Second Noble Truth are: “meaning of accumulation, meaning of source, meaning of bondage, meaning of impediment.” The four meanings of the third are: “meaning of escape, meaning of seclusion, meaning of not being formed, meaning of deathless.” The meanings of the Fourth Noble Truth are “meaning of outlet, meaning of cause, meaning of seeing, meaning of dominance.” These are called ‘the sixteen ways of the Four Noble Truths’.

Paragraph 98 raises a question. “Here it may be asked: since there are other meanings of suffering, etc., too, such as a disease, a tumor, etc., why then are only four mentioned for each?” Now if you go back to chapter 20, paragraph 18, you will find that there are forty ways of looking at things as impermanent and so on. So the First Noble Truth has more than four meanings. It has other meanings like a disease, a tumor and so on. So why are they not taken and only these four are taken? “We answer that in this context it is because of what is evident through seeing the other [three Truths in each case].”

“Firstly in the passage beginning ‘Herein, what is knowledge of suffering? It is the understanding, the act of understanding..that arises contingent upon suffering as its object [individually]. But in the passage beginning ‘Bhikkhus, he who sees suffering sees also its origin’ it is presented as accomplishing its function with respect to the other three Truths simultaneously with its making one of them its object.” So sometimes it is described as seeing one each, one at a time, but in other passages the seeing is presented as occurring at the same time, seeing the four at the same time.

“As regards these [two contexts], when, firstly, knowledge makes each Truth its object singly, then (Here SayÈdaw purposefully omitted ‘when suffering is made the object’.) suffering has the characteristic of oppressing as its individual essence” and so on. In these paragraphs we should strike out those in square brackets. It is inserted by the translator and it is not warranted by the Sub-Commentary. Paragraphs 99-102 after ‘likewise’ those things in brackets should be removed. ‘[When suffering is made the object]’ should be removed. If suffering is made the object, then the only thing it will see is the first meaning of suffering and not the others. What the author is explaining here is that when you see the Second Noble Truth, the Noble Truth of origin, the sense of being formed of the First Noble Truth becomes evident. When you see the Second Truth, then seeing the First Truth becomes evident. When you see the Third Noble Truth, another meaning of the First Noble Truth becomes evident. Wen you see the Fourth Noble Truth, yet another meaning of the First Noble Truth becomes evident. That is why these four are mentioned here. So when you see the First Noble Truth, the meaning of oppression is evident. When you see the Second Noble Truth, the meaning of being formed of the First Noble Truth becomes evident. When you see the Third Noble Truth, the meaning of burning or torment of the First Noble Truth becomes evident. When you see the Fourth Noble Truth, the meaning of the First Noble Truth, that is change, becomes evident. That is why these four meanings are given. By seeing them individually and also by seeing the other Truths, the meanings of the given Truth becomes evident. These paragraphs explain this meaning. So we do not need ‘[when Suffering is made the object]’, ‘[when Origin is made the object]’, ‘[when Cessation is made the object]’, ‘[when Path is made the object]’.

Then in paragraph 99 an example is given. “As the Beauty’s (Sundari’s) ugliness did to the Venerable Nanda through seeing the celestial nymphs.” Sundari was said to be very beautiful, maybe like a beauty queen. She was very beautiful. And so Nanda was very much in love with her. But the Buddha wanted to teach him a lesson. So Buddha took him to the celestial world and showed him the celestial nymphs. After seeing the celestial nymphs, Nanda was asked “Who is more beautiful the celestial nymphs or Sundari?” Then Nanda said “Sundari is like a she-monkey we saw on our way here.” After the sight of the nymphs Sundari seemed to have become ugly. Sundari was a beautiful woman. Here also “the cooling Path removes the burning of the defilements and so Suffering’s sense of burning becomes evident through seeing the Path.” When you see a cool one, then the burning becomes evident.

OK. That should be the end of it.

SÈdhu! SÈdhu! SÈdhu!

(Tape 46 / Ps: 47 – 103)

Paragraph 47 “ 4. The kinds of states that ought to be abandoned, 5. also the act of their abandoning” - so which kinds of states these four Paths abandon and the act of abandoning. “Now which states are to be abandoned by which kinds of knowledge among these four should be understood, and also the act of abandoning them.”

“For they each and severally bring about the abandoning of the states called fetters” and so on. ‘Each and severally’ is not a correct translation. The PÈÄi is yathayogaÑ. It means ‘as is proper’ or ‘as the case may be’. That means each of them abandon defilements and others differently. “For as is proper they bring about the abandoning of the states called fetters, defilements, wrongnesses, worldly states, kinds of avarice, perversions, ties, bad ways, cankers, floods, bonds, hindrances, adherences, clingings, inherent tendencies, stains, unprofitable courses of action, and unprofitable thought arisings.” The mental defilements are given different names. All of them are mental defilements.

The first one is fetters. “Herein, the fetters are the ten states beginning with greed for the fine material, so called because they fetter aggregates [in this life] to aggregates [of the next], (they fetter) kamma to its fruit or (they fetter) beings to suffering.” That is why they are called ‘fetters’. They are like ropes.

“For as long as the ones exist there is no cessation of the others.” As long as there are fetters, there is no cessation of aggregates, no cessation of kamma, no cessation of fruit, and no cessation of beings and suffering. They are called ‘fetters’.”

“And of these fetters, greed for the fine material, greed for the immaterial, conceit, agitation, and ignorance, are called the ‘five higher fetters’ because they fetter beings to aggregates, etc., produced in the higher [forms of becoming], while false view of individuality, uncertainty, adherence to rites and rituals, greed for sense desires, and resentment, are called the ‘five lower fetters’ because they fetter beings to aggregates, etc., produced in the lower states of existence. The other five fetter beings to the higher forms of existence. There are higher and lower fetters. All together there are ten. Which fetters are abandoned by which Path will be explained later. Right now the author is giving the lists of these states. The first is the ten fetters.

The second group is the ten defilements. “The defilements are the ten states, namely, greed, hate, delusion, conceit, [false] view, uncertainty, stiffness [of mind], agitation, consciencelessness, shamelessness.” These ten are called ‘defilements’. “They are so called because they are themselves defiled and because they defile the states associated with them.” They are themselves impurities and they make others also impure. So they are called ‘defilements’. In PÈÄi they are called ‘kilesas’.

“The wrongnesses are the eight states, namely, wrong view, wrong thinking, wrong speech, (They are the opposite of the Noble Eightfold Path.) wrong action, wrong livelihood, wrong effort, wrong mindfulness, wrong concentration which with wrong knowledge and wrong deliverance come to ten.” That means with wrong knowledge and wrong deliverance they are ten.

Footnote 14 “ ‘Wrong knowledge’, which is wrong because it does not occur rightly [i.e. in conformity with truth], and is wrong and mistaken owing to misinterpretations, etc., is just delusion. ‘Wrong deliverance’ is the wrong notion of liberation that assumes liberation to take place in a ‘World Apex’.” People think that when a being reaches the highest existence, there will be liberation. That is called ‘wrong liberation’. There are eight wrongnesses or there can be ten wrongnesses. When we take them to be ten, we add wrong knowledge and wrong deliverance.

The next one is the worldly states. They are the states which people meet or experience in their worldly life. There are said to be eight of these states, namely, gain, loss, fame, disgrace, pleasure, pain, blame, and praise. The PÈÄi words used for gain and loss are lÈbha and alÈbha. ‘AlÈbha’ means non-gain, not getting. For fame the word used is ‘yasa’ and for disgrace the word used is ‘ayasa’. The word ‘yasa’ can mean two things. One is fame and the other is followers. We interpret this here not as fame, but to have followers or to have students or pupils. For disgrace we say to be alone, not to be with followers or having few followers. We do not say ‘fame and disgrace’ because they are the same as the last two, praise and blame. So our interpretation is that instead of fame it is having friends, or followers, or having students. Instead of disgrace we say not having many followers. Pleasure, pain, blame, praise - these eight are to be met with in a life and nobody can escape them. “They are so called because they continually succeed each other as long as the world persists.” At times there is gain and at other times there is loss and so on. Sometimes you get what you want and sometimes you don’t get what you want or you lose what you have.

“But when the worldly states are included, then by the metaphorical use of the cause’s name [for its fruit], the approval that has the gain, etc., as its object and the resentment that has the loss, etc., as its object should also be understood as included.” Here the translation is a little different than the original. What is said in the original is that by the metaphorical use of the causes named for its fruit the approval and the resentment are to be understood as meant by worldly states. When we say ‘worldly states’, we mean gain, loss and so on, but here we do not mean gain, loss, etc., but approval or resentment or our reactions to these conditions. These are the eight conditions of life. When we have gain, then we have approval. That means we are attached to gain. When we have loss, we have aversion. That approval and resentment or that attachment and aversion are what are meant by these worldly states, not just the gain, loss, etc. The approval or the resentment is taken to be meant by worldly states by the metaphorical use of the causes named for its fruit. That means the name is really the cause’s name, but we must take the fruit of it.

There is gain. Because there is gain there is approval. That means there is attachment. Attachment is caused by gain. When we say ‘gain’, gain is the name of the cause. What we must really understand is the effect of that cause. It is like saying sugar is diabetes.

“The kinds of avarice are the five, namely, avarice about dwellings, families, gain, Dhamma, and praise, which occur as in ability to bear sharing with others any of these things beginning with dwellings.” The Pa4l0I word for the kinds of avarice is macchariya. Macchariya is one of the mental factors. ‘Macchariya’ really means inability to bear sharing with others. I have this thing and I don’t want to share it with other persons. If other persons come and make use of it, I am angry. That is what is meant by avarice here. It is not just stinginess. We have two mental factors issa and macchariya. Avarice here is not stinginess because stinginess is lobha. It is attachment. This mental factor is accompanied by dosa. It is intolerance of sharing things with others. There are five, namely, dwellings, families, gain, Dhamma and praise. Sometimes we don’t want people to come to our place and live with us. That is avarice with regard to dwelling. ‘Family’ has meaning for monks, not particularly for lay people. Monks always depend upon lay people for their living. So we may have attachment. Let us say that he is my supporter. So I do not want other monks to be acquainted with my supporter’s family. It is something like that. Gain is what one gets. Dhamma - that means you practice meditation and you may have some results and you don’t want those results to happen to other persons. If other persons get the same results, you are not happy. And then the last one is called ‘praise’. The PÈÄi word is ‘vaÓÓa’. That is interpreted to mean two things. One is appearance or you may say beauty, and the other is praise. Let us say you have a beautiful face. Then you don’t want other people to have a beautiful face. It is something like that. So ‘vaÓÓa’ can mean both beauty or appearance and praise.

“The perversions are the three, namely, perversion of perception, of consciousness, and of view, which occur apprehending objects that are impermanent, painful, not self, and foul, as permanent, pleasant, self, and beautiful.” If we take things as permanent, as pleasant, as self, and as beautiful, it is one of these kind of perversions. There are three - perversion of perception, perversion of consciousness and perversion of view.

“The ties are the four beginning with covetousness, so called because they tie the mental body and the material body. They are described as ‘the bodily tie of covetousness’, ‘the bodily tie of ill will’, ‘the bodily tie of adherence to rites and rituals’, and ‘the bodily tie of insisting or misinterpreting that “this [only] is the truth”.’ This alone is true and others are false. It is something like that. That is called ‘tie’ here. There are four ties.

“Bad ways is a term for doing what ought not to be done and not doing what ought to be done, out of zeal (desire), hate, delusion, and fear.” The PÈÄi word is ‘agati’. It is actually bias. So we should say out of attachment or out of desire, not zeal. If I am attached to someone, then I may have a favorable bias towards him. I am not just towards other people. That is what is called here ‘bad ways’. Sometimes we hate somebody and so we do not act justly towards him. Sometimes we are afraid. If we do this, a person will do something back to me. So we are afraid of him. So we may practice favoritism towards him. Sometimes there is just delusion. Because I am ignorant I favor one over the other. These are called ‘bad ways’.

“Cankers (Èsavas): as far as change of lineage [in the case of states of consciousness] and as far as the acme of becoming [in the case of the kinds of becoming (Here ‘becoming’ means realms or existences.), that is to say, the fourth immaterial state,] there are exudations owing to the [formed nature of the] object.” The real meaning here is that these cankers exude or drip like pus or something dripping from a sore. The PÈÄi word is ‘Èsava’. ‘Œ’ means ‘as far as’ and ‘sava’ means ‘to drip’ or ‘exude’. Here ‘to drip’ should be understood as taking as an object. ‘Exude’ actually means these take something as objects and they exude as far as change of lineage, as far as the highest existence or highest realm. These cankers are what? Lobha, diÔÔhi (wrong view), moha (ignorance). These can take objects up to change of lineage as objects and they can take the highest realm as object. It is to be understood by way of taking object. ‘They exude’ means they take them as object.

There is a footnote. I don’t think he really understood what he was referring to here. ‘As far as’ - I don’t know whether it can be explained in English. The PÈÄi word ‘Œ’, here translated as ‘as far as’, can mean two things. Let us say one is as far as change of lineage. It may mean as far as change of lineage, but excluding change of lineage. It just reaches up to that dhamma. Sometimes it may mean ‘including’. There are two meanings for the PÈÄi word ‘Œ’ or ‘as far as’. That means for example the fields extend as far as the mountain. They stop when there is a mountain. The fields do not include the mountain. When we say the Buddha’s fame goes as far as the highest realm, that is including the highest realm. Here inclusion is meant. So ‘as far as change of lineage’ means up to change of lineage. ‘As far as the acme of becoming’ or ‘as far as the highest realm’ means including the highest realm. I think you say ‘through’ or something like that. Right? So ‘Monday through Friday’ means Monday and the rest including Friday.

“This is a term for greed for sense desires, greed for becoming, wrong view, and ignorance, because of the exuding [of these defilements] from unguarded sense doors like water from cracks in a pot in the sense of constant trickling, or because of their producing the suffering of the round of rebirths.”

The next one is the floods. It is the same thing. They are called ‘floods’ “in the sense of sweeping away into the ocean of becoming, and in the sense of being hard to cross.”

“The bonds are so called because they do not allow disengagement from an object and disengagement from suffering. Both ‘floods’ and ‘bonds’ are terms for the cankers already mentioned.” The same states are sometimes called ‘cankers’, sometimes ‘floods’, sometimes called ‘bonds’.

“The hindrances are the five, namely, lust, [ill will, stiffness and torpor, agitation and worry, and uncertainty,] in the sense of obstructing and hindering and concealing [reality] from consciousness.” These are the five hindrances that we often encounter during meditation.

“Adherence (misapprehension - parÈmÈsa) is a term for wrong view, because it occurs in the aspect of missing the individual essence of a given state (That means going beyond the individual essence of a given state.) and apprehending elsewise an unactual individual essence.” That means taking something wrongly.

The clingings are the upÈdÈnas. “The clingings are the four beginning with the sense desire clinging described in all their aspects in the description of Dependent Origination.”

“The inherent tendencies are the seven, namely, greed for sense desire, etc., in the sense of inveterateness, stated thus: the inherent tendency to greed for sense desires, the inherent tendency to resentment, conceit, [false] view, uncertainty, greed for becoming, and ignorance.” There are seven all together. “For it is owing to their inveteracy that they are called inherent tendencies since they inhere as cause for the arising of greed for sense desires, etc., again and again.” ‘Inherent tendencies’ really means seven of the defilements. However when they are called ‘inherent tendencies’, they are not the real defilements, but they are those that can arise when there are conditions for their arising. When they really arise we call them ‘defilements’ or ‘kilesas’.

I am liable to get attached to things. But right now I am teaching Dhamma and there is no attachment in my mind. I am free from attachment now. But if I see something which I like and I am attached to it, then attachment arises. There is a liability of attachment to arise in me. That is what is called ‘an inherent tendency’. When attachment really arises, it is defilement. Before reaching the stage of defilements, they are called ‘latent tendencies’ or ‘inherent tendencies’. It is like being under the surface. When it surfaces, it is called ‘defilement’. When it lies dormant underneath, it is called ‘anusaya (inherent tendencies)’. There are seven. We will talk more about them later.

“The stains are the three, namely, greed, hate, and delusion. They are so called because they are themselves dirty like oil, black, and mud, and because they dirty other things.”

“The unprofitable courses of action are the ten, namely, killing living things, taking what is not given, sexual misconduct; false speech, malicious speech, harsh speech, gossip; covetousness, ill will, and wrong view. They are so called since they are both unprofitable action [kamma] and courses that lead to unhappy destinies (unhappy rebirths).”

“The unprofitable thought arisings are the twelve consisting of the eight rooted in greed, the two rooted in hate, and the two rooted in delusion.” They are, the twelve unwholesome types of consciousness. The PÈÄi word ‘cittuppÈda’ is translated here as thought arisings. Actually they are types of consciousness. They are the twelve types of unwholesome consciousness.

“So these [four kinds of knowledge] each and severally (or as is proper) abandon these states beginning with the fetters. How?”

“The five states eliminated by the first knowledge in the case of the fetters, firstly, are: false views of personality, doubt, adherence to rites and rituals, and then greed for sense desires and resentment that are [strong enough] to lead to states of loss.” With regard to defilements or these unwholesome states they have two or three layers. There are some defilements that are strong enough to lead to rebirth in woeful states. There are some defilements that are not strong enough to lead to rebirth in woeful states, but still they are defilements..

The first Knowledge or the first Path eliminates false views of personality, doubt, adherence to rites and rituals, and then greed for sense desires and resentment that are strong enough to lead to states of loss. The first Path eradicates false view of personality, doubt, and adherence to rites and rituals all together, once and for all. Greed for sense desires and resentment it cannot eradicate all together, but it destroys the stronger forms of sense desire and resentment which lead to states of loss. That means which lead to the four woeful states. That means a being after becoming a SotÈpanna may still have lobha and dosa. A SotÈpanna only eradicates diÔÔhi (wrong view) and vicikicchÈ (doubt). There are other mental defilements remaining, but these mental defilements are not strong enough to give rebirth in the four woeful states.

“The remaining gross greed for sense desires and resentment are eliminated by the second Knowledge. Subtle greed for sense desires and resentment are eliminated by the third Knowledge. The five beginning with greed for the fine material are only [actually] eliminated by the fourth Knowledge.” We have to understand the eradication of defilements in this manner. The first Path eliminates the ability of some mental defilements to lead us to the four woeful states.

Then there is a note. “In what follows, we shall not in every instance specify the fact with the expression ‘only’, nevertheless whatever we shall say is eliminated by one of the [three] higher Knowledges should be understood as only the [residual] state eliminated by the higher Knowledge; for that state will have already been rendered not conducive to states of loss by the preceding Knowledge.” Do you understand this?

Student: No.

Teacher: “In what follows, we shall not in every instance specify the fact with the expression ‘only’.” You see the word ‘only’ in the paragraph above. “The five beginning with greed for the fine material are ONLY eliminated by the fourth Knowledge.” If the author says ‘only’, we have to understand in one way. If the author does not use the word ‘only’, we have to understand in another way. That is what is meant. The translation is not so understandable.

Let us look at the next one. “In the case of the defilements, [false] view and uncertainty are eliminated by the first Knowledge.” They are eliminated totally. “Hate is eliminated by the third Knowledge (totallÿ). Greed, delusion, conceit, mental stiffness, agitation, consciencelessness, and shamelessness, are eliminated by the fourth Knowledge.” Here it doesn’t say ‘fourth knowledge only’. Right? There is no ‘only’ here. We have to understand that greed, delusion, conceit and others are eliminated by the preceding Paths. The elimination of the preceding Paths is of the stronger forms of greed, delusion and so on. What the fourth Knowledge eliminates is the subtle forms of greed, delusion and so on. The grosser forms of greed, delusion and so on are eradicated by the first Path, by the second Path and by the third Path. There is no ‘only’ here. They are eliminated by the fourth Knowledge and it does not say that they are only eliminated by the fourth Knowledge. We have to understand in this way.

“In the case of wrongness, wrong view, false speech, wrong action, wrong livelihood are eliminated by the first Knowledge. Wrong thinking, malicious speech, and harsh speech are eliminated by the third Knowledge.” The third Knowledge is the AnÈgÈmÊ (the Non-Returner). Right? The AnÈgÈmÊ can eradicate anger all together and the grosser forms of attachment. “Wrong thinking, malicious speech, and harsh speech, are eliminated by the third Knowledge. And here only volition is to be understood as speech.” Although the word ‘speech’ is used, we must understand it to mean volition. “Gossip, wrong effort, wrong mindfulness, wrong concentration, wrong deliverance, and wrong knowledge, are eliminated by the fourth Knowledge.” Here also since there is no ‘only’, we must understand that the stronger ones are destroyed by the previous Knowledges or previous Paths.

“In the case of the worldly states, resentment is eliminated by the third Knowledge, and approval is eliminated by the fourth Knowledge. Some say that approval of fame and praise is eliminated by the fourth Knowledge.” He didn’t say whether it is to be accepted or not. Maybe the author doesn’t like it. Maybe he just gives it as information.

“The kinds of avarice are eliminated by the first Knowledge only.” The five kinds of avarice are eliminated by the first Knowledge.

“In the case of perversions, the perversion of perception, consciousness and view, which find permanence in the impermanent and self in the not-self, and the perversion of view finding pleasure in pain and beauty in the foul, are eliminated by the first Knowledge. The perversions of perception and consciousness finding beauty in the foul are eliminated by the third Path. The perversions of perception and consciousness finding pleasure in the painful are eliminated by the fourth Knowledge.”

“In the case of ties, the bodily ties of adherence to rites and rituals and of the insistence (misinterpretation) that ‘This is the truth’, are eliminated by the first Knowledge (because they are all wrong views). The bodily tie of ill will is eliminated by the third Knowledge. The remaining one is eliminated by the fourth Path.”

“The bad ways are eliminated by the first knowledge only.” When a person becomes a SotÈpanna, he will not practice favoritism.

“In the case of the cankers, the cankers of view is eliminated by the first Knowledge (because it is wrong view). The canker of sense desire is eliminated by the third Knowledge. The other two are eliminated by the fourth Knowledge.”

“The same thing applies in the case of the floods and the bonds.”

“In the case of the hindrances, the hindrances of uncertainty is eliminated by the first Knowledge (because it is doubt). The three, namely, lust, ill will and worry, are eliminated by the third Knowledge.” ‘Lust’ means desire for sensual things. “Stiffness and torpor and agitation are eliminated by the fourth Knowledge.”

“Adherence is eliminated by the first Knowledge.” ‘Adherence’ just means wrong view. Wrong view is eliminated by the first Knowledge.

“In the case of the clingings (upÈdÈna), since according to what is given in the Texts all worldly states are sense desires.” That means objects of sense desires. I would like to put “all worldly states are objects of sense desires”, not ‘sense desires as object’. “All worldly states are objects of sense desires, and so greed both for the fine material and the immaterial falls under sense desire clinging.” You remember the clingings. Right? Sense desire clinging, wrong view clinging, and the others are also wrong view. Although the word ‘sense desire’ is used here in PÈÄi kÈmupÈdÈna, we must understand that sense desire for both the material and the immaterial states are taken as sense desire here because they are lobha or attachment. So here ‘sense desire clinging’ just means attachment (lobha).

“In the case of the inherent tendencies, the inherent tendencies to [false] view and to uncertainty are eliminated by the first Knowledge. The inherent tendencies to greed for sense desire and to resentment are eliminated by the third Knowledge. The inherent tendencies to conceit (pride), to greed for becoming, and to ignorance are eliminated by the fourth Knowledge.”

“In the case of the stains, the stain of hate is eliminated by the third Knowledge, the others are eliminated by the fourth Knowledge.”

“In the case of the unprofitable courses of action, killing living things, taking what is not given, sexual misconduct, false speech, and wrong view, are eliminated by the first Knowledge. The three, namely, malicious speech, harsh speech, and ill will, are eliminated by the third Knowledge. Gossip and covetousness are eliminated by the fourth Knowledge.”

“In the case of the unprofitable thought arisings, the four associated with [false] view, and that associated with uncertainty, making five, are eliminated by the first Knowledge. The two associated with resentment are eliminated by the third Knowledge. The rest are eliminated by the fourth Knowledge.”

Do you find mention of the second Knowledge? No. Right? Why? Did you ever wonder? The second Knowledge does not eliminate any mental defilements all together. It makes the remaining mental defilements more subtle. That is why it is not mentioned here.

For your knowledge or information the first Knowledge or Path eliminates what? Wrong view and doubt. The second Knowledge eliminates what?

Student: It just weakens the defilements

Teacher: It does not eliminate mental defilements, but it weakens the mental defilements. The third Knowledge eliminates what? Attachment for sensual things, the kÈmÈvacara and aversion (dosa) or ill will. Then the fourth Knowledge eradicates the remaining mental defilements.

Now we come to an interesting discussion. “And what is eliminated by any one of them is abandoned by it. That is why it was said above ‘So these [four kinds of Knowledge] as is proper abandon these states beginning with the fetters’.”

“The act of abandoning: but how then? Do these {Knowledges] abandon these states when they are past, or when they are future, or when they are present?” It’s very interesting. We say that Path Knowledge eradicates mental defilements. The question here is do these Knowledges abandon these states (‘These states’ means the defilements.) when they are past, or when they are future, or when they are present. In PÈÄi the sequence is past, future and present. “What is the position here? For firstly if [they are said to abandon] when past or future, it follows that the effort is fruitless.” That is because the past is already past and you don’t have to do anything about it. It has already gone. And the future has not come. So you cannot do anything about it either. So there is no question about the Path Knowledges abandoning the past defilements or the future defilements. But what about the present ones? Does the Path eliminate the present mental defilements or the mental defilements that are existent at the moment? No. That is because if they are present, there can be no Path at all. Path and mental defilements do not arise together. Then the Path eradicates nothing.

“Then if it is when they are present, it is likewise fruitless because the things to be abandoned exist simultaneously with the effort, and it follows that there is development of a Path that has defilement, or it follows that defilements are dissociated [from consciousness] though there is no such thing as a present defilement dissociated from consciousness.” There are three things here. If you say that the defilements are abandoned when they are present it is fruitless because the things to be abandoned exist simultaneously with the effort. That means the things to be abandoned would arise simultaneously with the effort. The ‘effort’ here is Path consciousness. “It follows that there is development of Path (That means arising of Path.) that has defilement.” If you say that the present defilements are eliminated, then that amounts to saying the Path and defilements arise together. No defilements can arise with Path. Defilements are unwholesome mental states and Path is a wholesome mental state. Unwholesome mental states and wholesome mental states cannot arise at the same time. “It follows that defilements are dissociated.” Then you may say at the moment of Path there are no defilements. The Path eradicates the defilements. If you say this, then it amounts to saying that defilements can arise without consciousness. That is not so. Defilements are mental factors and as mental factors they can only arise when there is consciousness. They are never dissociated from consciousness. But if you say at the Path moment defilements are eliminated, then you are saying that they can be dissociated from consciousness. Path consciousness does not eradicate the past defilements, nor the future defilements, nor the present defilements. If there are defilements in the mind, there can be no Path at all. It eradicates nothing.

“That is not an original argument.” Here ‘original’ means this argument or this discussion is not peculiar to this book only. This discussion has appeared already in other books. “For in the Texts first the question is put.” He quotes the Texts. The Texts are the same as what we have said. Magga eradicates neither the past, nor the future, nor the present defilements.

Then what does it eradicate? What does it abandon? Go to paragraph 80. “What does that show? It shows abandoning of defilements that have soil [to grow in].” It is difficult here, the use of the PÈÄi word ‘bh|mi???’. “But are defilements that have soil [to grow in] past, future or present?” Are those defilements that have soil to grow in past, future, or present? The answer is: “They are simply those described as arisen by having soil [to grow in].” They are just that. We cannot say that they are present, or that they are future, or that they are past. They are just those that have arisen by having soil to grow in.

“Now there are various meanings of ‘arisen’, that is to say, (1) arisen as ‘actually occurring’”, and so on.

Student: Is this close to saying they are empty?

Teacher: No. We will explain later. Then the Commentator brings in four kinds of what are called ‘arisen’. The PÈÄi word is ‘uppanna’. On the handout I gave you the PÈÄi word also. There are four kinds of uppanna (that which has arisen). There are four things which are called ‘uppanna’ in PÈÄi. The word ‘uppanna’ means that which has arisen.

The first meaning is arisen as actually occurring. That means all that is reckoned to possess the three moments of arising, aging and dissolution. That means it is the real present things. Because when we say something is present, we mean that it possesses the three stages of arising, staying and disappearing, or arising, aging and dissolution. Thus it is the real present. This real present is sometimes called ‘uppanna (that which has arisen)’.

The next one is ‘arisen as being and gone’. That means they have arisen and now they are no more. They have arisen and gone. They are also called ‘arisen’. There are two of them. Wholesome and unwholesome dhammas (cittas and cetasikas) which have experienced the stimulus of an object (That means which have tasted the object.) and disappeared. They are also called ‘arisen as been and gone’. Here ‘been’ means ‘experienced’. The second is anything conditioned that has reached the three moments beginning with arising and has ceased. Something conditioned which has come into being and then disappeared is meant. That is also called ‘arisen’. It is having been and gone.

The third is arisen by opportunity made. Past kamma is called ‘arisen by opportunity made’. It is really past. Although it is past, it is called ‘arisen’. That means it is still with us or something like that. Because it has stood (That is the direct translation), it has existed inhibiting the result of other kamma and has made opportunity for its own result to arise in the future. When there is kamma and then it disappears, it leaves something like a potential in the continuity of beings to give results in the future. When it makes opportunity for its results to arise in the future, it inhibits the results of other kammas. The second is the future result. The future result is also called ‘uppanna’. Although it has not yet arisen, it is called ‘arisen’. That is because when opportunity to arise is made, it is sure to arise in the future. When kamma is accumulated, when kamma is done, then the fruit is sure to arise. The future result can be called ‘arisen’, although in fact it has not yet arisen.

The fourth one is arisen by having soil to grow in. We are concerned with this. Arisen by having soil to grow in - that means unwholesome kamma which has not been eradicated with respect to any given soil. What is ‘soil’ here? ‘Soil’ here means the five aggregates in the three planes of becoming, which are the object of vipassanÈ, and ‘what has soil’ means mental defilements which are capable of arising with respect to those aggregates. So what the Path eliminates is this kind of defilement ‘arisen by having soil to grow in’. Here ‘soil’ means the five aggregates in the three planes of becoming. They are the object of vipassanÈ meditation. ‘What has soil’ means the mental defilements which are capable of arising with respect to those aggregates.

Suppose I see an object, a desirable object. And I do not practice vipassanÈ toward that object. So I take it to be beautiful. Although at that moment I may have no attachment, since I have taken it to be beautiful, I can have attachment with regard to that thing in the future. That kind of attachment or mental defilement is what is called ‘which is the soil to grow in’.

With regard to objects we have to practice vipassanÈ meditation in order to see their true nature so that we see that they are impermanent and so on. When we have seen that, when we have practiced vipassanÈ towards them, then the defilements are not said to be inherent in these objects. But with regard to objects with which we fail to observe by vipassanÈ, there is always the possibility that the defilements will arise with regard to those things. Defilements which can arise through not having observed objects by vipassanÈ are called ‘having soil to grow in’. Actually what the Path eradicates is not the present mental defilements, not the past mental defilements, not the future mental defilements, but it is something like future. There is some liability in our continuity. When there are conditions, defilements can arise. That liability is what is eradicated by the Path consciousness. That liability is called here ‘those having soil to grow in’. That means in my continuity of consciousness they can arise. They have my continuity as a soil to grow in. Because I have taken that object to be beautiful, to be permanent, to be pleasant, to be substantial or self, since I have taken this thing to be permanent and so on, then at any time the defilement can arise. Those defilements which can occur through not being observed by vipassanÈ are what are called ‘those that have soil to grow in’. It has obtained or it has got my continuity to grow in, to arise in.

“And that is not meant objectively.” That means having the soil to grow in. ‘Having the soil’ means having the soil not as an object, but as a place to grow in, as a base. That is also important because if we say it is by way of taking an object that it has got the soil, then it can mean, say, there is an Arahant. He said to be beautiful. A man saw the Arahant and he had sexual desires for that Arahant. He wanted that Arahant to be his wife or something like that. And so even with regard to the body of an Arahant, mental defilements can arise in other persons by taking the body of an Arahant as an object. If we mean that ‘having the soil’ means having the soil as an object, then it will mean that an Arahant can eradicate the mental defilements of another person. Because that person has taken the Arahant as an object and then he has attachment arise in his mind. So ‘having the soil’ does not mean having soil taken as an object. ‘Having the soil’ means having got somewhere or some place to grow in or grow out of. “Like those that arose in the rich man Soreyya with respect to the aggregates in MahÈ-KaccÈna” - he had wrong desires for Venerable MahÈ-KaccÈna. “And in the brahman student Nanda with respect to UppalavaÓÓÈ” - Venerable UppalavaÓÓÈ was an Arahant, a nun. Nanda fell in love with her. One day when she came back from the sun, he raped the nun. So ‘having soil’ does not mean having soil taken as an object. It is by way of having a place or having a base. If we say the defilement which has the soil to grow in by way of taking object, then we mean the defilement in another person also. Nobody, even the Buddha, can eradicate defilement in another person. I can eradicate defilements in my mind but not the defilements in another person’s mind. So it is to be understood as ‘having soil’ means having soil not as an object, not as being taken as an object. It is having it as its location or something like that.

“And if that were what is called ‘arisen by having soil [to grow in]’ no one could abandon the root of becoming because it would be unabandonable.” That means because it belongs to another person. “But ‘arisen by having soil [to grow in]’ should be understood [subjectively] with respect to the basis [for them in oneself].” That means they should be understood as having the place to live or to exist. “For the defilements that are the root of the round are inherent in [one’s own] aggregates not fully understood by insight.” If we do not practice vipassanÈ towards things, then we do not fully understand these objects. ‘Fully understand’ means seeing their arising and disappearing, their characteristics, and also being able to get rid of mental defilements with regard to them. “For the defilements that are the root of the round are inherent in [one’s own] aggregates not fully understood by insight from the instant those aggregates arise. And that is what should be understood as ‘arisen by having soil [to grow in]’, in the sense of its being unabandoned.”

In brief what the Path abandons or eliminates is the mental defilements which would arise when there are conditions, which would arise because one has not seen them correctly, one has not fully understood them. That liability is what the Path consciousness eradicates and not the real mental defilements arising at the moment. That is because when there are mental defilements, there can be no Path consciousness and when there is Path consciousness, there can be no mental defilements. I think if you understand this, the other passages are not difficult.

Then the author gives another set of four kinds of uppanna. Paragraph 89 “Besides these there are four other ways of classing ‘arisen’, namely, (5) arisen as happening, (6) arisen with apprehension of an object, (7) arisen through non-suppression, (8) arisen through non-abolition.”

“Herein, ‘arisen as happening’ is the same as (1) ‘arisen as actually occurring’.” That means it is rightly in existence lasting for three moments.

“When an object has at some previous time come into focus in the eye, etc., and defilement did not arise then but arose in full force later on simply because the object had been apprehended (That means taken firmly as permanent and so on.), then that defilement is called ‘arisen with apprehension of an object’. Like the defilement that arose in the Elder MahÈ-Tissa after seeing the form of a person of the opposite sex while wandering for alms in the village of KalyÈne.” (It is KalyÈne, not KalyÈna.) Before there was no defilement in the Elder MahÈ-Tissa. Then he saw a person of the opposite sex and then the defilements arose in his mind.

“As long as a defilement is not suppressed by either serenity or insight, though it may not have actually entered the conscious continuity, it is nevertheless called ‘arisen through non-suppression’.” That means it has not really arisen, but it is called ‘arisen’ because it has not been suppressed.

“Because there is no cause to prevent its arising [if suitable conditions combine]. But even when they are suppressed by serenity or insight, they are still called ‘arisen through non-abolition because the necessity for their arising has not been transcended unless they have been cut off by the Path.” That is those that have not been cut off or abandoned by the Path consciousness. They are called ‘arisen through non-abolition’. Abolition and suppression are different here. ‘Suppression’ means keeping them at bay for some time. ‘Abolition’ means eradicating all together.

“Like the Elder who had obtained the eight attainments and the defilements that arose in him while he was going through the air on his hearing the sound of a woman singing with a sweet voice as she was gathering flowers in a grove of blossoming trees.” He had obtained the eight attainments. That means he had suppressed the mental defilements by the eight attainments. The defilements arose in him while as he was going through the air. He was going through the air and he heard a woman singing as she was plucking flowers. Defilements arose in him. Such defilements are called ‘those arisen through non-abolition’. Because they are not abolished, because they are not eradicated, they may arise when there are conditions. So there are these four kinds.

“And the three kinds, namely, (6) arisen with apprehension of an object, (7) arisen through non-suppression, and (8) arisen through non-abolition, should be understood as included by arisen by having soil [to grow in].” The fourth of the first list corresponds to three of the second list.

“So as regards the kinds of ‘arisen’ stated, the four kinds, namely, (1) as actually occurring, (2) as been and gone, (3) by opportunity made, and (5) as happening, cannot be abandoned by any [of these four kinds of] knowledge because they cannot be eliminated by the Paths. But the four kinds of ‘arisen’, namely, (4) by having soil [to grow in], (6) with apprehension of an object, (7) through non-suppression, and (8) through non-abolition, can all be abandoned because a given mundane or supramundane knowledge, when it arises, nullifies a given one of these modes of being arisen.” When we say that the Path abandons, then we mean the second four. ‘The second four’ here means one of the first and three of the second list - so ‘by having soil’, ‘with apprehension of an object through non-suppression and non-abolition’. So what the Path eradicates is the inherent tendencies or the latent tendencies, not the ones that have arisen in the consciousness. When they are in the consciousness, we cannot eradicate them simply because they are there. That is why in the Suttas, especially in the Commentaries, it is said ‘anupÈdÈ nirodha’.

That means non-arising in the future. It is called ‘cessation’, so cessation of mental defilements, the non-arising of them in the future. The mental defilements arise and disappear by themselves. We cannot do anything about them. They arise and disappear.

‘The cessation of mental defilements’ really means not letting them arise again. Non-arising in the future is what is called ‘the cessation of mental defilements’. Here also when there is Path, it has the power to render them inactive or to render them unable to arise.

Now we have the four functions in a single moment. It is said that the Path does the four functions simultaneously. What are the four? “Now at the time of penetrating to the Truths each one of the four [Path] Knowledges is said to exercise four functions in a single moment. These are full understanding (of the First Noble Truth), abandoning (the Second Noble Truth), realizing (the Third Noble Truth), and developing (the Fourth Noble Truth).” At one moment the Path consciousness or the Path Knowledge exercises these four functions, not one by one, but simultaneously these four functions are done.

Then the simile of a lamp is given here. In paragraph 95 “another method: as the sun, when it rises, performs four functions simultaneously” and so on is another simile. Then “Another method: as a boat performs four functions” is another simile. These similes are given to illustrate the four functions done by Path consciousness simultaneously.

Paragraph 97 “So when his Knowledge occurs with the four functions in a single moment at the time of penetrating the Four Truths, then the Four Truths have a single penetration in the sense of trueness (reality) in sixteen ways.” There are sixteen ways or sixteen meanings mentioned here, four for each Truth.

“How is there single penetration of the Four Truths in the sense of trueness? There is a single penetration of the Four Truths in the sense of trueness in sixteen aspects: suffering has the meaning of oppressing, meaning of being formed, meaning of burning (torment), meaning of change, as its meaning of trueness.” These are the four meanings of the First Noble Truth. Then the four meanings of the Second Noble Truth are: “meaning of accumulation, meaning of source, meaning of bondage, meaning of impediment.” The four meanings of the third are: “meaning of escape, meaning of seclusion, meaning of not being formed, meaning of deathless.” The meanings of the Fourth Noble Truth are “meaning of outlet, meaning of cause, meaning of seeing, meaning of dominance.” These are called ‘the sixteen ways of the Four Noble Truths’.

Paragraph 98 raises a question. “Here it may be asked: since there are other meanings of suffering, etc., too, such as a disease, a tumor, etc., why then are only four mentioned for each?” Now if you go back to chapter 20, paragraph 18, you will find that there are forty ways of looking at things as impermanent and so on. So the First Noble Truth has more than four meanings. It has other meanings like a disease, a tumor and so on. So why are they not taken and only these four are taken? “We answer that in this context it is because of what is evident through seeing the other [three Truths in each case].”

“Firstly in the passage beginning ‘Herein, what is knowledge of suffering? It is the understanding, the act of understanding..that arises contingent upon suffering as its object [individually]. But in the passage beginning ‘Bhikkhus, he who sees suffering sees also its origin’ it is presented as accomplishing its function with respect to the other three Truths simultaneously with its making one of them its object.” So sometimes it is described as seeing one each, one at a time, but in other passages the seeing is presented as occurring at the same time, seeing the four at the same time.

“As regards these [two contexts], when, firstly, knowledge makes each Truth its object singly, then (Here SayÈdaw purposefully omitted ‘when suffering is made the object’.) suffering has the characteristic of oppressing as its individual essence” and so on. In these paragraphs we should strike out those in square brackets. It is inserted by the translator and it is not warranted by the Sub-Commentary. Paragraphs 99-102 after ‘likewise’ those things in brackets should be removed. ‘[When suffering is made the object]’ should be removed. If suffering is made the object, then the only thing it will see is the first meaning of suffering and not the others. What the author is explaining here is that when you see the Second Noble Truth, the Noble Truth of origin, the sense of being formed of the First Noble Truth becomes evident. When you see the Second Truth, then seeing the First Truth becomes evident. When you see the Third Noble Truth, another meaning of the First Noble Truth becomes evident. Wen you see the Fourth Noble Truth, yet another meaning of the First Noble Truth becomes evident. That is why these four are mentioned here. So when you see the First Noble Truth, the meaning of oppression is evident. When you see the Second Noble Truth, the meaning of being formed of the First Noble Truth becomes evident. When you see the Third Noble Truth, the meaning of burning or torment of the First Noble Truth becomes evident. When you see the Fourth Noble Truth, the meaning of the First Noble Truth, that is change, becomes evident. That is why these four meanings are given. By seeing them individually and also by seeing the other Truths, the meanings of the given Truth becomes evident. These paragraphs explain this meaning. So we do not need ‘[when Suffering is made the object]’, ‘[when Origin is made the object]’, ‘[when Cessation is made the object]’, ‘[when Path is made the object]’.

Then in paragraph 99 an example is given. “As the Beauty’s (Sundari’s) ugliness did to the Venerable Nanda through seeing the celestial nymphs.” Sundari was said to be very beautiful, maybe like a beauty queen. She was very beautiful. And so Nanda was very much in love with her. But the Buddha wanted to teach him a lesson. So Buddha took him to the celestial world and showed him the celestial nymphs. After seeing the celestial nymphs, Nanda was asked “Who is more beautiful the celestial nymphs or Sundari?” Then Nanda said “Sundari is like a she-monkey we saw on our way here.” After the sight of the nymphs Sundari seemed to have become ugly. Sundari was a beautiful woman. Here also “the cooling Path removes the burning of the defilements and so Suffering’s sense of burning becomes evident through seeing the Path.” When you see a cool one, then the burning becomes evident.

OK. That should be the end of it.

SÈdhu! SÈdhu! SÈdhu!