阿毘達磨俱舍論

Part 7

The causes have now been explained; what, then, are the conditions?

[Four kinds of conditions are taught.

The cause-condition consists precisely of five causes.

The homogeneous and immediately antecedent condition consists of arisen minds and mental factors,

Except for the final minds and mental factors.

The object-condition consists of all dharmas.

The predominant condition is the efficient cause.]

Treatise: Where are conditions (pratyaya) spoken of? The sutra says: “There are four kinds of conditionality (pratyayatā): the conditionality of the cause-condition (hetupratyayatā), the conditionality of the homogeneous and immediately antecedent condition (samanantarapratyayatā), the conditionality of the object-condition (ālambana), and the conditionality of the predominant condition (adhipatipratyayatā).”

Here, the expression “conditionality” designates the kinds of conditions (pratyayajāti).

Among the six causes, when the efficient cause is excluded, the remaining five causes constitute the cause-condition.

Except for the final mind and mental factors of an arhat at the time of entering nirvana, all arisen minds and mental factors are homogeneous and immediately antecedent conditions.

Only minds and mental factors serve as homogeneous and immediately antecedent conditions. For which dharmas are they homogeneous and immediately antecedent conditions?

(1) This condition is called homogeneous and immediately antecedent because it gives rise to dharmas that are equal (homogeneous, sama) and arise immediately (without interval, anantara).

With regard to other dharmas, such as matter (rūpa), there is no equality between cause and result. Indeed, immediately after one material dharma belonging to the Desire Realm, two kinds of non-informative matter may arise simultaneously: one belonging to the Desire Realm and one to the Form Realm; or two kinds of non-informative matter, one belonging to the Desire Realm and the other uncontaminated. By contrast, immediately after a mind belonging to the Desire Realm, a mind belonging to the Desire Realm and a mind belonging to the Form Realm never arise simultaneously.

The arising of material dharmas is confused and disorderly (ākuta), whereas a homogeneous and immediately antecedent condition never produces confused and disorderly results. Therefore, material dharmas cannot serve as homogeneous and immediately antecedent conditions.

The Venerable Vasumitra says that, within a single body, if the continuity of nutriment-produced matter (aupacayika) remains uninterrupted, it can give rise to a second nutriment-produced matter; therefore, matter cannot be established as a homogeneous and immediately antecedent condition.

The Elder (Sthavira Sautrāntika) says: A material dharma may directly produce either few dharmas or many dharmas; therefore, it is not a homogeneous and immediately antecedent condition. Sometimes many dharmas produce few dharmas, as when a heap of straw is burned to ashes; at other times, few dharmas produce many dharmas, as when a very small seed produces the roots, trunk, branches, and leaves of a fig tree, and so forth.

(Objection) When minds succeed one another, do they always possess equal numbers of associated mental factors of each kind? If not, the preceding mind may possess a greater number of mental factors, while the succeeding mind possesses fewer, and vice versa. Wholesome, unwholesome, and neutral minds succeed one another, yet they do not possess the same numbers of associated mental factors; successive kinds of meditative concentration may possess or lack initial and sustained application of thought. Thus, among mental factors, just as among material dharmas, there is likewise no equality (Vibhāṣā, 11, 5).

(Explanation) This is indeed so: Mental factors that are greater in number may be followed by other mental factors that are fewer in number, and vice versa; nevertheless, this is merely an increase or decrease among different mental factors (Vibhāṣā, 11, 17). When mental factors belong to only one kind, however, they are never unequal: it is never the case that feelings (vedanā) that are fewer in number are followed by feelings that are more numerous, or vice versa. This means that a mind associated with one feeling is never followed by a mind associated with two or three feelings. The same applies to perception (saṃjñā) and the other mental factors.

(Question) Is it therefore only in the case of dharmas belonging to the same kind that a preceding dharma can serve as the homogeneous and immediately antecedent condition for a succeeding dharma? Would feeling, then, serve as the homogeneous and immediately antecedent condition only for feeling?

(Answer) In general, preceding mental factors serve as homogeneous and immediately antecedent conditions for succeeding mental factors, not merely for mental factors of the same kind. Nevertheless, when mental factors of the same kind are examined, no succession from many to few, or from few to many, is found. The meanings of “equal” and “immediate” in the name of this condition can therefore be demonstrated.

Some masters of the Abhidharma (Abhidhārmika = Sāṃtānabhāgika) maintain the contrary. They hold that a dharma serves as the homogeneous and immediately antecedent condition only for a dharma of the same kind; that is, mind gives rise only to mind, feeling only to feeling, and so forth.

(Objection) If this position is maintained, then when a defiled dharma (kliṣṭa = akuśala, nirvṛtāvyākṛta) arises after an undefiled dharma, this defiled dharma would not arise from a homogeneous and immediately antecedent condition.

(Explanation) The affliction that previously ceased serves as the homogeneous and immediately antecedent condition for the affliction that defiles the succeeding dharma. The preceding affliction is regarded as the dharma that occurred directly before the succeeding affliction, even though it is separated (vyavahita) from the latter by an undefiled dharma; for separation by a dharma of a different kind (atulyajātīya) does not constitute an interval.

The same applies to the mind that emerges (the mind of emergence, vyutthānacitta) from the attainment of cessation (nirodhasamāpatti). This mind takes as its homogeneous and immediately antecedent condition the mind of entry into concentration (samāpatticitta) that previously ceased, because the attainment of cessation itself (samāpattidravya) does not constitute an interval.

(Author of the Treatise) The position above cannot be accepted, because, if it were correct, the uncontaminated mind arising for the first time would have no homogeneous and immediately antecedent condition.

Conditioned dharmas dissociated from mind also arise in a confused and disorderly manner, like material dharmas, and therefore are not homogeneous and immediately antecedent conditions. Moreover, following an acquisition belonging to the Desire Realm, dharmas belonging to all three realms and uncontaminated dharmas may be acquired simultaneously, and so forth.

(Question) Why are future dharmas not admitted as homogeneous and immediately antecedent conditions?

(Answer) Because future dharmas are confused and disorderly (vyākula), having neither before nor after.

(Question) If so, how can the Blessed One know which future dharma will arise first and which future dharma will arise later? He is able to know the order in which all dharmas will arise, even to the furthest limit of time.

(Vibhāṣā [11, 2]) He knows this through inference (anumāna) drawn from the past and present. Regarding the past, he sees which kind of karma produces which kind of result and which kind of dharma arises from which kind of dharma. Regarding the present, he sees what kind of karma this is and what kind of result will arise from it in the future; he sees what kind of dharma this is and what kind of dharma will arise from it.

Nevertheless, the Blessed One’s knowledge does not belong to inference but to knowledge born of resolution (praṇidhi-jñāna). On the basis of comparison drawn from the past and present, the Blessed One directly sees the dharmas existing in a confused and disorderly state in the future, and he knows: “A person who performs such an act will certainly experience such a karmic result in the future.”

(Treatise Master) According to your explanation, if the Blessed One does not examine the past, then he cannot know the future; and thus he would no longer be omniscient (sarvavid).

Some treatise masters (Vibhāṣā, 179, 4) say that within the continuum of a sentient being there is a certain dharma that serves as a sign (cihna = linga), foretelling the fruits that will arise in the future; this sign is a formation dissociated from mind. The Blessed One observes this formation and thereby knows the future fruit, without needing to enter meditative concentration or exercise supernormal cognition.

(Sautrāntika) If that were so, the Blessed One would be a physiognomist rather than one who directly realizes (sākṣātkārin, sākṣāddarśin).

(Treatise Master) In truth, the Blessed One can know all dharmas at will, not through inference or divination. This is the correct doctrine of the Sautrāntika masters, attested by a teaching (Ekottara, 18, 16; Dīgha, i. 31) of the Blessed One: “The qualities of a Buddha and the spheres of a Buddha are inconceivable.”

(Objection) If future dharmas have neither before nor after, how can it be said: “Immediately after the highest worldly dharma (laukika agradharma), only the receptivity to the knowledge of the Dharma concerning suffering arises, and no other dharma,” and “Immediately after the vajra-like concentration (vajropamasamādhi), only the knowledge of destruction (kṣayajñāna) arises”?

(Reply of the Vaibhāṣikas [Vibhāṣā, 11, 2]) If the arising of this dharma is related to that dharma, then immediately after that dharma, this dharma will arise. It is just as a sprout arises immediately after the seed, without an immediately antecedent condition.

(Question) Why are the final mind and mental factors of an arhat not an immediately antecedent condition?

(Answer) Because no mind or mental factors arise afterward.

(Question) You say that the mental faculty (manas) is precisely the mind (citta; consciousness, vijñāna) that has just ceased and serves as the support for the succeeding consciousness. Thus, if no mind continues after the final mind of an arhat, this final mind cannot be called the mental faculty and is also not an immediately antecedent condition; but why is this mind still called the mental faculty?

(Answer) This case is not the same. What constitutes the mental faculty is not its activity (kāritra), namely, its sustaining of a succeeding mind, but rather its nature as the support (āśraya) of that mind; whether or not that mind arises has no bearing on this. The final mind of an arhat is indeed a support: If a succeeding mind that would have this mind as its support does not arise, it is because the necessary conditions for its arising are lacking. What constitutes an immediately antecedent condition, however, is precisely its activity. Once this condition has taken hold of its fruit, no dharma and no sentient being can prevent that fruit from arising. Therefore, the final mind of an arhat is called the mental faculty but is not an immediately antecedent condition.

(Question) If a dharma is immediately antecedent with respect to a mind (cittasamanantara), that is, if it has a certain mind as its immediately antecedent condition, is this dharma also immediately contiguous to that mind (cittanirantara), meaning that it follows directly after that mind?

(Answer) There are four cases:

(1) The minds and mental factors upon emergence from the two kinds of mindless concentration, and all moments of these two kinds of concentration except the first moment, have the mind entering concentration as their immediately antecedent condition, but do not directly follow that mind of entry into concentration.

(2) The characteristics of arising, and so forth, belonging to the first moment of these two kinds of concentration, and the characteristics of arising, and so forth, of all minds and mental factors in a state endowed with mind (sacittakāvasthā), directly follow a mind but do not have it as their immediately antecedent condition.

(3) The first moment of these two kinds of concentration and all minds and mental factors in a state endowed with mind have the type of mind immediately preceding them as their immediately antecedent condition.

(4) The characteristics of arising, and so forth, belonging to all moments of these two kinds of concentration, and the characteristics of arising, and so forth, belonging to the minds and mental factors upon emergence from these two kinds of concentration, have no immediately antecedent condition, because they are dharmas dissociated from mind and do not directly follow any mind at all.

(Question) What is an object-condition?

(Answer) All conditioned and unconditioned dharmas serve as object-conditions (ālambanapratyaya) for minds and mental factors, but not without distinctions. For example, eye-consciousness and its associated mental factors, such as feeling and so forth, have all visible forms as their object-condition; ear-consciousness and its associated mental factors, such as feeling and so forth, have all sounds as their object-condition; nose-consciousness and so forth have odors; tongue-consciousness and so forth have tastes; body-consciousness and so forth have tangibles; and mental consciousness and so forth have dharmas.

Once a dharma has served as the object of a mind, there is no time at which it does not serve as the object of that mind. This means that even when a visible form is not apprehended by eye-consciousness as its object, it nevertheless remains an object-condition, because whether it is apprehended or not, its nature does not change. It is just as firewood remains firewood even when it has not yet been burned.

With regard to a mind apprehending a dharma as its object, three kinds of determination may be established. A mind is determined (1) by the sense sphere (āyatana): for example, an eye-consciousness takes only the sphere of visible form as its object; (2) by the entity (dravya): a particular eye-consciousness, such as the cognition of blue, red, and so forth, takes only blue, red, and so forth as its object; and (3) by the moment (kṣaṇa): a particular eye-consciousness takes as its object only a particular moment of blue.

(Question) With respect to its support (āśraya), is a mind likewise determined in the manner described above?

(Answer) Yes. However, in the present, the mind is connected with its support, whereas in the past and future the mind is separated from its support. One theory (Vibhāṣā, 12, 5) holds that in both the present and the past, the mind is connected with its support.

(Question) What is a dominant condition?

(Answer) This kind of dominant conditionality (adhipatipratyayatā) is precisely the efficient cause, because the efficient cause is a dominant condition.

It is called a dominant condition because this kind of condition pertains to most dharmas and exercises influence upon most dharmas.

All dharmas are objects of mental consciousness; however, dharmas that coexist with a particular mind are not objects of that mind, although they still serve as efficient causes for that mind. Therefore, all dharmas are dominant conditions insofar as they are efficient causes, but not insofar as they are objects.

Any dharma may take all other dharmas, with the exception of itself (its own entity), as efficient causes.

No dharma can serve as a condition for itself. Conditioned dharmas do not serve as conditions for unconditioned dharmas, nor do unconditioned dharmas serve as conditions for conditioned dharmas.

(Question) At what stage do conditions exercise their activity with respect to dharmas—that is, when the dharmas are present, past, or future?

Verse:

[Two causes exercise their activity while a dharma is ceasing.

Three causes exercise their activity while a dharma is arising.

The other two conditions exercise their activity in the reverse order of the above.]

Exposition: First, the cause-condition (hetupratyaya) must be considered. This condition comprises five causes, the efficient cause being excluded.

Two causes exercise their activity when a dharma is perishing. “Perishing” here refers to the present. A present dharma is called “perishing” because, immediately after arising, it proceeds toward (abhimukha) cessation.

The coexistent cause and the associated cause exercise their activity (kāritraṃ karoti) with respect to a present dharma because they function only in relation to a dharma that arises simultaneously with them.

The phrase “three causes when it is arising” means that when a dharma is arising—that is, a future dharma, because, having not previously arisen, it is proceeding toward arising—three causes all exercise their activity: the homogeneous cause, the universal cause, and the maturation cause.

As for the other conditions:

Following the order of the conditions explained above, the first is the immediately antecedent condition. This condition functions in the same way as the three causes above, namely, when a dharma is arising, because the minds and mental factors of the preceding moment make way (avakāśadāna) for the minds and mental factors that are arising.

Next is the object condition. This condition functions in the same way as the two causes above, namely, when a dharma is perishing. This perishing dharma is precisely the presently occurring mind and mental factors that apprehend (ālambana) a presently existing object.

As for the predominant condition, its activity consists in presenting no obstruction (anāvaraṇabhāvena .... avasthāna); that is, it does not obstruct present, past, or future dharmas.

(Question) How many conditions produce the various dharmas?

The verse answers:

[Mind and mental factors arise from four conditions.

The two attainments arise from only three conditions.

Other dharmas arise from two conditions.

They do not arise from God, because they arise successively.]

Treatise: Mind and mental factors arise through four conditions: (1) the causal condition (hetupratyaya), namely, the five causes; (2) the immediately antecedent condition, namely, mind and mental factors that arose previously and are not separated from them by other minds or mental factors; (3) the object condition, namely, the five objects, of which form (rūpa) is the first, or all dharmas as objects in the case of mental consciousness; and (4) the predominant condition, namely, all dharmas except the mind and mental factors under discussion.

The two attainments arise from three conditions, with the object condition excluded, because the attainment of non-perception and the attainment of cessation neither apprehend nor cognize an object. These three conditions are: (1) the causal condition, comprising the coexistent cause (that is, the characteristics of arising and so forth belonging to the attainment) and the homogeneous cause (that is, previously arisen wholesome dharmas belonging to a certain meditative level: the fourth dhyāna or the Summit of Existence, as the case may be); (2) the immediately antecedent condition, namely, the mind entering the attainment and the mental factors associated with it; throughout all the moments of the attainment, the mind entering the attainment is not separated from it by any kind of mind;

and (3) the predominant condition, as above.

These two kinds of attainment arise from preparatory practice and from the mental directing of attention (cittābhisaṃkāraja, cittābhogaja); therefore, they have one mind as their immediately antecedent condition. However, because they obstruct the arising of mind, they are not the immediately antecedent condition of the mind emerging from the attainment, even though they immediately precede (nirantara) that mind.

Other dharmas—formations dissociated from mind (cittaviprayukta) and material dharmas (rūpa)—arise through the causal condition and the predominant condition (Vibhāṣā, 136, 5).

All arisen dharmas arise from the five causes and four conditions explained above.

The world does not arise from a single cause such as God, the self (puruṣa), primordial nature (pradhāna), or anything else by whatever name it may be called.

(Question) How can the foregoing position be established?

(Answer) If you think there are arguments capable of establishing this position, then relinquish your own doctrine that the world arises from a single cause.

If it is maintained that everything is produced by a single cause—by God, the Great God (Mahādeva), and so forth—this cannot be accepted for the following reasons:

(1) If everything were produced by a single cause, all things should arise at the same time; yet everyone knows that they arise successively.

(Argument of the proponents of a single cause) They arise successively because of God’s will; that is, because God wills that this thing arise now, that thing cease now, and another thing arise and cease later, and so forth.

(Author of the Treatise) If God has such wills, then everything does not arise from a single cause, because there are many different acts of will. Moreover, these acts of will would occur simultaneously because God, their cause, is one; consequently, everything would have to arise at the same time.

(Argument) God’s acts of will are not simultaneous because, in producing them, God must also await many other causes.

(Author of the Treatise) If God must await many other causes, then God is not the sole cause of everything. Moreover, the causes upon which God depends themselves arise successively; this means that they too must depend upon causes, and those causes in turn must depend upon other causes. Thus, there would never be any final limit.

(Argument) Let it be admitted that the continuum of causes has no beginning.

(Author of the Treatise) If so, it must be admitted that this course of transmigration (saṃsāra) has no origin. Relinquish your doctrine of a “single cause” and accept the Buddhist teaching of causes and conditions.

(Argument) God’s acts of will arise simultaneously, but things do not arise simultaneously because they arise according to God’s will—that is, one after another in succession.

(Author of the Treatise) This cannot be accepted. God’s acts of will remain no different afterward than they were before (teṣaṃ paścād aviśeṣāt). Suppose God wills: “Let this thing arise now! Let that thing arise later!” In that case, why is the second act of will, which previously lacked the power to produce its effect, able to produce it later? Why does it possess the power to produce it later when it did not possess that power before? Furthermore, for what benefit would God exert such great effort to produce the world?

(Argument) God produces the world in order to give rise to joy (prīti).

(Author of the Treatise) If it is to give rise to joy, then he is no longer God, the Sovereign Lord (Īśvara), because he cannot accomplish this without a means (upāya). If he is not sovereign over joy, how could he be sovereign over the world? Moreover, does God find delight in seeing all the sentient beings he created endure the sufferings of life, including the torments of hell? Pay homage to God! An outsider’s verse indeed expresses this very well: “God is called Rudra because he burns, because he is fierce, savage, terrible, and devours flesh, blood, and marrow.”

If it is believed that God is the sole cause of the world, this would deny the causes and conditions that are directly observed, as well as human effort (puruṣakāra), from the time there is still a seed until it becomes a sprout, and so forth. Or, if they change their position and must admit that there are causes, yet maintain that these causes merely assist (sahakārin) God, this is nothing more than an empty assertion made as an expression of devotion (bhaktivāda); for apart from the activity of these so-called auxiliary causes, we do not perceive any separate activity belonging to the so-called “sole cause.” Moreover, God would no longer be sovereign with respect to these auxiliary causes if he had to await their efficacy before being able to produce an effect.

Perhaps, in order to avoid denying causes and conditions that are plainly evident, and also to avoid affirming an actual act of God—an act no one has ever seen—those who believe in a sole cause will say that God’s work is creation. Yet if this creation depended solely upon God, it too, like God, would have no beginning; and this is a consequence they would never wish to admit.

We refute the doctrines of a self, the Pradhāna, and so forth, in the same way that we have refuted the doctrine of God above. Therefore, no dharma arises from a single cause.

Alas! Because the world does not cultivate supreme wisdom, it wanders from lifetime to lifetime like beasts—how pitiable! Sentient beings create karma and then experience the fruits of that karma, yet they continue to believe that God himself is the cause of those fruits. In order to dispel this deluded belief, the true doctrine must be set forth.

It was stated above that material dharmas arise through two conditions: the causal condition and the predominant condition. It must now be further explained how the great elements (bhūta, mahābhūta) and derived matter (upādāyarūpa, bhautika) can serve as causes for themselves as well as for other dharmas.

[The great elements are two causes of the great elements,

And five causes of derived matter.

Derived matter is three causes of derived matter,

And one cause of the great elements.]

Treatise: The four great elements—the earth element (pṛthivīdhātu), and so forth—serve only as homogeneous causes and coexistent causes of the four great elements.

The four great elements serve as five causes for the arising of derived matter, such as color, odor, taste, and so forth. The five causes are the generative cause (jananahetu), the supporting cause (niśrayahetu), the establishing cause (pratiṣṭhāhetu), the sustaining cause (upastambhahetu), and the nourishing cause (upabṛṃhaṇahetu).

The four great elements are generative causes because derived matter is born from the elements, just as children are born from their parents (Vibhāṣā, 127, 6). They are supporting causes because, after arising, derived matter relies upon the power of the great elements, just as pupils must rely upon their teachers, and so forth. They are establishing causes because derived matter is firmly supported (ādhāra) by the great elements, just as a wall supports a painting. They are sustaining causes because the great elements are the causes that prevent derived matter from being interrupted. They are nourishing causes because the great elements are the causes that enable derived matter to increase.

Thus, it may be said that the great elements are the causes of origination (janmahetu), transformation (vikārahetu), support (ādhārahetu), continuance (sthitihetu), and growth (vṛddhihetu) of derived matter.

Derived material dharmas serve as coexistent causes, homogeneous causes, and retributive causes of one another. Efficient causes are not counted here because all dharmas are efficient causes of other dharmas.

As coexistent causes, they are the derived material dharmas of bodily karma and verbal karma of the kinds explained previously, namely, the two restraints. As homogeneous causes, they are already-arisen derived material dharmas in relation to derived material dharmas of the same kind. As retributive causes, bodily karma and verbal karma are such causes, just as the eye arises through retributive karma.

Bodily karma and verbal karma produce the great elements that are retributive results; therefore, these two kinds of karma are retributive causes.

It was stated above that preceding minds and mental factors serve as immediately antecedent conditions for subsequent minds and mental factors, but it has not yet been explained how many kinds of mind may arise immediately after each kind of mind. To explain this, the kinds of mind must first be analyzed. There are twelve kinds in all:

[The Desire Realm has four kinds:

Wholesome, unwholesome, defiled, and undefiled.

The Form Realm and Formless Realm have no unwholesome mind;

The uncontaminated comprises two minds.]

Treatise: The four kinds of mind belonging to the Desire Realm are wholesome (kuśala), unwholesome (akuśala), defiled-neutral (nivṛtāvyākṛta), and undefiled-neutral (anivṛtāvyākṛta).

In the two higher realms, there are only three kinds, the unwholesome kind being absent.

The uncontaminated mind is of two kinds: the mind of one in training and the mind of an arhat, or one beyond training.

These twelve kinds of mind do not arise from one another in the same manner.

[A wholesome mind of the Desire Realm produces nine minds,

And may arise from eight minds.

A defiled mind arises from ten and produces four;

The remaining kind arises from five and produces seven.

A wholesome mind of the Form Realm produces eleven minds,

And may arise from nine minds.

A defiled mind arises from eight minds,

And may produce six minds;

An undefiled-neutral mind arises from three minds,

And may produce six minds.

A wholesome mind of the Formless Realm produces nine minds,

And may arise from six minds.

A defiled mind produces seven and arises from seven minds;

An undefiled-neutral mind is the same as in the Form Realm.

The mind of one in training arises from four and produces five;

The mind of one beyond training arises from five and produces four.]

Treatise: (1) Immediately after a wholesome mind belonging to the Desire Realm, nine minds may arise: the four minds of the Desire Realm; two minds of the Form Realm—one wholesome mind when entering meditative concentration, and one defiled-neutral mind when one dies in the Desire Realm with a wholesome mind and passes into an intermediate-state body of the Form Realm; one mind of the Formless Realm, namely, a defiled-neutral mind, when one dies in the Desire Realm and is reborn in the Formless Realm.

This is not a wholesome mind because the Formless Realm is remote from the Desire Realm in four respects: its basis (āśraya), mode of activity (ākāra), object (ālambana), and antidote (pratipakṣadūratā). Therefore, one cannot pass directly from the Desire Realm into a meditative absorption of the Formless Realm; and the two uncontaminated minds belonging to one in training or one beyond training when entering direct realization of the truths (satyābhisamaya).

A wholesome mind may arise directly from eight minds: the four minds of the Desire Realm; two minds of the Form Realm, wholesome and defiled-neutral, when emerging from meditative concentration—that is, when a practitioner, being troubled (utpīḍita) by a defiled concentration, emerges from it, a wholesome mind belonging to a lower plane arises immediately after that defiled mind, and by relying upon this mind the practitioner avoids regression; and the two uncontaminated minds belonging to one in training or one beyond training when emerging from direct realization.

A defiled mind, namely, an unwholesome or defiled-neutral mind, may arise from ten minds, excluding the two uncontaminated minds, because the mind of rebirth-linking in the Desire Realm (pratisaṃdhikāla) is defiled and may follow any kind of mind in the three realms.

From a defiled mind, four minds may arise, namely, the four minds of the Desire Realm.

An undefiled-neutral mind may arise from five minds: the four minds of the Desire Realm together with one wholesome mind of the Form Realm. This is because a transformation mind (nirmāṇacitta) of the Desire Realm—that is, a mind capable of taking a transformation belonging to the Desire Realm as its object—immediately follows a wholesome mind belonging to the Form Realm.

From the unobscured-neutral mind, seven minds may arise: four minds of the Desire Realm; two minds of the Form Realm—namely, one wholesome mind, because from the aforementioned transformation mind a wholesome mind of the Form Realm may arise again, and one obscured-neutral mind when one dies with an obscured-neutral mind and is reborn in the Form Realm, where the first mind must necessarily be obscured-neutral; and one mind of the Formless Realm, namely an obscured-neutral mind, when one dies with an obscured-neutral mind and is reborn in the Formless Realm.

(2) Immediately after a wholesome mind of the Form Realm, eleven minds may arise, excluding the unobscured-neutral mind of the Form Realm.

A wholesome mind may arise from nine minds, excluding the two defiled minds (unwholesome and obscured-neutral) of the Desire Realm and the unobscured-neutral mind of the Formless Realm.

An obscured-neutral mind may arise from eight minds, excluding the two defiled minds of the Desire Realm and the two undefiled minds.

From an obscured-neutral mind, six minds may arise: the three minds of the Form Realm, and the wholesome, unwholesome, and obscured-neutral minds of the Desire Realm.

An unobscured-neutral mind may arise from the three minds of the Form Realm.

From an unobscured-neutral mind, six minds may arise: the three minds of the Form Realm, the two defiled minds of the Desire Realm, and the two defiled minds (nivṛtāvyākṛta) of the Formless Realm.

(3) The unobscured-neutral mind of the Formless Realm may arise from three minds belonging to the three realms.

From an unobscured-neutral mind, six minds may arise: the three minds of its own realm, the two defiled minds of the Desire Realm, and one defiled mind of the Form Realm.

From a wholesome mind, nine minds may arise, excluding the wholesome mind of the Desire Realm and the unobscured-neutral minds of the Desire Realm and the Form Realm.

A wholesome mind may arise from six minds: the three minds of the Formless Realm, one wholesome mind of the Form Realm, and the two undefiled minds.

From an obscured-neutral mind, seven minds may arise: the three minds of the Formless Realm, one wholesome mind of the Form Realm, two defiled minds of the Desire Realm, and one defiled mind of the Form Realm.

An obscured-neutral mind may arise from seven minds, excluding the two defiled minds of the Desire Realm, one defiled mind of the Form Realm, and the two undefiled minds.

(5) The mind of a Learner, that is, the mind of a noble one who is not an arhat, may arise from four minds: the mind of a Learner and the wholesome minds of the three realms.

From the mind of a Learner, five minds may arise: the four minds mentioned above and the mind of a Non-Learner.

The mind of a Non-Learner may arise from five minds: the mind of a Learner, the mind of a Non-Learner, and the wholesome minds of the three realms.

From the mind of a Non-Learner, four minds may arise: the mind of a Non-Learner and the wholesome minds of the three realms.

The mutual arising of the twelve minds has now been explained. Next comes the explanation of how the twelve minds are divided into twenty minds.

[The twelve minds become twenty minds:

The wholesome minds in the three realms

Are divided into those acquired through preparatory effort and those acquired by birth.

The unobscured mind of the Desire Realm is divided into four:

Resultant, deportment, craftsmanship, and the fruit of supernormal knowledge;

For the unobscured mind of the Form Realm, craftsmanship is omitted;

The remaining categories are as previously stated.]

Treatise: Each wholesome mind of the three realms is divided into two kinds: that acquired through preparatory effort (acquired through preparatory effort, yātnika, prāyogika) and that acquired innately (acquired by birth, upapattilābhika, upapattiprātilambhika). Thus, there are altogether six kinds of wholesome mind corresponding to the three kinds in the first enumeration above.

The unobscured-neutral mind of the Desire Realm is divided into four kinds: (1) that produced from a resultant cause (resultant-born, vipākaja); (2) that pertaining to the modes of deportment—walking, standing, lying down, and sitting (deportment, airyāpathika); (3) that pertaining to craftsmanship (sphere of craftsmanship, śailpasthānika); and (4) that pertaining to transformation (nairmita, nairmāṇika), namely the kind of mind by means of which a person possessing supernormal knowledge can produce forms and so forth; these objects are called the fruit of supernormal knowledge (abhijñāphala).

The unobscured-neutral mind of the Form Realm is divided into three kinds because there is no sphere of craftsmanship in that realm.

The unobscured-neutral mind of the Formless Realm is not divided, because there is only the resultant-born kind there.

Thus, there are seven kinds of unobscured-neutral mind corresponding to the two kinds of unobscured-neutral mind in the first enumeration. Adding the wholesome minds gives a total of twenty minds (= Desire Realm: two wholesome, one unwholesome, one obscured-neutral, and four unobscured-neutral; Form Realm: two wholesome, one obscured-neutral, and three unobscured-neutral; Formless Realm: two wholesome, one obscured-neutral, and one unobscured-neutral; one Learner and one Non-Learner).

The three unobscured-neutral minds of deportment, craftsmanship, and the fruit of supernormal knowledge take form, smell, taste, and tangible objects as their objects. The craftsmanship mind also takes sound as its object.

These three minds belong only to mental consciousness (manovijñānani); nevertheless, the five groups of consciousness precede and prepare (preparatory effort, prāyogika) for the two kinds of mind pertaining to deportment and craftsmanship.

Some masters (Vibhāṣā, 126, 19) maintain that there is a kind of mental consciousness induced (abhinirhṛta, utpādita) by deportment that is capable of taking all twelve objects, from the eye faculty through the sphere of mental objects, as its objects.

These twenty kinds of mind mutually arise as follows:

(1) In the Desire Realm there are eight minds: two wholesome, two defiled (unwholesome and obscured-neutral), and four unobscured-neutral.

The wholesome mind acquired through preparatory effort (wholesome preparatory mind, prāyogika kuśala) directly produces ten minds: seven minds of its own realm, excluding the fruit-of-supernormal-knowledge mind; one wholesome preparatory mind of the Form Realm; one mind of a Learner; and one mind of a Non-Learner. It arises from eight minds: four minds of its own realm, namely the two wholesome and two defiled minds; one wholesome preparatory mind and one unobscured-neutral mind of the Form Realm; one mind of a Learner; and one mind of a Non-Learner.

The wholesome mind acquired by birth (wholesome mind acquired by birth, upapattilābhika kuśala) directly produces nine minds: seven minds of its own realm, excluding the fruit-of-supernormal-knowledge mind, and two unobscured-neutral minds of the Form Realm and the Formless Realm. It arises from eleven minds: seven minds of its own realm, excluding the fruit-of-supernormal-knowledge mind; the wholesome preparatory mind and the unobscured-neutral mind of the Form Realm; the mind of a Learner; and the mind of a Non-Learner.

The two defiled minds directly produce seven minds of their own realm, excluding the fruit-of-supernormal-knowledge mind. These two minds arise from fourteen minds: seven minds of their own realm, excluding the fruit-of-supernormal-knowledge mind; four minds of the Form Realm, excluding the wholesome preparatory mind and the fruit-of-supernormal-knowledge mind; and three minds of the Formless Realm, excluding the wholesome preparatory mind.

The resultant-born mind and the deportment mind directly produce eight minds: six minds of their own realm, excluding the wholesome preparatory mind and the fruit-of-supernormal-knowledge mind, and two unobscured-neutral minds of the Form Realm and the Formless Realm. They arise from seven minds of their own realm, excluding the fruit-of-supernormal-knowledge mind.

The craftsmanship mind directly produces six minds of its own realm, excluding the wholesome preparatory mind and the fruit-of-supernormal-knowledge mind. It arises from seven minds, likewise of its own realm, excluding the fruit-of-supernormal-knowledge mind.

The fruit-of-supernormal-knowledge mind directly produces two minds: the fruit-of-supernormal-knowledge mind of its own realm and the wholesome preparatory mind of the Form Realm. It arises from the same two minds mentioned above.

(2) In the Form Realm there are six minds: two wholesome minds, one defiled mind (obscured-neutral), and three unobscured-neutral minds:

A preparatory wholesome mind directly gives rise to twelve minds: six minds of its own realm; three minds of the Desire Realm, namely, preparatory wholesome, innately wholesome, and the mind resulting from supernormal knowledge; a preparatory wholesome mind of the Formless Realm; a mind of one in training; and a mind of one beyond training. A preparatory wholesome mind arises from ten minds: four minds of its own realm, excluding the mind associated with deportment and the resultant mind; two minds of the Desire Realm, namely, preparatory wholesome and the mind resulting from supernormal knowledge; two minds of the Formless Realm, namely, preparatory wholesome and defiled-neutral; a mind of one in training; and a mind of one beyond training.

An innately wholesome mind directly gives rise to eight minds: five minds of its own realm, excluding the mind resulting from supernormal knowledge; two minds of the Desire Realm, namely, unwholesome and defiled-neutral; and the defiled-neutral mind of the Formless Realm. An innately wholesome mind arises from five minds of its own realm, excluding the mind resulting from supernormal knowledge.

A defiled-neutral mind directly gives rise to nine minds: five minds of its own realm, excluding the mind resulting from supernormal knowledge; and four minds of the Desire Realm, namely, the two wholesome and the two defiled minds. A defiled-neutral mind arises from eleven minds: five minds of its own realm, excluding the mind resulting from supernormal knowledge; three minds of the Desire Realm, namely, innately wholesome, associated with deportment, and resultant; and three minds of the Formless Realm, excluding the preparatory wholesome mind.

A resultant mind and a mind associated with deportment directly give rise to seven minds: four minds of their own realm, excluding the preparatory wholesome mind and the mind resulting from supernormal knowledge; two minds of the Desire Realm, namely, unwholesome and defiled-neutral; and one mind of the Formless Realm, namely, defiled-neutral. They arise from five minds of their own realm, excluding the mind resulting from supernormal knowledge.

A mind resulting from supernormal knowledge directly gives rise to two minds of its own realm: the preparatory wholesome mind and the mind resulting from supernormal knowledge; and it also arises from these two kinds of mind.

(3) The Formless Realm has four minds: two wholesome minds, one defiled-neutral mind, and one resultant mind.

A preparatory wholesome mind directly gives rise to seven minds: four minds of its own realm, one preparatory wholesome mind of the Form Realm, one mind of one in training, and one mind of one beyond training. It arises from six minds: three minds of its own realm, excluding the resultant mind; the preparatory wholesome mind of the Form Realm; the mind of one in training; and the mind of one beyond training.

An innately wholesome mind directly gives rise to seven minds: four minds of its own realm; the defiled-neutral mind of the Form Realm; and the unwholesome and defiled-neutral minds of the Desire Realm. It arises from the four minds of its own realm.

A defiled-neutral mind directly gives rise to eight minds: four minds of its own realm; the preparatory wholesome and defiled-neutral minds of the Form Realm; and the unwholesome and defiled-neutral minds of the Desire Realm. It arises from ten minds: four minds of its own realm; and the innately wholesome, deportment-associated, and resultant minds of both the Form Realm and the Desire Realm.

A resultant mind directly gives rise to six minds: three minds of its own realm, excluding the preparatory wholesome mind; the defiled-neutral mind of the Form Realm; and the unwholesome and defiled-neutral minds of the Desire Realm. It arises from the four minds of its own realm.

A mind of one in training directly gives rise to six minds: the three preparatory wholesome minds of the three realms; the innately wholesome mind of the Desire Realm; the mind of one in training; and the mind of one beyond training. It arises from four minds: the three preparatory wholesome minds of the three realms and the mind of one in training.

A mind of one beyond training directly gives rise to five minds, namely, the six minds given above as arising from the mind of one in training, less the mind of one in training: the three preparatory wholesome minds, one innately wholesome mind of the Desire Realm, and one mind of one beyond training. It arises from five minds: the three preparatory wholesome minds of the three realms, the mind of one in training, and the mind of one beyond training.

(Question) Resultant minds, minds associated with deportment, and minds associated with arts and crafts all arise directly from a preparatory wholesome mind of the Desire Realm. Why does the reverse not occur?

(Answer) A resultant mind is not congenial (anukūla) to a preparatory wholesome mind, because it is weak (durbala) and does not arise spontaneously (anabhisaṃskāravāhivāt = ayatnena tieḥ). Minds associated with deportment and with arts and crafts are not congenial to a preparatory wholesome mind, because their arising pertains to the performance of a deportment or the production of a work (īryāpathaśilpābhi saṃskāraṇapravṛttatvāt).

By contrast, the exit mind (niṣkramaṇacitta)—that is, some particular kind of mind, such as a resultant mind and so forth, upon which the practitioner relies to emerge from a sequence of preparatory wholesome minds and so forth—can arise spontaneously. Therefore, this exit mind can arise directly from a preparatory mind.

(Objection) If a preparatory mind cannot arise directly from a resultant mind and so forth because those minds are not congenial to the preparatory mind, how can a preparatory mind arise from a defiled mind, which is contrary (viguṇa) to it?

(Explanation) It is true that a defiled mind is contrary to a preparatory mind. Nevertheless, when the practitioner feels wearied (parikhinna) by the manifestation (samudācāra) of the afflictions (kleśa) that the practitioner wishes to comprehend fully (parijñāna), the preparatory mind can still arise.

(Objection) The innately wholesome mind of the Desire Realm is keen (paṭu), and therefore it can arise from the two undefiled minds as well as from a preparatory mind of the Form Realm. Why, when the innately wholesome mind arises spontaneously, is it not followed by the aforementioned minds?

(Explanation) Because the innately wholesome mind of the Desire Realm is keen, it can arise from a defiled mind of the Form Realm. The innately wholesome mind of the Form Realm, however, is not keen and therefore cannot arise from a defiled mind of the Formless Realm.