THE PATH
OF PURIFICATION
(VISUDDHIMAGGA)
BY
BHADANTACARIYA BUDDHAGHOSA
Translated from the Pali
by
BHIKKHU NANAMOLI
FIFTH EDITION
BUDDHIST PUBLICATION SOCIETY
Kandy Sri Lanka
CHAPTER XX
PURIFICATION BY KNOWLEDGE AND VISION
OF WHAT IS THE PATH
AND WHAT IS NOT THE PATH
(Maggamagga-nanadassana-visuddhi-niddesa)
1. [606] The knowledge established by getting to know the path and
the not-path thus, 'This is the path, this is not the path', is called 'purifi-
cation by knowledge and vision of what is the path and what is not the
path'.
2. One who desires to accomplish this should first of all apply himself
to the inductive insight called 'comprehension by groups'.
1
Why? Be-
cause knowledge of what is the path and what is not the path appears in
connexion with the appearance of illumination, etc. (Ch. XX, §105f.)
in one who has begun insight. For it is after illumination, etc., have
appeared in one who has already begun insight that there comes to be
knowledge of what is the path and what is not the path. And comprehen-
sion by groups is the beginning of insight. That is why it is set forth next
to the overcoming of doubt. Besides, knowledge of what is the path and
what is not the path arises when 'full-understanding as investigation' is
occurring, and full-understanding as investigation comes next to full-
understanding as the known (see Ch. XIX, §21). So this is also a reason
why one who desires to accomplish this purification by knowledge and
vision of what is the path and what is not the path should first of all
apply himself to comprehension by groups.
[THE THREE KINDS OF FULL-UNDERSTANDING]
3. Here is the exposition: there are three kinds of mundane full-under-
standing, that is, full-understanding as the known, full-understanding as
investigation, and full-understanding as abandoning, with reference to
which it was said: 'Understanding that is direct-knowledge is knowledge
in the sense of being known. Understanding that is full-understanding is
knowledge in the sense of investigating. Understanding that is abandon-
ing is knowledge in the sense of giving up' (Ps.i,87).
Herein, the understanding that occurs by observing the specific char-
acteristics of such and such states thus, 'Materiality (rupa) has the char-
acteristic of being molested (ruppana); feeling has the characteristic of
being felt', is called full-understanding as the known. The understand-
ing consisting in insight with the general characteristics as its object that
occurs in attributing a general characteristic to those same states in the
way beginning, 'Materiality is impermanent, [607] feeling is imperma-
nent' is called full-understanding as investigation.
2
The understanding
consisting in insight with the characteristics as its object that occurs as
the abandoning of the perception of permanence, etc., in those same
states is called full-understanding as abandoning.
4. Herein, the plane of full-understanding as the known extends from
the delimitation of formations (Ch. XVIII) up to the discernment of con-
ditions (Ch. XIX); for in this interval the penetration of the specific char-
acteristics of states predominates. The plane of full-understanding as
investigation extends from comprehension by groups up to contempla-
tion of rise and fall (Ch. XXI, §3f.); for in this interval the penetration of
the general characteristics predominates. The plane of full-understanding
as abandoning extends from contemplation of dissolution onwards
(Ch. XXI, §10); for from there onwards the seven contemplations that
effect the abandoning of the perception of permanence, etc., predominate
thus: '(1) Contemplating [formations] as impermanent, a man abandons
the perception of permanence. (2) Contemplating [them] as painful, he
abandons the perception of pleasure. (3) Contemplating [them] as not-
self, he abandons the perception of self. (4) Becoming dispassionate, he
abandons delighting. (5) Causing fading away, he abandons greed. (6)
Causing cessation, he abandons originating. (7) Relinquishing, he aban-
dons grasping' (Ps.i,58).
3
5. So, of these three kinds of full-understanding, only full-understand-
ing as the known has been attained by this meditator as yet, which is
because the delimitation of formations and the discernment of conditions
have already been accomplished; the other two still remain to be at-
tained. Hence it was said above: 'Besides, knowledge of what is the path
and what is not the path arises when full-understanding as investigation
is occurring, and full-understanding as investigation comes next to full-
understanding as the known. So this is also a reason why one who
desires to accomplish this purification by knowledge and vision of what
is the path and what is not the path should first of all apply himself to
comprehension by groups' (§2).
[INSIGHT: COMPREHENSION BY GROUPS]
6. Here is the text:
'How is it that understanding of defining past, future and present
states by summarisation is knowledge of comprehension?
'Any materiality whatever, whether past, future or present, internal
or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near—he defines
all materiality as impermanent: this is one kind of comprehension. He
defines it as painful: this is one kind of comprehension. He defines it as
not-self: this is one kind of comprehension. Any feeling whatever ...
Any perception whatever ... Any formations whatever ... Any conscious-
ness whatever ...—he defines all consciousness as impermanent: ... He
defines it as not-self: this is one kind of comprehension. The eye ...
(etc.) ... ageing-and-death, whether past, future or present, he defines it
as impermanent: this is one kind of comprehension. He defines it as
painful: this is one kind of comprehension. He defines it as not-self: this
is one kind of comprehension.
7. 'Understanding of defining by summarisation thus, "Materiality,
whether past, future or present, is impermanent in the sense of destruc-
tion, painful in the sense of terror, not-self in the sense of having no
core", is knowledge of comprehension. Understanding of defining by
generalization thus, "Feeling ... [608] (etc.)... Consciousness ... Eye ...
(etc.) ... Ageing-and-death, whether past ... "is knowledge of compre-
hension.
'Understanding of defining by summarisation thus, "Materiality,
whether past, future or present, is impermanent, formed, dependently
arisen, subject to destruction, subject to fall, subject to fading away,
subject to cessation", is knowledge of comprehension. Understanding of
defining by generalization thus, "Feeling ... (etc.) ... Consciousness ...
Eye ... (etc.) ... Ageing-and-death, whether past, future or present, is
impermanent, formed, dependently arisen, subject to destruction, subject
to fall, subject to fading away, subject to cessation" is knowledge of
comprehension.
8. 'Understanding of defining by summarisation thus, "With birth as
condition there is ageing-and-death; without birth as condition there is
no ageing-and-death", is knowledge of comprehension. Understanding
of defining by generalization thus, "In the past and in the future with
birth as condition there is ageing-and-death; without birth as condition
there is no ageing-and-death", is knowledge of comprehension. Under-
standing of defining by generalization thus, "With becoming as condi-
tion there is birth ... With ignorance as condition there are formations;
without ignorance as condition there are no formations", is knowledge of
comprehension. Understanding of defining by generalization thus, "In
the past and in the future with ignorance as condition there are forma-
tions; without ignorance as condition there are no formations" is knowl-
edge of comprehension.
'Knowledge is in the sense of that being known and understanding
is in the sense of the act of understanding that. Hence it was said:
"Understanding of defining past, future and present states by summarisa-
tion is knowledge of comprehension" ' (Ps.i,53f.).
9. Herein, the abbreviation, 'The eye ... (etc.) ... Ageing-and-death' ,
should be understood to represent the following sets of things elided:
1. The states that occur in the doors [of consciousness] together
with the doors and the objects.
2. The five aggregates.
3. The six doors.
4. The six objects.
5. The six kinds of consciousness.
6. The six kinds of contact.
7. The six kinds of feeling.
8. The six kinds of perception.
9. The six kinds of volition.
10. The six kinds of craving.
11. The six kinds of applied thought.
12. The six kinds of sustained thought.
13. The six elements.
14. The ten kasinas.
15. The thirty-two bodily aspects.
16. The twelve bases.
17. The eighteen elements.
18. The twenty-two faculties.
19. The three elements.
20. The nine kinds of becoming.
21. The four jhanas.
22. The four measureless states.
23. The four [immaterial] attainments.
24. The twelve members of the dependent origination.
10. For this is said in the Patisambhida in the description of what is to
be directly known: 'Bhikkhus, all is to be directly known. And what is
all that is to be directly known? [609] (1) Eye is to be directly known;
visible objects are to be directly known; eye-consciousness ... eye-con-
tact ... feeling, pleasant or painful or neither-painful-nor-pleasant, that
arises due to eye-contact is also to be directly known. Ear ... Mind ...
feeling, pleasant or painful or neither-painful-nor-pleasant, that arises
due to mind-contact is also to be directly known.
11. '(2) Materiality is to be directly known ... consciousness is to be
directly known. (3) Eye ... mind ... (4) Visible objects ... mental objects
... (5) Eye-consciousness ... mind-consciousness ... (6) Eye-contact ...
mind-contact .. . (7) Eye-contact-born feeling ... mind-contact-born feel-
ing ... (8) Perception of visible objects ... perception of mental objects
... (9) Volition regarding visible objects ... volition regarding mental
objects .. . (10) Craving for visible objects .. . craving for mental objects
.. . (11) Applied thought about visible objects .. . applied thought about
mental objects .. . (12) Sustained thought about visible objects ... sus-
tained thought about mental objects .. . (13) The earth element .. . the
consciousness element .. . (14) The earth kasina .. . the consciousness
kasina .. . (15) Head hairs .. . brain .. . (16) The eye base .. . the mental
object base .. . (17) The eye element .. . the mind-consciousness element
.. . (18) The eye faculty .. . the final-knower faculty .. . (19) The sense-
desire element .. . the fine-material element .. . the immaterial element
.. . (20) Sense-desire becoming ... fine-material becoming .. . immaterial
becoming .. . percipient becoming .. . non-percipient becoming ... nei-
ther percipient nor non-percipient becoming .. . one-constituent becom-
ing .. . four-constituent becoming .. . five-constituent becoming .. . (21)
The first jhana .. . the fourth jhana .. . (22) The mind-deliverance of
loving-kindness .. . the mind-deliverance of equanimity .. . (23) The
attainment of the base consisting of boundless space .. . the attainment
of the base consisting of neither perception nor non-perception .. .
(24) Ignorance is to be directly known .. . ageing-and-death is to be
directly known' (Ps.i,5f.).
12. Since all this detail is given there it has been abbreviated here. But
what is thus abbreviated includes the supramundane states. These should
not be dealt with at this stage because they are not amenable to compre-
hension. And as regards those that are amenable to comprehension a
beginning should be made by comprehending those among them that are
obvious to and easily discernible by the individual [meditator].
[COMPREHENSION BY GROUPS—APPLICATION OF TEXT]
13. Here is the application of the directions dealing with the aggregates:
'Any materiality whatever, (i-iii) whether past, future or present, (iv-v)
internal or external, (vi-vii) gross or subtle, (viii-ix) inferior or superior,
(x-xi) far or near—he defines all materiality as impermanent: this is one
kind of comprehension. He defines it as painful: [610] this is one kind of
comprehension. He defines it as not-self: this is one kind of comprehen-
sion' (see §6). At this point this bhikkhu [takes] all materiality, which is
described without specifying as 'any materiality whatever*, and having
delimited it in the eleven instances, namely, with the past triad and with
the four dyads beginning with the internal dyad, he 'defines all material-
ity as impermanent', he comprehends that it is impermanent. How? In
the way stated next. For this is said: 'Materiality, whether past, future or
present, is impermanent in the sense of destruction'.
14. Accordingly, he comprehends the materiality that is past as 'imper-
manent in the sense of destruction' because it was destroyed in the past
and did not reach this becoming; and he comprehends the materiality
that is future as 'impermanent in the sense of destruction' since it will be
produced in the next becoming, will be destroyed there too, and will not
pass on to a further becoming; and he comprehends the materiality that
is present as 'impermanent in the sense of destruction9
since it is de-
stroyed here and does not pass beyond. And he comprehends the materi-
ality that is internal as 'impermanent in the sense of destruction* since it
is destroyed as internal and does not pass on to the external state. And
he comprehends the materiality that is external ... gross ... subtle ...
inferior ... superior ... far ... And he comprehends the materiality that is
near as 'impermanent in the sense of destruction' since it is destroyed
there and does not pass on to the far state. And all this is impermanent in
the sense of destruction. Accordingly, there is 'one kind of comprehen-
sion' in this way; but it is effected in eleven ways.
15. And all that [materiality] is 'painful in the sense of terror'. In the
sense of terror because of its terrifyingness; for what is impermanent
brings terror, as it does to the deities in the SIhopama Sutta (S.iii,84). So
this is also painful in the sense of terror. Accordingly, there is one kind
of comprehension in this way too; but it is effected in eleven ways.
16. And just as it is painful, so too all that [materiality] is 'not-self in the
sense of having no core'. In the sense of having no core because of the
absence of any core of self conceived as a self, an abider, a doer, an
experiencer, one who is his own master; for what is impermanent is
painful (S.iii,82), and it is impossible to escape the impermanence, or the
rise and fall and oppression, of self, so how could it have the state of a
doer, and so on? Hence it is said, 'Bhikkhus, were materiality self, it
would not lead to affliction' (S.iii,66), and so on. So this is also not-self
in the sense of having no core. Accordingly, there is one kind of compre-
hension in this way too, but it is effected in eleven ways. [611] The same
method applies to feeling, and so on.
17. But what is impermanent is necessarily classed as formed, etc., and
so in order to show the synonyms for that [impermanence], or in order to
show how the attention given to it occurs in different ways, it is restated
in the text thus: 'Materiality, whether past, future or present, is imperma-
nent, formed, dependency arisen, subject to destruction, subject to fall,
subject to fading away, subject to cessation' (§7). The same method
applies to feeling, and so on.
No comments:
Post a Comment