General (conclusion to the direct-knowledges)

102.

The Helper, knower of five aggregates,
Had these five direct-knowledges to tell;
When they are known, there are concerning them
These general matters to be known as well.

103. Among these, the divine eye, called knowledge of passing away and reappearance, has two accessory kinds of knowledge, that is to say, “knowledge of the future” and “knowledge of faring according to deeds.” So these two along with the five beginning with the kinds of supernormal power make seven kinds of direct-knowledge given here.

104. Now, in order to avoid confusion about the classification of their objects:

The Sage has told four object triads
By means of which one can infer
Just how these seven different kinds
Of direct-knowledges occur.

105. Here is the explanation. Four object triads have been told by the Greatest of the Sages. What four? The limited-object triad, the path-object triad, the pastobject triad, and the internal-object triad.^[1]

106. (1) Herein, knowledge of supernormal power [430] occurs with respect to seven kinds of object, that is to say, as having a limited or exalted, a past, future or present, and an internal or external object. How?

When he wants to go with an invisible body after making the body dependent on the mind, and he converts the body to accord with the mind (XII.119), and he sets it, mounts it, on the exalted consciousness, then taking it that the [word in the] accusative case is the proper object,^[2] it has a limited object because its object is the material body. When he wants to go with a visible body after making the mind dependent on the body and he converts the mind to accord with the body and sets it, mounts it, on the material body, then taking it that the [word in the] accusative case is the proper object, it has an exalted object because its object is the exalted consciousness.

107. But that same consciousness takes what has passed, has ceased, as its object, therefore it has a past object. In those who resolve about the future, as in the case of the Elder Mahā Kassapa in the Great Storing of the Relics, and others, it has a future object. When the Elder Mahā Kassapa was making the great relic store, it seems, he resolved thus, “During the next two hundred and eighteen years in the future let not these perfumes dry up or these flowers wither or these lamps go out,” and so it all happened. When the Elder Assagutta saw the Community of Bhikkhus eating dry food in the Vattaniya Lodging he resolved thus, “Let the water pool become cream of curd every day before the meal,” and when the water was taken before the meal it was cream of curd; but after the meal there was only the normal water.^[3]

108. At the time of going with an invisible body after making the body dependent on the mind it has a present object.

At the time of converting the mind to accord with the body, or the body to accord with the mind, and at the time of creating one’s own appearance as a boy, etc., it has an internal object because it makes one’s own body and mind its object. But at the time of showing elephants, horses, etc., externally it has an external object.

This is how, firstly, the kinds of supernormal power should be understood to occur with respect to the seven kinds of object.

109. (2) Knowledge of the divine ear element occurs with respect to four kinds of object, that is to say, as having a limited, and a present, and an internal or external object. How?

Since it makes sound its object and since sound is limited (see Vibh 74), it therefore has a limited object.^[4] But since it occurs only by making existing sound its object, it has a present object. At the time of hearing sounds in one’s own belly it has an internal object. At the time of hearing the sounds of others it has an external object. [431] This is how the knowledge of the divine ear element should be understood to occur with respect to the four kinds of object.

110. (3) Knowledge of penetration of minds occurs with respect to eight kinds of object, that is to say, as having a limited, exalted or measureless object, path as object, and a past, future or present object, and an external object. How?

At the time of knowing others’ sense-sphere consciousness it has a limited object. At the time of knowing their fine-material-sphere or immaterial-sphere consciousness it has an exalted object. At the time of knowing path and fruition it has a measureless object. And here an ordinary man does not know a streamenterer’s consciousness, nor does a stream-enterer know a once-returner’s, and so up to the Arahant’s consciousness. But an Arahant knows the consciousness of all the others. And each higher one knows the consciousnesses of all those below him. This is the difference to be understood. At the time when it has path consciousness as its object it has path as object. But when one knows another’s consciousness within the past seven days, or within the future seven days, then it has a past object and has a future object respectively.

111. How does it have a present object? “Present” (paccuppanna) is of three kinds, that is to say, present by moment, present by continuity, and present by extent. Herein, what has reached arising (uppāda), presence (ṭhiti), and dissolution (bhaṅga) is present by moment. What is included in one or two rounds of continuity is present by continuity.

112. Herein, when someone goes to a well-lit place after sitting in the dark, an object is not clear at first; until it becomes clear, one or two rounds of continuity should be understood [to pass] meanwhile. And when he goes into an inner closet after going about in a well-lit place, a visible object is not immediately evident at first; until it becomes clear, one or two rounds of continuity should be understood [to pass] meanwhile. When he stands at a distance, although he sees the alterations (movements) of the hands of washer-men and the alterations (movements) of the striking of gongs, drums, etc., yet he does not hear the sound at first (see Ch. XIV n. 22); until he hears it, one or two rounds of continuity should be understood [to pass] meanwhile. This, firstly, is according to the Majjhima reciters.

113. The Saṃyutta reciters, however, say that there are two kinds of continuity, that is to say, material continuity and immaterial continuity: that a material continuity lasts as long as the [muddy] line of water touching the bank when one treads in the water takes to clear,^[5] as long as the heat of the body in one who has walked a certain extent takes to die down, as long as the blindness in one who has come from the sunshine into a room does not depart, as long as when, after someone has been giving attention to his meditation subject in a room and then opens the shutters by day and looks out, the dazzling in his eyes does not die down; and that an immaterial continuity consists in two or three rounds of impulsions. Both of these are [according to them] called “present by continuity.” [432]

114. What is delimited by a single becoming (existence) is called present by extent, with reference to which it is said in the Bhaddekaratta Sutta: “Friends, the mind and mental objects are both what is present. Consciousness is bound by desire and greed for what is present. Because consciousness is bound by desire and greed he delights in that. When he delights in that, then he is vanquished with respect to present states” (M III 197).

And here, “present by continuity” is used in the Commentaries while “present by extent” is used in the Suttas.

115. Herein, some^[6] say that consciousness “present by moment” is the object of knowledge of penetration of minds. What reason do they give? It is that the consciousness of the possessor of supernormal power and that of the other arise in a single moment. Their simile is this: just as when a handful of flowers is thrown into the air, the stalk of one flower is probably struck by the stalk of another, and so too, when with the thought, “I will know another’s mind,” the mind of a multitude is adverted to as a mass, then the mind of one is probably penetrated by the mind of the other either at the moment of arising or at the moment of presence or at the moment of dissolution.

116. That, however, is rejected in the Commentaries as erroneous, because even if one went on adverting for a hundred or a thousand years, there is never copresence of the two consciousnesses, that is to say, of that with which he adverts and that [of impulsion] with which he knows, and because the flaw of plurality of objects follows if presence [of the same object] to both adverting and impulsion is not insisted on. What should be understood is that the object is present by continuity and present by extent.

117. Herein, another’s consciousness during a time measuring two or three cognitive series with impulsions extending before and after the [strictly] currently existing cognitive series with impulsions, is all called “present by continuity.” But in the Saṃyutta Commentary it is said that “present by extent” should be illustrated by a round of impulsions.

118. That is rightly said. Here is the illustration. The possessor of supernormalpower who wants to know another’s mind adverts. The adverting [consciousness] makes [the other’s consciousness that is] present by moment its object and ceases together with it. After that there are four or five impulsions, of which the last is the supernormal-power consciousness, the rest being of the sense sphere. That same [other’s] consciousness, which has ceased, is the object of all these too, and so they do not have different objects because they have an object that is “present by extent.” And while they have a single object it is only the supernormal-power consciousness that actually knows another’s consciousness, not the others, just as in the eye-door it is only eye-consciousness that actually sees the visible datum, not the others.

119. So this has a present object in what is present by continuity and what is present by extent. [433] Or since what is present by continuity falls within what is present by extent, it can therefore be understood that it has a present object simply in what is present by extent.

It has an external object because it has only another’s mind as its object.

This is how knowledge of penetration of minds should be understood to occur with respect to the eight kinds of objects.

120. (4) Knowledge of past lives occurs with respect to eight kinds of object, that is to say, as having a limited, exalted, or measureless object, path as object, a past object, and an internal, external, or not-so-classifiable object. How?

At the time of recollecting sense-sphere aggregates it has a limited object. At the time of recollecting fine-material-sphere or immaterial-sphere aggregates it has an exalted object. At the time of recollecting a path developed, or a fruition realized, in the past either by oneself or by others, it has a measureless object. At the time of recollecting a path developed it has a path as object. But it invariably has a past object.

121. Herein, although knowledge of penetration of minds and knowledge of faring according to deeds also have a past object, still, of these two, the object of the knowledge of penetration of minds is only consciousness within the past seven days. It knows neither other aggregates nor what is bound up with aggregates [that is, name, surname, and so on]. It is said indirectly that it has a path as object since it has the consciousness associated with the path as its object. Also, the object of knowledge of faring according to deeds is simply past volition. But there is nothing, whether past aggregates or what is bound up with aggregates, that is not the object of knowledge of past lives;for that is on a par with omniscient knowledge with respect to past aggregates and states bound up with aggregates. This is the difference to be understood here.

122. This is the method according to the Commentaries here. But it is said in the Paṭṭhāna: “Profitable aggregates are a condition, as object condition, for knowledge of supernormal power, for knowledge of penetration of minds, for knowledge of past lives, for knowledge of faring according to deeds, and for knowledge of the future” (Paṭṭh I 154), and therefore four aggregates are also the objects of knowledge of penetration of minds and of knowledge of faring according to deeds. And there too profitable and unprofitable [aggregates are the object] of knowledge of faring according to deeds.

123. At the time of recollecting one’s own aggregates it has an internal object. At the time of recollecting another’s aggregates it has an external object. At the time of recollecting [the concepts consisting in] name, race (surname) in the way beginning, “In the past there was the Blessed One Vipassin. His mother was Bhandumatī. His father was Bhandumant” (see D II 6–7), and [the concept consisting in] the sign of the earth, etc., it has a not-so-classifiable object. And here the name and race (surname, lineage) must be regarded not as the actual words but as the meaning of the words, which is established by convention and bound up with aggregates. For the actual words [434] are “limited” since they are included by the sound base, according as it is said: “The discrimination of language has a limited object” (Vibh 304). Our preference here is this.

This is how the knowledge of past lives should be understood to occur with respect to the eight kinds of object.

124. (5) Knowledge of the divine eye occurs with respect to four kinds of object, that is to say, as having a limited, a present, and an internal or external object. How? Since it makes materiality its object and materiality is limited (see Vibh 62) it therefore has a limited object. Since it occurs only with respect to existing materiality it has a present object. At the time of seeing materiality inside one’s own belly, etc., it has an internal object. At the time of seeing another’s materiality it has an external object. This is how the knowledge of the divine eye should be understood to occur with respect to the four kinds of object.

125. (6) Knowledge of the future occurs with respect to eight kinds of object, that is to say, as having a limited or exalted or immeasurable object, a path as object, a future object, and an internal, external, or not-so classifiable object. How? At the time of knowing this, “This one will be reborn in the future in the sense sphere,” it has a limited object. At the time of knowing, “He will be reborn in the fine-material or immaterial sphere,” it has an exalted object. At the time of knowing, “He will develop the path, he will realize fruition,” it has an immeasurable object. At the time of knowing, “He will develop the path,” it has a path as object too. But it invariably has a future object.

126. Herein, although knowledge of penetration of minds has a future object too, nevertheless its object is then only future consciousness that is within seven days; for it knows neither any other aggregate nor what is bound up with aggregates. But there is nothing in the future, as described under the knowledge of past lives (§121), that is not an object of knowledge of the future.

127. At the time of knowing, “I shall be reborn there,” it has an internal object. At the time of knowing, “So-and-so will be reborn there,” it has an external object. But at the time of knowing name and race (surname) in the way beginning, “In the future the Blessed One Metteyya will arise. His father will be the brahman Subrahmā. His mother will be the brahmani Brahmavatī” (see D III 76), it has a not-so-classifiable object in the way described under knowledge of past lives (§123).

This is how the knowledge of the future should be understood.

128. (7) Knowledge of faring according to deeds occurs with respect to five kinds of object, that is to say, as having a limited or exalted, a past, and an internal or external object. How? At the time of knowing sense-sphere kamma (deeds) it has a limited object. [435] At the time of knowing fine-material-sphere or immaterialsphere kamma it has an exalted object. Since it knows only what is past it has a past object. At the time of knowing one’s own kamma it has an internal object. At the time of knowing another’s kamma it has an external object. This is how the knowledge of faring according to deeds should be understood to occur with respect to the five kinds of object.

129. And when [the knowledge] described here both as “having an internal object” and “having an external object” knows [these objects] now internally and now externally, it is then said that it has an internal-external object as well.

The thirteenth chapter concluding “The Description of Direct-knowledge” in the Path of Purification composed for the purpose of gladdening good people.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

See Abhidhamma Mātikā (“schedule”), Dhs 1f. This consists of 22 sets of triple classifications (tika) and 100 sets of double ones (duka). The first triad “profitable, unprofitable, and [morally] indeterminate,” and the first dyad is “root-cause, notroot-cause.” The Mātikā is used in the Dhammasaṅgaṇī (for which it serves as the basic structure), in the Vibhaṅga (in some of the “Abhidhamma Sections” and in the “Questionnaires”) and in the Paṭṭhāna. All dhammas are either classifiable according to these triads and dyads, under one of the headings, if the triad or dyad is allembracing, or are called “not-so-classifiable” (na-vattabba), if the triad or dyad is not. The four triads mentioned here are: no. 13, “dhammas with a limited object, with an exalted object, with a measureless object”; no. 16, “dhammas with a path as object, with a path as root-cause, with path as predominance”; no. 19, “dhammas with a past object, with a future object, with a present object”; and no. 21, “dhammas with an internal object, with an external object, with an internal-external object.”

[2]:

The “word in the accusative case” is in the first instance “body,” governed by the verb “converts” (kāyaṃ pariṇāmeti); see Vism-mhṭ.

[3]:

Vism-mhṭ comments: “Although with the words: ‘These perfumes,’ etc., he apprehends present perfumes, etc., nevertheless the object of his resolving consciousness is actually their future materiality that is to be associated with the distinction of not drying up. This is because the resolve concerns the future … ‘Cream of curd’: when resolving, his object is the future appearance of curd.”

Vattanīyasenāsana was apparently a monastery in the Vindhya Hills (Viñjaṭavī): see Mhv XIX.6; Dhs-a 419. The Elders Assagutta and Rohaṇa instructed Kajaṅgala who was sent to convert Menander (Lamotte, Histoire de la Bouddhisme Indien, p. 440).

[4]:

Cf. also Vibh 62 and 91.

[5]:

Vism-mhṭ adds: “Some however explain the meaning in this way: It is as long as, when one has stepped on the dry bank with a wet foot, the water line on the foot does not disappear.”

[6]:

The residents of the Abhayagiri Monastery in Anurādhapura (Vism-mhṭ).