[CHAPTER II.

The Category of Form considered by way of dual attributes-positive and negative (duvidhe na rupasangaho).

There is form which is derived.']

[596] What is that form which is derived?

This and the following italicised headings are quoted from the table of contents, $585, etc.-atthi rupam upādā, and again, atthi rupam no upada. The ablative resembles our idiom qua derived '-form as derived. In § 581 and in § 597, etc. the gerund upadaya is employed. Depending on, not released from, is the paraphrase (Asl. 300, 305). Grounded in' were an approximate rendering, the literal meaning being taking hold of.'

Ayatanam. The word means (see my Introduction) simplyfield,' locus, range, Gebiet.

Lit. body. The Upanishads use skin. j. our modern term skin-sensibility,' in extension of "touch,' 'tactile sense. The corresponding objective sphere of the tangible is classed among things underived. See § 647.

1

[597] What is that form which is the sphere of vision (cakkhayatanam)?

The eye,1 that is to say the sentient organ, derived from

1 Cakkhu, which stands for vision, sense of sight and eye. Eye,' however, is always in the present work to be understood as the seeing faculty or visual sense, and not as the physical organ or eye of flesh' (mamsa-cakkhu). The Cy. gives an account of the eye, of which the following is the substance: First the aggregate organism (sasambhara-cakkhu). A ball of flesh fixed in a cavity, bound by the socket-bone beneath and by the bone of the eyebrow above, by the angles of the eye at the sides, by the brain within and by the eyelashes without. There are fourteen constituents: the four elements, the six attributes dependent on them, viz., colour, odour, taste, sap of life, form (santhanam), and collocation (sambhavo); vitality, nature, body-sensibility (kayappasado) and the visual sentient organ. The last four have their source in karma. When 'the world,' seeing an obvious extended white object fancies it perceives the eye, it only perceives the basis (or seat -vatthu) of the eye. And this ball of flesh, bound to the brain by nerve-fibres, is white, black and red, and contains the solid, the liquid, the lambent and the gaseous. It is white by superfluity of humour, black by superfluity of bile, red by superfluity of blood, rigid by superfluity of the solid, exuding by superfluity of the liquid, inflamed by

See note on p. 174.

the Great Phenomena, forming part of the nature of the self, invisible and reacting-by which eye, invisible and

superfluity of the lambent, quivering by superfluity of the gaseous. But that sentient organ (pasado) which is there bound, inherent, derived from the four great principles-this is the visual sense (pasadacakkhu). Placed in the midst and in the front of the black disc of the composite eye, the white disc surrounding it (note that the iris is either not distinguished or is itself the black dise) and in the circle of vision, in the region where the forms of adjacent bodies come to appear (there seems here some omission in the tert), it permeates the seven ocular membranes as sprinkled oil will permeate seven cotton wicks. And so it stands, aided by the four elements, sustaining, binding, maturing, moving (samudiranam)-like an infant prince and his four nurses, feeding, bathing, dressing and fanning him-maintained by nutriment both physical (utu) and mental, protected by the (normal) span of life, invested with colour, smell, taste and so forth, in size the measure of a louse's head-stands duly constituting itself the door of the seat of visual cognitions, etc. For as it has been said by the Commander of the Doctrine (Sariputta):

The visual sense by which he beholds forms

Is small and delicate, comparable to a louse's head. The elaborate architectonics of this paragraph in the original is a fine effort of the Commentator's style. I am not clear to what the etc.' after 'cognitions' alludes. But the expression occurs in the description of each sense. Cf. the description in Hardy, Man. of Buddhism,' p. 419.

Pasado. By selecting this term, continues the Cy., he (the Buddha) rejects the other (physical) eye. So far as I know, the as yet unidentified verses quoted in the previous note are the only early instance of the word pasado, meaning literally clearness, brightness, serenity, faith, being used to denote the receptive reacting sense-agency. It is not easy to divine exactly how the Buddhists came to use the word in this connexion. It is used co-ordinately for all the other senses, hence the sensuous signification had nothing to do with the specific nature of sight (unless this was

1 See note on p. 175.

* See note on p. 175.

reacting, one has seen, sees, will, or may see form that is visible and impingeing-this that is sight, the sphere of sight, the element of vision, the faculty of vision, this that is 'a world,'' a door,'' an ocean,' 'lucent,' 'a field,' 'a

made the Type of all other sensation). Taken causatively it may conceivably have meant either that which makes clear-a revealer, as it were (cf. Böthl. and Roth-prasadana), or that which gratifies or satisfies (Beruhigen), both meanings emphasizing psychological process, rather than 'product' or 'seat.'

Attabhava-pariyapanno. The body and the five skandhas are here termed nature of the self, after the usage of foolish folk who say, "This is myself" (Asl. 308). Thus the usage of attabhavō was a concession on the part of the Great Teacher to animistic phraseology.

Le., impact and reaction are set up in the eye' (ibid.). 3 Paraphrased by ayam satto, any given individual (ibid.).

6

This and the following similes will be quotations of metaphors applied to the senses in the Sutta Pitaka. Eg., that of the empty village' occurs in S. iv. 174— Suñño gamo ti kho, bhikkhave, channam ajjhattikānam [? ayatananam] adhivacanam. That of a 'door,' which in the age of the Commentaries was the regular term for sense-organ, is, I believe, seldom used in the Sutta Pitaka, and then only as a poetical figure, not as a technical term. Cf., e.g., indriyesuguttadvaro (D I., 63, 250). Buddhaghosa simply paraphrases the various metaphors' world,' by reason of wasting and decay; 'door,' by reason of customary resort; ocean,' by reason of its insatiableness; 'lucent,' by reason of its purity; 'field,' by reason of the springing up (growth) of contact, etc.; base,' by reason of its fixed seat; 'guide,' 'guidance, by reason of its leading the nature-of-the-self showing agreements and differences; 'hither shore,' by reason of its being included in the body of this life' (or individuality, sakkayam); empty village,' because it is common to many, because there is no headman (i.e., Ego or soul. Many must mean the individual considered as an aggregate of constituents.) The metaphors, it will be seen, are applied equally, with the sole exception of guide' and 'guidance,' to each remaining sense. By the explanation of these two figures given in the Cy., they should have been

basis, a guide,'' guidance,' the hither shore,' an empty village'this is that form which constitutes the sphere of vision.

[598] What is that form which is the sphere of vision?

The eye, that is to say the sentient organ, derived from the four Great Phenomena, forming part of the nature of the self, invisible and reacting, and against which eye, invisible and reacting, form that is visible and impingeing, has impinged,' impinges, will, or may impinge- this that is sight, the sphere of sight, the constituent element of sight, etc. [continue as in § 597].

[599] What is that form which is the sphere of vision? The eye, that is to say the sentient organ, derived from the four Great Phenomena, forming part of the nature of the self, invisible and reacting, which eye, invisible and reacting, has impinged, impinges, will, or may impinge on form that is visible and impingeing-this that is sight, the sphere of sight, etc. [continue as in § 597].

[600] What is that form which is the sphere of vision? The eye, that is to say the sentient organ, derived from the four Great Phenomena, forming part of the nature of the self, invisible and reacting, (i.) depending on which eye, in consequence of some visible form, there has arisen, arises, will, or may arise

left to stand for each sense. Buddhaghosa, however, is of course not responsible for the expressions used in the Pitakas. Yet it is slightly disappointing that he makes no effort to account for an omission which is not without psychological justification.

In this answer, according to the Cy. (p. 309), involuntary visual sensation is described, as when lightning flashes on the sight of one not looking for it.

Here (Asl. 309) we have voluntary sense-impression described-the process in the case of one who, by his own desire, seeking to look at some object, concentrates his vision.'

3 Cakkhum nissaya, rupam arabbha.

Here there should be in the text... pe... as in