Latent Tendencies

Preface

This book is a translation from Thai of Bulletin II, of the “Dhamma Study and Support Foundation” which deals with the latent tendencies, anusayas. Since each citta that arises and falls away is immediately succeeded by the next citta, unwholesome and wholesome behaviour and inclinations are accumulated from moment to moment and from life to life. The latent tendencies are unwholesome inclinations that are accumulated. They are the following:

sense-desire (kāma-rāga), aversion (paṭigha), conceit (māna), wrong view (diṭṭhi), doubt (vicikicchā), desire for becoming (continued existence, bhavarāga), and ignorance (avijjā).

It is essential to have more understanding of the latent tendencies and their power. They are called subtle defilements because they do not arise with the akusala citta, but they are powerful. Since they have not been eradicated they can strongly condition and influence our behaviour. They lie dormant in the citta like microbes infesting the body. So long as they have not been eradicated we are like sick people, because they can condition the arising of akusala citta when there are the appropriate conditions. They can condition the arising of akusala citta even to the degree of transgression of sīla at any time, and thus, more defilements are accumulated again and added to the latent tendencies. The teaching of the latent tendencies helps us to see why the defilements in our life are so tenacious, arising again and again, and why their arising is unforeseeable and uncontrollable.

When we study the enumeration of the latent tendencies, we should remember that these latent tendencies are not abstract notions. The latent tendency of sense-desire or sensuous clinging conditions akusala citta with attachment to any kind of pleasant object. We may have expectations as to kind words or praise from other people. This is selfish desire that has been deeply accumulated and is very powerful. The latent tendency of aversion conditions akusala citta with aversion, but we should know that this has many shades. It is not only a matter of hate or anger, but it also arises when we are upset or depressed because we do not receive the pleasant object we were hoping for. The latent tendency of conceit conditions the arising of akusala citta with clinging to the importance of self. It can arise on account of any object experienced through the six doorways, and it often motivates our speech and actions. All latent tendencies condition the arising of akusala citta, but because of the accumulated ignorance we do not notice their arising, we are deluded time and again.

Through the Abhidhamma we come to know the deep underlying motives of our actions, speech and thoughts. We often deceive ourselves as to the motives of our actions, speech and thoughts that seem to be wholesome. In reality they are mostly directed towards our own gain, they are motivated by selfish desire. With a growing understanding of the latent tendencies that are powerful conditions for all akusala cittas in our life, we will be urged to be mindful of all realities, akusala included. By reflecting and being aware of whatever reality appears we can learn to become more sincere and truthful with regard to the cittas that arise.

In this book there are quotations from the texts of the Tipiṭaka and commentaries which deal with the latent tendencies and which explain in detail their characteristics and the way they are eradicated.

For the quotations of the texts in English I used the following texts:

• the “Guide through the Abhidhamma Piṭaka” by Venerable Nyanatiloka, BPS.
• The Book of Analysis (Vibhaṅga), Pali Text Society.
• The Path of Discrimination (Paṭisambhidāmagga), Pali Text Society.
• The Expositor (Atthasālinī), Pali Text Society.
• The Dispeller of Delusion (Sammohavinodanī), Pali Text Society.
• The “Inception of Discipline and The Vinaya Nidāna”, Pali Text Society.
• The commentary to the “All-Embracing Net of Views” (Brahmajāla Sutta), Venerable Bodhi, BPS.
• The commentary to the “Abhidhammatthasaṅgaha” (Abhidhammatthavibhāvinī), translated as “Exposition of the Topics of Abhidhamma”, Pali Text Society.
• The “Yamaka”, the sixth book of the Abhidhamma, has not been translated into English.

I have added the footnotes in the translation of this treatise.

Nina van Gorkom

Introduction

Issues

• 1. Are there latent tendencies?
• 2. What are the latent tendencies?
• 3. Can the latent tendencies be eradicated by the eightfold Path?

Conclusion of the first Issue:

There are latent tendencies. They are realities each with their own distinct characteristic.

The reasons for this conclusion:

The latent tendencies are subtle defilements which are realities each with their own characteristic. They are enumerated in the Tipiṭaka and the Commentaries, where it is stated that the Buddha, the Fully Enlightened One, understood these by his perfect knowledge of beings’ biases and underlying tendencies (āsayānusaya ñāṇa).

The “Knowledge of beings’ biases and underlying tendencies” is mentioned in the “Path of Discrimination”, “Paṭisambhidāmagga” of the Khuddaka Nikāya, in the Mātika (Table of Contents), among the seventy-three kinds of knowledge. These latent tendencies are further explained in its Commentary, the “Saddhammappakāsinī” under the Explanation (Niddesa) of Knowledge of beings’ biases and underlying tendencies (āsayānusaya ñāṇa).

The “Path of Discrimination”, in the Mātika, mentions the “Knowledge of beings’ biases and underlying tendencies” as the sixtynineth kind of knowledge among the seventy-three kinds of knowledge. This knowledge is not shared by disciples, it is only the Buddha who has this knowledge. We read in the “Path of Discrimination”:

“There are seventy-three kinds of knowledge and among these the first sixty-seven are shared by disciples. The last six are are not shared by disciples but are exclusively knowledges of the Buddha. These are: penetration of others’ faculties, knowledge of beings’ biases and underlying tendencies, knowledge of the twin metamorphosis, knowledge of the great compassion, omniscient knowledge and unobstructed knowledge.”¹

The Commentary to the “Path of Discrimination” (the ”Saddhammappakāsinī”) gives more explanations about the knowledge of beings’ biases and underlying tendencies.

As to the word “beings” we read in the “Kindred Sayings” (III, Khandhavagga, Ch XXIII, § 2, A being) that beings are involved in sensuous desire (chanda rāga) with regard to the khandha of material phenomena and so on, and that they are thus called beings (sattā). The text states that the Buddha said to Rādha:

“That desire, Rādha, that lust, that lure, that craving which is concerned with body - one is entangled thereby, fast entangled thereby, therefore is one called a being (satta)²

That desire, that lust, that lure, that craving which is concerned with feeling, with perception (saññā), the activities, consciousness - one is entangled thereby, fast entangled thereby, therefore is one called a being.”

With regard to the expression “biases and underlying tendencies”, āsayānusaya, some teachers who pay attention only to the letter and do not investigate the meaning, wrongly assume that this expression is only a name. However, other teachers investigate the meaning of the terms that are used. They define the meaning of the term satta, being, as someone who is endowed with all kinds of properties. As to the term āsaya³ bias, they explain this as dependence, abode or support on which beings depend. This term denotes the disposition to wrong view or to right view that has been accumulated. It denotes the disposition to all that is unwholesome, such as clinging to sense objects, or the disposition to all that is good, such as renunciation that has been accumulated.

The defilements that lie persisting in beings’ continuous stream of cittas are called anusaya, latent tendencies. This term denotes the defilements such as clinging to sense objects that is strong.

The terms āsaya and anusaya are joined together as āsayānusaya: biases and latent tendencies. It has become one word, which is actually a twin compound, formed by two words. The words disposition (adhimutti) and conduct (carita).⁴

In the text, after he (Sāriputta) has used the expression “knowledge of people’s biases and latent tendencies”, āsayānusaya ñāṇa, he speaks of the knowledge of people’s behaviour (carita) and resolutions or dispositions (adhimutti). We read (Ch 69, 585):

“Here the Perfect One knows beings’ biases, he knows their underlying tendencies (āsayānusaya ñāṇa), he knows their behaviour (carita), he knows their dispositions(adhimutti), he knows beings as capable and incapable.

586. What is the bias which is latent in beings? Beings are supported by the wrong view of existence or supported by the wrong view of non-existence⁵ thus: ‘The world is eternal’ or ‘The world is not eternal’ or ‘The world is finite’ or ‘The world is infinite’ or ‘The soul and the body are the same’ or ‘The soul is one, the body another’ or ‘A Perfect One is not after death’ or “A Perfect One both is and is not after death’ or ‘A Perfect One neither is nor is not after death.’ Or else, avoiding these extremes, they have ‘acceptance in conformity’⁶with respect to dhammas that are dependently arisen through specific conditionality. He also knows them as pursuing sensual-desires thus: ‘This person gives importance to sensual desires, is biassed to sensual desires, is inclined to sensual desires. He also knows them as pursuing renunciation thus: This person gives importance to renunciation, is biassed to renunciation, is inclined to renunciation.

He also knows them as pursuing ill-will thus: ‘This person gives importance to ill-will, is biassed to ill-will, is inclined to ill-will. He also knows them as pursuing non-ill-will thus: ‘This person gives importance to non-ill-will, is biassed to non-ill-will, is inclined to non-ill-will. He also knows them as pursuing stiffness-and-torpor thus: ‘This person gives importance to stiffness-and-torpor, is biassed to stiffness-and-torpor, is inclined to stiffness-and-torpor. He also knows them as pursuing perception of light thus: ‘This person gives importance to perception of light, is biassed to perception of light, is inclined to perception of light ⁷.

These are the biases (chanda) that become underlying tendencies in beings.

587. What are the defilements that are underlying tendencies in beings?

There are seven underlying tendencies (anusaya): Underlying tendency to greed for sense-desire (kāma-rāga), underlying tendency to aversion (paṭigha), underlying tendency to conceit (māna), underlying tendency to wrong view (diṭṭhi), underlying tendency to doubt (vicikicchā), underlying tendency to desire for becoming (continued existence, bhavarāga), and underlying tendency to ignorance (avijjā).”

From the above quoted text we can see that behaviour, habits and defilements are accumulated and become dormant in the succession of cittas. Since the Buddha has knowledge of beings’ biases and underlying tendencies (āsayānusaya ñāṇa), we know that there are underlying tendencies.

In the “Pañcappakaraṇatthakathā”, in the Commentary to the “Yamaka”, the Sixth Book of the Abhidhamma, we read in the section on the latent tendencies (anusaya-vāra) and the section on “possessed of latent tendencies” (sānusaya-vāra):

“In the section on ‘being possessed of latent tendencies’ the Buddha said : ‘Who has the latent tendency of sense desire, he is possessed of it’ .

It is just like someone who suffers extremely from the sickness of old age, and so on, and, so long as he is not cured from this sickness, is called a sick person even when illness does not arise.

It is the same in the case of someone with defilements who is traversing the round of rebirths whose latent tendencies have not been eradicated by the noble eightfold Path. Even though the latent tendencies do not arise he is called a person who is possessed of the latent tendencies...

The other words in this section are the same as those in the section on latent tendencies.”

Thus we see that there are latent tendencies in each of the cittas that are arising and falling away in succession so long as they have not been eradicated by the noble eightfold Path.

The latent tendencies have “arisen” in the sense of “having obtained a soil” (bhumiladdhuppanna)⁸. This refers to the defilements that cannot yet be eradicated and are present in their own soil.

First of all we should study the text that explains the meaning of the term “arisen”, uppanna, in the Commentary to the “Dhammasangaṇi”, the “Expositor” (Book I, Part II, Ch I, 67):

“Herein its word-definition: ‘present or existing’ is called uppanna, because it has arrived at the portal, so to speak, of genesis, etc., after the end of the previous state⁹. This word uppanna has many meanings: ‘past,’ ‘getting,’ ‘uprisen,’ ‘not discarded,’ ‘not completely cut off,’ ‘the totality of the three instants.’ In such passages as, ‘Bhikkhus, at that time Kakusandha, the Blessed One, the Saint has arisen in the world’- uppanna is used in the sense of ‘past’. ‘To the elder Ānanda has arisen a superfluous robe’- here uppanna means ‘getting’. ‘Even, bhikkhus, as a strong wind at intervals disperses a great mass of clouds that have arisen’- here upanna means ‘uprisen’. ‘The wandering of the mind which has arisen is difficult to remove; (mindfulness on respiration) then and there causes evil, i.e., immoral states, to disappear every time they have arisen,-here upanna means ‘not discarded’. ‘One who cultivates, practises many times the Ariyan Eightfold Path causes at intervals evil, i.e., immoral, states to disappear then and there every time they have arisen’ - here uppanna means ‘not cut off’. In the catechism, ‘Is a thing arisen in the course of generation ? Yes’–uppanna has the meaning of ‘reached the totality of the three instants,’ ‘is existing’, or ‘is present’. . . ”

From these text quotations we can see that the word ‘uppanna’, arisen, has many meanings. But here “arisen” in the sense of “having obtained a soil” (bhumiladdhuppanna) means: not cut off. “Arisen in the sense of having obtained a soil” refers to the defilements which have not been eradicated and which have obtained a soil.

In the Commentary to the “Book of Analysis”, the “Dispeller of Delusion”, Ch 8, Classification of the Right Efforts, Suttanta Division, 1448, it is said:

“But the five aggregates are called the plane of insight. These are divided into past, future and present. But the defilements inhering in these are not to be said to be past, future or present; inhering in the past aggregates, they are unabandoned. Inhering in the future aggregates and in the present aggregates, they are also unabandoned. This is called ‘arisen having obtained a plane’. Hence the ancients said: ‘The defilements which are unabolished in this or that plane are counted as arisen having obtained a soil’.”

The “Visuddhimagga”, in the explanation about “Purity by Knowledge and Vision” (Ch XXII, 81-86), gives an additional explication about “arisen in the sense of having obtained a soil”.

It states: “While unwholesomeness is still unabolished in any given soil [plane]¹⁰, it is called arisen by having soil [to grow in].” This refers to the latent tendencies that lie dormant in the citta.

We read further on (82):

“And here the difference between ‘soil’ and ‘having obtained a soil’ should be understood. For ‘soil’ (plane) means the five aggregates in the three planes of becoming, which are the objects of insight. ‘What has obtained a soil’ is an expression for defilements, capable of arising with respect to those aggregates. Those defilements have that soil (plane). That is why ‘by having soil [to grow in]’ is said.

And that is not meant in the sense of just making them the object¹¹. For defilements occupied with an object arise with respect to any aggregates including past or future ones as well [as present], and also with respect to the [subjectively] fully-understood aggregates in someone [else] whose cankers are destroyed, like those that arise in the rich man Soreyya with respect to the aggregates in Mahā-Kaccāna (Dh A. I, 325) and in the brahman student Nanda with respect to Uppalavaṇṇa (Dh A. II, 49), and so on. 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. But ‘arisen by having soil [to grow in]’ should be understood [subjectively] with respect to the bases [for them in oneself]. 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.

Now when defilements are inherent, in the sense of being unabandoned, in someone’s aggregates, it is only those aggregates of his that are basis for those defilements, not aggregates belonging to another. And only past aggregates, not others, are basis for defilements that inhere unabandoned in past aggregates. Likewise in the case of future aggregates, and so on. Similarly too only sense-sphere aggregates, not others, are the basis for defilements that inhere unabandoned in sense-sphere aggregates. Likewise in the case of the fine material and immaterial.

But in the case of the Stream Enterer, etc., when a given defilement, which is a root of the round, has been abandoned by means of a given path in a given Noble Person’s aggregates, then, his aggregates are no longer called ‘soil’ for such defilement since they are no longer a basis for it. . . ”

Therefore, the defilements that are dormant in the citta, the latent tendencies, are realities which each have their own characteristic. These can be eradicated by the development of insight, and this means, by knowing the true nature of the aggregates or the realities which appear.

Chapter 1Three Levels of Defilements

There are three levels of defilements. In the commentaries to the Vinaya, the Suttanta and the Abhidhamma, and in the subcommentaries, there are explanations of the elimination of the three levels of defilements, namely, the anusaya kilesa (latent tendencies), the pariyuṭṭhāna kilesa (arising with the akusala citta) and the vītikkama kilesa (transgression, misconduct).

We read in the commentary to the Vinaya, the “Samantapāsādikā, in the “Inception of Discipline” (II, the Account of the First Great Convocation, 22):

“In the Vinayapiṭaka is taught the avoidance of transgression (vītikkama kilesa), as morality is diametrically opposed to the defilements of the degree of transgression¹ ; in the Suttapiṭaka the avoidance of prepossession (pariyuṭṭhāna kilesa, arising with the akusala citta), as concentration (samādhi) is diametrically opposed to prepossession; in the Abhidhammapiṭaka, the avoidance (pahāṇa: abandoning) of latent bias, as wisdom is diametrically opposed to latent bias. In the first (piṭaka) the categorical avoidance (tadaṇgappahāṇa) of defilements has been taught and in the others(respectively) the avoidance consisting of elimination and eradication (vikkhambhanasamucchedappahāṇāni). In the first the avoidance of the defilement of misconduct has been taught and in the others (respectively) that of the defilements of craving and misbelief. . . ”²

We read in the “Sumaṅgalavilāsinī”, the commentary to the Dīgha Nikāya, in the commentary to the “Net of Views” (Brahmajālasutta), under the section on Sīla:

“In the Vinaya he taught the abandoning of the coarse defilements, because morality is opposed to coarse defilements. He taught the abandoning of medium defilements in the Suttanta, because concentration is opposed to medium defilements. He taught the abandoning of subtle defilements in the Abhidhamma because wisdom is opposed to subtle defilements. He taught in the first Piṭaka the temporary elimination of defilements and in the other two Piṭakas he taught (respectively) the elimination of defilements by suppression and by complete cutting off. The abandoning of the corruptions (sankilesa) which are akusala kamma he taught in the first Piṭaka, the abandoning of the corruptions which are craving (taṇhā) and wrong view (diṭṭhi) he taught (respectively) in the other two Piṭakas.”

We read in the “Expositor” (I, Introductory Discourse, 22) about the threefold training and the three levels of defilements:

“In the Vinaya-Piṭaka the riddance of transgression due to the corruptions is meant, because morality is opposed to transgressions (vītikkama kilesa); in the Suttanta-Piṭaka the riddance of the tyranny of the corruptions (defilements one is possessed by and that arise) is meant, because concentration of thought is inimical to such tyranny (pariyuṭṭhāna kilesa ); in the Abhidhamma-Piṭaka the riddance of latent bias (anusaya kilesa) is meant, because understanding is opposed to it. In the first Piṭaka there is a temporary riddance of the corruptions (by means of various factors of morality); in the others their riddance is of the nature of discarding and extirping by the Path. In the first Piṭaka the riddance is of the corruption of misconduct; in the others it is (respectively) of the corruption of craving and wrong views...”

The “Sāratthadīpanī”, the subcommentary to the Vinaya, gives an additional explanation. It states that the abandoning of the defilements that are transgressions (vītikkama kilesa), refers to the abandoning of transgressions through the body-door and through the door of speech. It states that morality (good conduct) is opposed to transgressions. This subcommentary states that the akusala cittas that arise and are disturbing, do not violate morality in the sense of causing transgressions. As regards the abandoning of medium defilements one is possessed with (pariyuṭṭhāna kilesa), this refers to the abandoning of the defilements that are disturbing because they arise in the succession of cittas.

We read in this text with regard to the latent tendencies:

“As to the expression, the abandoning of the latent tendencies, latent tendencies are the defilements that lie dormant in the succession of cittas since they cannot be eradicated yet, and they are to be eradicated successively.

These defilements can arise because of the appropriate conditions, and they are called latent tendencies³. There are seven defilements which are latent tendencies and these defilements can arise when the conditions are appropriate, such as sense desire. The abandoning of these seven defilements is called the eradication of the latent tendencies. The factor of the eightfold Path which is wisdom can completely eradicate them. Therefore the teachers said that wisdom is opposed to the latent tendencies.

As to the expression, overcoming by opposites, tadanga-pahāna, this is the overcoming of an unwholesome quality by an opposite wholesome quality among the bases of meritorious deeds, such as generosity, just as a lighted lamp dispels darkness. This is called overcoming by the opposite. However, here, overcoming by the opposite refers to the the overcoming of the wrong of transgressions by good morality.

There are the expressions: overcoming by repression, vikkhambhana-pahāna, and overcoming by destruction, samuccheda-pahāna. Overcoming by repression refers to the subduing of the hindrances and so on by suppression, by preventing their arising by means of concentration of the degree of access concentration and attainment concentration (jhāna), just as a pot thrown into moss-clad water pushes the moss aside.

Overcoming by destruction (samuccheda-pahāna) refers to the abandoning of the groups of defilements which originate in the succession of cittas of someone who develops the Path and which are completely eradicated by the four supramundane Paths so that they cannot arise anymore.

Wrong conduct through the body and so on is called “duccarita”. It is also called duccarita because it is conduct that the defilements have ruined. If such conduct has arisen in the succession of cittas, this is called “with corruptions” (sankilesa). The reason is that one is hindered by defilements and thoroughly disturbed. With regard to the abandoning of the corruptions which occur through bodily misconduct or verbal misconduct it is explained that the corruption of craving (taṇhā) is taught in the Suttanta, because concentration is opposed to sensuous desire (kāmachandha). It is explained that the corruption of wrong view (diṭṭhi) is taught in the Abhidhamma, because of the disclosure and explanation of the dhammas which each have their own characteristic (sabhāva dhammas) and are devoid of self and so on.”

We see from these text quotations that there are three levels of defilements:

Defilements that are transgressions (vītikkama kilesa), coarse defilements of the degree of unwholesome courses of action.

Defilements one is possessed by and that arise (pariyuṭṭhāna kilesa) are medium defilements that disturb the citta.

Latent tendencies (anusaya kilesa) are subtle defilements that lie dormant in the citta and that can be completely eradicated by the four Paths (at the four stages of enlightenment).

To conclude: there are latent tendencies which have their own distinct nature and characteristic.

Chapter 2Which are the Latent Tendencies?

Second Issue: what is the meaning of latent tendencies and what are their characteristics?

Conclusion of this Issue: latent tendencies are subtle akusala dhammas which are powerful and lie dormant in the succession of cittas of living beings. They are realities which are powerful because they can only be eradicated by the supramundane Paths.

The seven latent tendencies are: the latent tendency of sense desire (kāmarāgānusaya), of aversion (paṭighānusaya), of conceit (mānānusaya), of wrong view (diṭṭhānusaya), of doubt (vicikicchānusaya), of craving for existence (bhava-rāgānusaya) and of ignorance (avijjānusaya).

These latent tendencies are actually six kinds of cetasikas, namely: attachment (lobha, including sense desire and craving for existence), aversion (dosa), conceit (māna), wrong view (diṭṭhi), doubt (vicikicchā) and ignorance (moha)¹.

The sources which give the reason for this conclusion:

Many Commentary texts explain the meaning of the latent tendencies. We read in the “Pañcappakaraṇatthakathā”, the commentary to the “Yamaka”, in the section on the latent tendencies:

“Question: As to the word latent tendency, anusaya, why is this term used for the latent tendencies? Answer: the term latent tendency is used because it lies dormant².

Question: why is a latent tendency said to lie dormant? Answer: It is so called because it is unabandoned (appahīna).

It is true that these defilements are said to lie dormant in the succession of beings’ cittas because they cannot be eradicated. Therefore the teachers call these defilements latent tendencies.”

The commentary to the “Path of Discrimination”, the “Saddhammappakāsinī”, under the Explanation (Niddesa) of “Knowledge of Beings’ Biases and Underlying Tendencies”, states:

“The word anusaya, latent tendency, is used in the explanation of latent tendency. Why is the name anusaya used? Because it lies dormant. What is called dormant? The defilements that cannot yet be eradicated. Truly, these defilements lie dormant in the succession of beings’ cittas because they cannot yet be eradicated. Therefore they are called anusaya, latent tendencies.”

The “Saddhammapajjotikā”, the commentary to the Mahāniddesa, in the Commentary to Chapter 8, “the Purified” (Suddhaṭṭhaka) explains about the latent tendencies:

“What is the meaning of the expression anusaya? It means that it lies dormant. What is the meaning of lying dormant? It means that it cannot yet be eradicated. These defilements lie dormant in the succession of beings’ cittas because they cannot yet be eradicated. Therefore they are called latent tendencies, anusaya.”

In the Commentary to the “Group of Discourses”, the “Paramatthajotikā”, in the Commentary to the “Snake Chapter” we read:

“. . . The akusala dhammas lie dormant in the succession of cittas because they cannot yet be eradicated. Therefore, these akusala dhammas are called latent tendencies. The following akusala dhammas are called latent tendencies: sense desire, aversion, conceit, wrong view, doubt, craving for existence and ignorance. They are called roots (mūla) in the sense of foundation for the accompanying dhammas. These are called akusala because they are sorrowful, and they are called roots (mūla) because they are the foundation for the accompanying dhammas that are akusala. They are akusala because they are dangerous and they have dukkha, suffering, as result.”

In the “Saddhammapajjotikā”, the Commentary to the Cūlaniddesa, on “Posāla’s Questions”³, the meaning of latent tendencies has been explained as follows:

“The word āsaya is used for inclination or disposition that lies dormant and that is a supporting condition for beings. This word designates beings’ accumulation in the succession of cittas of wrong view or right view, sensuous clinging or renunciation.

The word anusaya is used because the defilements lie dormant and persist, they lie dormant in the succession of beings’ cittas. This word is a name for sense desire etc. that have become strong. The words āsaya and anusaya are joined into one word āsayānusayo which is actually a twin-compound (dvanda compound). The notions of behaviour (carita) and disposition (adhimutti) are in the text combined with āsaya (bias) and anusaya (latent tendency). Thus, the wording: ‘knowledge of beings’ conduct and dispositions’ is combined with the wording: ‘knowledge of beings’ inclinations and underlying tendencies’, into one expression: the knowledge of beings’ biases and underlying tendencies, āsayanusaya ñāṇa.”

In the “Abhidhammatthavibhāvinī” the Commentary to the “Abhidhammatthasaṅgaha”, Ch 7, we read:

“There are seven latent tendencies: sense desire (kāma-rāga), aversion (paṭigha), conceit (māna), wrong view (diṭṭhi), doubt (vicikicchā), desire for existence (continued existence, bhavarāga), and ignorance (avijjā).”

We read in the Abhidhammatthasaṅgaha : “The latent tendencies are just six.” Thus, the seven latent tendencies are actually six kinds of cetasikas (sense desire and desire for existence being lobha cetasika).

To conclude from the foregoing explanations of latent tendencies: the latent tendencies, anusayas, are subtle akusala dhammas which are powerful and which lie persistently in the succession of beings’ cittas (anu can be translated as following closely and saya as sleeping). Anusaya is a reality which is powerful because it can only be eradicated by the noble Path (which is lokuttara). As we have seen, the latent tendencies are six kinds of cetasikas: attachment (lobha), aversion (dosa) conceit (māna), wrong view (diṭṭhi), doubt (vicikicchā) and ignorance (moha).

Second Issue: What is the meaning of the fact that the latent tendencies inhere in feelings and objects?

Conclusion of this Issue: When there are still latent tendencies there are conditions for the arising of pariyuṭṭhāna defilements (medium defilements arising with the akusala citta) and these must be accompanied by feeling and other conascent dhammas. There must also be an object that is appropriate for that kind of pariyuṭṭhāna defilement, and when that defilement attaches weight to that object, it is strong. When it has fallen away, it conditions the accumulation of that kind of defilement to go on as latent tendency.

The Reason for this Conclusion:

In the sixth Book of the “Abhidhamma”, the ‘Yamaka”, in the section on the definition (translated in “Guide through the Abhidhamma Piṭaka, by Ven. Nyanatiloka), definitions of the latent tendencies have been given⁴:

(1)“Where does the Bias of Sensuous Craving adhere?- To the two feelings (pleasant and indifferent) of the Sensuous sphere⁵. (2)Where anger? To painful (bodily or mental) feeling. (3)Where conceit? To the two feelings of the Sensuous sphere, and of the fine-material and immaterial sphere⁶. (4)Where Erroneous Opinion? To all phenomena included in the Existence-group (sakkāya)⁷. (5)Where Scepticism? (Answer as in 4) (6)Where craving for existence? To the fine-material sphere and to the immaterial sphere. (7)Where ignorance? (Answer as in 4).

Chapter 3Conditions for akusala citta

The commentary to the Yamaka explains that the latent tendencies inhere in feelings and objects (lie dormant in, Pāli: anuseti).

The following quotations are given about the latent tendencies of sense desire and aversion, as examples.

The “Pañcappakaraṇatthakathā”, the commentary to the “Yamaka”, the section on Latent Tendencies, explains the words of the “Yamaka”: “Where does the latent tendency of sense desire adhere?

It adheres to two feelings of the sense sphere (kāma-dhātu).”

We read in the commentary:

“The word ‘upattithāna’ means the foundation (abode or condition) for the arising of the latent tendencies. The Buddha, in order to explain this, said, ‘there it (this latent tendency) inheres in the two feelings of the sense sphere’. This means, that it inheres in the pleasant feeling and indifferent feeling of the sense sphere, thus, to two feelings. This means that it ‘arises’ with these two feelings¹.

. . . When the latent tendency of sense desire arises it is conascent with unwholesome pleasant feeling or indifferent feeling, and it can also take these two feelings as object. It can also take as object the feelings that accompany kusala citta, vipākacitta and kiriyacitta of the sense-sphere². The latent tendency of sense desire that inheres in two feelings of the sense sphere, also inheres in the khandhas of perception (saññā), of formations (saṅkhārakkhandha) and viññāṇa (citta) that are conascent with these two feelings. It is impossible that the latent tendency that inheres in these two feelings does not arise together with perception and so on [the other khandhas] which are also accompanied by those feelings, or that it does not take as object perception and so on which are also accompanied by those feelings.

When the latent tendency of sense desire arises, these two feelings are predominant over the other conascent dhammas because of the satisfaction obtained by the enjoyment of happiness and calm³. Therefore, the Buddha said, ‘Here the latent tendency inheres in these two kinds of feeling’, and those who were capable of being led to enlightenment (buddha veneyya) could realize happy feeling because of its coarse nature.”

It can be concluded from this text that the latent tendency in the citta which is defilement (akusala dhamma) and which is subtle, causes the arising of akusala citta and cetasikas whenever there are conditions. The latent tendency of sense desire, for example, causes the arising of sense desire which is pariyuṭṭhāna (medium defilement arising with the akusala citta) when there are the appropriate conditions. The sense desire that arises must always be accompanied by pleasant feeling or by indifferent feeling. As is said in the text: “The latent tendency of sense desire must inhere in pleasant feeling and indifferent feeling because of being conascent with them”.

As to the statement, “The latent tendency of sense desire must inhere in the pleasant feeling and indifferent feeling which are akusala dhammas, because of their being the object”, this means that pleasant feeling and indifferent feeling are the objects to which the sense desire that arises is attached. Apart from the pleasant feeling and indifferent feeling, all accompanying dhammas (the khandhas of perception, saññā, of the formations and of consciousness, viññāṇa) that arise together with pleasant feeling and indifferent feeling, can evenso be the object sense desire is attached to. However, the Buddha refers especially to feeling because feeling is the “chief” with regard to experiencing the flavour of an object. Moreover, the two feelings that are mentioned, pleasant feeling and indifferent feeling, are dhammas that are in particular desirable and enjoyable for sense desire. Therefore the Buddha said:

“The latent tendency of sense desire inheres in these two feelings.”

Further on we read in the commentary:

“Surely, the latent tendency of sense desire that inheres in an object, does not merely inhere in these two feelings and the dhammas that are conascent with them. It also inheres in visible object that is desirable, and so on. The Buddha taught in the ‘Book of Analysis’ (Ch 16, Analysis of Knowledge, 816, And what is the latent tendency of beings?):

‘That which in the world is a lovely thing, pleasant thing (piyarūpaṃ, sātarūpaṃ), the tendency of beings to lust for that lies latent. . . ⁴’ ”

The expression, “The latent tendency of sense desire inheres also in visible object etc. that is desirable”, means, that the sense desire that arises (because there is still the latent tendency) does not only have as object pleasant feeling, indifferent feeling and the dhammas that accompany those. It means that it can also have as object a lovely thing (piya rūpa) and a pleasant thing (sāta rūpa). Thus, desirable nāma dhammas and rūpa dhammas can be the objects of sense desire. When sense desire arises and has as object desirable nāmas and rūpas, the accumulation of the latent tendency of sense desire continues. Therefore, the Buddha said that there is the latent tendency of sense desire for a lovely thing (piya rūpa) and pleasant thing (sāta rūpa).”

We read further on in the commentary:

“In the Yamaka the Buddha taught about the latent tendencies also by way of the negative method: ‘In which dhammas does the latent tendency of sense desire not inhere and does the latent tendency of wrong view not inhere either?’.

The latent tendency of sense desire does not inhere in painful feeling, nor in rūpa-dhātu or arupa-dhātu (rupa-jhāna and arūpa-jhāna) but it is not so that the latent tendency of wrong view does not inhere in them⁵.

The latent tendency of sense desire does not inhere in the ‘unincluded dhamma’(apariyāpanna, the lokuttara dhammas that are exempt from the cycle of birth and death), neither does the latent tendency of wrong view inhere in these dhammas.

Actually, the Buddha taught that the latent tendency of sense desire does not inhere in painful feeling nor to rūpa dhātu or arupa dhātu, and therefore he said: ‘Except for unhappy feeling and its conascent dhammas, except for rūpāvacara dhammas and arūpāvacara dhammas which belong to their (respective) planes, and except for the nine lokuttara dhammas⁶, the latent tendency of sense desire inheres in the remaining dhammas of visible object, sound, odour, flavour and tangible object.’ ”

The Buddha said, “The latent tendency of sense desire does not inhere in unhappy feeling and the elements of rūpa-jhāna and so on”. Here he intended to teach the dhammas that directly appear and generally occur, and that can be understood by people who are capable of being taught. He taught, for example, feelings and the dhammas that are objects of sense desire and that can be directly experienced (visible object, sound, odour, flavour and tangible object).

He said on account of the latent tendency of wrong view, “The latent tendency of wrong view inheres in all dhammas connected with sakkāya, personality”. In that case he said this for the benefit of people who were capable of being taught: they could investigate and consider that when wrong view arises that takes realities for self, it is a condition for the accumulation of the latent tendency of wrong view to continue.

However, even when sense desire does not attach weight to an object, it still continues to be accumulated as a latent tendency.

We read further on in the commentary about a question concerning the words of the Yamaka Exposition:

“Except for unhappy feeling and its conascent dhammas, except for rūpāvacara dhammas and arūpāvacara dhammas which belong to their (respective) planes, and except for the nine lokuttara dhammas, the latent tendency of sense desire inheres in the remaining dhammas of visible object, sound, odour, flavour and tangible object.”

The text of the Commentary states:

“Question: Why didn’t the Buddha state this here (in the Exposition of the Yamaka)?

Answer: Because these dhammas are not coarse. It is true that the Buddha did not say: ‘The latent tendency of sense desire inheres in these rūpas’ and so on, because the meaning can be inferred. As explained before, only the feelings are coarse but these rūpas are subtle. However, it should be known that the latent tendency of sense desire also inheres in these rūpas.

The Teacher did not teach everything at all occasions. Depending on beings’ capacity of being taught and attaining enlightenment, he explained all dhammas wherever this was proper and he did not explain them where it was not proper. To the question, ‘Where does the latent tendency of wrong view inhere?’, he answered as follows: ‘The latent tendency of wrong view inheres in all phenomena connected with personality (sakkāya)’ and he taught whatever was suitable.

At another occasion again he answered: ‘The latent tendencies of doubt, conceit and wrong view inhere in the fine-material sphere and immaterial sphere. The latent tendencies of doubt, sense desire, conceit and wrong view inhere in two feelings of the sense sphere. The latent tendencies of doubt, aversion, wrong view and ignorance inhere in unpleasant feeling’. When it was not proper he did not teach everything. Sometimes he only spoke about the three feelings in relation to rūpa-dhātu, the sphere of rūpa-jhāna, and arūpa-dhātu, the sphere of arūpa-jhāna. He did not speak about all dhammas that are arūpa (nāma) and that are conascent with feeling, and about all rūpas. Although the Buddha did not state this expressively, the latent tendency of wrong view inheres in these dhammas. Although he did not expressively mention desirable objects (itthārammaṇa) such as visible object and so on, still, the latent tendency of sense desire inheres in them. It should be known that these rūpas are a foundation (or object) for the latent tendency of sense desire.”

Chapter 4Eradication of Latent Tendencies

Further on in the Commentary we read where the latent tendency of aversion in-heres. The “Yamaka” states about the latent tendency of aversion as follows:

“Where does the latent tendency of aversion inhere?

It inheres in unpleasant feeling”

The Commentary explains this text as follows:

“As regards the latent tendency of aversion, when it is said that it is inherent in unpleasant feeling, this means that it is inherent in three feelings, namely, to two kinds of unpleasant feeling¹ and to painful feeling that accompanies body-consciousness. Thus, the latent tendency of aversion is inherent in unpleasant feeling (domanassa) in two ways: it arises together with it and it can also take feeling as object². It inheres in (bodily) painful feeling because this feeling can be its object. When the latent tendency of aversion inheres in those feelings it also inheres in the accompanying dhammas such as perception (saññā). The latent tendency of aversion is conascent with feeling and also with the other accompanying khandhas such as perception. It takes not only feeling as object but also the accompanying dhammas such as perception. Nevertheless, unpleasant feeling is truly predominant among the accompanying dhammas, and this happens when the latent tendency of aversion arises and is displeased with the unpleasant, painful experience. Therefore, the Buddha said: ‘The latent tendency of aversion is inherent in unpleasant feeling’. He spoke thus, so that beings who were capable of being led to enlightenment might be able to realize (unpleasant) feeling since it is coarse. This is similar to what he said in the case of pleasant feeling that is coarse³.”

The explanation in this text about the latent tendency of aversion is similar to the explanation about the latent tendency of sense desire that was given before. When there are the appropriate conditions the latent tendency of aversion causes the arising of akusala citta (pariyuṭṭhāna kilesa) of aversion that is accompanied by unhappy feeling and the other khandhas of perception and formations (saṅkhārakkhandha) which arise at that moment. The usual object of akusala citta with aversion is an undesirable object such as unhappy feeling, painful feeling and the dhammas conascent with those feelings, and all nāma dhammas and rūpa dhammas that are disagreeable and unpleasant are included.

Therefore, when there are the appropriate conditions for the latent tendency of aversion to cause the arising of akusala citta rooted in aversion, this is accompanied by unhappy feeling and it experiences an undesirable object to which it attaches weight at that moment. In this way aversion continues to be accumulated again as latent tendency. Therefore it is said:

“The latent tendency of aversion is inherent in unpleasant feeling and all dhammas such as rūpa which are undesirable.”

We read further on in the Commentary to the Yamaka:

“Question: When the latent tendency of aversion inheres in an object, is it true that it does not only inhere in unpleasant feeling and its accompanying dhammas, but that it also inheres in dhammas such as visible object that is undesirable?

It is said in the ‘Book of Analysis’ (Ch 16, Analysis of Knowledge, 816, And what is the latent tendency of beings?): ‘. . . that which in the world is an unlovely thing, unpleasant thing, the tendency of beings for repulsion for that lies latent.’

It is also said in the ‘Yamaka’ in its treatment in the negative method (paṭiloma) of the latent tendency of aversion:

‘The latent tendency of aversion does not adhere to two feelings of the sense sphere (kāma dhātu), but it is the latent tendency of sense desire that adheres to these feelings⁴.

The latent tendency of aversion does not inhere in rūpa-dhātu, arūpa-dhātu (the planes of rūpa-jhāna and arūpa-jhāna) and the unincluded (lokuttara dhammas), nor does the latent tendency of sense desire inhere in these.’ The Buddha said that the latent tendency of aversion in-heres in the remaining dhammas of visible object, sound, odour, flavour and tangible object, but that it does not inhere in two feelings of the sense sphere, in rūpa-dhātu, in arūpa-dhātu (the planes of rupa-jhāna and arūpa-jhāna) and in the unincluded (lokuttara dhammas).”

The gist of this is contained in his teaching when he said: ‘The latent tendency of aversion does not inhere in two feelings of the sense sphere, in rūpa-dhātu (rūpa-jhāna) and so on.’ ”

The usual object of aversion it attaches weight to is an undesirable object, namely, painful feeling, unhappy feeling and the other dhammas that are undesirable. As is stated in the text: “Just as the Buddha explained: ‘The latent tendency of aversion inheres in the other dhammas such as rūpa, but it does not inhere in rūpāvacara dhammas and arūpāvacara dhammas which belong to their (respective) planes, and the nine lokuttara dhammas’. As we read in the Commentary, the gist of this is contained in his teaching when he said: ‘The latent tendency of aversion does not inhere in two feelings accompanying the cittas of the sense sphere, to rūpa-dhātu (rūpa-jhāna) and so on.’ ”

We read further on in the Commentary to the Yamaka:

“Question: Why did he not explain all this in detail here?

Answer: Because it concerns realities that are not coarse. It is true that the Buddha said that the latent tendency of aversion inheres in these (afore-mentioned) dhammas, because unpleasant feeling is a coarse reality according to the method that was explained before. And he did not expressively state that it inheres in these rūpas⁵, because these are not coarse. However, the meaning can be deducted and therefore, it should be known that the latent tendency also inheres in these rūpas.

Question: Are the two feelings that are desirable objects (iṭṭhārammaṇa) not objects of aversion? Answer: This cannot be said.

In the person whose jhāna has declined unpleasant feeling arises on account of the two feelings⁶ that can accompany jhānacitta, because he regrets this. Unhappy feeling arises because he reflects on the decline of the desirable objects he had obtained, or on the fact that he did not obtain them. This is only unpleasant feeling, not the latent tendency of aversion. The latent tendency of aversion is a strong defilement that arises on account of affliction by an unpleasant object. Therefore, in this case, though aversion arises together with unhappy feeling, it is not a basis for the latent tendency of aversion. It does not perform its own function as such, it is negligible. . .

Aversion with unpleasant feeling conditioned by renunciation may arise and the Buddha said that a person should abandon aversion accompanied by such kind of unpleasant feeling. Renunciation is a pleasant object, but aversion arising on account of it is not a foundation for the latent tendency of aversion.

Thus, it should be understood in which dhamma the latent tendency of aversion inheres.”

Although it is said that the latent tendency of aversion that arises may have pleasant feeling, indifferent feeling or dhammas belonging to rūpa-jhāna as object, these are not objects aversion attaches weight to. Therefore, it was not said that in that case aversion continues to be accumulated as a latent tendency. As we have seen, when someone whose skill to attain jhāna declines, aversion may arise on account of happy feeling or indifferent feeling that accompany the jhānacitta but that are no more. Since these two feelings are not the usual objects of aversion, aversion is not accumulated as latent tendency. Therefore, it is said: “The latent tendency of aversion is a strong defilement that arises on account of affliction by an unpleasant object. Thus, in this case, though aversion arises together with unhappy feeling, it is not the latent tendency of aversion. It does not perform its own function of aversion, it is negligible.”

When it is said that the latent tendencies inhere in feeling and objects, this does not mean that the latent tendencies arise and perform functions. It means that, so long as there are latent tendencies, there are conditions for the arising of medium defilements (pariyutthāna kilesa, arising with akusala citta) and coarse defilements (vitikkama kilesa, transgressions). These are accompanied by feeling and the other dhammas that arise at such moments. When the objects that are appropriate conditions for the arising of the relevant medium defilements, thus, objects they attach weight to and that are the usual objects for them, then the medium defilements are powerful and they cause the continuation of the latent tendencies concerned.

Chapter 5Dormant in each citta

In the previous sections it has been explained that the latent tendencies that lie dormant in the citta condition the arising of akusala citta. When it is said that they ‘arise’ it means that they do not arise themselves but that they cause the arising of the medium defilements, the paryuṭṭhāna kilesas. Although they lie dormant in each citta they do not cause the arising of akusala at the moment of vipākacitta and kusala citta.

Third Issue: The latent tendencies lie dormant in the citta. Do they also lie dormant in kusala citta and avyākata citta¹?

Conclusion of this Issue: The latent tendencies lie dormant also in kusala citta and avyākata citta.

The sources which give the reason for this conclusion: In the commentary to the Anusaya Yamaka, in the section on the “Spheres of Existence” (dhātu vāra) we read:

“As to the words, how many latent tendencies lie dormant, this means how many latent tendencies having persisted in the succession of cittas lie dormant. As to the words, how many latent tendencies do not lie dormant, this means, how many latent tendencies do not persist in the succession of cittas and do not lie dormant? One should distinguish between how many latent tendencies lie dormant and how many latent tendencies do not lie dormant.

It has been said with regard to the ordinary people (putthujjana, non-ariyan) that seven latent tendencies are lying dormant.

As to the words, for whom there are five latent tendencies, this has been said with regard to the streamwinner and the once-returner who have eradicated the latent tendencies of wrong view and doubt. Therefore, for them there are only five latent tendencies.

The meaning of the subject matter of the latent tendencies that lie dormant and arise in the section on the latent tendencies should, in the section on the elements (dhātuvāra), not be taken in the same way.

Question: Why? Answer: Because at that moment they do not arise² . When a person enters the sensuous plane of existence (at rebirth) vipākacitta and the rūpas originated by kamma arise, but akusala does not arise at that moment. The latent tendencies arise at the moment of akusala citta but not at the moment of vipākacitta. Therefore the subject matter of the latent tendencies is different in the section on the dhātus³. Because there is no opportunity for their arising at that moment. Question: How should one understand that? Answer: One should understand the subject matter in that way.

Question: What is the meaning of it? Answer: The latent tendencies lie dormant because the defilements have not been eradicated. Someone who has kusala citta or avyākata citta is (still) called a person with attachment, aversion and ignorance, so long as these have not been eradicated by the magga-citta. The latent tendencies lie dormant in the case of that person, also at the moment of paṭisandhicitta, because they have not been eradicated by the magga-citta. The Buddha did not merely say that the latent tendencies lie dormant, but it should also be understood that they lie dormant because they cannot yet be eradicated.”

The latent tendencies are lying dormant also in kusala citta and avyākata citta, but at such moments there are no conditions for the latent tendencies to cause the arising of akusala citta. Even in the magga-citta, the lokuttara kusala citta, there are still latent tendencies that are being eradicated by the magga-citta at that moment. This will be explained in detail later on.

In the “Kathāvatthu” (Ch XIV) and its commentary, there are questions and answers between Sakavādin (orthodox theravada) and the Paravādin (opponent) in order to eliminate the wrong view of the Andhaka heritics. They had the wrong view that the defilements that are latent tendencies and those that are “pariyuṭṭhāna kilesas” (medium defilements arising with akusala citta) are different in nature⁴.

Issue: Do the latent tendencies arise or not?

Conclusion of this Issue: The latent tendencies are akusala dhammas that are subtle and lie dormant in the citta. They do not arise together with citta to perform a function, they are free from khandha, khandha vimutta. But when there is a proper condition they cause the arising of pariyuṭṭhāna kilesa, akusala citta that is medium defilement.

The sources which give the reason for this conclusion:

In the “Yamaka” under the section on the latent tendency of sensuous desire (kāmarāganussaya) and anger (paṭighanusaya) it is said: “(a)Does in (every) one in whom the Bias of Sensuous Craving inheres, also the Bias of Anger inhere?- Yes. (b) And does in (every) one in whom the Bias of Anger inheres, also the Bias of Sensuous Craving inhere?- Yes.”

In the commentary to the Yamaka (mahāvara) it is said:

“As to what has been asked: ‘Does in (every) one in whom the Bias of Sensuous Craving inheres, also the Bias of Anger inhere?’, the reply ‘Yes’ appears to be not right.

Question: Why is that? Answer: Because sensuous desire and anger do not arise at the same time.

Sensuous desire arises with the eight types of lobha-mūlacitta, whereas anger arises with the two types of dosa-mūlacitta. Therefore these two kinds of dhammas cannot arise at the same time. In this way with regard to the negation⁵, the (afore-mentioned) expressions should not be taken with regard to the present moment. The affirmative answer in the Yamaka as mentioned above should be taken in another way.

The answer should be affirmative. Question: How to take this? Answer: It refers to the defilements that have not yet been eradicated.”⁶

Text of the commentary: “The expression ‘anuseti’, lies dormant, in connection with ‘what is not eradicated’ is a term designating what is existing, and it does not refer to the present moment. It refers to what cannot yet be eradicated. As to the question, ‘Does to (every) one to whom the Bias of Sensuous Craving lies dormant, also the Bias of Anger lies dormant?’, one should understand it in this way: sense-desire that someone cannot eradicate, and evenso anger of that person that he cannot eradicate yet are realities that are lying dormant.

What has been answered with ‘yes’ refers to arising in the future. And then, as stated above as to arising, when it was asked, ‘Does to (every) one for whom the Bias of Sensuous Craving arises, also the Bias of Anger arises?’, this was answered with ‘Yes.’ How should the meaning be taken? This also refers to their non-eradication. This was said with regard to the non-obstruction to their arising when there would be a condition for their arising.

Just as in the case of a painter or a woodsculptor who begins with sketching the outline. When he has not yet finished his work at that moment, friends ask him: ‘What did you do these days?’ They answer: ‘I am doing painting, I am doing woodsculpting.’ They take it that they are doing these things, because they think of the time they have worked at it and have to continue doing it⁷.

Evenso it is with the latent tendencies in a continuity (of cittas) that cannot yet be eradicated. When there is for the latent tendencies in a continuity a condition for their arising, their arising cannot be prevented. It should be understood in this way, even with regard to the moments the latent tendencies do not yet arise⁸. The latent tendency of sense desire is arising for someone because it also arose in the past and it also arises meanwhile (so long as it is there).

And it is the same for the latent tendency of aversion.

What was just quoted shows that the latent tendencies are akusala dhammas which are lying dormant in the citta. They do not arise and perform functions and they cannot yet be eradicated. When they are medium defilements (pariyuṭṭhāna kilesas, arising with the akusala citta), sensuous desire arises only with lobha-mūla-citta, and anger arises only with dosa-mūla-citta. They cannot arise at the same moment of citta. But for the person who is not yet anāgāmī (nonreturner), there are still the latent tendencies of sensuous desire and anger lying dormant in each citta. The latent tendencies are realities that do not arise and that cannot yet be eradicated. But when there is a condition the latent tendencies cause the arising of akusala citta, as was said: “It refers to the defilements that cannot yet be eradicated. When there are conditions it should be taken that there is no obstruction to their arising.”

Chapter 6The arising of akusala citta

As to the statement that sensuous desire is arising for someone because it also arose in the past and it arose meanwhile (so long as there is still the latent tendency), this means that sensuous desire cannot yet be eradicated. In the past that is already gone it arose and it can also arise in the future. If someone has the latent tendency of sensuous desire he has also the latent tendency of anger, because these latent tendencies are only eradicated by the magga-citta of the anāgāmī at the same time.

In the commentary to the “Path of Discrimination”, the ”Saddhammappakāsinī”, in the section on āsayānusaya, there is the following explanation:

“As to the term ‘it lies dormant’ (anuseti), when there is an appropriate condition it arises. If it is like that, one could say: ‘what cannot yet be eradicated is the reality of latent tendency. And it would not be correct to say that a latent tendency could arise, since a latent tendency cannot arise.’ In reply to this it can be said: ‘a latent tendency is not (merely) a state that cannot yet be eradicated, but it should be known that the words: ‘what cannot yet be eradicated is the reality of latent tendency’, refer to the defilements that are powerful¹.

A latent tendency is associated with citta, it experiences an object, it has a root, it is dependent on conditions, and it can only be akusala. It is past, future or present. Therefore it is correct to say that latent tendencies can arise, when there is an appropriate condition. With reference to this, referring to the words: ‘he abandons defilements at the present’, the reply to this is: ‘He can abandon the latent tendencies that are strong. This is because of the fact that these defilements are there at the present.’ ”

It has been explained in the commentaries that the latent tendencies are defilements which are powerful. They lie dormant in the citta and do not arise and perform functions. However, when there is an appropriate condition the defilements arise. As was stated: “They lie dormant (anusenti) and when there is an appropriate condition they will arise”.

It was said that the latent tendency is associated with citta, it experiences an object, it has a root, it proceeds according to conditions and it can only be akusala. It is past, future or present. Therefore it is correct to say that the latent tendencies arise.

This means that when there is an appropriate condition the latent tendency causes the (relevant) defilement ( akusala cetasika) to arise and perform its function. Then it must accompany citta (citta-sampayutta), it must have an object, and be accompanied by roots. It can only be akusala, it is the reality that arises together with citta and is therefore past, future or present.

In the “Path of Discrimination” (Paṭisambhidāmagga, abhisamaya, convergence) it is explained about the eradication of defilements, that path-consciousness (magga-citta) eradicates latent tendencies. These are defilements that do not arise at the moment of magga-citta but are realities that are inherent at that moment. Therefore, the latent tendencies are not defilements that arise and perform their functions.

In the Dhammasaṅganī (390) it is said that when moha arises it does so together with akusala citta and that it is an akusala root. The fact that moha arises and can perform its function is because it has as condition the latent tendency of ignorance, avijjā.

We read: “The lack of knowledge, of vision, which there is on that occasion. . . the bias (anusaya) of ignorance (avijjā), the obsession (pariyuṭṭhāna) of ignorance, the barrier of ignorance; the dullness that is the root of badness-that is the dullness that there then is.”

It is explained in the “Points of Controversy”, Kathāvatthu Ch XI, 108, in the talk on the latent tendencies, that when there is an appropriate condition the latent tendencies cause the arising of akusala citta. At that moment it must be akusala, sahetuka (with root), associated with citta (citta sampayutta). These statements are opposed of those who have wrong view and follow the schismatic schools of Mahāsanghika and Sammitiya who believed that the latent tendencies were indeterminate (avyākata), without roots, not accompanying citta (citta-vippayutta), because they did not understand that when the latent tendencies have an appropriate condition they cause the arising of akusala citta.

The “Yamaka” (anusaya yamaka, arising of latent tendencies, uppajjana vāra) states: “(a) Does to (every) one in whom the Bias of Sensuous Craving inheres, also the Bias of Anger inhere?- Yes. (b) And does to (every) one to whom the Bias of Anger inheres, also the Bias of Sensuous Craving inhere?- Yes.”

As to the term anusenti, they lie dormant, this refers to the fact that when there is an appropriate condition for a latent tendency it will arise.

The latent tendencies which cannot yet be eradicated are lying dormant in each citta. For example, someone who is not yet an anāgāmī must have the latent tendencies of sensuous desire and of anger lying dormant in the citta. The latent tendencies are not medium defilements, pariyuṭṭhāna kilesa, that arise and perform their functions. The medium defilement of sensuous desire and of anger cannot arise together with the citta at the same time.

It can be concluded that the latent tendencies are subtle defilements that do not arise but when there is an appropriate condition they cause the arising of medium defilements together with akusala citta.

Chapter 7Latent Tendencies and other Defilements

Also the commentary to the “Visuddhimagga”, the tīka which is the “paramattha mañjusā”, explains that the latent tendencies are akusala dhammas that do not arise but that are lying dormant and follow the continuous succession of cittas. It explains that when there is an appropriate condition they cause the arising of akusala citta. We read:

“The dhammas that are called latent tendencies are lying dormant; they follow the continuous succession of cittas and they cannot be eradicated yet. It is explained that when they come upon an appropriate condition they arise. It is true that the defilements that cannot be eradicated yet must arise when there is a cause for this, they are as it were dormant in the continuous succession of cittas. Therefore, the defilements that have such a characteristic are called latent tendencies. These defilements that can be of the future, are called in a general way of speech latent tendencies. And likewise those that are of the past or the present are called latent tendencies because they have that nature as has been explained. The difference in time (their existence in the past, present and future) does not indicate a difference in their nature¹. Someone may object to this and think that what is said about the latent tendencies pertains to all defilements. Latent tendencies are defilements that cannot yet be eradicated, and can this not be said about all defilements that cannot yet be eradicated, and should these also not be called latent tendencies?

This objection is to be corrected as follows: we do not say that the latent tendencies are so called merely because they cannot yet be eradicated, but also because they are of great strength.”

The subcommentary explains that this is the difference between the latent tendencies and the other defilements.

From this text we learn that the latent tendencies are defilements that cannot yet be eradicated, that they are lying dormant in each citta. When there is an appropriate condition they arise as medium defilement (pariyuṭṭhāna kilesa). When speaking in general, it is said that the defilements that are past, future and present are called latent tendencies. This means that when they are not yet eradicated in the past, future and present, they are still lying dormant in the citta and they are ready to be a condition for the arising of medium defilement. Thus, they have the nature of latent tendency with regard to the past, the future and the present. This does not mean that they are dependent on time, thus, that they arise and fall away. If someone objects that all defilements that cannot yet be eradicated are latent tendencies, the answer is that the latent tendencies are not merely defilements that cannot yet be eradicated, but that they are defilements which are very powerful; they are able to lie dormant in each citta without arising and performing functions. Therefore, the latent tendencies have the nature of akusala dhamma, but they are different from all other defilements since they are subtle defilements which are of great strength. They are able to lie dormant in each citta and they can only be completely eradicated by the path-consciousness.

The text of the commentary to the Visuddhimagga explains further that the latent tendencies are of a nature that is powerful (thāmagato). They are as hard to remove as is dirt in the eye that one tries to remove with a lubricant oil as medicine.

The sub-commentary to the Vinaya deals with the latent tendencies in the context of the eradication of transgressions through body and speech. The latent tendencies themselves cannot transgress sīla. They are lying dormant and follow the continuous succession of cittas, and they cannot yet be eradicated. The latent tendencies are seven kinds of defilements that are powerful, such as sensuous desire and so on. They can arise when there is an appropriate condition for their arising.

The sub-commentary that was quoted is merely an additional elaboration of the fact that latent tendencies are not medium defilements arising with the akusala citta (pari- yuṭṭhāna kilesa), but that they are akusala of a different level. When there are the appropriate conditions they can arise as medium defilement.

Issue: Are the latent tendencies defilements that are eradicated by the noble eightfold Path?

Conclusion of this Issue: The latent tendencies are subtle defilements which are to be eradicated by the noble eightfold Path.

The sources which give the reason for this conclusion are the following:

The “Path of Discrimination” (Paṭisambhidāmagga, Khuddaka Nikāya), in Treatise XXIII, the section on “Convergence”(Abhisamaya Kathā: penetration, at enlightenment) explains about the defilements that are to be eradicated by the noble eightfold Path. After dealing with the Path-factors and all the enlightenment factors it is said that convergence is “in the sense of end, nibbāna which merges in the deathless is convergence.”

We then read:

“How then, is convergence that much only? No. At the moment of stream-entry path: there is convergence of seeing, which is right view (and so on). . . . in the sense of end, nibbāna which merges in the deathless is convergence.

How then, is convergence that much only? No. At the moment of the fruition of stream-entry: there is convergence of seeing, which is right view (and so on)... knowledge of non-arising in the sense of tranquillization is convergence. . . in the sense of end, nibbāna which merges in the deathless is convergence.

How then, is convergence that much only? No. At the moment of the once-return path: there is convergence of seeing, which is right view (and so on). . .

How then, is convergence that much only? No. At the moment of the fruition of the once-return path: there is convergence of seeing, which is right view (and so on). . . At the moment of the non-return path. . . at the moment of the fruition of the non-return path. . . at the moment of the arahant path. . . at the moment of the fruition of arahantship: there is convergence of seeing, which is right view (and so on). . . knowledge of non-arising in the sense of tranquillization is convergence, in the sense of end, nibbāna which merges in the deathless is convergence.

When the noble person abandons defilements, does he then abandon past defilements, abandon future defilements, abandon presently-arisen defilements?”

The commentary to the Paṭisambhidāmagga gives the following explanations.

It states that the venerable Sariputta wanted to separate convergence of Path and of Fruition. He wanted to answer to those who asked whether the noble person abandons past defilements, abandons future defilements, abandons presently-arisen defilements. This was an opportunity for him to correct those who objected.

We read in the text of the Paṭisambhidāmagga (11):

“[Suppose that] he abandons past defilements.

If he abandons past defilements, he destroyed what has already been destroyed, causes to cease what has already ceased, causes to vanish what has already vanished, causes to subside what has already subsided. What is past, which is non-existent, that he abandons?

He does not abandon past defilements. [Suppose that] he abandons future defilements. If he abandons future defilements, he abandons what has not been born, he abandons what has not been generated, he abandons what has not been arisen, he abandons what has not become manifest. What is future, which is non-existent, that he abandons?

He does not abandon future defilements. [Suppose that] he abandons presently-arisen defilements. If he abandons presently-arisen defilements, then though inflamed with greed, he abandons greed, though corrupted by hate, he abandons hate, though deluded, he abandons delusion, though shackled, he abandons conceit, though misapprehending, he abandons wrong view, though distracted, he abandons agitation, though undecided, he abandons uncertainty, though having inveterate habits, he abandons underlying-tendency, dark and bright ideas (dhammas) occur coupled together, and there is development of a path that has defilement.

He does not abandon past defilements and he does not abandon future defilements and he does not abandon presently-arisen defilements.”

This refers to medium defilements, pariyuṭṭhāana kilesa, defilements arising with the akusala citta.

If he does not abandon past defilements and he does not abandon future defilements, and he does not abandon presently-arisen defilements, then there is no development of the path, there is no realization of its fruition, there is no convergence of ideas?

That is not so. There is development of the path, there is realization of its fruition, there is convergence of ideas! In what way?

Suppose there were a young tree with unborn fruit, and a man cut its root, then the unborn fruit of the tree remain unborn and do not come to be born, they remain ungenerated and do not come to be generated, they remain unarisen and do not come to be arisen, they remain unmanifest and do not come to be manifested. So too, arising is a cause, arising is a condition, for the generation of defilements. Seeing danger in arising, cognizance enters into non-arising². With cognizance’s entering into non-arising the defilements that would be generated with arising as their condition remain unborn and do not come to be born, . . . remain unmanifested and do not come to be manifested. So with the cessation of the cause there is the cessation of suffering.

Occurrence is a cause. . . the sign is a cause. . . Accumulation³ is a cause, accumulation is a condition, for the generation of defilements. Seeing danger in accumulation, cognizance enters into non-accumulation. With cognizance’s entering into non-accumulation the defilements that would be generated with accumulation as their condition remain unborn and do not come to be born, . . . remain unmanifested and do not come to be manifested. So with the cessation of the cause there is the cessation of suffering.

Thus there is development of the path, there is realization of its fruition, there is convergence of ideas (dhammas).”

From the foregoing text quotations it can be concluded that there is development of the path, that there is eradication of defilements. The path does not eradicate past, future or present defilements. The defilements that arose in the past have already ceased, thus, they are not present at the moment the path-consciousness arises. As to the defilements that will arise in the future, these have not yet arisen. As to presently arising defilements, it is impossible that these could arise together with the magga-citta. Someone who eradicates past defilements, future defilements and presently arisen defilements cannot be found.

However, the path eradicates latent tendencies which are there at that moment. The latent tendencies are defilements that do not arise, they are timeless⁴. When the magga-citta, path-consciousness, has eradicated latent tendencies there are no more conditions for the arising of akusala, since there are no germs of it in the form of latent tendencies. That is why it is said that when someone eradicates latent tendencies he actually eradicates akusala of past, future and present. Thus, akusala has no opportunity to arise. As it is said “This person eradicates defilements of the past, the future and the present.”

This is compared to a tree which does not produce fruition yet. When its roots have been cut off there is no opportunity for the production of fruition. Evenso, in the past that has gone there is no production of fruition. In the future there is no opportunity for the arising of fruition. At the present time there is no arising either of fruition.

Chapter 8Meanings of “arisen”

Recapitulation: the path does not eradicate past, future or present defilements. The defilements that arose in the past have already ceased, thus, they are not present at the moment the path-consciousness arises. As to the defilements that will arise in the future, these have not yet arisen. As to presently arising defilements, it is impossible that these could arise together with the magga-citta.

However, the path eradicates latent tendencies. When the magga-citta, path-consciousness, has eradicated latent tendencies, there are no more conditions for the arising of akusala, since there are no germs of it in the form of latent tendencies. That is why it is said that when someone eradicates latent tendencies he actually eradicates akusala of past, future and present.

The “Dispeller of Delusion”, the commentary to the “Book of Analysis”, Ch 8, on the four Right Efforts, Suttanta division, explains about the eradication of defilements by the Noble eightfold Path. We read:

“Arisen (upanna) is fourfold:

1. arisen as actually occurring (vattamānuppannaṃ)

2. arisen as experienced and gone (bhutvaa vigatuppannaṃ) 3. arisen having got an opportunity (okāsakatuppannaṃ) 4. arisen having obtained a plane (bhūmiladdhuppannaṃ). Herein, (1) those defilements which are existent, being possessed of arising and so on¹, are ‘arisen as actually occurring’. (2) When kamma has been accumulated by impulsion [N: javana], the [kamma-] result which has ceased after experiencing the essential nature of the object is ‘gone away having experienced’, and kamma which has arisen and ceased is ‘gone away having been’; both are counted as ‘arisen as experienced and gone’.

(3) Profitable or unprofitable kamma inhibits the result of other kamma and makes the opportunity for its own result. When such an opportunity is thus made, the result which arises, from the [time of the] making of the opportunity, is counted as arisen; this is called ‘arisen having got an opportunity’.

(4) But the five aggregates are called the plane of insight. These are divided into past, etc. But the defilements inhering in these are not to be said to be past, future or present; inhering in the past aggregates, they are unabandoned. Inhering in the future aggregates and in the present aggregates, they are also unabandoned. This is called ‘ arisen having obtained a plane’. Hence the ancients said: ‘The defilements which are unabolished in this or that plane are counted as arisen having obtained a plane’.

‘Arisen’ is again fourfold thus:

5. arisen as behaviour (samudācāruppannaṃ), 6. arisen because an object has been taken up (ārammaṇādhigahituppannaṃ),

7. arisen through non-suppression (avikkhambhituppannaṃ), 8. arisen through non-abolition (asamugghātituppannaṃ). Herein, (5) that existing now is what is called ‘arisen as behaviour”.

(6) After the eyes have been opened once, when an object has been grasped as a sign, it cannot be said that the defilements will not arise at any moment whenever [the object is] remembered (anussaritakkha.ne). Why? Because the object has been taken up. Like what? Just as it cannot be said that milk will not issue from a place on a milk tree which has been repeatedly struck by a hatchet. Thus this is called ‘ arisen because an object has been taken up’.

(7) But when the defilements are not suppressed by an attainment, it is not to be said that they will not arise in that situation. Why? Because of non-suppression. Like what? Like it cannot be said that if one were to strike a milk tree with a hatchet, milk would not issue from that very spot. Thus this is called ‘ arisen through non-suppression’.

(8) But the idea that it is not to be said that defilements which are not abolished by the path will not arise in one even if reborn in the summit of existence, should be elaborated in the same way. This is called ‘arisen through non-abolition’.

Among these (varieties of) ‘arisen’, that is to say, (1) ‘arisen as actually occurring’, (2) arisen as experienced and gone’, (3) ‘arisen having got an opportunity’ and (5) ‘arisen as behaviour’, are not to be annihilated by the path; but the four kinds of ‘arisen’, that is to say, (4) ‘arisen having obtained a plane’, (6) ‘arisen because an object has been taken up’, (7) ‘arisen through non-suppression’ and (8) ‘ arisen through non-abolition’, are to be annihilated by the path. For the path, on arising abandons these defilements. The defilements which it abandons are not to be said to be past, future or present.”

Chapter 9The four right efforts

Recapitulation: The Dispeller of Delusion explained different meanings of ‘arisen’, upanna. It explains by giving details of the meanings of ‘arisen’, that akusala that arises is not eradicated by the magga-citta, since akusala citta cannot occur at the same time as the magga-citta. But the magga-citta on arising annihilates defilements so that there is no more opportunity for their arising.

The Dispeller of Delusion continues:

“And this, too, is said: ‘If he abandons past defilements, he therefore destroys what is destroyed, causes to cease what has ceased, causes to go away what has gone away, causes to subside what has subsided; the past which is non-existent, he abandons. . .

If he abandons future defilements, he therefore abandons what is not born, he abandons what is not produced, he abandons what is not arisen; he abandons what has not appeared. The future, which is non-existent, he abandons. . .

If he abandons present defilements, one therefore who is greedy abandons greed, one who is hateful abandons hate, one who is deluded abandons delusion, one who is bound abandons pride, one who is held abandons views, one who is distracted abandons agitation, one who has not found his aim abandons uncertainty, one who is obdurate, abandons inherent tendency; dark and bright states occur simultaneously, and there is defiled development of the path. . .

Therefore is there no development of the path, is there no realisation of fruition, is there no abandoning of defilements, is there no comprehension of the Law [N: the Dhamma]?. . . [on the contrary,] there is development of the path, there is realisation of fruition, there is abandoning of defilements, there is comprehension of the Law. Like what? Just as a young tree. . . [etc.]” (Paṭisambhidāmagga II, 217 f.).

In the Pāli [N: the text] the [simile of the] tree with unborn fruit is given. But it should be illustrated by the tree with born fruit. For just as though there were a young mango tree with fruit, and men were to eat some of its fruit and, knocking the rest down, were to fill baskets [with them], and then another man cut it down with an axe; in that case, neither its past fruits are destroyed by him nor the future and the present ones. For the past ones are not destroyed since they were eaten by the men, and those in the future, being as yet unproduced, he cannot destroy; but when [the tree] is cut down, since there are no fruits at that time, the present ones too are not destroyed. But it is those which would appear on the tree due to essence of earth and water if the tree had not been cut down that are destroyed then. For those which are unborn do not come to be born, those which are unproduced do not come to be produced, those which have not become manifest do not become manifest.

So indeed the path does not abandon the past, etc. kinds of defilements nor does it not abandon them. Those defilements whose arising would have taken place if the aggregates had not been fully understood by means of the path which has arisen- those defilements which are unborn do not come to be born, which are unproduced do not come to be produced, which have not become manifest do not become manifest.

Again this meaning should be explained by way of the medicines drunk by a newly-pregnant woman for the purpose of not giving birth, or for the purpose of allaying the illnesses of the sick.

The “Dispeller of Delusion”, the commentary to the “Book of Analysis”, Ch 8, on the four Right Efforts, continues:

“Thus those defilements which the path abandons are not to be called past, future or present, nor does the path fail to abandon defilements. But it is with reference to those defilements which the path abandons that “of arisen evil” and so on is said. And not only does the path abandon the defilements but it abandons also the clung-to aggregates which would arise because of the non-abandonment of the defilements¹ .

And this is said in detail: “Through the cessation of [kamma- ]formation consciousness due to the knowledge of the Stream Entry path, the mentality and materiality that would arise in the endless round of rebirths cease here, except for [the duration of] seven existences” (cf. As.l 236).

Thus the path emerges from the clung to and the not clung to; but by way of the [three] existences, the Stream Entry path emerges from the state of woe², the Once Return path from part of the happy-destiny existence, the No-Return path from the happy-destiny existence³, the Arahat path from fine-material and immaterial existence. “It emerges from all kinds of existence” also they say.

Then how, at the moment of the path, is there development for the arising of the unarisen ? Or how for the maintenance of those that are arisen? Through the occurrence of the path itself. For the path is called unarisen when it is occurring because it has not occurred previously⁴. Those who have gone to a place not previously gone to, having experienced an object not previously experienced, give utterance thus: ‘We have come to a place not previously gone to, we experience an object not previously experienced.’ And what is called occurrence is also called maintenance, thus it is correct to say that he develops for maintenance.”

This text is similar to the commentary to the Mahāsakuludāyisutta (Middle Length Sayings II, no 77). The commentary to the Mahāsakuludāyisutta states in addition:

“ In the ‘Cetokhilasutta’ (Middle Length Sayings, sutta 16) it is said as to the right efforts, in short, that he approaches calm or that he approaches the calming [and eradication] of defilements.

He approaches awakening, for the sake of the realisation of the Path.”

Chapter 10Eradication of Latent Tendencies II

Recapitulation: the previous text alluded to the four right efforts: the right effort to avoid akusala, overcome akusala, develop kusala and maintain kusala. In stating that the path is unarisen, it is emphasized that the lokuttara cittas arising at the moment of enlightenment did not arise before. At the moment of path-consciousness there is the fulfillment of the right efforts to develop and to maintain what is wholesome.

The following text of the Visuddhimagga refers to the different meanings of arisen, upanna. As we have seen in the text of the “Dispeller of Delusion”, the first four meanings of arisen were: (1) ‘arisen as actually occurring’, (2) arisen as experienced and gone’, (3) ‘arisen having got an opportunity’ and (4) arisen having obtained a plane (bhūmiladdhuppannaṃ).

Then it continues with four more meanings of arisen, as was also explained in the “Dispeller of Delusion” . It adds a few examples in addition.

The “Visuddhimagga”, in “Purity by Knowledge and Vision” (XXII,

• 89) explains the following four ways of “arisen” (upanna)¹ :

(5) arisen as behaviour (samudācāruppannaṃ), (6) arisen with apprehension of an object (ārammaṇādhigahituppannaṃ), (7) arisen through non-suppression (avikkhambhituppannaṃ),(8) arisen through non-abolition (asamugghātituppannaṃ).

Herein, (5) “arisen as happening” is the same as “arisen as actually occurring” (vattamānuppannaṃ)².

(6) 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, then that defilement is called arisen with apprehension of an object. Like the defilement that arose in the Elder Mahā-Tissa after seeing the form of a person of the opposite sex while wandering for alms in the village of Kalyāna (cf. MA. 1, 66 and AA, to A.1, 4).

(7) 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 because there is no cause to prevent its arising [if suitable conditions combine].

(8) 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. 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.

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 (4) arisen by having soil [to grow in] (bhūmiladdhuppanna.m)³.

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] knowledge⁴ 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.

So here ‘the kinds of states that ought to be abandoned, also the act of abandoning’ should be known in this way.”

Summarizing the eight meanings of “upanna” , arisen, the “Visuddhimagga” refers to :

(1) as actually occurring, (2) as been and gone, (3) by opportunity made, (4) by having soil [to grow in], (5) arisen as happening, (6) arisen with apprehension of an object , (7) arisen through non-suppression, (8) arisen through non-abolition.

The items 6, 7, 8, are included in 4: having soil [to grow in]. These refer to the latent tendencies that can be eradicated.

From the texts quoted before from the commentary to the Vinaya⁵, from the commentary to the Vibhaṅga (the Dispeller of Delusion), from the commentary to the Mahāsakuludāyisutta, and from the Visuddhimagga (XXII, “Purity by Knowledge and Vision”), it can be concluded that four meanings of ‘arisen’ refer to the akusala dhammas which can be eradicated by path-consciousness. They are: (4) arisen having obtained a plane (bhūmiladdhuppannaṃ), (6) arisen with apprehension of an object (ārammaṇādhigahituppannaṃ), defilements that are there when an object is experienced, (7) arisen through non-suppression (avikkhambhituppannaṃ), defilements that cannot be eradicated by the attainment of jhāna and that arise when there is an opportunity , and (8) arisen through non-abolition (asamugghātituppannaṃ), defilements that cannot be eradicated yet by path-consciousness.

These four meanings of “arisen” refer to the latent tendencies that are akusala dhammas lying dormant in the citta, akusala dhammas that do not arise and perform a function. But when there is an appropriate condition akusala dhamma arises and performs the function of that particular akusala dhamma⁶. The path-consciousness will eradicate these latent tendencies that are not dependent on time, thus, that are not past, future or present.

As was stated before with reference to the latent tendencies being timeless: when the magga-citta arises it eradicates defilements, but it should not be said that these are past, future or present.

In the Points of Controversity, the Kathāvatthu and commentary, there are questions and answers with the purpose to eliminate the wrong view of the heretics such as the Uttarāpathakas who wrongly believed that the defilements to be eradicated by the magga-citta, namely the latent tendencies, were realities dependent on time⁷. They believed that the defilements that were past, future and present could be overcome. They did not understand that when there is an appropriate condition the latent tendencies cause the arising of akusala citta (pariyuṭṭhāna kilesa). As we have seen, some of the Andhakas and the Uttarāpathakas wrongly believed that the latent tendencies that were dormant in the succession of cittas were not conjoined with citta, that they were ahetuka (without roots), indeterminate (avyākata, in this case not akusala), and consequently without object⁸.

In the commentary to the Mahāniddesa (to the Chapter of Eights, “The Purified”) it is explained that the path-consciousness eradicates akusala dhammas which are latent tendencies that are there at that moment.⁹

This commentary deals with the question how the defilements that arise in the future can be eradicated. It is answered that the person who has strength can eradicate latent tendencies because these are there at present.

The commentary to the “Yamaka” refers to the “Path of Discrimination” which deals with the question whether a person eradicates only defilements that are present. It answers that a person can eradicate latent tendencies, defilements that are powerful, because these are there at present.

From the explanations of the foregoing texts it has been clearly shown that the magga-citta eradicates latent tendencies that are akusala dhammas which are there at that moment.