1. There is convergence.
By means of what does he cause convergence?
He causes convergence by means of cognizance.
If he causes convergence by means of cognizance, then one without knowledge causes convergence?
One without knowledge does not cause convergence; he causes convergence by means of knowledge.
If he causes convergence by means of knowledge, then one without cognizance causes convergence?
One without cognizance does not cause convergence; he causes convergence by means of cognizance and by means of knowledge.
If he causes convergence by means of cognizance and by means of knowledge, then he causes convergence by means of sensual-desire-sphere cognizance and by means of knowledge?
He does not cause convergence by means of sensual-desire-sphere cognizance and by means of knowledge.
Then he causes convergence by means of material-sphere cognizance and by means of knowledge?
He does not cause convergence by means of material-sphere cognizance and by means of knowledge.
Then he causes convergence by means of immaterial-sphere cognizance and by means of knowledge?
He does not cause convergence by means of immaterial-sphere cognizance and by means of knowledge.
Then he causes convergence by means of cognizance that is the heir of action and by means of knowledge?
He does not cause convergence by means of cognizance that is the heir of action and by means of knowledge.
Then he causes convergence by means of cognizance that is the owner of action and by means of knowledge?
He does not cause convergence by means of cognizance that is the owner of action and by means of knowledge.
Then he causes convergence by means of cognizance in conformity with actuality and by means of knowledge?
He does not cause convergence by means of cognizance in conformity with actuality and by means of knowledge.
Then he causes convergence by means of past cognizance and by means of knowledge?
He does not cause convergence by means of past cognizance and by means of knowledge.
Then he causes convergence by means of future cognizance and by means of knowledge?
He does not cause convergence by means of future cognizance and by means of knowledge.
Then he causes convergence by means of presently-arisen mundane cognizance and by means of knowledge?
He does not cause convergence by means of presently-arisen mundane cognizance and by means of knowledge; he causes convergence by means of presently-arisen cognizance at the moment of the supramundane path and by means of knowledge.
How does he cause convergence by means of presently-arisen cognizance at the moment of the supramundane path and by means of knowledge?
At the moment of the supramundane path cognizance whose predominant feature is [the nature of] its arising is the cause and condition for the knowledge, and also the cognizance associated with that [knowledge] has cessation as its domain; and knowledge, whose predominant feature is seeing, is the cause and condition for the cognizance, and also the knowledge associated with that cognizance has cessation as its domain. That is how he causes convergence by means of presently-arisen cognizance at the moment of the supramundane path and by means of knowledge.
2. How then, is convergence that much only?
No. At the moment of the supramundane path: there is convergence of seeing, which is right view; there is convergence of directing-onto, which is right thought; there is convergence of embracing, which is right speaking; there is convergence of originating, which is right acting; there is convergence of cleansing, which is right living; there is convergence of exertion, which is right effort; there is convergence of establishing (founding), which is right mindfulness; there is convergence of non-distraction, which is right concentration. There is convergence of establishing (founding), which is the mindfulness enlightenment factor; … [and so on with the rest of the seven enlightenment factors] … there is convergence of reflexion, which is the equanimity enlightenment factor. There is convergence of unshakability by non-faith, which is the faith power: … [and so on with the rest of the five powers] … there is convergence of unshakability by ignorance, which is the understanding power. There is convergence of resolution, which is the faith faculty; … [and so on with the rest of the five faculties] … there is convergence of seeing, which is the understanding faculty. There is convergence of the faculties in the sense of dominance; there is convergence of the powers in the sense of unshakability; there is convergence of the enlightenment factors in the sense of outlet; there is convergence of the path in the sense of cause; there is convergence of the foundations of mindfulness in the sense of establishment (foundation); there is convergence of the right endeavours in the sense of endeavouring; there is convergence of the bases for success in the sense of succeeding; there is convergence of the actualities in the sense of suchness (reality). There is convergence of serenity in the sense of non-distraction; there is convergence of insight in the sense of contemplation; there is convergence of serenity and insight in the sense of single function (taste); there is convergence of coupling in the sense of non-excess. Purification of virtue in the sense of restraint is convergence; purification of cognizance in the sense of non-distraction is convergence; purification of view in the sense of seeing is convergence; liberation in the sense of freedom is convergence; recognition in the sense of penetration is convergence; deliverance in the sense of giving up is convergence; knowledge of exhaustion in the sense of cutting off is convergence. In the sense of root foundation, zeal is convergence; in the sense of origination, attention is convergence; in the sense of combining, contact is convergence; in the sense of being foremost, concentration is convergence; in the sense of dominance, mindfulness is convergence; in the sense of being the highest of all, understanding is convergence; in the sense of core, deliverance is convergence; in the sense of end, nibbana which merges in the deathless is convergence.
3. How then, is convergence that much only?
No. At the moment of the stream-entry path: there is convergence of seeing, which is right view; … [and so on as in § 2] … knowledge of destruction in the sense of cutting off is convergence. In the sense of root-foundation, zeal is convergence … [and so on as in § 2] … in the sense of end, nibbana which merges in the deathless is convergence.
4. 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 as in § 2] … knowledge of non-arising in the sense of tranquillization is convergence. In the sense of root-foundation, zeal is convergence … [and so on as in § 2] … in the sense of end, nibbana which merges in the deathless is convergence.
5. 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; … [repeat § 3].
6. How then, is convergence that much only?
No. At the moment of the fruition of once-return: there is convergence of seeing, which is right view; … [repeat § 4].
7. How then, is convergence that much only?
No. At the moment of the non-return path: there is convergence of seeing, which is right view; … [repeat § 3].
8. How then, is convergence that much only?
No. At the moment of the fruition of non-return there is convergence of seeing, which is right view; … [repeat § 4].
9. How then, is convergence that much only?
No. At the moment of the arahant path: there is convergence of seeing, which is right view; … [repeat § 3].
10. How then, is convergence that much only?
No. At the moment of the fruition of arahantship: there is convergence of seeing, which is right view; … [repeat § 4].
11. [When] this [noble person] abandons defilements, [then] he abandons past defilements, abandons future defilements, abandons presently arisen defilements?
[Suppose that] he abandons past defilements.
If he abandons past defilements, he destroys 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 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 (pride), 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 occur coupled together, and there is development of a path that has defilement. He does not abandon past defilements, he does not abandon future defilements, he does not abandon presently-arisen defilements.
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?
12. 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 (launches out into) non-arising. With cognizance's entering into (launching out into) non-arising the defilements that would be generated with arising as their condition remain unborn and do not come to be born, … remain unmanifest 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 … Accumulation is a cause, accumulation is a condition, for the generation of defilements. Seeing danger in accumulation, cognizance enters into (launches out into) non-accumulation. With cognizance's entering into (launching out into) non-accumulation the defilements that would be generated with accumulation as their condition remain unborn and do not come to be born, … remain unmanifest 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.
End of Treatise on Convergence.