[1203] "For whomever the bodily formation (kāya-saṅkhāra) arises, did the verbal formation (vacī-saṅkhāra) cease for him?"
"Yes."
"Or rather, for whomever the verbal formation did cease, does the bodily formation arise for him?"
"For all [beings] at the moment of the dissolution of mind (citta) and at the moment of the arising of mind apart from in-and-out breathing, for those who have attained cessation (nirodha-samāpanna), and for non-percipient beings (asaññasattā) — for them the verbal formation did cease, but the bodily formation does not arise for them. At the moment of the arising of in-and-out breathing, for them the verbal formation did cease and the bodily formation arises.¹ …"
Just as in the section on arising (uppāda-vāra) the questions [combining] the past with the present have been analyzed both in the affirmative (anuloma) and in the negative (paccanīya), so too in the section on arising and cessation (uppāda-nirodha-vāra) the questions [combining] the past with the present should be analyzed both in the affirmative and in the negative.
—
¹ [Editorial note in Pali, Siam Raṭṭha edition:] "From here onward it is easily understood; therefore it should be understood that it is not analyzed [in full]. Herein this is the distinction: the paired questions on the bodily formation and the mental formation (citta-saṅkhāra) are like the preceding; but in the paired questions on the verbal formation and the mental formation, in the place of 'apart from in-and-out breathing' one should read 'apart from thought-conception and discursive thought (vitakka-vicāra)', and in the place of 'of in-and-out breathing', 'of thought-conception and discursive thought.'"
English translation from the Pali (Siam Raṭṭha edition) — under review, not for citation.