[1281] For whomever, and wherever, the latent tendency of doubt (vicikicchānusaya) does not lie latent, does the latent tendency of lust for existence (bhavarāgānusaya) not lie latent for that person there?
For three persons, in the form element (rūpadhātu) and in the formless element (arūpadhātu): for them there the latent tendency of doubt does not lie latent, but it is not the case that the latent tendency of lust for existence does not lie latent for them there. For those same persons, in the three feelings (vedanā) in the sense element (kāmadhātu) and in the unincluded (apariyāpanna): for them there the latent tendency of doubt does not lie latent and the latent tendency of lust for existence does not lie latent. For the Arahant, everywhere, the latent tendency of doubt does not lie latent and the latent tendency of lust for existence does not lie latent.
Or rather, for whomever, and wherever, the latent tendency of lust for existence does not lie latent, does the latent tendency of doubt not lie latent for that person there?
For the ordinary person (puthujjana), in the three feelings in the sense element: for him there the latent tendency of lust for existence does not lie latent, but it is not the case that the latent tendency of doubt does not lie latent for him there. For that same person, in the unincluded: for him there the latent tendency of lust for existence does not lie latent and the latent tendency of doubt does not lie latent. For the Arahant, everywhere, the latent tendency of lust for existence does not lie latent and the latent tendency of doubt does not lie latent.
For whomever, and wherever, the latent tendency of doubt does not lie latent, does the latent tendency of ignorance (avijjānusaya) not lie latent for that person there?
For three persons, in the three feelings in the sense element, in the form element, and in the formless element: for them there the latent tendency of doubt does not lie latent, but it is not the case that the latent tendency of ignorance does not lie latent for them there. For those same persons, in the unincluded: for them there the latent tendency of doubt does not lie latent and the latent tendency of ignorance does not lie latent. For the Arahant, everywhere, the latent tendency of doubt does not lie latent and the latent tendency of ignorance does not lie latent.
Or rather, for whomever, and wherever, the latent tendency of ignorance does not lie latent, does the latent tendency of doubt not lie latent for that person there?
Yes (āmantā).
English translation from the Pali (Siam Raṭṭha edition) — under review, not for citation.