[21] Whatever phenomena (dhammā) are name (nāma), do all those have the name-root as root (nāmamūlamūlaka)?
Name that is rootless (ahetuka) does not have the name-root as root; name that is with roots (sahetuka) has the name-root as root.
Or rather, whatever [phenomena] have the name-root as root, are all those phenomena name?
Form (rūpa) originated by name (nāmasamuṭṭhāna) has the name-root as root but is not name; name both has the name-root as root and is name.
Whatever phenomena are name, do all those, by way of the name-root (nāmamūlena), have one and the same root as root (ekamūlamūlaka)?
Name that is rootless, by way of the name-root, does not have one and the same root as root; name that is with roots, by way of the name-root, has one and the same root as root.
Or rather, whatever [phenomena], by way of the name-root, have one and the same root as root, are all those phenomena name?
Form originated by name, by way of the name-root, has one and the same root as root but is not name; name, by way of the name-root, both has one and the same root as root and is name.
Whatever phenomena, by way of the name-root, have one and the same root as root, do all those, by way of the name-root, have mutual roots as root (aññamaññamūlamūlaka)?
Whichever roots arise together, those name-roots both have one and the same root as root and have mutual roots as root; the remaining phenomena conascent with the name-roots (nāmamūlasahajāta), by way of the name-root, have one and the same root as root but do not have mutual roots as root.
Or rather, whatever [phenomena], by way of the name-root, have mutual roots as root, are all those phenomena name?
Yes (āmantā).
___________
English translation from the Pali (Siam Raṭṭha edition) — under review, not for citation.