Comments

Comm. NT: 21.
Rūpakkhandhakathāvaṇṇanā

“If there is no differentiation according to primaries, what then is the reason for the differentiation of the eye, and so on?
Though the kamma that is produced by the longing for a selfhood (individual personality) with five sense-bases is one only, still it should be taken as called ‘not common to them all’ and ‘difference of kamma’ because it is the cause of the differentiation of the eye, and so on.
For it is not a condition for the ear through the same particular difference through which it is a condition for the eye, since, if it were, it would then follow that there was no distinction between the faculties.
Because of the words, ‘At the moment of rebirth-linking, exalted volition is a condition, as kamma condition, for the kinds of materiality due to kamma performed’ (Paṭṭh) it must be recognized that a single volition is kamma condition for all the kinds of materiality due to kamma performed that come into existence at the moment of rebirth-linking.
For if the volition were different, then, when there came to be the arising of the faculties, it would follow that the materiality due to kamma performed was generated by limited and exalted kamma.
And rebirth-linking that is one is not generated by a plurality of kinds of kamma. Thus it is established that the arising of the plurality of the faculties is due to a single kamma” (Vism-mhṭ 446).

пали	Kiṃ pana taṃ yaṃ aññamaññassa asādhāraṇaṃ?
Nyanamoli thera	But what is it that is not common to them all?21