Comments

Comm. NT: 36.
Saṅkhārupekkhāñāṇakathāvaṇṇanā

‘From the object interpreted as the sign’: from the pentad of aggregates as the object of insight;
for that pentad of aggregates is called the ‘object interpreted’ on account of the interpreting, in other words, on account of being made the domain of insight.
And although it is included in one’s own continuity, it is nevertheless called ‘external’ because it is seen as alien to it;
it is that too which in other contexts is spoken of as ‘externally from all signs’ (Paṭis I 71).
‘Internally from occurrence’: from the occurrence of wrong view, etc., in one’s own continuity, and from the defilements and from the aggregates that occur consequent upon them.
For it is stated in this way because there is occurrence of defilement in one’s own continuity and because there is occurrence of clung-to aggregates produced by that [defilement] when there is no path development.
And emergence consists both in making these the object and in producing their non-liability to future arising.

пали	Vuṭṭhānaṃ vuccati bahiddhānimittabhūtato abhiniviṭṭhavatthuto ceva ajjhattapavattato ca vuṭṭhahanato maggo, taṃ gacchatīti vuṭṭhānagāminī, maggena saddhiṃ ghaṭiyatīti attho.
Nyanamoli thera	The path is called “emergence” because it emerges externally from the objective basis interpreted as a sign and also internally from occurrence [of defilement].36 It goes to that, thus it leads to emergence; the meaning is that it joins with the path.