Points of Controversy
OR
Subjects of Discourse
BEING A TRANSLATION OF THE KATHAVATTHU
FROM THE ABHIDHAMMA-PITAKA
BY
SHWE ZAN AUNG, B.A
AND
MRS. RHYS DAVIDS, M.A
4. Of the Outward Life of an Ariyan.
Controverted Point—That the Ariyan ' forms ' [of speech
and action] are derived from the four primary qualities of
matter.3
From the Commentary.—The Uttarapathakas and others hold that
Ariyan speech and action are material qualities derived, as such, from
the four primary elements of matter, the Doctrine teaching that all
material qualities are the four primary qualities of matter, or are
derived from them.'4
3
Extended, cohesive, hot, and mobile elements, popularly called
earth, water, fire, air.
4
Majjhima-Nik., i. 53 ; cf . 185.
[1] Th.—You admit that the qualities1 of the Ariyan
are moral, and not unmoral. But the primary qualities of
matter are not moral; they are unmoral. . . .
[2] Again, there is in these primary qualities nothing
akin to the absence of intoxicant, fetter, tie, flood, bond,
hindrance, infection, grasping, corruption, characteristic of
the Ariyan's qualities. On the contrary, the former are
concomitant with these [ethically undesirable things].
[3] U.—But if I am wrong, was it not said by the
Exalted One: ' Whatever matter there is, bhikkhus, is the
four primary qualities and their derivatives' P Hence it is
surely right to say that the material qualities of the Ariyan
are derived from the primary qualities.
5. Of Latent Bias as Something Apart.3
Controverted Point.—That latent bias, in any of the
seven forms, is different in kind from a patent outbreak of
the vice.
From the Commentary.—Some, like the Andhakas, hold this view,
inasmuch as an average worldly person, while his thoughts are
ethically good or neutral, may be said to have latent bias for the seven
vices, but not to be openly manifesting them.
[1] Th.—Do you equally maintain that the lusts of
sense are different in kind from the lusts of sense openly
manifested? You deny, but you cannot then maintain
your proposition. You cannot maintain that the lusts of
sense are the same as fchose lusts manifested, and yet deny
1
Evidently rupa is here taken in the limited sense of 'forms' of
speech and action—in fact, conduct. Cf. the Yamaka (i., p. xi), in
which book rupa is used in the sense of 'forms' of consciousness.
It should also be recollected that the Path-factors—supremely right
speech and action—are mental properties through which corresponding
conduct is effected. See above, X. 2.
2
Anguttara-Nik., v. 348.
3
This theory was discussed in IX. 4; XI. 1.
the identity in the case of the manifesting of them and the
latent bias.
[2-7] This argument holds good for the other six forms
—enmity, conceit, erroneous opinion, doubt, lust of life,
ignorance.
[8] A.—But if I am wrong, may not an average worldly
man, while thinking what is good or unmoral, be said to
have latent bias, but not to be openly manifesting any of
its forms ?
Th.—If you conclude from this that your proposition is
right, you must equally admit that, whereas such a person
may also be said to have lust, though he be not openly
manifesting it, lust is different in kind from open mani-
festation of it.
6. Of Unconscious Outbursts of Corruption.
Controverted Point—That outbursts of corruption take
place unconsciously.
From the Commentary.—The Andhakas, for instance, hold that lust
and other wrong states may arise even in one who is attending to
Impermanence, etc., and besides, it has been said: 'Sometimes,
Master Bharadvdja, when he is thinking: " I will attend to the
unbeautiful " he attends to it as beautiful.'1 Hence we are liable to
involuntary outbursts of corruption.
[1] Th.—You imply that such outbursts come under the
non-mental categories—matter, Nibbana, organ or object
of sense. . . . Are they not rather to be classed as lust-
ridden, hate-ridden, dulness-ridden mind, as immoral, cor-
rupted consciousness, the existence of which you of course
admit?
1
Samyutta-Nik., iv. 111. The PTS text of the Samyutta reads,
for subhato manasikarotiti , subhato agacchati. The
speaker is King Udena conversing with Pindola-Bharadvaja. Cf.
Vin. Texts, i. 302 f.; iii. 79 f.; 382 f .
0 comments:
Post a Comment