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
5. Of  Buddhas. 
Controverted  Point— That Buddhas differ  one from 
another in grades. 
From the Commentary.—We  hold that, with the exception of 
differences  in body, age, and radiance,2 at any given time, Buddhas 
differ  mutually in no other respect. Some, however, like the Andhakas, 
hold that they differ  in other qualities in general. 
[1]  Th.—"Wherein  then do they differ—in  any of  the 
matters pertaining to Enlightenment?3 in self-mastery?4 
in omniscient insight and vision? . . . 
 6. Of  All-Pervading  Power. 
Controverted  -Point.—That  the Buddhas persist in all 
directions.
2
 Some manuscripts read pabhava-mattang , measure of  power, 
which is scarcely plausible for  a Buddhist. Pacceka Buddhas are 
presumably not taken into account. 
3 See p. 65. 
4
 Vasibhava, literally, the state of  one who has practice.
From the Commentary.—Some,  like the Mahasanghikas, hold that 
a Buddha1 exists in the four quarters of the firmament, above, below, 
and around, causing his change of  habitat to come to pass in any-
sphere of  being. 
[1] Th.—Do  you., mean that they persist2 in the eastern 
quarter ? You deny. Then you contradict yourself.  You 
assent.3 Then I ask, How is [this Eastern] Buddha named ? 
What is his family?  his clan? what the names of  his 
parents ? or of  his pair of  elect disciples ? or of  his body-
servant ? What sort of  raiment or bowl does he- bear ? and 
in what village, town, city, kingdom, or country ? 
[2] Or does a Buddha persist in the southern . . . 
western . . . northern quarter ? or in the nadir ? or in the 
zenith ? Of  any such an one I ask you the same ques-
tions. .. . Or does he persist in the realm of  the four 
great Kings?4 or in the heaven of  the Three-and-Thirty? 
or in that of  the Yama or the Tusita devas ? or in that of 
the devas who rejoice in creating,.or of  those who exploit 
the creations of  others ?5 or in the Brahma-world ? If  you 
assent, I ask you further  as before.  . . . 
7. Of  Phenomena. 
Controverted  Point.—That  all things are by nature im-
mutable.6 
From the Commentary.—Some,  like the Andhakas and certain of 
the Uttarapathakas, hold this, judging from  the fact  that nothing 
1
 In the PTS edition for  buddh a read buddho atthiti . 
2
 Titthanti , lit. 'stand'; the word used in XIII. 1 for 'endure.' 
3
 He denies with respect to [the locus of]  the historical Sakya-
muni [sic]; he assents, since by his view the persisting is in different 
places.—Comy. 
4 On the possible birthplace of  these deities, see Moulton, Zoro-
astrianism,  22-27, 242. 
5
 Cf.  Compendium,  p. 140 f. 
6
 Niyata. On this term, see above, V. 4; VI. 1. 'Not fixed'  , 
below is a -niyato. On the three alternatives in § 1, see Childers's 
Dictionary, s.v. rasi. The three are affirmed in Digha-Nik.,  iii. 217.
[however it may change] gives up its fundamental  nature, matter, 
e.g., being fixed  as matter, and so on. 
[1] Th.—Do  you mean that they all belong to that Order 
of  things, by which the wrong-doer is assured of  immediate 
retribution on rebirth, or to that other Order by which the 
Path-winner is assured of  final  salvation ? Is there not a 
third congeries that is not fixed  as one or the other ? You 
deny. But think. Surely there is? You assent. Then 
you contradict your proposition. And you must do so, for 
did not the Exalted One speak of  three congeries ? 
[3] You affirm  [as your reason] that matter is fixed  as 
matter, and that mind (or each mental aggregate) is fixed 
as mind. Well, then, under which of  those three congeries 
do you find  them fixed ?1
[4] A. V.—But i f  I may not say that matter, or mind 
is fixed  as matter, or mind respectively, tell me, can body 
become mind, can become one of  the four  mental aggre-
gates, or conversely ? Of  course not. Surely then I am 
right. 
8. Of  Karma. 
Controverted  Point.—That  all karmas are inflexible.
2 
From the Commentary.—The  same parties hold also this opinion, 
judging by the fact  that karmas which work out their own effects 
under present conditions in this or the next life,  or in a posterior series 
of  lives, are fixed  with respect one to the other. 
[1,-2] Similar  to §§ 1, 2 in the foregoing. 
[3] Th.—Do  you mean that karma which eventuates in 
1
 They are not immutable in badness, nor in goodness, wrongness, 
nor rightness. Therefore,  since these are the only two categories 
admitted as immutable, they must come under the third or mutable 
'non-fixed'  category or congeries (rasi). 
2
 There are two uniformities  in Nature, by one of  which the worst 
offenders  are assured of  immediate retribution after  death, and by the 
other of  which the Path-winner is assured of  final  salvation. And 
there is a third alternative group which is neither. 
this life  is a fixed  fact  as such ? You assent.1 Then does 
it belong to either of  the fixed  orders ? You deny. [Then 
it belongs to no fixed  order.] The same holds good with 
respect to karma, results of  which will be experienced at 
the next rebirth, or in a succession of  rebirths. 
[4] A. U.—But  you admit, do you not, that none of 
these three binds of  karma is mutually convertible with 
the other two ? How then am I wrong ? 
1 This kind of karma, if capable of eventuating at all, [invariably]
works out its effects in this very life; if not, it becomes inoperative
[ahosi-kamma]. So the Theravadin assents.-Comy. That is,
each of these three kinds of karma retains its own characteristics.
0 comments:
Post a Comment