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
Examination continued by way of Rebirth.
3
[158] Th.—Does (a person or) soul4 run on (or trans-
migrate) from this world to another and from another
world to this ?
6
P.—Yes.
Is it the identical soul who transmigrates from this
world to another and from another world to this ?
6
Nay, that cannot be truly said . . . (complete as above).
Th— Then is it a different soul who transmigrates. .. .
P.—Nay, that cannot truly be said.
7
. . . (complete as
above).
Th.—Then is it both the identical and also a different
soul who transmigrates . , .?
P.—Nay, that cannot truly be said. .. .
1
Namely, to § 156.
2
Puggalo .
3
G r ati-anuyogo.—Comy. The PTS. text omits the title
after § 170.
4
Puggalo is now rendered by soul, that term being in eschato-
logical discussion more familiar to us than ' person,'
5
This question eliciting an essential feature in the Puggala-vadin's
or animistic position is repeated, as a matter of form, before each of
the four following questions.
6
The Eternalist view.—Comy. See Dialogues, i. 46 f .
1
He fears lest he side with the Annihilationists.—Comy.
Th.—Then is it neither the identical soul, nor yet a
different soul who transmigrates . . .?*
P.—Nay, that cannot truly be said. . . .
Th— Is it the identical, a different, both identical and
also different, neither identical, nor different soul who
transmigrates . . .?
P.—Nay, that cannot truly be said. . . .
[159] P.—Then is it wrong to say, ' The soul trans-
migrates from this world to another world, and from
another world to this ?'
Th.—Yes.
P.—Was it not said by the Exalted One :—
' When he hath run from birth to birth
Seven times and reached the last, that soul
Endmaker shall become of ill,
By tvearing every fetter down ' ? 2
Is the Suttanta thus ?
Th.—Yes.
P.—Then surely the soul does transmigrate from this
world to another world and from another world to this.
Again (:repeating his first question) was it not said by the
Exalted One: ' Without a known beginning, 0 bhikkhus, is
the way of life ever renewed ; unrevealed is the origin of souls
(lit. beings) ivho, shrouded' in ignorance and bound by the
fetters of natural desire, run on transmigrating.'
3
Is the Suttanta thus ?
Th.—Yes.
P. —Then surely the soul does transmigrate as was
said.
[160] Th.—Does the soul transmigrate from this world,
etc.?
P.— Yes.
Th.—Does the identical soul so transmigrate ?
1
He fears in this and the next question lest he side with certain
Eternalists and the 'Eel wrigglers' respectively.—Comy. Cf . Dialogues,
i. 37 f .
2
Iti-vuttaka, § 24.
3
Samyutta-Nikaya, iii. 149.
P.—Nay, that cannot truly be said . . . {complete , as
usual).
Th.—I repeat my question.
P.—Yes.
Th.—Is there any soul who after being human becomes
a deva 91
P.—Yes.
Th.—Is the identical man the deva ?
P.—Nay, that cannot truly be said . . . (complete as
usual).
Th.—[I repeat], is the identical man the deva ?
2
P.—Yes.
Th.—Now you are wrong to admit as true that, having
been man he becomes deva, or having been deva he becomes
man, and again that, having become man, a deva is different
from a human being, [and yet] that this identical soul
transmigrates. . . .
Surely i f the identical soul, without [becoming] different,
transmigrates when deceasing hence to another world,
there will then be no dying; destruction of life will cease
to take place. There is action (karma); there is action's
effect; there is the result of deeds done. But when good
and bad acts are maturing as results, you say that the very
same [person] transmigrates—this is wrong.
3
[161] Th.—Does the self-same soul transmigrate from
this world to another, from another world to this ?
P.—Yes.
Th.—Is there anyone who, having been human, becomes
a Yakkha, a Peta, an inmate of purgatory,- a beast, for
example a camel, an ox, a mule, a pig, a buffalo ?
1
We have let deva stand. It includes all that we mean by spirit,
god, angel, and even fairy. (Pronounce day-va.)
2
"When he is [first] asked this, he denies for a mere man the state
of godship. When asked again, he admits the identity because of such
Sutta-passages as
4
I at that time was Sunetta, a teacherJ (.Peta-
vatthu, iv. 7, 3).—Comy.
3
By the orthodox view, the newly reborn is not ' the same,' nor
different, but a resultant of the deceased one's karma (acts). Hence
the notion of an identical entity persisting is in conflict with that law
of karma which the otherwise-dissenting Puggalavadin would accept.
P.—Yes.
Th.—Does the self-same human become anyone of these,
say, a buffalo ?
P.—Nay, that cannot truly be said . . . (complete the
refutation as usual).
Th.—[I repeat] is the self-same human the buffalo ?
P.—Yes.
Th.—[But all this, namely, that] having been man, he
becomes a buffalo, or having been buffalo he becomes man,
again, that having become a man, he is quite different
from the buffalo, and yet that the self-same soul goes on
transmigrating, is wrong . . . (.complete as usual).
Surely if the identical soul, when deceasing from this
world and being reborn in another, is nowise different, then
there will be no dying, nor will taking life be possible.
There is action; there is action's effect; there is the result
of deeds done. But when good and bad acts are maturing
as results, you say that the identical person transmigrates,
—this is wrong.
[162] Th.—You say that the identical soul trans-
migrates.
1
Is there anyone who having been a noble
becomes a brahmin ?
Yes.
Is the noble in question the very same as the brahmin in
question ? .
Nay, that cannot truly be said ... . (complete the dis-
course).
Is there anyone who, having been noble, becomes reborn
in the middle, or in the lower class ?
Yes.
Is the noble in question the very same as the person so
reborn ?
Nay, that cannot truly be said. .. .
The other alternatives^ substituting 'brahmin,'etc., in turn
for ' noble,' are treated similarly.
1
Repeating the original question, § 160, second query.
[163] You say that the identical soul transmigrates. . . .
Is then one who has had hand or foot cut off , or hand and
foot, or ear or nose, or both cut off , or finger or thumb
cut off , or who is hamstrung, the same as he was before ?
Or is one whose fingers are bent or webbed1
the same
as he was before ? Or is one afflicted with leprosy, skin
disease, dry leprosy, consumption, epilepsy, the same as
he was before ? Or is [one who has become] a camel,
ox, mule, pig, buffalo, the same as he was before ?
Nay, that cannot truly be said. . . .
[164] P.—Is it wrong to say : ' The identical soul trans-
migrates from this world to another, etc.
Th.—Yes.
P.—But is not one who has
4
attained the stream ' (i.e.,
the first path towards salvation), when he is deceasing from
the world of men, and is reborn in the world of devas, a
stream-winner there also ?
Th.—Yes.
P.—But if this man, reborn as deva, is a stream-winner
also in that world, then indeed, good sir, it is right to
say:
c
The identical soul transmigrates from this world to
another.' .. .
Th.—Assuming that one who has attained the stream,
when deceasing from the world of men, is reborn in the
world of devas, does the identical soul transmigrate from
this world to another and from another world to this in
just that manner ?
P.—Yes.
Th.—Is such a stream-winner, when reborn in deva-world,
a man there also ?
P.—Nay, that cannot truly be said. . . . (complete the
6
refutation').
[165]' Th.—Does the identical soul transmigrate from
this world to another, etc.?
Yes.
1
Like the wings of a bat.
Is the transmigrates not different, still present ?
Nay, that cannot truly be said. . . .
I repeat, is the transmigrate not different, still present ?
Yes.
If he has lost a hand, a foot, .. . i f he is diseased . . .
i f he is an animal . . . is he the same as before ?
Nay, that cannot truly be said . . . {complete).
[166] Th.—Does the identical soul transmigrate ? . . .
Yes.
Does he transmigrate with his corporeal qualities ?
Nay, that cannot truly be said. . . .
[Think again !] Does he transmigrate with these
- Yes.
Are soul and body the same ?
Nay, that cannot truly be said. . . .
2
Does he transmigrate with feeling, with perception, with
mental coefficients, with consciousness ?
3
Nay, that cannot truly be said. .. .
Think again . . . does he transmigrate with conscious-
ness?
Yes.
Is soul the same as body ?
Nay, that cannot truly be said. .. .
[167] Th.—If, as you say, the identical soul transmigrates,
. . . does he transmigrate without corporeal qualities,
without feeling, perception, mental coefficients, without
consciousness?
Nay, that cannot truly be said. . .
1
He first rejects because the material frame does not go with the
soul (Comy. P.T.S. text: read agamanang), then accepts because
there is no interval of soul-life only.—Comy. See below, YIII. 2. .
2
The opponent rejects this, inasmuch as, in transmigrating, the body
is held to be abandoned; moreover, he would not oppose the Suttas.—
Comy.
a
According to the Comy., this is denied because of possible rebirth
in the sphere known as the unconscious, but is admitted with respect
to other spheres.
4
Because without the five aggregates (mind, body) there is no
individual.—Comy.
Think again . . . without corporeal qualities . . . with-
out consciousness ?
Yes.
Is then the soul one thing, the body another ?
Nay, that cannot truly be admitted. .. .
[168] Th.—If, as you say, the identical soul trans-
migrates, .. . do the material qualities transmigrate ?
Nay, that cannot truly be admitted. .. .
Think again. .. .
Yes.
But is this soul (x) the same as this body (%) ?
Nay, that cannot truly be said. . . .
Does feeling . . . or perception . . . or do mental co-
efficients . . . or does consciousness transmigrate ?
Nay, that cannot truly be said. .. .
Think again . . . does consciousness transmigrate ?
Yes.
But is this soul (x) the same as this body (x) ?
Nay, that cannot truly be said. . . .
[169] Th.—Then, the identical soul, according to you,
transmigrating . . . does none of the above-named five
aggregates transmigrate ?
Nay, that cannot truly be said. .. .
Think again. .. .
Yes, they do.
Is, then, soul one thing, body another ?
Nay, that cannot truly be said. .. .
[170] At dissolution of each aggregate,
If then the ' person ' doth disintegrate,
Lo! by the Buddha shunned, the Nihilistic creed.
At dissolution of each aggregate,
If then the ' soul' doth not disintegrate,
Eternal, like Nibbana,1 were the soul indeed.
1
Samasamo—' i.e., exceedingly like, or just resembling by the
state of resemblance. Just as Nibbana is neither reborn nor dissolved,
so would the soul be.'—-Comy.
No comments:
Post a Comment