-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
/
Copy pathkv10.3.html
44 lines (44 loc) · 4.78 KB
/
kv10.3.html
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta charset='UTF-8'>
<meta name='author' content='Shwe Zan Aung, C.A.F. Rhys Davids'>
<title></title>
</head>
<body>
<article id='kv10.3' lang='en'>
<header>
<ul>
<li class='division'>Points of Controversy</li>
</ul>
<h1>10.3 Of Path-Culture and the Senses</h1>
</header>
<p><span class='add'>Controverted Point</span>: That one may develop the Path while enjoying the fivefold cognitions of sense.</p>
<p><span class='add'>Theravādin:</span> <a class='ref pts-cs' id='pts-cs10.3.1' href='#pts-cs10.3.1'>PTS cs 10.3.1</a>But you will admit (i.) that the five kinds of sense-consciousness have a seat and an object that have already sprung up; (ii.) that their seat and object are antecedent; (iii.) that their seat is of the subject while their object is external, that seat and object are not yet broken up while operative; (iv.) that seat and object are of different varieties; (v.) that they do not enjoy mutually their respective ranges and fields; (vi.) that they come to pass not without co-ordinated application or attention; (vii.) that they are not unmixed; (viii.) are not without order in time; (ix.) are without order of contiguity; and (x.) without any ideation? Now if all this be true, your proposition cannot be true.</p>
<p><a class='pc' id='pc246' href='#pc246'></a><a class='ref pts-cs' id='pts-cs10.3.2' href='#pts-cs10.3.2'>PTS cs 10.3.2</a>Consider visual consciousness and one of the Path-subjects—Emptiness—does the former come to pass concerning the latter? If you deny, you are opposing your thesis. If you assent, I ask whether it is right doctrine to say not only:</p>
<p>“Because of the eye and the visible object visual consciousness arises”,</p>
<p>but also:</p>
<p>Because of the eye and Emptiness visual consciousness arises?</p>
<p>Is the Suttanta thus? <span class='add'>Of course not.</span></p>
<p><a class='ref pts-cs' id='pts-cs10.3.3' href='#pts-cs10.3.3'>PTS cs 10.3.3</a>Again, if your proposition be true, you must also affirm that visual consciousness arises concerning the past and the future. Also that it arises <span class='add'>not solely because of visible object, but also</span> concerning mental contact, feeling, perception, volition, thought, the organs of sight, hearing, smell, taste, touch, and the objects of hearing, smell, taste, touch—impossible affirmations.</p>
<p>Now you can admit that representative (ideational) consciousness does arise concerning Emptiness, concerning the past and the future, concerning phases of mind, factors of experience, as stated just now.</p>
<p>And one may develop a Path while enjoying representative cognition concerning any one of those matters, but not during the enjoyment of sense-consciousness, which as such is not concerned with them.</p>
<p><a class='ref pts-cs' id='pts-cs10.3.4' href='#pts-cs10.3.4'>PTS cs 10.3.4</a><span class='add'>Mahāsaṅghika:</span> Well, but was it not said by the Exalted One: </p>
<p>“Here, <i>bhikkhus</i>, when a <i>bhikkhu</i> sees an object with the eye, he does not grasp at the general characters nor at the details of it,… or hears a sound,… or smells,… tastes,… touches a tangible …”?</p>
<p>Surely here there is Path-practice by one who is enjoying the five sorts of sense-consciousness? … .</p>
<footer>
<p><cite class='book' translate='no'>The Points of Controversy</cite>, an English translation of the Pali Abhidhamma Kathāvatthu. Translated by <span class='author'>Shwe Zan Aung</span> and <span class='author'>C.A.F. Rhys Davids</span>. First published by Pali Text Society, <span class='publication-date'>1915</span>.</p>
<p>This SuttaCentral edition was prepared by <span class='editor'>Manfred Wierich</span> and <span class='editor'>Ven. Vimala</span> and proofread by <span class='editor'>Josephine Tobin</span>. Some changes were introduced:</p>
<ul>
<li>Abbreviations, i.e., those of cited works and the participants in the controversies, were expanded.</li>
<li>Cross-references were linked.</li>
<li>Some typographic changes were introduced, among others, i.e.: the phonetic symbol “ŋ” was changed to the Pāli diacritical letter “ṃ”, “ô” to “o”, single quotes to double quotes, and “:—” to “:”.</li>
<li>Letter-spacing with fixed spaces was replaced with bold font.</li>
<li>The corrigenda were merged into the text. Some could not be resolved, though.</li>
</ul>
<p>This electronic version is published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial 3.0 licence (CC BY-NC 3.0) as found here: <a href='http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/'>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/</a></p>
<p>All copyright is owned by the Pali Text Society. See also the statement under http://www.palitext.com/ → Publications → Copyright Announcement. For non-commercial use only.</p>
</footer>
</article>
</body>
</html>