Kathāvatthu: An exploration of the text and its meaning

Discussion of Abhidhamma and related Commentaries
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Kathāvatthu: An exploration of the text and its meaning

Post by DooDoot »

Dear Abhidhamma Expert/s

Our renowned SarathW posted he has read the Kathāvatthu; which inspired me to have a browse.

The following appears to say Theravada asserts the devas can be evil. Have i read this clearly? Thank you :thanks:
Theravādin: PTS cs 1.3.1

Āmantā. Natthi devesu brahmacariyavāsoti?

Controverted Point: That there is no higher life among the devas

Sabbe devā jaḷā elamūgā aviññū hatthasaṁvācikā nappaṭibalā subhāsitadubbhāsitānaṁ atthamaññātuṁ, sabbe devā na buddhe pasannā na dhamme pasannā na saṅghe pasannā, na buddhaṁ bhagavantaṁ payirupāsanti, na buddhaṁ bhagavantaṁ pañhaṁ pucchanti, na buddhena bhagavatā pañhe vissajjite attamanā, sabbe devā kammāvaraṇena samannāgatā kilesāvaraṇena samannāgatā vipākāvaraṇena samannāgatā assaddhā acchandikā duppaññā abhabbā niyāmaṁ okkamituṁ kusalesu dhammesu sammattaṁ, sabbe devā mātughātakā pitughātakā arahantaghātakā ruhiruppādakā saṅghabhedakā, sabbe devā pāṇātipātino adinnādāyino kāmesumicchācārino musāvādino pisuṇāvācā pharusāvācā samphappalāpino abhijjhāluno byāpannacittā micchādiṭṭhikāti?

Theravādin [speaking to Sammitiya]. You deny the practice of the higher life among devas; yet you deny also that they are physically, mentally, or morally defective: that they are, any of them, stupid, deaf and dumb, unintelligent, communicating by signs, and incapable of discerning the meaning of what is well or badly spoken; that they all lack faith in the Buddha, the Doctrine, the Order; that they did not attend the Exalted Buddha; ask him questions and delight in his answers; that they are all of them handicapped by their actions, by the corruptions, by the effect of their actions; that they are all faithless, devoid of purpose and understanding, incapable of reaching the right Order of the Path in things that are good; that they are matricides, parricides, murderers of saints, shedders of holy blood, schismatics; that they all take life, steal, are unchaste, liars, slanderers, revilers, idle talkers, given to covetousness, ill-will and erroneous opinion.

https://suttacentral.net/kv1.3/en/aung-rhysdavids
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Kathāvatthu: Satipaṭṭhānakathā ???

Post by DooDoot »

Sabbe dhammā satipaṭṭhānāti?

Are all things or all mental states satipatthana? :shrug:
Points of Controversy

1.9 Of Applications in Mindfulness

Controverted Point: That all mental states are applications in mindfulness.

Theravādin: Do all cognizable things constitute applications in mindfulness?

Andhaka: Yes.

Theravādin: Then must you also admit that all cognizable things constitute mindfulness, the controlling faculty and force of mindfulness, mindfulness that is perfect, that is a factor of enlightenment, the “sole conveying” path “leading to extinction”, to “enlightenment”, to “disintegration”, are “not bound up with the intoxicants”, “not akin to the fetters, ties, floods, bonds, hindrances, contagions, graspings, corruptions”; you must admit that all cognizable things constitute the “ten recollections”, namely of the Buddha, the Norm, the Order, morals, pious liberality, the devas, “mindfulness in respiration”, “reflection on death”, “mindfulness concerning the body”, “reflection on peace”. But this you deny.

Again, you must equally admit, given your first affirmation, that the eye-organ constitutes an application in mindfulness. And if you are driven to admit that it does, then you must admit everything for it, which, as I claim, you must admit for all cognizable things. The same argument holds for the four other sense-organs, for the five objects of sense, for lust, hate, dullness, conceit, error, doubt, sloth, distraction, impudence, indiscretion.

Is mindfulness itself an application of mindfulness, and conversely? If you admit this, then must you also admit that each of the foregoing cognizable things is an application of mindfulness, and that application of mindfulness is each of those things.

You deny; then do you hold that each of those cognizable things is an application of mindfulness, but not conversely? You assent; then you must equally admit that mindfulness itself is an application in mindfulness, but that application in mindfulness is not mindfulness.

Andhaka: Then is it wrong to say “all things are applications in mindfulness”?

Theravādin: Yes.

Andhaka: But is not mindfulness established concerning all cognizable things?

Theravādin: Yes.

Andhaka: How then, good sir, can you deny what I affirm: “All cognizable things are applications of mindfulness”?

Theravādin: We have said that mindfulness is established concerning all cognizable things: now, are all cognizable things applications of mindfulness

https://suttacentral.net/kv1.9/en/aung-rhysdavids
https://suttacentral.net/kv1.9/pli/ms
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
SarathW
Posts: 21240
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Kathāvatthu: Satipaṭṭhānakathā ???

Post by SarathW »

I can't see any problem with this.
That is how I exactly understand it.
I agree with Theravadin.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Kathāvatthu: Satipaṭṭhānakathā ???

Post by DooDoot »

SarathW wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 4:12 am That is how I exactly understand it.
But the Kathāvatthu appears to say all things or all mental states are not satipatthana.
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
SarathW
Posts: 21240
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Kathāvatthu: Satipaṭṭhānakathā ???

Post by SarathW »

DooDoot wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 4:21 am
SarathW wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 4:12 am That is how I exactly understand it.
But the Kathāvatthu appears to say all things or all mental states are not satipatthana.
Andhaka: Then is it wrong to say “all things are applications in mindfulness”?

Theravādin: Yes.

Andhaka: But is not mindfulness established concerning all cognizable things?

Theravādin: Yes.

My Note: This is how you practice Satipathana
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Kathāvatthu: Satipaṭṭhānakathā ???

Post by DooDoot »

SarathW wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 4:35 am Andhaka: But is not mindfulness established concerning all cognizable things?

Theravādin: Yes.

My Note: This is how you practice Satipathana
How is mindfulness established concerning lust, hate, dullness, conceit, error, doubt, sloth, distraction, impudence, indiscretion? :shrug:
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
SarathW
Posts: 21240
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Kathāvatthu: Satipaṭṭhānakathā ???

Post by SarathW »

DooDoot wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 4:40 am
SarathW wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 4:35 am Andhaka: But is not mindfulness established concerning all cognizable things?

Theravādin: Yes.

My Note: This is how you practice Satipathana
How is mindfulness established concerning lust, hate, dullness, conceit, error, doubt, sloth, distraction, impudence, indiscretion? :shrug:
This is practicing Dhammanupassana.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Kathāvatthu: Satipaṭṭhānakathā ???

Post by DooDoot »

SarathW wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 4:43 am This is practicing Dhammanupassana.
The above is not an adequate answer. Please explain in detail.
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8151
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Kathāvatthu: Satipaṭṭhānakathā ???

Post by Coëmgenu »

SarathW wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 4:12 amI can't see any problem with this.
That is how I exactly understand it.
I agree with Theravadin.
The Āndhaka stance IMO only makes sense if for them "sati" is being treated 1) as a sabbacittasādhāraṇa cetasika, a "universal mental factor" as it is often given in English, and 2) as not inherently a sobhana cetasika, a "wholesome mental factor." This would make them at least slightly similar to the Sabbāthivādins, who seem to have held that sati was always present and that sati was not necessarily wholesome. If that's true, from there stems the disagreement and miscommunication. One of the Theravādin's arguments toward the end stems from, as one would imagine, the placement of sati in the context of the seven limbs of Bodhi, where it is taken necessarily to not mean micchāsati, and certainly that the Theravādins have it as a sabbacittasādhāraṇa cetasika also would inform their rejection of the Āndhaka proposal IMO.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
SarathW
Posts: 21240
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Kathāvatthu: Satipaṭṭhānakathā ???

Post by SarathW »

Buddha very clearly said in Sutta that there are Samma Sati and Mitccha Sati.
So this KV is in line with Sutta.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8151
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Kathāvatthu: Satipaṭṭhānakathā ???

Post by Coëmgenu »

SarathW wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 4:53 amBuddha very clearly said in Sutta that there are Samma Sati and Mitccha Sati.
So this KV is in line with Sutta.
Does KV address micchāsati here?
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Kathāvatthu: Satipaṭṭhānakathā ???

Post by DooDoot »

SarathW wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 4:53 am Buddha very clearly said in Sutta that there are Samma Sati and Mitccha Sati.
So this KV is in line with Sutta.
:focus:
The Abhidhamma and Classical Theravada sub-forums are specialized venues for the discussion of the Abhidhamma and the classical Mahavihara understanding of the Dhamma. Within these forums the Pali Tipitaka and its commentaries are for discussion purposes treated as authoritative, and the following classification of priority, derived from the tradition itself, is accepted.
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
SarathW
Posts: 21240
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Kathāvatthu: Satipaṭṭhānakathā ???

Post by SarathW »

Coëmgenu wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 5:03 am
SarathW wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 4:53 amBuddha very clearly said in Sutta that there are Samma Sati and Mitccha Sati.
So this KV is in line with Sutta.
Does KV address micchāsati here?
Not directly.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Kathāvatthu: Satipaṭṭhānakathā ???

Post by DooDoot »

Coëmgenu wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 4:49 am The Āndhaka stance IMO only makes sense if for them "sati" is being treated 1) as a sabbacittasādhāraṇa cetasika, a "universal mental factor" as it is often given in English, and 2) as not inherently a sobhana cetasika, a "wholesome mental factor."
While the translation i posted is not exactly clear to me:

1) SarathW often posts on this forum sati is a universal mental factor, as stated in Sutta, such as MN 117

2) however, at least, definitely the Abhidhamma Vibhanga, and possibly this Kathāvatthu, only treat sati as a wholesome factor
Coëmgenu wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 4:49 am certainly that the Theravādins have it as a sabbacittasādhāraṇa cetasika also would inform their rejection of the Āndhaka proposal IMO.
maybe... but i do not comprehend the translation clearly
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
Post Reply