Kathavatthu 17.2: Natthiarahatoakālamaccūtikathā
Kathāvatthu 17.2
- Language
- Pāli
Contents
Natthiarahatoakālamaccūtikathā
17.2.1.1
Natthi arahato akālamaccūti?
Is there no untimely death for an arahant?
Controverted Point: That an Arahant cannot have an untimely death.
17.2.1.2
Āmantā.
Yes.
Controverted Point: That an Arahant cannot have an untimely death.
17.2.1.3
Natthi arahantaghātakoti?
Is there no slayer of an arahant?
Theravādin: Then are there no murderers of Arahants? You admit there are. Now when anyone takes the life of an Arahant, does he take away the remainder of life from a living man, or from one who is not living? If the former, then you cannot maintain your proposition. If the latter, there is no murder, and your admission is wrong.
17.2.1.4
Na hevaṃ vattabbe …pe…
It should not be said thus …pe…
Theravādin: Then are there no murderers of Arahants? You admit there are. Now when anyone takes the life of an Arahant, does he take away the remainder of life from a living man, or from one who is not living? If the former, then you cannot maintain your proposition. If the latter, there is no murder, and your admission is wrong.
17.2.1.5
atthi arahantaghātakoti?
Is there a slayer of an arahant?
Theravādin: Then are there no murderers of Arahants? You admit there are. Now when anyone takes the life of an Arahant, does he take away the remainder of life from a living man, or from one who is not living? If the former, then you cannot maintain your proposition. If the latter, there is no murder, and your admission is wrong.
17.2.1.6
Āmantā.
Yes.
Theravādin: Then are there no murderers of Arahants? You admit there are. Now when anyone takes the life of an Arahant, does he take away the remainder of life from a living man, or from one who is not living? If the former, then you cannot maintain your proposition. If the latter, there is no murder, and your admission is wrong.
17.2.1.7
Atthi arahato akālamaccūti?
Is there untimely death for an arahant?
Theravādin: Then are there no murderers of Arahants? You admit there are. Now when anyone takes the life of an Arahant, does he take away the remainder of life from a living man, or from one who is not living? If the former, then you cannot maintain your proposition. If the latter, there is no murder, and your admission is wrong.
17.2.1.8
Na hevaṃ vattabbe …pe…
It should not be said thus …pe…
Theravādin: Then are there no murderers of Arahants? You admit there are. Now when anyone takes the life of an Arahant, does he take away the remainder of life from a living man, or from one who is not living? If the former, then you cannot maintain your proposition. If the latter, there is no murder, and your admission is wrong.
17.2.1.9
natthi arahato akālamaccūti?
Is there no untimely death for an arahant?
Theravādin: Then are there no murderers of Arahants? You admit there are. Now when anyone takes the life of an Arahant, does he take away the remainder of life from a living man, or from one who is not living? If the former, then you cannot maintain your proposition. If the latter, there is no murder, and your admission is wrong.
17.2.1.10
Āmantā.
Yes.
Theravādin: Then are there no murderers of Arahants? You admit there are. Now when anyone takes the life of an Arahant, does he take away the remainder of life from a living man, or from one who is not living? If the former, then you cannot maintain your proposition. If the latter, there is no murder, and your admission is wrong.
17.2.1.11
Yo arahantaṃ jīvitā voropeti, sati jīvite jīvitāvasese jīvitā voropeti, asati jīvite jīvitāvasese jīvitā voropetīti?
Does one who deprives an arahant of life deprive them of life when life and a remainder of life exist, or deprive them of life when life and a remainder of life do not exist?
Theravādin: Then are there no murderers of Arahants? You admit there are. Now when anyone takes the life of an Arahant, does he take away the remainder of life from a living man, or from one who is not living? If the former, then you cannot maintain your proposition. If the latter, there is no murder, and your admission is wrong.
17.2.1.12
Sati jīvite jīvitāvasese jīvitā voropetīti.
They deprive them of life when life and a remainder of life exist.
Theravādin: Then are there no murderers of Arahants? You admit there are. Now when anyone takes the life of an Arahant, does he take away the remainder of life from a living man, or from one who is not living? If the former, then you cannot maintain your proposition. If the latter, there is no murder, and your admission is wrong.
17.2.1.13
Hañci sati jīvite jīvitāvasese jīvitā voropeti, no ca vata re vattabbe—
If they deprive them of life when life and a remainder of life exist, then indeed it should not be said:
Theravādin: Then are there no murderers of Arahants? You admit there are. Now when anyone takes the life of an Arahant, does he take away the remainder of life from a living man, or from one who is not living? If the former, then you cannot maintain your proposition. If the latter, there is no murder, and your admission is wrong.
17.2.1.14
“natthi arahato akālamaccū”ti.
“There is no untimely death for an arahant.”
Theravādin: Then are there no murderers of Arahants? You admit there are. Now when anyone takes the life of an Arahant, does he take away the remainder of life from a living man, or from one who is not living? If the former, then you cannot maintain your proposition. If the latter, there is no murder, and your admission is wrong.
17.2.1.15
Asati jīvite jīvitāvasese jīvitā voropetīti, natthi arahantaghātakoti?
[If you say:] “They deprive them of life when life and a remainder of life do not exist,” is there no slayer of an arahant?
Theravādin: Then are there no murderers of Arahants? You admit there are. Now when anyone takes the life of an Arahant, does he take away the remainder of life from a living man, or from one who is not living? If the former, then you cannot maintain your proposition. If the latter, there is no murder, and your admission is wrong.
17.2.1.16
Na hevaṃ vattabbe …pe….
It should not be said thus …pe…
Theravādin: Then are there no murderers of Arahants? You admit there are. Now when anyone takes the life of an Arahant, does he take away the remainder of life from a living man, or from one who is not living? If the former, then you cannot maintain your proposition. If the latter, there is no murder, and your admission is wrong.
17.2.2.1
Natthi arahato akālamaccūti?
Is there no untimely death for an arahant?
Again, you admit that poison, weapons, or fire may get access to the body of an Arahant. It is therefore clear that an Arahant may suffer sudden death. But if you deny, then there can be no murderer.
17.2.2.2
Āmantā.
Yes.
17.2.2.3
Arahato kāye visaṃ na kameyya, satthaṃ na kameyya, aggi na kameyyāti?
Would poison not affect the arahant’s body, a weapon not affect it, fire not affect it?
17.2.2.4
Na hevaṃ vattabbe …pe…
It should not be said thus …pe…
17.2.2.5
nanu arahato kāye visaṃ kameyya, satthaṃ kameyya, aggi kameyyāti?
Would not poison affect the arahant’s body, a weapon affect it, fire affect it?
17.2.2.6
Āmantā.
Yes.
17.2.2.7
Hañci arahato kāye visaṃ kameyya, satthaṃ kameyya, aggi kameyya, no ca vata re vattabbe—
If poison would affect the arahant’s body, a weapon would affect it, fire would affect it, then indeed it should not be said:
17.2.2.8
“natthi arahato akālamaccū”ti.
“There is no untimely death for an arahant.”
17.2.3.1
Arahato kāye visaṃ na kameyya, satthaṃ na kameyya, aggi na kameyyāti?
Would poison not affect the arahant’s body, a weapon not affect it, fire not affect it?
17.2.3.2
Āmantā.
Yes.
17.2.3.3
Natthi arahantaghātakoti?
Is there no slayer of an arahant?
17.2.3.4
Na hevaṃ vattabbe …pe….
It should not be said thus …pe…
17.2.4.1
Atthi arahato akālamaccūti?
Is there untimely death for an arahant?
Rājagirika, Siddhatthika: But was it not said by the Exalted One:
17.2.4.2
Āmantā.
Yes.
Rājagirika, Siddhatthika: But was it not said by the Exalted One:
17.2.4.3
Nanu vuttaṃ bhagavatā—
Was it not said by the Blessed One:
Rājagirika, Siddhatthika: But was it not said by the Exalted One:
17.2.4.4
“nāhaṃ, bhikkhave, sañcetanikānaṃ kammānaṃ katānaṃ upacitānaṃ appaṭisaṃveditvā byantībhāvaṃ vadāmi;
“Monks, I do not say that there is an end of intentional deeds that have been done and accumulated without having experienced [their results];
“I declare, bhikkhus, that there cannot be destruction of karmic energy ere the outcome of deeds that have been deliberately wrought and conserved has been experienced, whether that destruction be under present conditions, or in the next or in a subsequent series of conditions”?
17.2.4.5
tañca kho diṭṭheva dhamme upapajjaṃ vā apare vā pariyāye”ti.
and that too either in this very life, or in the next rebirth, or on some subsequent occasion”?
“I declare, bhikkhus, that there cannot be destruction of karmic energy ere the outcome of deeds that have been deliberately wrought and conserved has been experienced, whether that destruction be under present conditions, or in the next or in a subsequent series of conditions”?
17.2.4.6
Attheva suttantoti?
Is there such a sutta passage?
Hence there is no untimely dying for an Arahant.
17.2.4.7
Āmantā.
Yes.
Hence there is no untimely dying for an Arahant.
17.2.4.8
Tena hi natthi arahato akālamaccūti.
Then there is no untimely death for an arahant.
Hence there is no untimely dying for an Arahant.
17.2.4.9
Natthi arahato akālamaccūtikathā niṭṭhitā.
The discussion on whether there is no untimely death for an arahant is finished.
Translations (2)
- Points of Controversy, or Subjects of Discourse — Shwe Zan Aung & Caroline A. F. Rhys Davids 1915, English
- English (machine translation) — English, machine translation
Commentaries (2)
- Mūlaṭīkā — Ānanda (Vanaratana), Pāli
- Pañcappakaraṇaṭṭhakathā — Buddhaghosa, Pāli
Discussed in (2)
- A History of Indian Philosophy — Dasgupta 1922, English
- Early Monastic Buddhism — Dutt 1941, English