Kathavatthu 22.8: Khaṇikakathā

22.8.1.1

Ekacittakkhaṇikā sabbe dhammāti?

Do all phenomena last for a single moment of consciousness?

Controverted Point: That all things are momentary conscious units.

22.8.1.2

Āmantā.

Yes.

Controverted Point: That all things are momentary conscious units.

22.8.1.3

Citte mahāpathavī saṇṭhāti, mahāsamuddo saṇṭhāti, sinerupabbatarājā saṇṭhāti, āpo saṇṭhāti, tejo saṇṭhāti, vāyo saṇṭhāti, tiṇakaṭṭhavanappatayo saṇṭhahantīti?

Does the great earth endure [only as long as] consciousness, does the great ocean endure, does Mount Sineru, king of mountains, endure, does water endure, does fire endure, does wind endure, do grass, wood, and forest trees endure?

Theravādin: Do you imply that a mountain, the ocean, Sineru chief of mountains, the cohesive, fiery, and mobile elements, grass, twigs, trees, all last only so long in consciousness? You deny … .

22.8.1.4

Na hevaṃ vattabbe …pe….

It should not be said thus …

Theravādin: Do you imply that a mountain, the ocean, Sineru chief of mountains, the cohesive, fiery, and mobile elements, grass, twigs, trees, all last only so long in consciousness? You deny … .

22.8.2.1

Ekacittakkhaṇikā sabbe dhammāti?

Do all phenomena last for a single moment of consciousness?

Or do you imply that the organ of sight coincides for the same moment of time with the visual cognition? If you assent, I would remind you of what the venerable Sāriputta said:

22.8.2.2

Āmantā.

Yes.

Or do you imply that the organ of sight coincides for the same moment of time with the visual cognition? If you assent, I would remind you of what the venerable Sāriputta said:

22.8.2.3

Cakkhāyatanaṃ cakkhuviññāṇena sahajātanti?

Is the eye sense base co-arisen with eye-consciousness?

Or do you imply that the organ of sight coincides for the same moment of time with the visual cognition? If you assent, I would remind you of what the venerable Sāriputta said:

22.8.2.4

Na hevaṃ vattabbe …pe…

It should not be said thus …

Or do you imply that the organ of sight coincides for the same moment of time with the visual cognition? If you assent, I would remind you of what the venerable Sāriputta said:

22.8.2.5

cakkhāyatanaṃ cakkhuviññāṇena sahajātanti?

Is the eye sense base co-arisen with eye-consciousness?

Or do you imply that the organ of sight coincides for the same moment of time with the visual cognition? If you assent, I would remind you of what the venerable Sāriputta said:

22.8.2.6

Āmantā.

Yes.

Or do you imply that the organ of sight coincides for the same moment of time with the visual cognition? If you assent, I would remind you of what the venerable Sāriputta said:

22.8.2.7

Nanu āyasmā sāriputto etadavoca—

Did not the Venerable Sāriputta say this:

Or do you imply that the organ of sight coincides for the same moment of time with the visual cognition? If you assent, I would remind you of what the venerable Sāriputta said:

22.8.2.8

“ajjhattikañceva, āvuso, cakkhuṃ aparibhinnaṃ hoti, bāhirā ca rūpā na āpāthaṃ āgacchanti, no ca tajjo samannāhāro hoti, neva tāva tajjassa viññāṇabhāgassa pātubhāvo hoti.

“When, friends, the internal eye is intact, and external sights do not come into range, and there is no appropriate attention, then there is not yet the appearance of the corresponding class of consciousness.

“If, brother, the eye within be intact, but the object without does not come into focus, and there is no co-ordinated application of mind resulting therefrom, then a corresponding state of cognition is not manifested. And if the organ of sight within be intact, and the object without come into focus, but no co-ordinated abdication of mind result therefrom, a corresponding state of cognition is not manifested. But if all these conditions be satisfied, then a corresponding state of cognition is manifested”?

22.8.2.9

Ajjhattikañceva, āvuso, cakkhuṃ aparibhinnaṃ hoti, bāhirā ca rūpā āpāthaṃ āgacchanti, no ca tajjo samannāhāro hoti, neva tāva tajjassa viññāṇabhāgassa pātubhāvo hoti.

When, friends, the internal eye is intact, and external sights come into range, but there is no appropriate attention, then there is not yet the appearance of the corresponding class of consciousness.

“If, brother, the eye within be intact, but the object without does not come into focus, and there is no co-ordinated application of mind resulting therefrom, then a corresponding state of cognition is not manifested. And if the organ of sight within be intact, and the object without come into focus, but no co-ordinated abdication of mind result therefrom, a corresponding state of cognition is not manifested. But if all these conditions be satisfied, then a corresponding state of cognition is manifested”?

22.8.2.10

Yato ca kho, āvuso, ajjhattikañceva cakkhuṃ aparibhinnaṃ hoti, bāhirā ca rūpā āpāthaṃ āgacchanti, tajjo ca samannāhāro hoti, evaṃ tajjassa viññāṇabhāgassa pātubhāvo hotī”ti.

But when, friends, the internal eye is intact, external sights come into range, and there is appropriate attention, then there is the appearance of the corresponding class of consciousness”?

“If, brother, the eye within be intact, but the object without does not come into focus, and there is no co-ordinated application of mind resulting therefrom, then a corresponding state of cognition is not manifested. And if the organ of sight within be intact, and the object without come into focus, but no co-ordinated abdication of mind result therefrom, a corresponding state of cognition is not manifested. But if all these conditions be satisfied, then a corresponding state of cognition is manifested”?

22.8.2.11

Attheva suttantoti?

Is there such a sutta passage?

Where now is your assertion about coincidence in time?

22.8.2.12

Āmantā.

Yes.

Where now is your assertion about coincidence in time?

22.8.2.13

Tena hi na vattabbaṃ—

Therefore it should not be said:

Where now is your assertion about coincidence in time?

22.8.2.14

“cakkhāyatanaṃ cakkhuviññāṇena sahajātan”ti.

“The eye sense base is co-arisen with eye-consciousness.”

Where now is your assertion about coincidence in time?

22.8.2.15

(…)

(…)

The same Suttanta reference may be cited to refute you with respect to time-coincidence in the other four senses.

22.8.3.1

Sotāyatanaṃ …pe…

The ear sense base …

22.8.3.2

ghānāyatanaṃ …pe…

the nose sense base …

22.8.3.3

jivhāyatanaṃ …pe…

the tongue sense base …

22.8.3.4

kāyāyatanaṃ kāyaviññāṇena sahajātanti?

Is the body sense base co-arisen with body-consciousness?

22.8.3.5

Na hevaṃ vattabbe …pe…

It should not be said thus …

22.8.3.6

kāyāyatanaṃ kāyaviññāṇena sahajātanti?

Is the body sense base co-arisen with body-consciousness?

22.8.3.7

Āmantā.

Yes.

22.8.3.8

Nanu āyasmā sāriputto etadavoca—

Did not the Venerable Sāriputta say this:

22.8.3.9

“ajjhattiko ceva, āvuso, kāyo aparibhinno hoti, bāhirā ca phoṭṭhabbā na āpāthaṃ āgacchanti, no ca …pe…

“When, friends, the internal body is intact, and external tangibles do not come into range, and no …

22.8.3.10

ajjhattiko ceva, āvuso, kāyo aparibhinno hoti, bāhirā ca phoṭṭhabbā āpāthaṃ āgacchanti, no ca …pe…

when, friends, the internal body is intact, and external tangibles come into range, and no …

22.8.3.11

yato ca kho, āvuso, ajjhattiko ceva kāyo aparibhinno hoti, bāhirā ca phoṭṭhabbā āpāthaṃ āgacchanti, tajjo ca samannāhāro hoti, evaṃ tajjassa viññāṇabhāgassa pātubhāvo hotī”ti.

but when, friends, the internal body is intact, external tangibles come into range, and there is appropriate attention, then there is the appearance of the corresponding class of consciousness”?

22.8.3.12

Attheva suttantoti?

Is there such a sutta passage?

22.8.3.13

Āmantā.

Yes.

22.8.3.14

Tena hi na vattabbaṃ—

Therefore it should not be said:

22.8.3.15

“kāyāyatanaṃ kāyaviññāṇena sahajātan”ti.

“The body sense base is co-arisen with body-consciousness.”

22.8.4.1

Na vattabbaṃ—

Should it not be said:

Pubbaseliya, Aparaseliya: But are all things permanent, enduring, perduring, immutable?

22.8.4.2

“ekacittakkhaṇikā sabbe dhammā”ti?

“All phenomena last for a single moment of consciousness”?

Pubbaseliya, Aparaseliya: But are all things permanent, enduring, perduring, immutable?

22.8.4.3

Āmantā.

Yes.

Pubbaseliya, Aparaseliya: But are all things permanent, enduring, perduring, immutable?

22.8.4.4

Sabbe dhammā niccā dhuvā sassatā avipariṇāmadhammāti?

Are all phenomena permanent, constant, eternal, not subject to change?

Pubbaseliya, Aparaseliya: But are all things permanent, enduring, perduring, immutable?

22.8.4.5

Na hevaṃ vattabbe.

It should not be said thus.

Theravādin: Nay that cannot truly be said … .

22.8.4.6

Tena hi ekacittakkhaṇikā sabbe dhammāti.

Therefore, all phenomena last for a single moment of consciousness.

Theravādin: Nay that cannot truly be said … .

22.8.4.7

Khaṇikakathā niṭṭhitā.

The discussion on momentariness is finished.

22.8.4.8

Bāvīsatimo vaggo.

Twenty-second chapter.

22.8.4.9

Tassuddānaṃ

Its summary verse:

22.8.5.1

Atthi kiñci saṃyojanaṃ appahāya parinibbānaṃ,

Final unbinding without abandoning any fetter,

22.8.5.2

arahā kusalacitto parinibbāyati,

an arahant attains final unbinding with wholesome consciousness,

22.8.5.3

arahā āneñje ṭhito parinibbāyati,

an arahant attains final unbinding abiding in the imperturbable,

22.8.5.4

atthi gabbhaseyyāya dhammābhisamayo,

there is penetration of the Dhamma in the womb,

22.8.5.5

atthi gabbhaseyyāya arahattappatti,

there is attainment of arahantship in the womb,

22.8.5.6

atthi supinagatassa dhammābhisamayo,

there is penetration of the Dhamma for one who is dreaming,

22.8.5.7

atthi supinagatassa arahattappatti,

there is attainment of arahantship for one who is dreaming,

22.8.5.8

sabbaṃ supinagatassa cittaṃ abyākataṃ,

all consciousness of one who is dreaming is indeterminate,

22.8.5.9

natthi kāci āsevanapaccayatā,

there is no repetition as a condition,

22.8.5.10

ekacittakkhaṇikā sabbe dhammāti.

all phenomena last for a single moment of consciousness.