Kathavatthu 3.11: Asaññakathā

3.11.1.1

Asaññasattesu saññā atthīti?

Is there perception among unconscious beings?

Controverted Point: That there is consciousness among the denizens of the sphere called Unconscious.

3.11.1.2

Āmantā.

Yes.

Controverted Point: That there is consciousness among the denizens of the sphere called Unconscious.

3.11.1.3

Saññābhavo saññāgati saññāsattāvāso saññāsaṃsāro saññāyoni saññattabhāvapaṭilābhoti?

Is it a conscious existence, a conscious destiny, a conscious abode of beings, a conscious saṃsāra, a conscious womb, an acquisition of a conscious individual existence?

Theravādin: But you surely cannot admit that such a being has conscious life or destiny, dwells among conscious beings, fares onward with conscious continuity from birth to birth, has consciousness as his birthright, has acquired a conscious personality? Is not the opposite of all these terms true of him? Is their life, etc., fivefold in its constituents? Is it not rather a life, destiny … acquisition of personality, of a single constituent? Hence, even if we grant your proposition, you cannot say that such a being, when consciously functioning, functions by just that act of consciousness you ascribe to him; nor do you claim this.

3.11.1.4

Na hevaṃ vattabbe …pe….

It should not be said thus …

3.11.2.1

Nanu asaññabhavo asaññagati asaññasattāvāso asaññasaṃsāro asaññayoni asaññattabhāvapaṭilābhoti?

Is it not an unconscious existence, an unconscious destiny, an unconscious abode of beings, an unconscious saṃsāra, an unconscious womb, an acquisition of an unconscious individual existence?

3.11.2.2

Āmantā.

Yes.

3.11.2.3

Hañci asaññabhavo asaññagati asaññasattāvāso asaññasaṃsāro asaññayoni asaññattabhāvapaṭilābho, no ca vata re vattabbe—

If it is an unconscious existence, an unconscious destiny, an unconscious abode of beings, an unconscious saṃsāra, an unconscious womb, an acquisition of an unconscious individual existence, then indeed, sir, you should not say:

3.11.2.4

“asaññasattesu saññā atthī”ti.

“There is perception among unconscious beings.”

3.11.3.1

Asaññasattesu saññā atthīti?

Is there perception among unconscious beings?

3.11.3.2

Āmantā.

Yes.

3.11.3.3

Pañcavokārabhavo gati sattāvāso saṃsāro yoni attabhāvapaṭilābhoti?

Is it an existence with five aggregates, a destiny, an abode of beings, a saṃsāra, a womb, an acquisition of individual existence [with five aggregates]?

3.11.3.4

Na hevaṃ vattabbe …pe…

It should not be said thus …

3.11.4.1

Nanu ekavokārabhavo gati sattāvāso saṃsāro yoni attabhāvapaṭilābhoti?

Is it not an existence with one aggregate, a destiny, an abode of beings, a saṃsāra, a womb, an acquisition of individual existence [with one aggregate]?

3.11.4.2

Āmantā.

Yes.

3.11.4.3

Hañci ekavokārabhavo gati sattāvāso saṃsāro yoni attabhāvapaṭilābho, no ca vata re vattabbe—

If it is an existence with one aggregate, a destiny, an abode of beings, a saṃsāra, a womb, an acquisition of individual existence [with one aggregate], then indeed, sir, you should not say:

3.11.4.4

“asaññasattesu saññā atthī”ti.

“There is perception among unconscious beings.”

3.11.5.1

Asaññasattesu saññā atthīti?

Is there perception among non-percipient beings?

3.11.5.2

Āmantā.

Yes.

3.11.5.3

Tāya saññāya saññākaraṇīyaṃ karotīti?

Does one perform the function of perception with that perception?

3.11.5.4

Na hevaṃ vattabbe …pe….

It should not be said thus …

3.11.6.1

Manussesu saññā atthi, so ca saññābhavo saññāgati saññāsattāvāso saññāsaṃsāro saññāyoni saññattabhāvapaṭilābhoti?

Perception exists among humans, and is that an existence with perception, a destination with perception, an abode of beings with perception, a saṃsāra with perception, an origin with perception, an acquisition of an individual existence with perception?

If, in PTS CS 3.11.1, you substitute for “unconscious beings” “men”, you could and would describe the latter further as “having conscious life, and destiny, and so on”. And you would describe them, further, as having a life, destiny, habitation, further rebirth, constitution, acquisition of personality as determined for them by five organic constituents. But when I say you have committed yourself to all this with respect to unconscious beings, in virtue of your proposition, you deny. Similarly for PTS CS 3.11.3, if we substitute “man” for “such a being”.

3.11.6.2

Āmantā.

Yes.

3.11.6.3

Asaññasattesu saññā atthi, so ca saññābhavo saññāgati sattāvāso saṃsāro yoni attabhāvapaṭilābhoti?

Perception exists among non-percipient beings, and is that an existence with perception, a destination with perception, an abode of beings [with perception], a saṃsāra [with perception], an origin [with perception], an acquisition of an individual existence [with perception]?

3.11.6.4

Na hevaṃ vattabbe …pe…

It should not be said thus …

3.11.7.1

Manussesu saññā atthi, so ca pañcavokārabhavo gati sattāvāso saṃsāro yoni attabhāvapaṭilābhoti?

There is perception among human beings, and is that a five-constituent existence, a destination, an abode of beings, a samsara, a womb, an acquisition of an individual existence?

3.11.7.2

Āmantā.

Yes.

3.11.7.3

Asaññasattesu saññā atthi, so ca pañcavokārabhavo gati sattāvāso saṃsāro yoni attabhāvapaṭilābhoti?

There is perception among non-percipient beings, and is that a five-constituent existence, a destination, an abode of beings, a samsara, a womb, an acquisition of an individual existence?

3.11.7.4

Na hevaṃ vattabbe …pe….

It should not be said thus …

3.11.8.1

Manussesu saññā atthi, tāya saññāya saññākaraṇīyaṃ karotīti?

There is perception among human beings, and does one perform the function of perception with that perception?

3.11.8.2

Āmantā.

Yes.

3.11.8.3

Asaññasattesu saññā atthi, tāya saññāya saññākaraṇīyaṃ karotīti?

There is perception among non-percipient beings, and does one perform the function of perception with that perception?

3.11.8.4

Na hevaṃ vattabbe …pe….

It should not be said thus …

3.11.9.1

Asaññasattesu saññā atthi, so ca asaññabhavo asaññagati asaññasattāvāso asaññasaṃsāro asaññayoni asaññattabhāvapaṭilābhoti?

There is perception among non-percipient beings, and is that a non-percipient existence, a non-percipient destination, a non-percipient abode of beings, a non-percipient samsara, a non-percipient womb, an acquisition of a non-percipient individual existence?

Let us assume the truth of your proposition, admitting, of course, that there is consciousness in the human sphere—why do you go on to affirm, for those devas, an unconscious life, destiny, habitation, further rebirth, constitution, acquisition of personality, but deny it for men? And why do you go on, further, to affirm a life, destiny, etc., of one organic constituent for those devas, but deny it for men? Why, finally, do you deny, for the unconscious beings, the functioning in consciousness by just that quota of consciousness you assign to them, but affirm it in the case of human beings?

3.11.9.2

Āmantā.

Yes.

3.11.9.3

Manussesu saññā atthi, so ca asaññabhavo asaññagati …pe…

There is perception among human beings, and is that a non-percipient existence, a non-percipient destination …

3.11.9.4

asaññattabhāvapaṭilābhoti?

an acquisition of a non-percipient individual existence?

3.11.9.5

Na hevaṃ vattabbe …pe….

It should not be said thus …

3.11.10.1

Asaññasattesu saññā atthi, so ca ekavokārabhavo gati sattāvāso saṃsāro yoni attabhāvapaṭilābhoti?

There is perception among non-percipient beings, and is that a one-constituent existence, a destination, an abode of beings, a samsara, a womb, an acquisition of an individual existence?

3.11.10.2

Āmantā.

Yes.

3.11.10.3

Manussesu saññā atthi, so ca ekavokārabhavo gati …pe…

There is perception among human beings, and is that a one-constituent existence, a destination …

3.11.10.4

attabhāvapaṭilābhoti?

an acquisition of an individual existence?

3.11.10.5

Na hevaṃ vattabbe …pe….

It should not be said thus …

3.11.11.1

Asaññasattesu saññā atthi, na ca tāya saññāya saññākaraṇīyaṃ karotīti?

There is perception among non-percipient beings, and does one not perform the function of perception with that perception?

3.11.11.2

Āmantā.

Yes.

3.11.11.3

Manussesu saññā atthi, na ca tāya saññāya saññākaraṇīyaṃ karotīti?

There is perception among human beings, and does one not perform the function of perception with that perception?

3.11.11.4

Na hevaṃ vattabbe …pe….

It should not be said thus …

3.11.12.1

Na vattabbaṃ—

Should it not be said:

Andhaka: If it is wrong to say “there is consciousness in the Unconscious devas”, let me remind you of a Suttanta in which the Exalted One said:

3.11.12.2

“asaññasattesu saññā atthī”ti?

“There is perception among non-percipient beings”?

Andhaka: If it is wrong to say “there is consciousness in the Unconscious devas”, let me remind you of a Suttanta in which the Exalted One said:

3.11.12.3

Āmantā.

Yes.

Andhaka: If it is wrong to say “there is consciousness in the Unconscious devas”, let me remind you of a Suttanta in which the Exalted One said:

3.11.12.4

Nanu vuttaṃ bhagavatā—

Was it not said by the Blessed One:

Andhaka: If it is wrong to say “there is consciousness in the Unconscious devas”, let me remind you of a Suttanta in which the Exalted One said:

3.11.12.5

“santi, bhikkhave, asaññasattā nāma devā;

“There are, monks, deities named non-percipient beings;

“There are devas, bhikkhus, called the Unconscious Beings; now those devas, when consciousness does arise, decease from that group”.

3.11.12.6

saññuppādā ca pana te devā tamhā kāyā cavantī”ti.

and moreover, with the arising of perception, those deities pass away from that body”?

“There are devas, bhikkhus, called the Unconscious Beings; now those devas, when consciousness does arise, decease from that group”.

3.11.12.7

Attheva suttantoti?

Is there such a discourse?

“There are devas, bhikkhus, called the Unconscious Beings; now those devas, when consciousness does arise, decease from that group”.

3.11.12.8

Āmantā.

Yes.

“There are devas, bhikkhus, called the Unconscious Beings; now those devas, when consciousness does arise, decease from that group”.

3.11.12.9

Tena hi asaññasattesu saññā atthīti.

Therefore, there is perception among non-percipient beings.

“There are devas, bhikkhus, called the Unconscious Beings; now those devas, when consciousness does arise, decease from that group”.

3.11.13.1

Asaññasattesu saññā atthīti?

Is there perception among non-percipient beings?

But our view really is this, that they are only conscious sometimes.

3.11.13.2

Kiñci kāle atthi, kiñci kāle natthīti.

At some times there is, at some times there is not.

But our view really is this, that they are only conscious sometimes.

3.11.13.3

Kiñci kāle saññasattā kiñci kāle asaññasattā, kiñci kāle saññabhavo kiñci kāle asaññabhavo, kiñci kāle pañcavokārabhavo kiñci kāle ekavokārabhavoti?

Are they percipient beings at some times, non-percipient beings at some times; is it a percipient existence at some times, a non-percipient existence at some times; is it a five-constituent existence at some times, a one-constituent existence at some times?

Theravādin: That is to say, they are sometimes conscious beings, having conscious life, having fivefold organic life, and sometimes unconscious beings, having unconscious life, having a single organic life—which is absurd.

3.11.13.4

Na hevaṃ vattabbe …pe….

It should not be said thus …

Theravādin: That is to say, they are sometimes conscious beings, having conscious life, having fivefold organic life, and sometimes unconscious beings, having unconscious life, having a single organic life—which is absurd.

3.11.14.1

Asaññasattesu saññā kiñci kāle atthi, kiñci kāle natthīti?

Is there perception among non-percipient beings at some times, and at some times is there not?

Again, at what time are they conscious, at what time not?

3.11.14.2

Āmantā.

Yes.

Again, at what time are they conscious, at what time not?

3.11.14.3

Kaṃ kālaṃ atthi, kaṃ kālaṃ natthīti?

At what time is there, at what time is there not?

Again, at what time are they conscious, at what time not?

3.11.14.4

Cutikāle upapattikāle atthi, ṭhitikāle natthīti.

At the time of passing away and at the time of rebirth there is; at the time of remaining there is not.

Andhaka: At decease and at rebirth, but not during life.

3.11.14.5

Cutikāle upapattikāle saññasattā, ṭhitikāle asaññasattā;

At the time of passing away and at the time of rebirth are they percipient beings, and at the time of remaining non-percipient beings;

Theravādin: But then the same absurd transformation must happen.

3.11.14.6

cutikāle upapattikāle saññabhavo, ṭhitikāle asaññabhavo;

at the time of passing away and at the time of rebirth is it a percipient existence, and at the time of remaining a non-percipient existence;

Theravādin: But then the same absurd transformation must happen.

3.11.14.7

cutikāle upapattikāle pañcavokārabhavo, ṭhitikāle ekavokārabhavoti?

at the time of passing away and at the time of rebirth is it a five-constituent existence, and at the time of remaining a one-constituent existence?

Theravādin: But then the same absurd transformation must happen.

3.11.14.8

Na hevaṃ vattabbe …pe….

It should not be said thus …

Theravādin: But then the same absurd transformation must happen.

3.11.14.9

Asaññakathā niṭṭhitā.

Discussion on the non-percipient is finished.