9.2 Of the Ambrosial as an Object by which we are bound (KV9.2)

Controverted Point: That the Ambrosial as an object of thought is a “fetter”.

Theravādin: If you say that, are you prepared to admit that the Ambrosial is the object of consciousness accompanied by “Fetters”, “Ties”, “Floods”, “Bonds”, “Hindrances”, “Infections”, “Graspings”, “Corruptions”? Is it not rather an object accompanied by the very opposite?

You affirm that, on account of the Ambrosial occupying the mind, lust, hate, ignorance may spring up. But are you prepared to admit that the Ambrosial itself conduces to occasions for lusting, to lusting after, wishing for, being inebriated, and captivated by, languishing for? That it conduces to occasions for hatred, anger, and resentment? That it conduces to occasions for delusion, for depriving of knowledge, for blinding vision, for suspending insight, for siding with trouble, for failing to win Nibbāna? Is it not rather the opposite of all these? How then can you say that, on account of the Ambrosial occupying the mind, lust, hate, and ignorance spring up? All these things you may truly predicate as springing up because of the occupation of the mind with material qualities (rūpa). But material qualities are not the Ambrosial.

You would not say that, whereas the Fetters spring up because of material qualities, the latter do not conduce to Fetters, Ties, Floods, and all such spiritual defects and dangers. How then can you affirm just the same of the Ambrosial: that, whereas the Fetters spring up because of it, it does not conduce to Fetters, and so forth? Or that, whereas lust, hate, and ignorance spring up because of the Ambrosial, nevertheless the Ambrosial is not an occasion for lusting and all the rest?

Pubbaseliya: But was it not said by the Exalted One:

“He perceives Nibbāna as such, and having perceived it he imagines things about Nibbāna, with respect to Nibbāna, things as Nibbāna, that “Nibbāna is mine”, dallying with the idea”?

Therefore the Ambrosial is an object of thought not yet freed from bondage.

The Points of Controversy, an English translation of the Pali Abhidhamma Kathāvatthu. Translated by Shwe Zan Aung and C.A.F. Rhys Davids. First published by Pali Text Society, 1915.

This SuttaCentral edition was prepared by Manfred Wierich and Ven. Vimala and proofread by Josephine Tobin. Some changes were introduced:

Abbreviations, i.e., those of cited works and the participants in the controversies, were expanded.

Cross-references were linked.

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 “:”.

Letter-spacing with fixed spaces was replaced with bold font.

The corrigenda were merged into the text. Some could not be resolved, though.

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: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/

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.