Points of ControversyKathāvatthu
Points of ControversyMahāpaṇṇāsaka
8.2 Of an Intermediate StateAṭṭhamavagga

Controverted Point: That there is an intermediate state of existence.Antarābhavakathā

Controverted PointAtthi antarābhavoti? Theravādin:If there be such a state, you must identify it with either the Kāma-life, or Rūpa-life, or Arūpa-life, which you refuse to do … .Āmantā. You deny that there is an intermediate state between the first and second, or the second and third, of these …you affirm, indeed, that there is no such thing; how then can you maintain your proposition?Kāmabhavoti? Isit a fifth matrix, a sixth destiny, an eighth station for reborn consciousness, a tenth realm of beings? Is it a mode of living, a destiny, a realm of beings, a renewal of life, a matrix, a station of consciousness, an acquiring of individuality? Is therekarmaleading to it? Are there beings who approach thither? Do beings get born in it, grow old, die in it, decease from it, and get reborn from it? Do the five aggregates exist in it? Is it a five-mode existence? All this you deny. How then can you maintain your proposition?Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… You admit that every one of thesecategories or notionsapplies to each of the three planes of life named above, the only difference being that the first two—Kāma-life andRūpa-life—are five-mode existences; the last—Arūpa-life—is a four-mode existence (that is, without material qualities). If then there is an intermediate stage of life, you must be able to predicate some or all of thesenotions or categoriesof it. But you say you cannot … .atthi antarābhavoti? categories or notionsĀmantā. notions or categoriesRūpabhavoti? But you deny also that there is an intermediate life for all beings. Hence your proposition is not universally valid.Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… For whom then do you deny the intermediate state? For the person whose retribution is immediate? If you assent, to that extent your proposition is for you not true. Or is it for the person whose retribution is not immediate that you affirm this state? Yes, you say. Then you must deny it for his opposite.atthi antarābhavoti? You deny it also for one who is to be reborn in purgatory, in the sphere of unconscious beings, in the immaterialĀmantā. heavens. Therefore to that extent your proposition is not universally valid. Nevertheless, you maintain that thereArūpabhavoti? is an intermediate stage of life for one whose retribution is not immediate, for one who is not to be reborn in purgatory, nor among the “unconscious beings”, nor in the immaterial heavens.Concerning these you have yet to state in what respect, as a plane of life, it resembles, or differs from, the three named by the Exalted One.Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… Concerning these you have yet to state in what respect, as a plane of life, it resembles, or differs from, the three named by the Exalted One.atthi antarābhavoti? Pubbaseliya, Sammitiya:But are there not beings who “complete existence within the first half of the term”? If so, are we not right?Āmantā. Pubbaseliya, Sammitiya:Kāmabhavassa ca rūpabhavassa ca antare atthi antarābhavoti? Theravādin:Granted that there are such beings, is there a separate interval-statebetween any two recognized existences? Yes, you say. But granted that there are beings who “complete existence within the second half of the term”, is there a separate state of life corresponding thereto? If you deny, you must also deny your propositionsince you rest it on this basis.Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… stateatthi antarābhavoti? between any two recognized existencesĀmantā. since you rest it on this basisRūpabhavassa ca arūpabhavassa ca antare atthi antarābhavoti? The same argument applies to such cognate terms as “beings who complete existence without”, and again, “with difficulty and striving”.Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe….

Shwe Zan AungKāmabhavassa ca rūpabhavassa ca antare natthi antarābhavoti? This SuttaCentral edition was prepared byManfred WierichandVen. Vimalaand proofread byJosephine Tobin. Some changes were introduced:Āmantā. Manfred WierichHañci kāmabhavassa ca rūpabhavassa ca antare natthi antarābhavo, no ca vata re vattabbe—Ven. Vimala“atthi antarābhavo”ti. Josephine TobinRūpabhavassa ca arūpabhavassa ca antare natthi antarābhavoti? 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.Āmantā. Abbreviations, i.e., those of cited works and the participants in the controversies, were expanded.Hañci rūpabhavassa ca arūpabhavassa ca antare natthi antarābhavo, no ca vata re vattabbe—Cross-references were linked.“atthi antarābhavo”ti.

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 “:”.Atthi antarābhavoti? Letter-spacing with fixed spaces was replaced with bold font.Āmantā. The corrigenda were merged into the text. Some could not be resolved, though.Pañcamī sā yoni, chaṭṭhamī sā gati, aṭṭhamī sā viññāṇaṭṭhiti, dasamo so sattāvāsoti? 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/Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… 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.atthi antarābhavoti? Āmantā. Antarābhavo bhavo gati sattāvāso saṁsāro yoni viññāṇaṭṭhiti attabhāvapaṭilābhoti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… atthi antarābhavūpagaṁ kammanti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… atthi antarābhavūpagā sattāti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… antarābhave sattā jāyanti jīyanti mīyanti cavanti upapajjantīti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… antarābhave atthi rūpaṁ vedanā saññā saṅkhārā viññāṇanti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… antarābhavo pañcavokārabhavoti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe….

Atthi kāmabhavo, kāmabhavo bhavo gati sattāvāso saṁsāro yoni viññāṇaṭṭhiti attabhāvapaṭilābhoti? Āmantā. Atthi antarābhavo, antarābhavo bhavo gati sattāvāso saṁsāro yoni viññāṇaṭṭhiti attabhāvapaṭilābhoti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… atthi kāmabhavūpagaṁ kammanti? Āmantā. Atthi antarābhavūpagaṁ kammanti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… atthi kāmabhavūpagā sattāti? Āmantā. Atthi antarābhavūpagā sattāti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… kāmabhave sattā jāyanti jīyanti mīyanti cavanti upapajjantīti? Āmantā. Antarābhave sattā jāyanti jīyanti mīyanti cavanti upapajjantīti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… kāmabhave atthi rūpaṁ vedanā saññā saṅkhārā viññāṇanti? Āmantā. Antarābhave atthi rūpaṁ vedanā saññā saṅkhārā viññāṇanti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… kāmabhavo pañcavokārabhavoti? Āmantā. Antarābhavo pañcavokārabhavoti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe….

Atthi rūpabhavo, rūpabhavo bhavo gati sattāvāso saṁsāro yoni viññāṇaṭṭhiti attabhāvapaṭilābhoti? Āmantā. Atthi antarābhavo, antarābhavo bhavo gati sattāvāso saṁsāro yoni viññāṇaṭṭhiti attabhāvapaṭilābhoti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… atthi rūpabhavūpagaṁ kammanti? Āmantā. Atthi antarābhavūpagaṁ kammanti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… atthi rūpabhavūpagā sattāti? Āmantā. Atthi antarābhavūpagā sattāti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… rūpabhave sattā jāyanti jīyanti mīyanti cavanti upapajjantīti? Āmantā. Antarābhave sattā jāyanti jīyanti mīyanti cavanti upapajjantīti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… rūpabhave atthi rūpaṁ vedanā saññā saṅkhārā viññāṇanti? Āmantā. Antarābhave atthi rūpaṁ vedanā saññā saṅkhārā viññāṇanti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… rūpabhavo pañcavokārabhavoti? Āmantā. Antarābhavo pañcavokārabhavoti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe….

Atthi arūpabhavo, arūpabhavo bhavo gati sattāvāso saṁsāro yoni viññāṇaṭṭhiti attabhāvapaṭilābhoti? Āmantā. Atthi antarābhavo, antarābhavo bhavo gati sattāvāso saṁsāro yoni viññāṇaṭṭhiti attabhāvapaṭilābhoti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… atthi arūpabhavūpagaṁ kammanti? Āmantā. Atthi antarābhavūpagaṁ kammanti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… atthi arūpabhavūpagā sattāti? Āmantā. Atthi antarābhavūpagā sattāti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… arūpabhave sattā jāyanti jīyanti mīyanti cavanti upapajjantīti? Āmantā. Antarābhave sattā jāyanti jīyanti mīyanti cavanti upapajjantīti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… arūpabhave atthi vedanā saññā saṅkhārā viññāṇanti? Āmantā. Antarābhave atthi vedanā saññā saṅkhārā viññāṇanti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… arūpabhavo catuvokārabhavoti? Āmantā. Antarābhavo catuvokārabhavoti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe….

Atthi antarābhavoti? Āmantā. Sabbesaññeva sattānaṁ atthi antarābhavoti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… sabbesaññeva sattānaṁ natthi antarābhavoti? Āmantā. Hañci sabbesaññeva sattānaṁ natthi antarābhavo, no ca vata re vattabbe—“atthi antarābhavo”ti.

Atthi antarābhavoti? Āmantā. Ānantariyassa puggalassa atthi antarābhavoti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… ānantariyassa puggalassa natthi antarābhavoti? Āmantā. Hañci ānantariyassa puggalassa natthi antarābhavo, no ca vata re vattabbe—“atthi antarābhavo”ti.

Na ānantariyassa puggalassa atthi antarābhavoti? Āmantā. Ānantariyassa puggalassa atthi antarābhavoti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… ānantariyassa puggalassa natthi antarābhavoti? Āmantā. Na ānantariyassa puggalassa natthi antarābhavoti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… nirayūpagassa puggalassa …pe… asaññasattūpagassa puggalassa …pe… arūpūpagassa puggalassa atthi antarābhavoti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… arūpūpagassa puggalassa natthi antarābhavoti? Āmantā. Hañci arūpūpagassa puggalassa natthi antarābhavo, no ca vata re vattabbe—“atthi antarābhavo”ti.

Na arūpūpagassa puggalassa atthi antarābhavoti? Āmantā. Arūpūpagassa puggalassa atthi antarābhavoti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… arūpūpagassa puggalassa natthi antarābhavoti? Āmantā. Na arūpūpagassa puggalassa natthi antarābhavoti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe….

Na vattabbaṁ atthi antarābhavoti? Āmantā. Nanu antarāparinibbāyī puggalo atthīti? Āmantā. Hañci antarāparinibbāyī puggalo atthi, tena vata re vattabbe—“atthi antarābhavo”ti.

Antarāparinibbāyī puggalo atthīti katvā atthi antarābhavoti? Āmantā. Upahaccaparinibbāyī puggalo atthīti katvā atthi upahaccabhavoti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… antarāparinibbāyī puggalo atthīti katvā atthi antarābhavoti? Āmantā. Asaṅkhāraparinibbāyī puggalo …pe… sasaṅkhāraparinibbāyī puggalo atthīti katvā atthi sasaṅkhārabhavoti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe….

Antarābhavakathā niṭṭhitā.

English Translation

Pāli Text

Points of Controversy
Points of Controversy
8.2 Of an Intermediate State

Controverted Point: That there is an intermediate state of existence.

Controverted PointTheravādin:If there be such a state, you must identify it with either the Kāma-life, or Rūpa-life, or Arūpa-life, which you refuse to do … .You deny that there is an intermediate state between the first and second, or the second and third, of these …you affirm, indeed, that there is no such thing; how then can you maintain your proposition?Isit a fifth matrix, a sixth destiny, an eighth station for reborn consciousness, a tenth realm of beings? Is it a mode of living, a destiny, a realm of beings, a renewal of life, a matrix, a station of consciousness, an acquiring of individuality? Is therekarmaleading to it? Are there beings who approach thither? Do beings get born in it, grow old, die in it, decease from it, and get reborn from it? Do the five aggregates exist in it? Is it a five-mode existence? All this you deny. How then can you maintain your proposition?You admit that every one of thesecategories or notionsapplies to each of the three planes of life named above, the only difference being that the first two—Kāma-life andRūpa-life—are five-mode existences; the last—Arūpa-life—is a four-mode existence (that is, without material qualities). If then there is an intermediate stage of life, you must be able to predicate some or all of thesenotions or categoriesof it. But you say you cannot … .categories or notionsnotions or categoriesBut you deny also that there is an intermediate life for all beings. Hence your proposition is not universally valid.For whom then do you deny the intermediate state? For the person whose retribution is immediate? If you assent, to that extent your proposition is for you not true. Or is it for the person whose retribution is not immediate that you affirm this state? Yes, you say. Then you must deny it for his opposite.You deny it also for one who is to be reborn in purgatory, in the sphere of unconscious beings, in the immaterialheavens. Therefore to that extent your proposition is not universally valid. Nevertheless, you maintain that thereis an intermediate stage of life for one whose retribution is not immediate, for one who is not to be reborn in purgatory, nor among the “unconscious beings”, nor in the immaterial heavens.Concerning these you have yet to state in what respect, as a plane of life, it resembles, or differs from, the three named by the Exalted One.Concerning these you have yet to state in what respect, as a plane of life, it resembles, or differs from, the three named by the Exalted One.Pubbaseliya, Sammitiya:But are there not beings who “complete existence within the first half of the term”? If so, are we not right?Pubbaseliya, Sammitiya:Theravādin:Granted that there are such beings, is there a separate interval-statebetween any two recognized existences? Yes, you say. But granted that there are beings who “complete existence within the second half of the term”, is there a separate state of life corresponding thereto? If you deny, you must also deny your propositionsince you rest it on this basis.statebetween any two recognized existencessince you rest it on this basisThe same argument applies to such cognate terms as “beings who complete existence without”, and again, “with difficulty and striving”.

Shwe Zan AungThis SuttaCentral edition was prepared byManfred WierichandVen. Vimalaand proofread byJosephine Tobin. Some changes were introduced:Manfred WierichVen. VimalaJosephine TobinAbbreviations, 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.Abbreviations, i.e., those of cited works and the participants in the controversies, were expanded.Cross-references were linked.

Kathāvatthu
Mahāpaṇṇāsaka
Aṭṭhamavagga

Antarābhavakathā

Atthi antarābhavoti? Āmantā. Kāmabhavoti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… atthi antarābhavoti? Āmantā. Rūpabhavoti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… atthi antarābhavoti? Āmantā. Arūpabhavoti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… atthi antarābhavoti? Āmantā. Kāmabhavassa ca rūpabhavassa ca antare atthi antarābhavoti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… atthi antarābhavoti? Āmantā. Rūpabhavassa ca arūpabhavassa ca antare atthi antarābhavoti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe….

Kāmabhavassa ca rūpabhavassa ca antare natthi antarābhavoti? Āmantā. Hañci kāmabhavassa ca rūpabhavassa ca antare natthi antarābhavo, no ca vata re vattabbe—“atthi antarābhavo”ti. Rūpabhavassa ca arūpabhavassa ca antare natthi antarābhavoti? Āmantā. Hañci rūpabhavassa ca arūpabhavassa ca antare natthi antarābhavo, no ca vata re vattabbe—“atthi antarābhavo”ti.

Atthi antarābhavoti? Āmantā. Pañcamī sā yoni, chaṭṭhamī sā gati, aṭṭhamī sā viññāṇaṭṭhiti, dasamo so sattāvāsoti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… atthi antarābhavoti? Āmantā. Antarābhavo bhavo gati sattāvāso saṁsāro yoni viññāṇaṭṭhiti attabhāvapaṭilābhoti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… atthi antarābhavūpagaṁ kammanti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… atthi antarābhavūpagā sattāti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… antarābhave sattā jāyanti jīyanti mīyanti cavanti upapajjantīti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… antarābhave atthi rūpaṁ vedanā saññā saṅkhārā viññāṇanti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… antarābhavo pañcavokārabhavoti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe….

Na vattabbaṁ atthi antarābhavoti? Āmantā. Nanu antarāparinibbāyī puggalo atthīti? Āmantā. Hañci antarāparinibbāyī puggalo atthi, tena vata re vattabbe—“atthi antarābhavo”ti.

Antarābhavakathā niṭṭhitā.

Points of ControversyKathāvatthu
Points of ControversyMahāpaṇṇāsaka
8.2 Of an Intermediate StateAṭṭhamavagga

Controverted Point: That there is an intermediate state of existence.Antarābhavakathā

Na vattabbaṁ atthi antarābhavoti? Āmantā. Nanu antarāparinibbāyī puggalo atthīti? Āmantā. Hañci antarāparinibbāyī puggalo atthi, tena vata re vattabbe—“atthi antarābhavo”ti.

Antarābhavakathā niṭṭhitā.