Controverted PointRūpaṁ sārammaṇanti? Theravādin:If that is so, you must also affirm of matter or body, that it has the mental features of “adverting”, ideating, reflecting, co-ordinated application, attending, willing, anticipating, aiming—things which you would, on the contrary, deny of matter.Āmantā. All, or any of them you can rightly affirm of mental properties, such as contact (mental reaction), feeling, perception, volition, cognition, faith, energy, mindfulness, concentration, understanding, lust, hate, illusion, conceit,erroneous opinion, doubt, mental inertia, distraction, immodesty, indiscretion—all of which you admit as subjective. But matter is not one of these, and therefore such things may not be affirmed of it.Atthi tassa āvaṭṭanā ābhogo samannāhāro manasikāro cetanā patthanā paṇidhīti? You deny in the case of matter all those mental features—adverting, etc.—but claim for it the term “subjective”, which is really applicable to “contact”, sensation, etc. These, as you admit, do not lack those mental features named.Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe… Uttarāpathaka:But is not matter correlated (as an object)? Of course you assent. Then as correlated it is surely right to apply the term “subjective” to matter, etc.since “object” is one of the twenty-four (causal) relations.nanu natthi tassa āvaṭṭanā ābhogo …pe… paṇidhīti? Uttarāpathaka:Āmantā. since “object” is one of the twenty-four (causal) relations.Hañci natthi tassa āvaṭṭanā ābhogo …pe… paṇidhi, no ca vata re vattabbe—Shwe Zan Aung“rūpaṁ sārammaṇan”ti.

This SuttaCentral edition was prepared byManfred WierichandVen. Vimalaand proofread byJosephine Tobin. Some changes were introduced:Phasso sārammaṇo, atthi tassa āvaṭṭanā ābhogo …pe… paṇidhīti? Manfred WierichĀmantā. Ven. VimalaRūpaṁ sārammaṇaṁ, atthi tassa āvaṭṭanā ābhogo …pe… paṇidhīti? Josephine TobinNa hevaṁ vattabbe …pe….

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.Vedanā …pe… Abbreviations, i.e., those of cited works and the participants in the controversies, were expanded.saññā cetanā cittaṁ saddhā vīriyaṁ sati samādhi paññā rāgo doso moho māno diṭṭhi vicikicchā thinaṁ uddhaccaṁ ahirikaṁ …pe… Cross-references were linked.anottappaṁ sārammaṇaṁ, atthi tassa āvaṭṭanā ābhogo …pe… paṇidhīti? 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 “:”.Āmantā. Letter-spacing with fixed spaces was replaced with bold font.Rūpaṁ sārammaṇaṁ, atthi tassa āvaṭṭanā ābhogo …pe… paṇidhīti? The corrigenda were merged into the text. Some could not be resolved, though.Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe….

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/Rūpaṁ sārammaṇaṁ, natthi tassa āvaṭṭanā ābhogo …pe… paṇidhīti? 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.Āmantā. Phasso sārammaṇo, natthi tassa āvaṭṭanā ābhogo …pe… paṇidhīti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe….

Rūpaṁ sārammaṇaṁ, natthi tassa āvaṭṭanā ābhogo …pe… paṇidhīti? Āmantā. Vedanā …pe… anottappaṁ sārammaṇaṁ, natthi tassa āvaṭṭanā ābhogo …pe… paṇidhīti? Na hevaṁ vattabbe …pe….

Na vattabbaṁ—“rūpaṁ sārammaṇan”ti? Āmantā. Nanu rūpaṁ sappaccayanti? Āmantā. Hañci rūpaṁ sappaccayaṁ, tena vata re vattabbe—“rūpaṁ sārammaṇan”ti.

Rūpaṁ sārammaṇantikathā niṭṭhitā.