The Debates and Their Schools
The book of points for discussion refutes view after view without saying whose views they were. Putting names and a history to those views turns a list of errors into a quarrel inside the community.
The commentary names the parties: those who hold that a person exists as a real and ultimate fact are Vajjiputtakas and Sammitiyas, other views belong to the Andhakas or the Uttarāpathakas. It tells how Aśoka questioned the monks from behind a screen and expelled those who answered wrongly, and how Moggaliputta Tissa filled out an outline the Buddha had left. Then it follows each argument closely: whether an arahant can fall back, whether gods can be said to keep moral restraint, whether gifts to the Buddha bear fruit.
- scriptural interpretation
- personal identity
- arahantship
- spiritual attainment
- liberation
- knowledge
- textual structure
Enter a dialogue
- Aśoka questions the monks from behind a screen and expels those who answer wrongly. Can a king decide what a teaching means?
- Gods commit none of the five kinds of wrongdoing, yet you deny that they keep moral restraint. Why is restraint only real where wrongdoing is possible?
- One school held that the Buddha only seemed to eat, so gifts to him bore no fruit. What goes wrong when devotion makes a teacher more than human?
- Whether someone fully awakened can fall back, you test with a rich man who loses part of his fortune. Is he still rich?