..續本文上一頁not go to reiterated existence[3].” (877)

　　Kalahavivâdasutta is ended.

　　--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

　　12. KÛLAVIYÛHASUTTA.

　　A description of disputing philosophers. The different schools of philosophy contradict each other, they proclaim different truths, but the truth is only one. As long as the disputations are going on, so long will there be strife in the world.

　　 1. Abiding by their own views, some (people), having got into contest, assert themselves to be

　　[1. Comp. Sundarikabhâradvâgasutta, v. 25.

　　2. Ettâvat” aggam pi vadanti h” eke

　　 Yakkhassa suddhim idha panditâse,

　　 Tesam pun” eke samayam[*] vadanti

　　 Anupâdisese kusalâ vadânâ.

　　3. Ete ka ñatvâ upanissitâ ti

　　 Ñatvâ munî nissaye so vimamsî

　　 Ñatvâ vimutto na vivâdam eti

　　 Bhavâbhavâya na sameti dhîro.

　　*. Ukkhedam. Commentator.]

　　p. 168

　　the (only) expert (saying), ”(He) who understands this, he knows the Dhamma; he who reviles this, he is not perfect[1].” (878)

　　 2. So having got into contest they dispute: ”The opponent (is) a fool, an ignorant (person),” so they say. Which one of these, pray, is the true doctrine (vâda)

　　 for all these assert themselves (to be the only) expert. (879)

　　 3. He who does not acknowledge an opponent”s doctrine (dhamma), he is a fool, a beast, one of poor understanding, all are fools with a very poor understanding; all these abide by their (own) views. (880)

　　 4. They are surely purified by their own view, they are of a pure understanding, expert, thoughtful, amongst them there is no one of poor understanding, their view is quite perfect! (881)

　　 5. I do not say, ”This is the reality,” which fools say mutually to each other; they made their own views the truth, therefore they hold others to be fools. (882)

　　 6. What some say is the truth, the reality, that others say is void, false, so having disagreed they dispute. Why do not the Samanas say one (and the same thing)

　　 (883)

　　 7. For the truth is one, there is not a second, about which one intelligent man might dispute with another intelligent man; (but) they themselves praise different truths, therefore the Samanas do not say one and the same thing)[2]. (884)

　　[1. Sakam sakam ditthi paribbasânâ

　　 Viggayha nânâ kusalâ vadanti

　　 Yo evam gânâti sa vedi dhammam

　　 Idam patikkosam akevalî so.

　　2. Ekam hi sakkam na dutîyam atthi

　　 Yasmim pagâno vivade pagânam,

　　 Nânâ te sakkâni sayam thunanti,

　　 Tasmâ na ekam samanâ vadanti.]

　　p. 169

　　 8. Why do the disputants that assert themselves (to be the only) expert, proclaim different truths

　　 Have many different truths been heard of, or do they (only) follow (their own) reasoning

　　 (885)

　　 9. There are not many different truths in the world, no eternal ones except consciousness; but having reasoned on the (philosophical) views they proclaim a double Dhamma, truth and falsehood[1]. (886)

　　 10. In regard to what has been seen, or heard, virtue and (holy) works, or what has been thought, and on account of these (views) looking (upon others) with contempt, standing in (their) resolutions joyful, they say that the opponent is a fool and an ignorant person[2] (

　　) (887)

　　 11. Because he holds another (to be) a fool, therefore he calls himself expert, in his own opinion he is one that tells what is propitious, others he blames, so he said[3]. (

　　) (888)

　　 12. He is full of his overbearing (philosophical) view, mad with pride, thinking himself perfect, he is in his own opinion anointed with the spirit (of genius…

《The Sutta-Nipâta - IV· Atthakavagga· 》全文未完，請進入下頁繼續閱讀…