AN 3.67

Kathāvatthusutta

“Tīṇimāni, bhikkhave, kathāvatthūni. Katamāni tīṇi? Atītaṁ vā, bhikkhave, addhānaṁ ārabbha kathaṁ katheyya: ‘evaṁ ahosi atītamaddhānan’ti. Anāgataṁ vā, bhikkhave, addhānaṁ ārabbha kathaṁ katheyya: ‘evaṁ bhavissati anāgatamaddhānan’ti. Etarahi vā, bhikkhave, paccuppannaṁ addhānaṁ ārabbha kathaṁ katheyya: ‘evaṁ hoti etarahi paccuppannamaddhānan’ti.

Topics of Discussion

“There are, mendicants, these three topics of discussion. What three? You might discuss the past: ‘That is how it was in the past.’ You might discuss the future: ‘That is how it will be in the future.’ Or you might discuss the present: ‘This is how it is at present.’

Kathāsampayogena, bhikkhave, puggalo veditabbo yadi vā kaccho yadi vā akacchoti. Sacāyaṁ, bhikkhave, puggalo pañhaṁ puṭṭho samāno ekaṁsabyākaraṇīyaṁ pañhaṁ na ekaṁsena byākaroti, vibhajjabyākaraṇīyaṁ pañhaṁ na vibhajja byākaroti, paṭipucchābyākaraṇīyaṁ pañhaṁ na paṭipucchā byākaroti, ṭhapanīyaṁ pañhaṁ na ṭhapeti, evaṁ santāyaṁ, bhikkhave, puggalo akaccho hoti. Sace panāyaṁ, bhikkhave, puggalo pañhaṁ puṭṭho samāno ekaṁsabyākaraṇīyaṁ pañhaṁ ekaṁsena byākaroti, vibhajjabyākaraṇīyaṁ pañhaṁ vibhajja byākaroti, paṭipucchābyākaraṇīyaṁ pañhaṁ paṭipucchā byākaroti, ṭhapanīyaṁ pañhaṁ ṭhapeti, evaṁ santāyaṁ, bhikkhave, puggalo kaccho hoti.

You can know whether or not an individual is competent to hold a discussion by seeing how they take part in a discussion. When an individual is asked a question, if it needs to be answered categorically and they don’t answer it categorically; or if it needs analysis and they answer without analyzing it; or if it needs a counter-question and they answer without a counter-question; or if it should be set aside and they don’t set it aside, then that individual is not competent to hold a discussion. When an individual is asked a question, if it needs to be answered categorically and they answer it categorically; or if it needs analysis and they answer after analyzing it; or if it needs a counter-question and they answer with a counter-question; or if it should be set aside and they set it aside, then that individual is competent to hold a discussion.

Kathāsampayogena, bhikkhave, puggalo veditabbo yadi vā kaccho yadi vā akacchoti. Sacāyaṁ, bhikkhave, puggalo pañhaṁ puṭṭho samāno ṭhānāṭhāne na saṇṭhāti parikappe na saṇṭhāti aññātavāde na saṇṭhāti paṭipadāya na saṇṭhāti, evaṁ santāyaṁ, bhikkhave, puggalo akaccho hoti. Sace panāyaṁ, bhikkhave, puggalo pañhaṁ puṭṭho samāno ṭhānāṭhāne saṇṭhāti parikappe saṇṭhāti aññātavāde saṇṭhāti paṭipadāya saṇṭhāti, evaṁ santāyaṁ, bhikkhave, puggalo kaccho hoti.

You can know whether or not an individual is competent to hold a discussion by seeing how they take part in a discussion. When an individual is asked a question, if they’re not consistent about what their position is and what it isn’t; about what they propose; about speaking from what they know; and about the appropriate procedure, then that individual is not competent to hold a discussion. When an individual is asked a question, if they are consistent about what their position is and what it isn’t; about what they propose; about speaking from what they know; and about the appropriate procedure, then that individual is competent to hold a discussion.

Kathāsampayogena, bhikkhave, puggalo veditabbo yadi vā kaccho yadi vā akacchoti. Sacāyaṁ, bhikkhave, puggalo pañhaṁ puṭṭho samāno aññenaññaṁ paṭicarati, bahiddhā kathaṁ apanāmeti, kopañca dosañca appaccayañca pātukaroti, evaṁ santāyaṁ, bhikkhave, puggalo akaccho hoti. Sace panāyaṁ, bhikkhave, puggalo pañhaṁ puṭṭho samāno na aññenaññaṁ paṭicarati na bahiddhā kathaṁ apanāmeti, na kopañca dosañca appaccayañca pātukaroti, evaṁ santāyaṁ, bhikkhave, puggalo kaccho hoti.

You can know whether or not an individual is competent to hold a discussion by seeing how they take part in a discussion. When an individual is asked a question, if they dodge the issue; distract the discussion with irrelevant points; or display annoyance, hate, and bitterness, then that individual is not competent to hold a discussion. When an individual is asked a question, if they don’t dodge the issue; distract the discussion with irrelevant points; or display annoyance, hate, and bitterness, then that individual is competent to hold a discussion.

Kathāsampayogena, bhikkhave, puggalo veditabbo yadi vā kaccho yadi vā akacchoti. Sacāyaṁ, bhikkhave, puggalo pañhaṁ puṭṭho samāno abhiharati abhimaddati anupajagghati khalitaṁ gaṇhāti, evaṁ santāyaṁ, bhikkhave, puggalo akaccho hoti. Sace panāyaṁ, bhikkhave, puggalo pañhaṁ puṭṭho samāno nābhiharati nābhimaddati na anupajagghati na khalitaṁ gaṇhāti, evaṁ santāyaṁ, bhikkhave, puggalo kaccho hoti.

You can know whether or not an individual is competent to hold a discussion by seeing how they take part in a discussion. When an individual is asked a question, if they intimidate, crush, mock, or seize on trivial mistakes, then that individual is not competent to hold a discussion. When an individual is asked a question, if they don’t intimidate, crush, mock, or seize on trivial mistakes, then that individual is competent to hold a discussion.

Kathāsampayogena, bhikkhave, puggalo veditabbo yadi vā saupaniso yadi vā anupanisoti. Anohitasoto, bhikkhave, anupaniso hoti, ohitasoto saupaniso hoti. So saupaniso samāno abhijānāti ekaṁ dhammaṁ, parijānāti ekaṁ dhammaṁ, pajahati ekaṁ dhammaṁ, sacchikaroti ekaṁ dhammaṁ. So abhijānanto ekaṁ dhammaṁ, parijānanto ekaṁ dhammaṁ, pajahanto ekaṁ dhammaṁ, sacchikaronto ekaṁ dhammaṁ sammāvimuttiṁ phusati. Etadatthā, bhikkhave, kathā; etadatthā mantanā; etadatthā upanisā; etadatthaṁ sotāvadhānaṁ, yadidaṁ anupādā cittassa vimokkhoti.

You can know whether or not an individual has what’s required by seeing how they take part in a discussion. If they actively listen they have what’s required; if they don’t actively listen they don’t have what’s required. Someone who has what’s required directly knows one thing, completely understands one thing, gives up one thing, and realizes one thing— and then they experience complete freedom. This is the purpose of discussion, consultation, sitting close, and listening well, that is, the liberation of the mind by not grasping.

Ye viruddhā sallapanti, viniviṭṭhā samussitā; Anariyaguṇamāsajja, aññoññavivaresino.

Those who converse with hostility, too sure of themselves, arrogant, ignoble, attacking virtues, they look for flaws in each other.

Dubbhāsitaṁ vikkhalitaṁ, sampamohaṁ parājayaṁ; Aññoññassābhinandanti, tadariyo kathanācare.

They rejoice together when their opponent speaks poorly and makes a mistake, becoming confused and defeated— but the noble ones don’t discuss like this.

Sace cassa kathākāmo, kālamaññāya paṇḍito; Dhammaṭṭhapaṭisaṁyuttā, yā ariyacaritā kathā.

If an astute person wants to hold a discussion connected with the teaching and its meaning— the kind of discussion that noble ones hold— then that attentive one should start the discussion,

Taṁ kathaṁ kathaye dhīro, aviruddho anussito; Anunnatena manasā, apaḷāso asāhaso.

knowing when the time is right, neither hostile nor arrogant. Not over-excited, contemptuous, or aggressive,

Anusūyāyamāno so, sammadaññāya bhāsati; Subhāsitaṁ anumodeyya, dubbhaṭṭhe nāpasādaye.

or with a mind full of jealousy, they’d speak from what they rightly know. They agree with what was well spoken, without criticizing what was poorly said.

Upārambhaṁ na sikkheyya, khalitañca na gāhaye; Nābhihare nābhimadde, na vācaṁ payutaṁ bhaṇe.

They’d not persist in finding faults, nor seize on trivial mistakes, neither intimidating nor crushing the other, nor would they speak suggestively.

Aññātatthaṁ pasādatthaṁ, sataṁ ve hoti mantanā; Evaṁ kho ariyā mantenti, esā ariyāna mantanā; Etadaññāya medhāvī, na samusseyya mantaye”ti.

Good people consult for the sake of knowledge and clarity. That’s how the noble ones consult, this is a noble consultation. Knowing this, an intelligent person would consult without arrogance.”