Controverted Point: That one can control the mind of another.

Theravādin: Do you mean that one can bid the consciousness of another not to lust, not to hate, not to be bewildered, not to be corrupted? Of course you deny. But how then can you maintain your view? Or do you mean that one can bid any mental phase uprisen in another's consciousness—reaction, feeling, perception, volition … understanding—to cease? Equally you deny … Or do you mean that anyone puts away lust, hate, or any evil mental coefficient on account of another? Or practises the Ariyan Path, or applications in mindfulness, or any other set of the factors of enlightenment because of another? Or masters the Four Truths—understanding Ill, putting away its Cause, realizing its Cessation, practising the Path thereto—because of another? Or finally, do you mean that anyone makes another the doer of his actions, that anyone's happiness and ill are wrought by another, that one acts while another experiences? If you deny, you must deny your own view.

And was it not said by the Exalted One:

“'Tis thou alone dost work thine evil deeds;
'Tis thou alone dost make thyself corrupt;
'Tis thou alone dost leave the wrong undone;
'Tis thou alone dost purify thyself.
Self-wrought is cleanness and impurity.
None may his brother's heart make undefiled”?

Hence it is surely wrong to say that one can control the mind of another.

Mahāsaṅghika: But have not some admittedly won power and authority? Surely this includes control over others' minds.