Controverted Point: That penetration is acquired in segmentary order.

Theravādin: If you affirm that there is a definite graduation in penetration, you must also affirm that the first Path (Stream-Winning) is gradually developed. If you refuse, your first proposition falls. If you consent, you must also admit gradual realization of the fruition of that Path. But you cannot. Similarly for the realization of the second, third, and fourth Fruits.

But tell me more of this gradual piecemeal acquiring: when a person is working to be able to realize the fruition of Stream-Winning, and wins insight into the first Truth, namely the fact of Ill, what does he give up?

Andhaka, Sabbatthivādin, Sammitiya, Bhadrayānika: He gives up the theory of soul, doubt, the infection of mere rule and ritual, and a fourth part in the corruptions that are bound up with them.

Theravādin: This fourth part: do you maintain that he thereby becomes one quarter Stream-Winner, one quarter not? Has one quarter of him won, attained to, arrived at, realized the Fruit? Does a quarter of him abide in personal contact with it, and a quarter not? Does a quarter of him get seven more rebirths only, rebirths only among gods and men, or one more rebirth only? Is one quarter of him endowed with implicit faith in the Buddha, the Norm, the Order? Is a quarter of him endowed with virtues dear to Ariyans, and a quarter of him not? You deny this, yet it follows from your proposition.

Again, when he wins insight into the second, third, and fourth Truths, namely the cause of Ill, its cessation, and the Path leading to that, what does he give up? The same things, say you? Then the same objection applies.

Or what does a person who is working to be able to realize the fruition of the other three Paths give up?

Andhaka, Sabbatthivādin, Sammitiya, Bhadrayānika: He gives up respectively

1. the bulk of sense-desires, intense ill-will, and a quarter of the corruptions bound up with them;
2. the residuum of sense-desires and of ill-will, and one quarter of the corruptions bound up with them;
3. lusting after life in any of the higher heavens, conceit, distraction, ignorance, and one quarter of the corruptions bound up with them.

Theravādin: Then the same objection applies, namely, you must say whether, for example, he is one quarter Arahant, one quarter not, and so on.

When a person who is practising to be able to realize the fruition of Stream-Winning is beginning to see the fact of Ill, would you call him “a practiser”?

Andhaka, Sabbatthivādin, Sammitiya, Bhadrayānika: Yes.

Theravādin: Would you, when he has seen it, call him “established in the fruit”? No, you reply, but why not? So again, in the case of the three other Truths—why not?

Again, you allow that such a person, when he is coming to see the first Path, may be called a practiser, and you allow that when he has seen that Path, he is to be called “established in fruition”. Yet you do not allow that such a person who, when he is coming to see the fact of Ill, may be called practiser, may, when he has seen the fact of Ill, be called “established in fruition”—why not? Again, you allow that such a person, when he is coming to see the first Path, may be called practiser, and when he has seen the fact of Ill, may be called established in fruition. Yet you do not allow that such a person who, when he is coming to see the cause, or the cessation of Ill, may be called practiser, may, when he has seen either of these Truths, be called established in fruition—why not?

Once more, you allow that such a person, when he is coming to see the fact of Ill, may be called practiser, while you refuse, when he has seen that fact, to call him established in fruition (as in PTS CS 2.9.10). Then you must allow, and refuse similarly, if we substitute any other of the Four Truths—but to this you did not agree. (PTS CS 2.9.11) With reference to your position (in PTS CS 2.9.12): you compel yourself to admit, that insight into the fact, or the cause, or the cessation, of Ill is really of no value.

Andhaka, Sabbatthivādin, Sammitiya, Bhadrayānika: You affirm then that, when once the first Truth, viz., the fact and nature of Ill is seen, the Four Truths are seen?

Theravādin: Yes.

Andhaka, Sabbatthivādin, Sammitiya, Bhadrayānika: Then you must admit also that the First Truth amounts to the Four Truths.

Theravādin: Ah, no! for you as for us if the material aggregate (khandha) is seen to be impermanent, all five are seen to be so. Yet you would not therefore say that the material aggregate amounts to all the others. A similar argument may be applied to the twelvefold field of sense and the twenty-two “controllers” or faculties.

If you believe that the fruition of the First Path is realized by insight considered as divided into so many integral portions, for example, the Four Insights, the Eight, Twelve, Forty-four, Seventy-seven Insights, then you must admit a corresponding number of Fruits of the First Path—which of course you do not.

Andhaka, Sabbatthivādin, Sammitiya, Bhadrayānika: You say our proposition that there is a gradual sequence in penetration is wrong. But was it not said by the Exalted One:

“Even, O bhikkhus, as the ocean slopes gradually, inclines gradually, has gradual hollows, without abrupt precipices, so, in this Norm and Discipline, is there gradual training, gradual achievement, gradual practice, but no sudden discernment of gnosis”?

Again, was it not said by the Exalted One:

“Little by little, one by one, as pass
The moments, gradually let the wise
Like smith the blemishes of silver, blow
The specks away that mar his purity”?

Theravādin: That is so. But did not the venerable Gavampati address the brethren thus:

“Brothers, I have heard this from the Exalted One, and learnt it from his lips: O bhikkhus! whoso sees the fact of Ill, sees also its cause, its cessation, and the course of practice leading thereto. Whoso sees the cause of Ill, sees also Ill itself, its cessation, and the course of practice leading thereto. Whoso sees the cessation of Ill, sees also Ill itself, its cause, and the course of practice leading to its cessation. Whoso sees the way, sees also Ill, sees its cause, sees its cessation”?

Again, was it not said by the Exalted One:

“For him e'en as insight doth come to pass.
Three things as bygones are renounced for aye:
Belief that in him dwells a soul, and doubt.
And faith in rule and rite—if aught remain.
Both from the fourfold doom is he released
And n'er the six fell deeds are his to do”?

Again, was it not said by the Exalted One:

“Whenever, O bhikkhus, for the Ariyan disciple there doth arise the stainless, flawless Eye of the Norm—that whatsoever by its nature may happen, may all by its nature cease—then with the coming of that vision doth he put away these three fetters: belief in a soul, doubt, and the contagion of mere rule and ritual”?