“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.
“Bhikkhus, there are these three bases of conversation. What three? Engaging in a conversation concerning the past, one might say: ‘It was like this in the past.’ Or engaging in a conversation concerning the future, one might say: ‘It will be like this in the future.’ Or engaging in a conversation concerning the present, one might say: ‘It is like this now in the 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.
Through engaging in conversation, |bhikkhus,::::| a person can be known as to whether they are fit to converse with or unfit to converse with. If a person, being asked a question, does not categorically answer a question that should be answered categorically; does not answer by making a distinction a question that should be answered by making a distinction; does not answer with a counter-question a question that should be answered with a counter-question; and does not set aside a question that should be set aside—then, |bhikkhus,::::| such a person is unfit to converse with. But if a person, being asked a question, categorically answers a question that should be answered categorically; answers by making a distinction a question that should be answered by making a distinction; answers with a counter-question a question that should be answered with a counter-question; and sets aside a question that should be set aside—then, |bhikkhus,::::| such a person is fit to converse with.
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.
Through discussion, |bhikkhus,::::| a person can be known as to whether they are fit to converse with or unfit to converse with. If a person, being asked a question, does not stand firm regarding their premise and the counter-premise, does not stand firm in their strategy, does not stand firm in an assertion about what is known, and does not stand firm on rules of engagement—then, |bhikkhus,::::| such a person is unfit to converse with. But if a person, being asked a question, stands firm regarding their premise and the counter-premise, stands firm in their strategy, stands firm in an assertion about what is known, and stands firm on rules of engagement—then, |bhikkhus,::::| such a person is fit to converse with.
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.
Through discussion, |bhikkhus,::::| a person can be known as to whether they are fit to converse with or unfit to converse with. If a person, being asked a question, evades the issue, distracts the conversation, and displays anger, hatred, and resentment—then, |bhikkhus,::::| such a person is unfit to converse with. But if a person, being asked a question, does not evade the issue, does not distract the conversation, and does not display anger, hatred, and resentment—then, |bhikkhus,::::| such a person is fit to converse with.
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.
Through discussion, |bhikkhus,::::| a person can be known as to whether they are fit to converse with or unfit to converse with. If a person, being asked a question, bears down on the questioner, crushes them, mocks them, and seizes upon a mistake—then, |bhikkhus,::::| such a person is unfit to converse with. But if a person, being asked a question, does not bear down on the questioner, does not crush them, does not mock them, and does not seize upon a mistake—then, |bhikkhus,::::| such a person is fit to converse with.
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.
Through discussion, |bhikkhus,::::| a person can be known as to whether they have the prerequisite foundation or lack the prerequisite foundation. One who does not lend an ear lacks the prerequisite foundation; one who lends an ear has the prerequisite foundation. One who has the prerequisite foundation directly knows one thing, completely comprehends one thing, abandons one thing, and realizes one thing. Directly knowing one thing, completely comprehending one thing, abandoning one thing, and realizing one thing, they touch right liberation. This is the purpose of conversation; this is the purpose of counsel; this is the purpose of the prerequisite foundation; this is the purpose of lending an ear—namely, the liberation of the mind through |non-clinging::not grasping [anupādā]|.
Ye viruddhā sallapanti,
viniviṭṭhā samussitā;
Anariyaguṇamāsajja,
aññoññavivaresino.
Those who converse with hostility,
|with fixed opinions::dogmatic; lit. completely entered down [viniviṭṭha]|, |swollen with pride::propped up; lit. raised up [samussita]|;
ignoble and having assailed virtues,
look for openings [to attack] one another.
Dubbhāsitaṁ vikkhalitaṁ,
sampamohaṁ parājayaṁ;
Aññoññassābhinandanti,
tadariyo kathanācare.
They mutually delight when their opponent
speaks badly and makes a mistake,
[they rejoice] in his bewilderment and defeat;
but Noble Ones don’t engage in such talk.
Sace cassa kathākāmo,
kālamaññāya paṇḍito;
Dhammaṭṭhapaṭisaṁyuttā,
yā ariyacaritā kathā.
If a wise person wishes to converse,
having known the proper time,
the kind of conversation practiced by the Noble Ones,
which is connected with the Dhamma and meaning.
Taṁ kathaṁ kathaye dhīro,
aviruddho anussito;
Anunnatena manasā,
apaḷāso asāhaso.
The wise one speaks on that topic
without hostility, not swollen with pride,
with a mind that is not puffed up,
without spite, |without harshness::gently; lit. without force [asāhasa]|.
Anusūyāyamāno so,
sammadaññāya bhāsati;
Subhāsitaṁ anumodeyya,
dubbhaṭṭhe nāpasādaye.
Without envy,
he speaks |completely comprehending::fully understanding [sammadaññā]|.
He is pleased with what is well-spoken,
and |does not disparage::does not belittle [nāpasādayati]| what is poorly spoken.
Upārambhaṁ na sikkheyya,
khalitañca na gāhaye;
Nābhihare nābhimadde,
na vācaṁ payutaṁ bhaṇe.
He does not train to |find faults::criticize, refute [upārambhati]|,
nor does he seize upon a mistake;
he does not bear down, nor crush,
nor speak with an ulterior motive.
Aññātatthaṁ pasādatthaṁ,
sataṁ ve hoti mantanā;
Evaṁ kho ariyā mantenti,
esā ariyāna mantanā;
Etadaññāya medhāvī,
na samusseyya mantaye”ti.
For the sake of knowledge, for the sake of clarity,
is the counsel of good people.
Thus do the Noble Ones counsel;
this is the counsel of the Noble Ones.
Knowing this, a wise person
should consult without being swollen with pride.”