[1812] Paravādin: Is it not to be said that a matricide (mātughātaka) is one who has committed an act entailing immediate result (ānantarika)?
Sakavādin: Yes.
Paravādin: But has not the mother been deprived of life?
Sakavādin: Yes.
Paravādin: If the mother has been deprived of life, then indeed, good sir, it should be said that a matricide is one who has committed an act entailing immediate result.
Paravādin: Is it not to be said that a patricide (pitughātaka) is one who has committed an act entailing immediate result?
Sakavādin: Yes.
Paravādin: But has not the father been deprived of life?
Sakavādin: Yes.
Paravādin: If the father has been deprived of life, then indeed, good sir, it should be said that a patricide is one who has committed an act entailing immediate result.
Paravādin: Is it not to be said that a killer of an Arahant (arahantaghātaka) is one who has committed an act entailing immediate result?
Sakavādin: Yes.
Paravādin: But has not the Arahant been deprived of life?
Sakavādin: Yes.
Paravādin: If the Arahant has been deprived of life, then indeed, good sir, it should be said that a killer of an Arahant is one who has committed an act entailing immediate result.
Paravādin: Is it not to be said that a shedder of [a Tathāgata's] blood (ruhiruppādaka) is one who has committed an act entailing immediate result?
Sakavādin: Yes.
Paravādin: But has not the Tathāgata's blood been shed?
Sakavādin: Yes.
Paravādin: If the Tathāgata's blood has been shed, then indeed, good sir, it should be said that a shedder of blood is one who has committed an act entailing immediate result.
Sakavādin: Is one who causes schism in the Saṅgha (saṅghabhedaka) one who has committed an act entailing immediate result?
Paravādin: Yes.
Sakavādin: Are all who cause schism in the Saṅgha ones who have committed an act entailing immediate result?
Paravādin: It should not be said thus. …
Sakavādin: Are all who cause schism in the Saṅgha ones who have committed an act entailing immediate result?
Paravādin: Yes.
Sakavādin: Is one who causes schism in the Saṅgha perceiving [it] as Dhamma (dhammasaññī) one who has committed an act entailing immediate result?
Paravādin: It should not be said thus. …
Sakavādin: Is one who causes schism in the Saṅgha perceiving [it] as Dhamma one who has committed an act entailing immediate result?
Paravādin: Yes.
Sakavādin: But was it not said by the Blessed One: "There is, Upāli, one who causes schism in the Saṅgha who is bound for a state of loss (āpāyika), bound for hell (nerayika), abiding [there] for the aeon (kappaṭṭha), and incurable (atekiccha); there is, Upāli, one who causes schism in the Saṅgha who is not bound for a state of loss, not bound for hell, not abiding [there] for the aeon, and not incurable"—does such a discourse (suttanta) indeed exist?
Paravādin: Yes.
Sakavādin: If so, it should not be said that one who causes schism in the Saṅgha perceiving [it] as Dhamma is one who has committed an act entailing immediate result.
English translation from the Pali (Siam Raṭṭha edition) — under review, not for citation.