The attainment of the Arhats
- PuerAzaelis
- Posts: 958
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 1:37 pm
Re: The attainment of the Arhats
You asked "where" they exist in an arhat.
Where else would they exist other than in the place they always have existed?
It's not like they change places.
Where else would they exist other than in the place they always have existed?
It's not like they change places.
Generally, enjoyment of speech is the gateway to poor [results]. So it becomes the foundation for generating all negative emotional states. Jampel Pawo, The Certainty of the Diamond Mind
For posts from this user, see Karma Dondrup Tashi account.
For posts from this user, see Karma Dondrup Tashi account.
Re: The attainment of the Arhats
As the Buddha taught:
"My teaching is not a philosophy. It is the result of direct experience...
My teaching is a means of practice, not something to hold onto or worship.
My teaching is like a raft used to cross the river.
Only a fool would carry the raft around after he had already reached the other shore of liberation."
"My teaching is not a philosophy. It is the result of direct experience...
My teaching is a means of practice, not something to hold onto or worship.
My teaching is like a raft used to cross the river.
Only a fool would carry the raft around after he had already reached the other shore of liberation."
Re: The attainment of the Arhats
Where have they always existed then?PuerAzaelis wrote:You asked "where" they exist in an arhat.
Where else would they exist other than in the place they always have existed?
It's not like they change places.
1 Myriad dharmas are only mind.
Mind is unobtainable.
What is there to seek?
2 If the Buddha-Nature is seen,
there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.
3 Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —
this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.
4 With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,
the six paramitas and myriad means
are complete within that essence.
1 Huangbo, T2012Ap381c1 2 Nirvana Sutra, T374p521b3; tr. Yamamoto 3 Mazu, X1321p3b23; tr. J. Jia 4 Yongjia, T2014p395c14; tr. from "The Sword of Wisdom"
Mind is unobtainable.
What is there to seek?
2 If the Buddha-Nature is seen,
there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.
3 Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —
this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.
4 With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,
the six paramitas and myriad means
are complete within that essence.
1 Huangbo, T2012Ap381c1 2 Nirvana Sutra, T374p521b3; tr. Yamamoto 3 Mazu, X1321p3b23; tr. J. Jia 4 Yongjia, T2014p395c14; tr. from "The Sword of Wisdom"
Re: The attainment of the Arhats
Astus wrote:The three quotes merely state thatPuerAzaelis wrote:He just quoted three sutras answering precisely that. What else is he supposed to do?
"Srāvakas and pratyekabuddhas have not abandoned all connection with traces"
"not completely destroyed traces"
"they are confused through the other traces of affliction"
and the questions raised are in response to that concept of remaining traces.
Astus wrote:The three quotes merely state thatPuerAzaelis wrote:He just quoted three sutras answering precisely that. What else is he supposed to do?
"Srāvakas and pratyekabuddhas have not abandoned all connection with traces"
"not completely destroyed traces"
"they are confused through the other traces of affliction"
and the questions raised are in response to that concept of remaining traces.
The location of traces is in the mind stream of course. Daṃṣṭrasenam, in his commentary on the 100,000 lines Perfection of Wisdom Sūtra, notes that the result of possessing those traces mentions specifically that arhats can err, gossip, can be unattractive, are forgetful, and so on.
But the above only refers to past traces, the absence of which is how the eighteen unshared qualities of a buddha are defined. But that is not really the most important point. Below we will see too that it is claimed that arhats also do not abandon the traces of conceptuality.
The most important point is that śrāvakayanists in general do not meditate on the view of emptiness. As we will see below, they meditate in the four truths and this is how they attain their awakening. They realize the person as a momentary formation and this is what it means to say that an arhat realizes "the selflessness of persons." But they do not meditate directly on the view of emptiness in anyway. The Goenka Vipassana school is an excellent example of this principle.
Bhavaviveka II mentions in the Tarkajvala that the difference between nirvana of a buddha and an arhat is the the latter's nirvana is result of totally abandoning the two obscurations, while the latter's nirvana is merely severing the continuum of their physical body in samsara. He remarks too that the traces of affliction from cultivating afflictions from beginningless time exist within arhats. He distinguishes buddhas by pointing out that they totally eliminate all afflictions along with their traces by cultivating the view of emptiness for a long while, and they eliminate the knowledge obscuration the same way. This is not how arhats attain their realization since their realization is attained not by meditating on emptiness, but rather by meditating the four noble truths in sixteen moments on the path of seeing.
Vibhuticandra says much the same thing in his commentary on the Bodhicaryāvatāra:
- With respect to the traces of emptiness, since ṡrāvakas and so on cannot bear the fact that all phenomena are empty, it is said they are liberated solely through seeing four truths of nobles. Since they obtain freedom only through the direct perception of the "truths" — suffering, the origin, the cessation, and the path— of what use to them is seeing emptiness?
- Therefore, śrāvakas and pratyekabuddha do not abandon the affliction of the traces of conceptuality, but because bodhisattvas, beginning on the eighth bhumi, are able to exhaust the affliction of the traces of of conceptuality through the power of the path of effortlessness and characteristiclessness, they are able to attain buddhahood.
Finally, concerning the Lanka and its samadhi-intoxicated arhats, Jñānavajra states:
- With respect to that, the three liberations are the three awakenings which are equivalent in abandoning afflictions.
"The absence of self in phenomena," and so on means that the ultimate suchness and the pristine consciousness which realizes that is liberated from afflictions and abandons the obscuration of knowledge — this is Mahāyāna of the result.
It is taught that śrāvakas cannot realize that. "Just as..." and "They are distracted by characteristics" means they are distracted because they conceptualize particular and universal characterisics of the aggregates and so on, and thus cannot abandon the knowledge obscuration. In the same way, though they indeed abandon the active causes of the afflictive obscuration, they cannot abandon the latent ones. Through perceiving sensation and perception as flaws, they solely rely on the method of pacifying them and are intoxicated with an intoxicating samadhi that lacks the wisdom that realizes the truth. Since they abandon the manifest causes of affliction, they reside in the uncontaminated dhātu. If is asked whether that is their ultimate result, they do no reach an ultimate result apart from that. That being the case, if it is wondered whether or not they are outside of and turned away from samsara, through realizing the emptiness of the person as being a momentary formation and understanding a self is an agent of action, there is no further accumulated karma for birth in samsara and the causal condition for the active cause of craving and addiction are absent, just as a log floating on the ocean does sink to the bottom, there is no certainty of their remaining in one place. If it is wondered how long they remain in the the uncontaminated dhātu, it is said "Samadhi, etc..."
"Then I will cause them to obtain the dharmakāya..." means that as explained already, when through their own roots of virtue and the blessings of the tathāgata they awaken from uncontaminated dhātu and generate the mind for supreme awakening. Having filled their compliment of the two accumulations, they will obtain the dharmakāya."
Re: The attainment of the Arhats
Thanks for looking it up. The same traits are mentioned elsewhere regarding arhats as well, aren't they? Still, nice to know.Malcolm wrote:Daṃṣṭrasenam, in his commentary on the 100,000 lines Perfection of Wisdom Sūtra, notes that the result of possessing those traces mentions specifically that arhats can err, gossip, can be unattractive, are forgetful, and so on.
The part where it is true is that the path described that way is what is found in the abhidharma works, although there can be differences. The part where it is not true is the Nikayas/Agamas and those Theravada teachers who don't follow the abhidhamma. Look at this description for instance: The Recognition of Selflessness (Anattasaññā). Also, it is quite common in Mahayana to describe arhats by their realisation of the emptiness of self, and sometimes even by the realisation of the emptiness of phenomena.Malcolm wrote:The most important point is that śrāvakayanists in general do not meditate on the view of emptiness. As we will see below, they meditate in the four truths and this is how they attain their awakening. They realize the person as a momentary formation and this is what it means to say that an arhat realizes "the selflessness of persons." But they do not meditate directly on the view of emptiness in anyway. The Goenka Vipassana school is an excellent example of this principle.
The issue is whether they are attached to the aggregates or not. In order to keep any form of traces, obscurations, or defilements for arhats, they necessarily have to still cling to the aggregates and the areas, and what they attain then as a pseudo-nirvana is nirodha-samapatti, hence as you quote "Through perceiving sensation and perception as flaws, they solely rely on the method of pacifying them and are intoxicated with an intoxicating samadhi that lacks the wisdom that realizes the truth."Thus, it is somewhat inane to speculate about where traces reside in an arhat. It is also somewhat foolish to assert that arhats realize the selflessness of phenomena when it has nothing at all to do with how they achieve their realization since they never even meditate the view of the emptiness of the person let alone emptiness in general.
Or they could be simply put into the formless realms, as I think some Zen texts do.Thus we can also see there is no place where such arhats "reside" after death, no Hinayāna pure land. After their nirvana, arhats have no location per se, being like "logs floating on the ocean, moved by the waves."
1 Myriad dharmas are only mind.
Mind is unobtainable.
What is there to seek?
2 If the Buddha-Nature is seen,
there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.
3 Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —
this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.
4 With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,
the six paramitas and myriad means
are complete within that essence.
1 Huangbo, T2012Ap381c1 2 Nirvana Sutra, T374p521b3; tr. Yamamoto 3 Mazu, X1321p3b23; tr. J. Jia 4 Yongjia, T2014p395c14; tr. from "The Sword of Wisdom"
Mind is unobtainable.
What is there to seek?
2 If the Buddha-Nature is seen,
there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.
3 Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —
this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.
4 With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,
the six paramitas and myriad means
are complete within that essence.
1 Huangbo, T2012Ap381c1 2 Nirvana Sutra, T374p521b3; tr. Yamamoto 3 Mazu, X1321p3b23; tr. J. Jia 4 Yongjia, T2014p395c14; tr. from "The Sword of Wisdom"
Re: The attainment of the Arhats
Are they not utterly non-existent, then? That would seem to follow from the whole trajectory of 'cessation'.After their nirvana, arhats have no location per se, being like "logs floating on the ocean, moved by the waves."
'Only practice with no gaining idea' ~ Suzuki Roshi
Re: The attainment of the Arhats
No, arhats do not just poof out. They have no physical existence in samsara, per se, but they continue in a samadhi of cessation.Wayfarer wrote:Are they not utterly non-existent, then? That would seem to follow from the whole trajectory of 'cessation'.After their nirvana, arhats have no location per se, being like "logs floating on the ocean, moved by the waves."
Re: The attainment of the Arhats
Nothing here goes beyond the selflessness of persons. For example, here the Buddha is not describing the selflessness of phenomena:Astus wrote:
The part where it is true is that the path described that way is what is found in the abhidharma works, although there can be differences. The part where it is not true is the Nikayas/Agamas and those Theravada teachers who don't follow the abhidhamma. Look at this description for instance: The Recognition of Selflessness (Anattasaññā).
- Thus he abides contemplating selflessness with regard to the six internal and external sensory spheres. This, Ānanda, is called the recognition of selflessness.
The absence of a self in persons is only mentioned in these Mahāyāna sūtras:Also, it is quite common in Mahayana to describe arhats by their realisation of the emptiness of self, and sometimes even by the realisation of the emptiness of phenomena.
śatasāhasrikā-prajñāpāramitā, 1 mention
ārya-daśasāhasrikā-prajñāpāramitā-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra, 1 mention
ārya-saṃdhinirmocana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra, 3 mentions
ārya-laṅkāvatāra-mahāyāna-sūtra, 26 mentions
ārya-ghanavyūha-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra, 1
ārya-mahāyāna-prasāda-prabhāvana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra, 1 mention
ārya-ratnamegha-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra, 3 mentions.
Rājadeśa-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra, 1 mention
Absence of a self in phenomena is mentioned in these sūtras:
śatasāhasrikā-prajñāpāramitā, 9
Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā-prajñāpāramitā, 2
ārya-aṣṭādaśasāhasrikā-prajñāpāramitā-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra, 1
ārya-prajñāpāramitā-nāma-aṣṭaśataka, 2
Giri-ānanda-sūtra, 1
ārya-niṣṭhāgata-bhagavaj-jñāna-vaipulya-sūtra-ratnānanta-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra, 1
ārya-sarvabuddha-viṣayāvatāra-jñānālokālaṃkāra-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra, 1
ārya-saṃdhinirmocana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra, 13
ārya-laṅkāvatāra-mahāyāna-sūtra, 47
ārya-sarvapuṇya-samuccaya-samādhi-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra,1
ārya-sāgara-nāgarāja-paripṛcchā-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra,1
ārya-anavatapta-nāgarāja-paripṛcchā-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra,1
ārya-ghanavyūha-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra, 4
ārya-karuṇāpuṇḍarīka-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra, 1
ārya-mahāyāna-prasāda-prabhāvana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra, 1
ārya-sāgaramati-paripṛcchā-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra, 1
ārya-akṣayamati-nirdeśa-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra, 1
Rājadeśa-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra, 1
ārya-ratnamegha-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra, 3
ārya-samyag-cāravṛtta-gaganavarṇa-vinaya-kṣānti-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra, 1
ārya-dīpaṃkara-vyākaraṇa-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra, 1
What we can see from the above is that the main sūtra that deals with this issue is the Lanka, the main polemical sūtra in this respect.
In general, what is discussed in the Perfection of Wisdom sūtras is the limitations upon the omniscience of arhats and pratyekabuddhas, and this is why in that body of sūtras there is an extensive discussion of how emptiness is understood with respect to arhats and pratyekabuddhas where it is primarily stated that one should avoid their result because śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas have trained in characteristics of the aggregate, etc., that lack a self because of being impermanent and so on, rather than in emptiness.
For example, the Lanka responds to your question, "to what do arhats grasp?"
- Further, if it is asked what is the śravakas to the nature of conceiving entities, it is like this, having perceived...the elements that arise without a creator, intrinsic and general characteristics, reasongings, scripture, and authority, they cling to the nature of those.
It is asserted that they cling to characteristics, not that they cling to the aggregates, etc., per se.The issue is whether they are attached to the aggregates or not. In order to keep any form of traces, obscurations, or defilements for arhats, they necessarily have to still cling to the aggregates and the areas,
Re: The attainment of the Arhats
Yes, that is a clear difference. On the one side it's rise and fall, birth and death, while on the other it's unarisen and unceasing, unborn and undying.Malcolm wrote:This is only the selflessness of persons, not phenomena, because there is no refutation of characteristics themselves. But, for example, in Mahāyāna, even the characteristics by which phenomena are apprehended are refuted. This is the main difference.
Did you do a search specifically for pudgala naitratmya? That (人無我) doesn't seem to be a common term in Chinese either, although using synonyms can turn up further results.The absence of a self in persons is only mentioned in these Mahāyāna sūtras
Contemplation of the three characteristics are what is said to bring about the realisation of the three gates of liberation, so there is a correlation.śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas have trained in characteristics of the aggregate, etc., that lack a self because of being impermanent and so on, rather than in emptiness.
An this is something I have difficulty to take literally on a practical level. Sure, most of the usual criticisms of arhats look valid for people obsessed with total cessation and/or systems and lists of dharmas. But I fail to see them as anything but common warnings one can find in all sorts of teachings, and that is likely the reason why Mahayana traditions kept this view of the arhat alive (at the same time, arhats in East Asia are also popular spirit/deity/bodhisattva-like beings). Although looking at the sixteen insight stages can give the impression that the criticism is valid, it's also possible to say that as both body and mind are let go of, there can be no hindrances left, nor even clinging to characteristics, since even those are just thoughts.It is asserted that they cling to characteristics, not that they cling to the aggregates, etc., per se.
1 Myriad dharmas are only mind.
Mind is unobtainable.
What is there to seek?
2 If the Buddha-Nature is seen,
there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.
3 Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —
this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.
4 With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,
the six paramitas and myriad means
are complete within that essence.
1 Huangbo, T2012Ap381c1 2 Nirvana Sutra, T374p521b3; tr. Yamamoto 3 Mazu, X1321p3b23; tr. J. Jia 4 Yongjia, T2014p395c14; tr. from "The Sword of Wisdom"
Mind is unobtainable.
What is there to seek?
2 If the Buddha-Nature is seen,
there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.
3 Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —
this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.
4 With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,
the six paramitas and myriad means
are complete within that essence.
1 Huangbo, T2012Ap381c1 2 Nirvana Sutra, T374p521b3; tr. Yamamoto 3 Mazu, X1321p3b23; tr. J. Jia 4 Yongjia, T2014p395c14; tr. from "The Sword of Wisdom"
Re: The attainment of the Arhats
Yes, that is what I have been saying all along.Astus wrote:Yes, that is a clear difference. On the one side it's rise and fall, birth and death, while on the other it's unarisen and unceasing, unborn and undying.Malcolm wrote:This is only the selflessness of persons, not phenomena, because there is no refutation of characteristics themselves. But, for example, in Mahāyāna, even the characteristics by which phenomena are apprehended are refuted. This is the main difference.
I specifically searched for all instances of dharmanaitratmya and pudgalanaitratmya in their various forms.Did you do a search specifically for pudgala naitratmya? That (人無我) doesn't seem to be a common term in Chinese either, although using synonyms can turn up further results.The absence of a self in persons is only mentioned in these Mahāyāna sūtras
Contemplation of the three characteristics are what is said to bring about the realisation of the three gates of liberation, so there is a correlation.śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas have trained in characteristics of the aggregate, etc., that lack a self because of being impermanent and so on, rather than in emptiness.
There is a correlation in terms of liberation, but not in terms of omniscience. This is the principle distinction that the PP sūtras make.
An this is something I have difficulty to take literally on a practical level. Sure, most of the usual criticisms of arhats look valid for people obsessed with total cessation and/or systems and lists of dharmas. But I fail to see them as anything but common warnings one can find in all sorts of teachings, and that is likely the reason why Mahayana traditions kept this view of the arhat alive (at the same time, arhats in East Asia are also popular spirit/deity/bodhisattva-like beings).It is asserted that they cling to characteristics, not that they cling to the aggregates, etc., per se.
Don't confuse the cult of the 16 arhats, who are all bodhisattva emanations, with the śrāvaka arhat that is the object of Mahāyāna criticism.
Personally, I think you are reading with a Mahāyāna bias, and interpolating your own view on the view of śrāvakas. Since there is no evidence that śrāvakas negate characteristics through a vipaśyāna analysis that allows them to see through characteristics, there is also no evidence that they are free from clinging to characteristics. One assumes that ancient Mahāyānis had ample contact and debate with those who were reputed to be śrāvaka arhats.Although looking at the sixteen insight stages can give the impression that the criticism is valid, it's also possible to say that as both body and mind are let go of, there can be no hindrances left, nor even clinging to characteristics, since even those are just thoughts.
Re: The attainment of the Arhats
I'm afraid there is a not so small possibility of that. I got that impression yesterday right when I looked up Mahasi's Manual of Insight.Malcolm wrote:Personally, I think you are reading with a Mahāyāna bias, and interpolating your own view on the view of śrāvakas.
The four noble truths are what is taught to be the definitive insight one needs to gain on the shravaka path. And there what one needs to recognise is how there is suffering, how suffering arises, how it ceases, and how one can bring it to cessation. In short, the goal is not to have or maintain any ideas of what characterises phenomena, but to let go of them, to end one's clinging. So, what I don't see the evidence of is how there can remain anything one keeps being hooked on anything.Since there is no evidence that śrāvakas negate characteristics through a vipaśyāna analysis that allows them to see through characteristics, there is also no evidence that they are free from clinging to characteristics.
I'm not so sure. It rather seems to me that what they tend to refute are their own interpretations of abhidharma materials. Have you perhaps encountered this small book: Maha Boowa: The Path to Arahantship?One assumes that ancient Mahāyānis had ample contact and debate with those who were reputed to be śrāvaka arhats.
1 Myriad dharmas are only mind.
Mind is unobtainable.
What is there to seek?
2 If the Buddha-Nature is seen,
there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.
3 Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —
this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.
4 With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,
the six paramitas and myriad means
are complete within that essence.
1 Huangbo, T2012Ap381c1 2 Nirvana Sutra, T374p521b3; tr. Yamamoto 3 Mazu, X1321p3b23; tr. J. Jia 4 Yongjia, T2014p395c14; tr. from "The Sword of Wisdom"
Mind is unobtainable.
What is there to seek?
2 If the Buddha-Nature is seen,
there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.
3 Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —
this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.
4 With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,
the six paramitas and myriad means
are complete within that essence.
1 Huangbo, T2012Ap381c1 2 Nirvana Sutra, T374p521b3; tr. Yamamoto 3 Mazu, X1321p3b23; tr. J. Jia 4 Yongjia, T2014p395c14; tr. from "The Sword of Wisdom"
Re: The attainment of the Arhats
The point is that arhats suffer from obscurations, and that their wisdom is insufficient to perceive the real nature of phenomena, even though they have a partial realization through which they can claim to be liberated (and liberation in Buddhadharma simply means being free of the afflictions that cause rebirth in samsara).Astus wrote:The four noble truths are what is taught to be the definitive insight one needs to gain on the shravaka path. And there what one needs to recognise is how there is suffering, how suffering arises, how it ceases, and how one can bring it to cessation. In short, the goal is not to have or maintain any ideas of what characterises phenomena, but to let go of them, to end one's clinging. So, what I don't see the evidence of is how there can remain anything one keeps being hooked on anything.Since there is no evidence that śrāvakas negate characteristics through a vipaśyāna analysis that allows them to see through characteristics, there is also no evidence that they are free from clinging to characteristics.
It is a certainty, considering that they rubbed shoulders.I'm not so sure. It rather seems to me that what they tend to refute are their own interpretations of abhidharma materials.One assumes that ancient Mahāyānis had ample contact and debate with those who were reputed to be śrāvaka arhats.
Re: The attainment of the Arhats
This is exactly the kind of thing Mahāyan̄a sūtra are criticizing:Astus wrote:Have you perhaps encountered this small book: Maha Boowa: The Path to Arahantship?
"Since when did the earth element ever die? When they decompose and disintegrate, what do they become? All parts of the body revert to their original properties. The earth and water elements revert to their original properties, as do the wind and fire elements. Nothing is annihilated. Those elements have simply come together to form a lump in which the citta then takes up residence...The citta itself is the real culprit, not the lump of physical elements. The body is not some hostile entity whose constant fluctuations threaten our well-being. It is a separate reality that changes naturally according to its own inherent conditions.
The emptiness he talks about is not Mahāyāna emptiness, the absence of characteristics. The emptiness he talks about is a result of vairaga, dispassion.The four elements—earth, water, wind and fire—they don’t die.
This kind of statement is impossible in Mahāyāna:
Here is a very nice expression of the emptiness of the person:Sankhãras arise and cease with distinct beginnings and endings, like flashes of lightning or fireflies blinking on and off.
- Then, from that neutral, impassive state of the citta, the nucleus of existence—the core of the knower—suddenly separated and fell away. Having finally been reduced to anattã, brightness and dullness and everything else were suddenly torn asunder and destroyed once and for all.
Re: The attainment of the Arhats
That is hard to reconcile with the idea that everything is impermanent, isn't it?Malcolm wrote:[Arhats] have no physical existence in samsara, per se, but they continue in a samadhi of cessation.
'Only practice with no gaining idea' ~ Suzuki Roshi
Re: The attainment of the Arhats
The samadhi of cessation isn't permanent, according to Mahayana POV, so it's all goodWayfarer wrote:That is hard to reconcile with the idea that everything is impermanent, isn't it?Malcolm wrote:[Arhats] have no physical existence in samsara, per se, but they continue in a samadhi of cessation.
Re: The attainment of the Arhats
So Arhats are reborn when it finishes? That can't be right. Or then cease to exist, in which case the original question I asked isn't answered.
'Only practice with no gaining idea' ~ Suzuki Roshi
Re: The attainment of the Arhats
That's my understanding. The reason for rebirth is different than it was before, though: compassion.Wayfarer wrote:So Arhats are reborn when it finishes?
Re: The attainment of the Arhats
I think that is at best a doctrinal innovation. My point is simply that if the Parinirvana of an arhat is something other than non-existence, then there is some element of their identity that is not impermanent. I presume that element is whatever it is that is capable of realising the deathless. But I know from experience that there is supposed to be no such being as it will be interpreted as 'soul'.
'Only practice with no gaining idea' ~ Suzuki Roshi
Re: The attainment of the Arhats
And my question is still the same: how can one be obscured in any way, when no aggregate is grasped at? And aggregates mean all the possible experiences that occur. So there is no physical appearance, no feeling, no thought, no state of consciousness that can delude an arhat. On the other hand, to say that an arhat clings to cessation requires the assumption that he sees the aggregates as enemies, is bound by a specific peaceful state free from appearances, and still has extreme views of existence and annihilation. I see only the latter as the object of criticism, while at the same time that type of flawed arhat is hardly acceptable even for the shravakas, although this is a point where interpretations among them may be different. For instance:Malcolm wrote:The point is that arhats suffer from obscurations, and that their wisdom is insufficient to perceive the real nature of phenomena, even though they have a partial realization through which they can claim to be liberated (and liberation in Buddhadharma simply means being free of the afflictions that cause rebirth in samsara).
"During fruition absorption, the mind is fully absorbed in its object, nibbāna, the cessation of all conditioned phenomena. It does not perceive anything else. Nibbāna is completely different from the conditioned mental and physical phenomena and conceptual objects that belong to this world or any other. So you cannot perceive or remember this world (i.e., your own body) or any other during fruition absorption, and you are free from all thoughts. Even if there are obvious objects around to see, hear, smell, touch, and so on, you will not be aware of any of them."
(Mahasi Sayadaw: Manual of Insight, p 295)
That description of nirvana sounds very much like the latter type of arhat. On the other hand, looking at Maha Boowa's description:
"When avijjã is extinguished, conditioned phenomena—which give rise to dukkha—are also extinguished. They have disappeared from the knowing nature of the citta. Conditioned phenomena, such as thoughts, which are an integral part of the khandhas, continue to function in their own sphere but they no longer cause dukkha. Uncorrupted by kilesas, they simply give form and direction to mental activity. Consciousness arises in the mind, purely and simply without producing suffering."
(The Path to Arahantship, p 62)
There it's only craving, only clinging that is gone, since it's not the phenomena that constitute the problem, but only attachment. And that I think is a crucial difference. Even though there are suttas where it's stated simple that one has to abandon phenomena (e.g. Pahanaya Sutta), but it's clarified that - just the the four noble truths state - it is craving and clinging that need to end (e.g. Kotthita Sutta). In this case, it's the former type of arhat that can have no delusion regarding anything.
No doubt that the shravaka teachings are significantly more limited. But that is not the problem here.there is nothing there which is not anticipated by Mahāyāna critiques of the limitations of the śrāvaka teachings
1 Myriad dharmas are only mind.
Mind is unobtainable.
What is there to seek?
2 If the Buddha-Nature is seen,
there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.
3 Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —
this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.
4 With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,
the six paramitas and myriad means
are complete within that essence.
1 Huangbo, T2012Ap381c1 2 Nirvana Sutra, T374p521b3; tr. Yamamoto 3 Mazu, X1321p3b23; tr. J. Jia 4 Yongjia, T2014p395c14; tr. from "The Sword of Wisdom"
Mind is unobtainable.
What is there to seek?
2 If the Buddha-Nature is seen,
there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.
3 Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —
this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.
4 With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,
the six paramitas and myriad means
are complete within that essence.
1 Huangbo, T2012Ap381c1 2 Nirvana Sutra, T374p521b3; tr. Yamamoto 3 Mazu, X1321p3b23; tr. J. Jia 4 Yongjia, T2014p395c14; tr. from "The Sword of Wisdom"
Re: The attainment of the Arhats
I don't think so. Why do you?Wayfarer wrote:That is hard to reconcile with the idea that everything is impermanent, isn't it?Malcolm wrote:[Arhats] have no physical existence in samsara, per se, but they continue in a samadhi of cessation.