Is Arahant a five aggregate?

[vinasp]

Hi Unrul3r,

How would you interpret this passage from SN 22.115

If, through revulsion towards form, through it's fading away and cessation,
one is liberated by nonclinging, one can be called a bhikkhu who has attained Nibbana in this very life.

Regards, Vincent.

[Unrul3r]

Hi Unrul3r,

How would you interpret this passage from SN 22.115

If, through revulsion towards form, through it's fading away and cessation,
one is liberated by nonclinging, one can be called a bhikkhu who has attained Nibbana in this very life.

Regards, Vincent.

Just like that. It doesn't say permanent cessation. Form comes back after an experience of it's cessation. But after the experience, one understands that, since one actually saw it ceasing, it really isn't mine, me or my self. It's no longer and hypothesis\belief\assumption. That's why one is liberated by non-clinging.

[vinasp]

Hi Unrul3r,

How do you interpret this passage from SN 22.79

"And what is it that he neither extinguishes nor kindles, but abides having
extinguished? He neither extinguishes nor kindles form, but abides having
extinguished it."

Regards, Vincent.

[Unrul3r]

Hi Unrul3r,

How do you interpret this passage from SN 22.79?

"And what is it that he neither extinguishes nor kindles, but abides having
extinguished? He neither extinguishes nor kindles form, but abides having extinguished it."

Regards, Vincent.

Just like that.
If you read the context right after that passage, it is stated:

“When, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu is thus liberated in mind, the devas together with Indra, Brahma, and Pajapati pay homage to him from afar:

“‘Homage to you, O thoroughbred man!
Homage to you, O highest among men!
We ourselves do not directly know
Dependent upon what you meditate.’”

This indicates the experience of cessation of all aggregates (nirodhasāmapatti or saññāvedayitanirodha). That is why "He neither extinguishes nor kindles form, but abides having extinguished it.".

-"He neither extinguishes" because they are already extinguished in that state.

-"nor kindles" because, during that state, he can't will himself out of it. And due to that, no aggregate arises or "is kindled" in that state.

-"but abides having extinguished it." just expresses, that he is in that state of cessation. (Just as the above passage demonstrates)

(Note that "will himself out" & "he is in that state" is just a manner of speaking.)

With that said, as I stated before, the aggregates arise again after the experience, unless he's already at the end of his life-span, in which case, they just cease.

[Spiny Norman]

There will not be one that CLEARLY distinguishes the two sets. That would destroy the ordinary man's understanding of the teachings.

I admit to being an ordinary man.

But seriously, if there were indeed 2 sets of aggregates, wouldn't such an important point be described in the suttas?

[Spiny Norman]

"And what is it that he neither extinguishes nor kindles, but abides having
extinguished? He neither extinguishes nor kindles form, but abides having
extinguished it."

I think the passage which immediately follows this one clarifies the meaning - it's craving for form which is extinguished, not form itself.

"Seeing thus, bhikkhus, the instructed noble disciple experiences revulsion towards form, revulsion towards feeling, revulsion towards perception, revulsion towards volitional formations, revulsion towards consciousness. Experiencing revulsion, he becomes dispassionate. Through dispassion his mind is liberated. When it is liberated there comes the knowledge: ‘It’s liberated.’ He understands: ‘Destroyed is birth, the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more for this state of being.’

[vinasp]

Hi Spiny,

Of course the craving for form is eliminated, how could there be any when there is no form?

Craving depends on its "object."

Regards, Vincent.

[vinasp]

Hi Unrul3r,

If you admit the temporary cessation of all aggregates, why do you not also admit the permanent cessation of all aggregates?

Regards, Vincent.

[Unrul3r]

Hi Unrul3r,

If you admit the temporary cessation of all aggregates, why do you not also admit the permanent cessation of all aggregates?

Regards, Vincent.

Read my previous post. I do admit, at the break-up of the body.

With that said, as I stated before, the aggregates arise again after the experience, unless he's already at the end of his life-span, in which case, they just cease.

[vinasp]

Hi everyone,

"Contacts contact dependent upon the substrate - due to what might contacts contact one lacking that substrate?" [PTS The Udana, Masefield, 1997 page 22]

So there is no contact in the case of an Arahant.

It follows that there can be no feeling, perception or volition, of the kind which arise due to contact.

Regards, Vincent.

[Mkoll]

Hi everyone,

"Contacts contact dependent upon the substrate - due to what might contacts contact one lacking that substrate?" [PTS The Udana, Masefield, 1997 page 22]

So there is no contact in the case of an Arahant.

It follows that there can be no feeling, perception or volition, of the kind which arise due to contact.

Regards, Vincent.

So then what are the feelings that an arahant feels conditioned by? Your theory has a rather huge hole if you can't answer that.

[vinasp]

Hi Mkoll,

Quote:"So then what are the feelings that an arahant feels conditioned by? Your theory has a rather huge hole if you can't answer that."

If by feeling you mean vedana then the answer is simple.

There is no contact so there is no vedana, and no craving or clinging.

sukha is quite distinct from sukha vedana.

dukkha is quite distinct from dukkha vedana.

Regards, Vincent.

[Mkoll]

sukha is quite distinct from sukha vedana.

dukkha is quite distinct from dukkha vedana.

Regards, Vincent.

Hi Vincent,

Can you point me to a sutta where this distinction is made clear?

Thanks.

[vinasp]

Hi everyone,

[reposted from page 1 of this thread.]

On feelings: There is, of course, pleasant feeling, but there is also pleasure which is not a feeling.

A difficult point for English speakers? See MN 59.16

Regards, Vincent.

[Mkoll]

Hi everyone,

[reposted from page 1 of this thread.]

On feelings: There is, of course, pleasant feeling, but there is also pleasure which is not a feeling.

A difficult point for English speakers? See MN 59.16

Regards, Vincent.

"And what, Ananda, is another pleasure more extreme & refined than that? There is the case where a monk, with the complete transcending of the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception, enters & remains in the cessation of perception & feeling. This is another pleasure more extreme & refined than that. Now it's possible, Ananda, that some wanderers of other persuasions might say, 'Gotama the contemplative speaks of the cessation of perception & feeling and yet describes it as pleasure. What is this? How can this be?' When they say that, they are to be told, 'It's not the case, friends, that the Blessed One describes only pleasant feeling as included under pleasure. Wherever pleasure is found, in whatever terms, the Blessed One describes it as pleasure.'"

-MN 59.16

Hi Vincent,

I see that is true in regards to pleasure. But that sutta does not go into detail about pain. Can you point to a sutta that distinguishes between dukkha and dukkha vedana?