What motivates Arahant?

[santa100]

Alex123 wrote:
But they do not cling to their body, so why eat? They don't cling to existence, and they don't cling to helping (to whatever extent that is possible) others either. Without clinging to the body (in order to...), one would die and be unable to help others.

As I understand it, certain perception of self is required to respond to stimuli such as hunger, heat, cold, danger, etc. One protects oneself and one responds accordingly because one knows that "I am in danger or discomfort therefor I, not someone else, need to do something". IMHO

But why can't arahants eat after their enlightenment? Starving oneself to death on purpose is the same as killing a sentient being, thus breaking the 1st Precept, something an arahant wouldn't do..

[daverupa]

Motivation isn't the same as clinging or craving.

There can be sankhara, in other words, which are wholly unrelated to raga, dosa, moha, and these sankhara can be found amongst the five aggregates of an arahant, even though the aggregates are no longer subject to clinging. Compassion is a motive of this sort, for example.

Arahants still experience five aggregates, not just four...

[Alex123]

But why can't arahants eat after their enlightenment?

Arahant has no perception of "I, me, mine" so how can he know that "I am hungry and I need to eat or I will die".

This is what I wonder.

[Coyote]

Just because he/she does not identify with the aggregates does not mean he/she understands no distinction between one being and another. He/she knows "this is hunger" and eats because it is appropriate/because she will die.

[Alex123]

Just because he/she does not identify with the aggregates does not mean he/she understands no distinction between one being and another. .

But doesn't one need to identify with one's own aggregates to feed them, and not someone else's?

[Modus.Ponens]

Do you need to identify with a fellow hungry man's agregates in order to feed him?

[Alex123]

Do you need to identify with a fellow hungry man's agregates in order to feed him?

I need to know that I am one person and he is another person. He is hungry not me, so I feed him and not me.

If I am hungry, then I need to eat, not him. I need to distinguish him from me. So one needs to perceive identity and difference.

[Gena1480]

The Arahant abandon greed,delusion,anger
so the actions come from non-greed,non-delusion,non-anger.
he is untraceable
yet if you follow the path he took.
you will arrive at same destination.

[Bhikkhu Pesala]

If I am hungry, then I need to eat, not him. I need to distinguish him from me. So one needs to perceive identity and difference.

Alex, what you need to do is find out what motivates you, not what motivates Arahants.

[Buckwheat]

...they do not cling to their body, so why eat?

Why not eat? To not seek food is also a choice.

[Buckwheat]

But why can't arahants eat after their enlightenment?

Arahant has no perception of "I, me, mine" so how can he know that "I am hungry and I need to eat or I will die".

This is what I wonder.

Enlightenment is wisdom, not ignorance. Where does it say that an arahant is unable to perceive "I am hungry"? That seems like it would be ignorance, not wisdom.

In "the Not-Self Strategy", Ven. Thanissaro points out that "selfing" is an activity that we all do with ignorance. An arahant can still "self" but he does it with wisdom and compassion, seeing that there is actually no real and substantial self.

[Cittasanto]

If there is no perception of self, then there is no perception of other self to feel compassion for.

there maybe a perception of beings, rather than selves. there is a difference.

Can you please explain the difference between "perception of beings" and "selves" ?

The self is no more than a combination of parts, kamma, mind & body... but although there is no-thing that can be called a self or should be held as a self doesn't mean that the combination of parts is absent. it only means that there is a combination of parts, not, as assumed, that there is a self.

That is only my understanding anyway.

[Alex123]

...they do not cling to their body, so why eat?

Why not eat? To not seek food is also a choice.

Not doing something doesn't have to be actively doing the opposite.

[Alex123]

Where does it say that an arahant is unable to perceive "I am hungry"?

Because Arahant doesn't have "I, me, mine".

An arahant can still "self" but he does it with wisdom and compassion, seeing that there is actually no real and substantial self.

Doesn't this contradict anatta? Can self be unreal and non-substantial (if there is no self, then it cannot have any properties)?

[Ben]

If I am hungry, then I need to eat, not him. I need to distinguish him from me. So one needs to perceive identity and difference.

Alex, what you need to do is find out what motivates you, not what motivates Arahants.

Well said, Bhante!