Arahants Tears

[Jechbi]

I read the article (some of it any way). It seems a little weird, especially the part where he invites people to crawl out of their toilet holes. Maybe it's just a teaching-style thing.

I think it's worth noting that there are some things an arahant can't do, such as acting out of ill will toward another. The reason is that getting to the state of arahantship involves extinguishing certain elements of personality that are common to every ordinary (worlding) human being on the planet. Once those bits and pieces are gone, they are truly cut off and gone. That's my understanding of the teaching, any way. So an arahant can't act out of ignorance, or out of ill will, or out of greed, for example. The arahant no longer has the capacity for these things.

What does that have to do with crying? Maybe not a whole lot. Sure, the tear ducts will still function, and if a fly lands in an arahant's eye, there's no reason to think that a normal bodily function would not occur (at least I don't think there's any reason). But I don't think that's what we're talking about.

This discussion seems to have to do with how we perceive ourselves when we cry. I don't think it matters what an arahant would or would not do. But I think it's worth considering how we react to ourselves when we cry, and how we react to others when they cry. Does that reaction stem from ignorance, or from wisdom?

[mountain]

Jechbi,
I agree that the question relates to our attitudes towards tears and crying. I feel honored when others share their tears. For myself tears are a wonderful solvent that dissolve knots in the heart. I am not sure if an arahant would cry or not.

[clw_uk]

There are also tears of joy, tears of amazement

Yes but the arahant would not engage in these, joy would be to delight which would kick dependent origination back into action and back into samsara and dukkha.

Delight, craving, clinging, becoming, birth, ageing and death, dukkha.

If an arahant cries because a fly gets into his eye well yes this would happen because its a natural bodily reaction.

[jcsuperstar]

from what i remember ananada who was not an arahant cried when the buddha died and mahakasyapa who was an arahant scolded him for this, the arhants that studied directly under the buddha seem to think there is something wrong with crying. i dont feel like looking it up but i bet the best way to find out about this is to look at angulimala and mogglana both were treated pretty badly and killed, see if they are mentioned as crying and there you should find your answer if an arahant can cry

[Heavenstorm]

There are also tears of joy, tears of amazement

Yes but the arahant would not engage in these, joy would be to delight which would kick dependent origination back into action and back into samsara and dukkha.

You should read the article in the previous post, the Arahant talked about it.

I read the article (some of it any way). It seems a little weird, especially the part where he invites people to crawl out of their toilet holes. Maybe it's just a teaching-style thing.

Arya Saints see samara as cesspool. Its not unusual.

[clw_uk]

You should read the article in the previous post, the Arahant talked about it.

I dont know if he is an Arahant

[bodom]

You should read the article in the previous post, the Arahant talked about it.

I dont know if he is an Arahant

Venerable Ajahn Maha Bua (born August 12, 1914), (commonly known in Thai as หลวงตามหาบัว, Luang Ta Maha Bua;​ alternate spelling Ajahn Maha Boowa) is the common name for Pra Dharma Visuthimongkol (Thai: พระธรรมวิสุทธิมงคล​), a revered Buddhist monk. "Ajahn" (or "Acharn"), meaning "teacher," is the common honorific for Thai monks, similar to "Bhikkhu" or "Rishi" in other Buddhist traditions. Ajahn Maha Bua is one of the best known Thai Buddhist monks of the late Twentieth and early Twenty-first centuries. He is widely regarded as an Arahat — a living Buddhist saint. He was a disciple of the esteemed forest master Ajahn Mun Bhuridatta, and is now himself considered a master in the Thai Forest Tradition.[1]

http://www.buddhanet.net/masters/mahaboowa.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luang_Ta_Maha_Bua

[clw_uk]

I know he is thought of as one but that doesnt mean I should believe it just because others do, i have never even met him.

[bodom]

I know he is thought of as one but that doesnt mean I should believe it just because others do, i have never even met him.

Have you ever met the Buddha?

[clw_uk]

Yes I have, through his dhamma.

[bodom]

Yes I have, through his dhamma.

Why can you not then meet Ajahn Maha Boowa through his Dhamma?

[clw_uk]

The dhamma of his that I have come accross I dont agree with (the part about arahants crying), thats not to say I have read all of his teachings so my opinion can change.

[bodom]

The dhamma of his that I have come accross I dont agree with (the part about arahants crying), thats not to say I have read all of his teachings so my opinion can change.

On one occasion the Blessed One was dwelling at Kosambi in a grove of trees. Then the Blessed One took up a few leaves in his hand and addressed the bhikkhus thus: "What do you think, bhikkhus, which is more numerous: these few leaves that I have taken up in my hand or those in this grove of trees?"

"Venerable sir, the leaves that the Blessed One has taken up in his hand are few, but those in the grove of trees are numerous."

"So too, bhikkhus, the things I have directly known but have not taught you are more numerous, while the things I have taught you are few. And why, bhikkhus have I not taught those many things? Because they are unbeneficial, irrelevant to the fundamentals of the holy life... and do not lead to peace......

Samyutta Nikaya V437-438

Maybe the Buddha left this subject out of his teachings as it is unbeneficial and irrelevant to to the holy life?

[clw_uk]

Maybe so

[bodom]

I am also of the view that an Arahant would not shed tears, BUT since the Buddha did not explicitly say so i will not discount it.

The Buddha:] "There are five things that can turn out in two ways in the here-&-now. Which five? Conviction, liking, unbroken tradition, reasoning by analogy, & an agreement through pondering views. These are the five things that can turn out in two ways in the here-&-now. Now some things are firmly held in conviction and yet vain, empty, & false. Some things are not firmly held in conviction, and yet they are genuine, factual, & unmistaken. Some things are well-liked... truly an unbroken tradition... well-reasoned... Some things are well-pondered and yet vain, empty, & false. Some things are not well-pondered, and yet they are genuine, factual, & unmistaken. In these cases it isn't proper for a knowledgeable person who safeguards the truth to come to a definite conclusion, 'Only this is true; anything else is worthless."

[Kapadika Bharadvaja:] "But to what extent, Master Gotama, is there the safeguarding of the truth? To what extent does one safeguard the truth? We ask Master Gotama about the safeguarding of the truth."

[The Buddha:] "If a person has conviction, his statement, 'This is my conviction,' safeguards the truth. But he doesn't yet come to the definite conclusion that 'Only this is true; anything else is worthless.' To this extent, Bharadvaja, there is the safeguarding of the truth. To this extent one safeguards the truth. I describe this as the safeguarding of the truth. But it is not yet an awakening to the truth."

— MN 95

[clw_uk]

The buddha has stated Arahants cant cry, at least in relation to delight or sadness, because the arahant has abandoned these.

[bodom]

The buddha has stated Arahants cant cry, at least in relation to delight or sadness, because the arahant has abandoned these.

Could you please show credible evidence from the pali canon or commentaries? You are posting mere hearsay. As ive stated i am of the same opinion but you cannot just say the Buddha said such and such without reference to the canon. Please show me where the Buddha has stated that there are no physical tears from an arahant.

[clw_uk]

He seeing a form with the eye does not greed for a pleasant form, nor become averse to a disagreeable form. Abides with mindfulness of the body established and with a limitless mind, knowing the release of mind and the release through wisdom as it really is, where thoughts of demerit cease completely.Dispelling agreeing and disagreeing feels whatever feeling, pleasant, unpleasant, or neither unpleasant nor pleasant. Neither delighted nor pleased with those feelings does not appropriate them. To him neither delighted, nor pleased and not appropriating those feelings the interest for them ceases.

He does not engage in aversion (sadness) or delight(joy)

He cannot cry because of sadness or joy.

[bodom]

He seeing a form with the eye does not greed for a pleasant form, nor become averse to a disagreeable form. Abides with mindfulness of the body established and with a limitless mind, knowing the release of mind and the release through wisdom as it really is, where thoughts of demerit cease completely.Dispelling agreeing and disagreeing feels whatever feeling, pleasant, unpleasant, or neither unpleasant nor pleasant. Neither delighted nor pleased with those feelings does not appropriate them. To him neither delighted, nor pleased and not appropriating those feelings the interest for them ceases.

He does not engage in aversion (sadness) or delight(joy)

He cannot cry because of sadness or joy.

That says nothing of physical tears.

[clw_uk]

I dont deny he cant cry if for example a fly hits him smack in the eye