kirk5a wrote: . . .
The texts you quote do not contradict anything I have said. If anything, they support my position, but the texts you quote certainly do not support your seeming contention that there is a "the Deathless" that exists even if there were no arahants or other ariya. Since you refuse, despite my repeatedly asking you, to explain your actual position, it is unclear what you are contending. You might want to clarify your position here.
Now we come to this:
kirk5a wrote: Otherwise, if it really was the case that "there is no dukkha in what rises and falls " for an arahant, they might as well be reborn then! Keep being reborn and help others, enjoy life, whatever.
Like much of what you have done with what I have said, the problem is, you take it out of context and twist it, which has been pointed out to you. And this particular taking my words out of context is no different. The full sentence, not just the bit you plucked out to twist: A cognition is dukkha because it is not satisfactory to grasp, but there is freedom from grasping, obviously there is no dukkha in what rises and falls.
And, of course, what I said was posted in a msg that immediately followed the msg where I quoted this
And what, monks, is the passing away of the world? Dependent on the eye and forms arise visual consciousness. The concurrence of the three is contact. Conditioned by contact is feeling. Conditioned by feeling is craving. By the utter fading away and cessation of that craving, grasping ceases, by the ceasing of grasping, becoming ceases, by the ceasing of becoming birth ceases, by the ceasing of birth, decay-and-death, grief, lamentation, suffering, despair, cease. Such is the ceasing of this entire man[sic; should be 'mass'] of Ill." -- SN ii 73 CDB i 581
If there is no grasping, I am obviously talking about an arahant, and certainly in this is so in the context of this passage.
Now, this is a very interesting passage. The passage as a whole tells us where and how the drama of awakening happens. It also tells that for an arahant that -- Dependent on the eye and forms arise visual consciousness. The concurrence of the three is contact. Conditioned by contact is feeling
-- continues to function, but the relationship to that which rises and falls has been radically altered. The craving for it has ceased, and with no craving, there is no grasping after it. And because of that there is no becoming -- no compulsion forward because of it -- leading to rebirth. And no rebirth gives us amata
, freedom from death.
In other words, this statement of yours -- Otherwise, if it really was the case that "there is no dukkha in what rises and falls " for an arahant, they might as well be reborn then! Keep being reborn and help others, enjoy life, whatever
-- is not something I said or even remotely implied. For the arahant is freed of craving for what rises and falls, no longer grasping after the khandhas, with no further compulsion to rebirth, the congitions that rise and fall are no longer conditioned – asankhata – for the arahant by greed, hatred, and delusion:"And what have I
[the Buddha] taught? 'This is dukkha... This is the origination of dukkha... This is the cessation of dukkha... This is the path of practice leading to the cessation of dukkha': This is what I have taught. And why have I taught these things? Because they are connected with the goal, relate to the rudiments of the holy life, and lead to disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to calm, to direct knowledge, to self-awakening
[sambodhi], to nibbana. This is why I have taught them.
SN v 437 cf DN i 189. The arahant, in experiencing the rising and falling of seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching and cognizing, is free of dukkha.