Arahants Tears

[clw_uk]

This is something that was raised in a different thread that I thought would be quite interesting to discuss.

Can/Would an Arahant Cry?

[Tex]

I'm sure an arahant could cry.

But I can't imagine than an arahant would cry. I think the full realization of upekkha would prevent one from being moved to tears by pain, sadness, joy, etc.

But I could be wrong.

[Jason]

clw_uk,

This is something that was raised in a different thread that I thought would be quite interesting to discuss.

Can/Would an Arahant Cry?

See chapter 3 (How Can an Arahant Shed Tears?, pg 86-94) of Ajahn Maha Boowa's Arahattamagga.

Jason

[Heavenstorm]

This is something that was raised in a different thread that I thought would be quite interesting to discuss.

Can/Would an Arahant Cry?

Yes, Arahant are still humans after all and as a result of their compassion arising from their enlightened state.

[Cittasanto]

I have been thinking on this, and unless they were cutting onions I doubt they would cry, at least over emotional worldly things, as it says in the Satipatthana sutta

For the overcoming of sorrow & lamentation, for the disappearance of pain & distress

ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. He remains focused on feelings... mind... mental qualities in & of themselves — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world

[adeh]

"And those monks who had not yet overcome their passions wept, tore their hair, raising their arms, throwing themselves down and twisting and turning, crying: 'All too soon the Blessed Lord has passed away, all too soon the Well-Farer has passed away, all too soon the Eye of the World has disappeared!' But those monks who were free from craving endured mindfully and clearly aware, saying: 'All compounded things are impermanent-what is the use of this?'
Then the Venerable Anuruddha said: 'Friends, enough of your weeping and wailing! Has not the Lord already told you that all things that are pleasant and delightful are changeable, subject to separation and to becoming another? So why all this, friends? Whatever is born, become, compounded is subject to decay, it cannot be that it does not decay.' " Mahaaparinibbaana Sutta 16; 6.10. Digha Nikaaya.

[clw_uk]

Thank you Adeh I think that shows quite nicely how arahants would not cry.

[nathan]

I have to agree, what arahant needs tears who has no cause in the world for tears? Still an arahant may give tears as a gift should it communicate the dhamma. No? Who among us can judge an arahant? I know what all things should mean to an arahant but I do not know the range of their acts. Whatever they are we should be somehow blessed by it. So I see that something is quite certain here about having let go, but letting go as much to not giving tears as to giving tears, just not for oneself. From an arahants peace, looking at us and the world, would not tears be a gift of clear seeing?

Just turning this around for a closer inspection, what do you think? Certainly upon the death of the Buddha, of all men, how can there be cause for tears? This is his triumph and our aspiration. But in looking at those lost in being and becoming there is much to inspire tears.

[Jechbi]

Interesting topic. I think it's safe to assume an arahant would not cry for any of the ordinary reasons that you or I might cry. So would an arahant laugh?

Bottom line is that we can speculate all we want, but probably there's something important that we won't understand until we ourselves are fully liberated. At that point, what source could there be for tears? (Besides ducts, I mean. )

Metta

[nathan]

It is an interesting topic. Communicating in person is not just about words but real direct two way understandings. We relate to tears, laughter and feelings as much as we do to thoughts and words when we communicate. And if tears communicated the message of the dhamma to the people in a profound way at one place and time and if later it was noted along with the many other notations in the many histories of accomplished Noble disciples then we need not make more of it than it is. It is like a koan though in a way. For us. Paradoxical. Arresting the mind. Pointing out other kinds of agitation and attachment to views or expansive possibilities for insights, compassion and equanimity to arise.

[clw_uk]

How do you propose tears can help teach the dhamma?

To cry is to act either with aversion of delight which the arahant has abandonded.

With Metta

[bodom]

How do you propose tears can help teach the dhamma?

To cry is to act either with aversion of delight which the arahant has abandonded.

With Metta

Just as a solid rock is not shaken by the storm, even so the wise are not affected
by praise or blame. (Dhp. 81)

Everywhere, indeed, good persons "let go."
The good ones do not occasion talk, hankering for pleasure.
Touched now by ease and now by misery,
The wise manifest no high and low. (Dhp. 83)

He who, having cast off likes and dislikes, has become tranquil, is rid of the substrata of existence
and like a hero has conquered all the worlds — him do I call a holy man. (Dhp. 418)

[nathan]

How do you propose tears can help teach the dhamma?

To cry is to act either with aversion of delight which the arahant has abandonded.

With Metta

How can you be so certain what it is an act of? Why should an arahant not have all the capacities of a full human being? Why they act at all is imponderable to all but arahants. So I do not judge any who are seen to be so in such a way that I have to presume their motives. How can I really discern this unless I am an arahant? This is not getting drunk and smashing a car. It is not an offense against anyone. Are they really free if they are not freer than we are? Geez. Of all things to criticize. Not because they are effected but because they can affect us. Tears are something we can understand.

[clw_uk]

Its not an offence against anyone but as an arahant sees clearly, there would be no need for one to cry through pain or pleasure.

Arahants are still human in a physical sense but not in the mind, humans experience pleasure and pain mentally as well as physically, arahants do not feel mental dukkha.

[nathan]

Its not about an arahants need to feel happy or sad it is about what gets his message accross. It is about what the hearer will feel. How we relate to expressions about profound changes in thinking and feeling. Vedana, feeling is central to the path. What we feel, in relation to ourselves, to dhamma, to everything. You can communicate all kinds of feeling in all kinds of ways. Man, I can't believe it can be so difficult for anyone to get what I am saying. Are you saying that the great teachers and accomplished in the Noble Sangha who I have known aren't allowed to be expressive at all? Not even for my benefit can they share a smile or a laugh? You can have them then, your robot arahants and be like them if you wish. I will look for free men, they were men first like me and they will appear to me as men like me if at all.

[clw_uk]

Man, I can't believe it can be so difficult for anyone to get what I am saying.

I understand what your saying I just see arahants differently to you friend

Are you saying that the great teachers and accomplished in the Noble Sangha who I have known aren't allowed to be expressive at all? Not even for my benefit can they share a smile or a laugh? You can have them then, your robot arahants and be like them if you wish. I will look for free men, they were men first like me and they will appear to me as men like me if at all.

I didnt say that they werent allowed to be expressive, but I do not hold that they would engage in crying in relation to desire and aversion.

Metta

[nathan]

Man, I can't believe it can be so difficult for anyone to get what I am saying.

I understand what your saying I just see arahants differently to you friend

I didnt say that they werent allowed to be expressive, but I do not hold that they would engage in crying in relation to desire and aversion.

Metta

I don't see why you need to at all if you get what I say and you allow for free human expression with the purest intentions within the limited means we have for communicating as human beings. I think that will go further to recognizing them. But in any case, in your eyes, when you do see them let us know so I can come see them also. I think we all need to see them.

[bodom]

Are you saying that the great teachers and accomplished in the Noble Sangha who I have known aren't allowed to be expressive at all? Not even for my benefit can they share a smile or a laugh?

I read a sutta in the Samyutta Nikaya last night in which the Buddha smiled at a devata.

1. 4. 5.

(35) Ujjhànasa��ino Ý Gods Taking Offence

1. I heard thus. Once the Blessed One lived in Sàvatthi, in Jeta's grove in the monastery offered by Anàthapiõóika.

2. When the night was waning a large number of deities with the perception of taking offence, approached the Blessed One, illuminating the whole of Jeta's grove stood in mid air.

3. One of those deities said this stanza in the presence of the Blessed One:

Appeasement of the self, is one thing, it's declared in another way,
It is deceit and fraud, like partaking a stolen meal.
Whatever you do, say that, do not say what you do not do
The wise know those, who say what they do not do.

Just by saying, or by listening only, it is not possible,
To step out, other than by following this difficult method
The wise, by concentrating find release from the bonds of death.
Merely by knowing the ways of the world, it is not possible,
The wise ones knowing it cross the diffused ness of the world.

4. Then those deities descended to earth, put their tops down at the feet of the Blessed One and said: ßVenerable sir, pardon us, we have fallen to an offence owing to our demerit and ignorance. Without thinking we have hurt the Blessed One. May the Blessed One accept our pardon for our future restrain.

5. The Blessed One smiled.

http://metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/ ... ggo-e.html

[nathan]

There is no question of an arahant giving rise to grief about the aggregates or the world. Abandoning all that of is an arahant and we don't need the crying at the Buddha's funeral to define this. If there is a question then it is why would an arahant produce a tear? Never? I don't think that is at all reasonable.

Suppose an arahant, mindful, fully released and dwelling in equanimity has a gnat fly un-mindfully into his eye. And the arahant, noting the unpleasant sensation produces and releases a tear which frees the ignorant and heedless gnat caught in that eye. Should this not be possible? Should the arahant's body do otherwise for some reason?

[Heavenstorm]

There are also tears of joy, tears of amazement............ Why don't you guys read the article pinned earlier by Elohim? It was from a famed Thai Arahant criticizing those ignorant people who think that Arahants never wept and out of ignorance, spreading lies and slandering the poor monk for doing so earlier in one of His talks.