Craving for Non-Existence is not really a bad thing…

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
asahi
Posts: 2732
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2020 4:23 pm

Re: Craving for Non-Existence is not really a bad thing…

Post by asahi »

I would think the applicable or be-fitting phrase for eradicating suffering should be 《aspiring for non existence》 if we take existence itself equivalent to suffering .
No bashing No gossiping
un8-
Posts: 747
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2021 6:49 am

Re: Craving for Non-Existence is not really a bad thing…

Post by un8- »

sakka wrote: Thu Jul 29, 2021 9:53 pm

Craving for non-existence = Arupaloka! The 4 Arupa Jhanas… :)

Hello, do you have a sutta source that backs this claim?

One argument I heard is that vibhavataṇhā doesn't mean craving non-existence, as non-existence is abhava not vibhava. Apparently vibhavataṇhā means craving what is absent, i.e what you're not experiencing here and now.

bhavataṇhā means craving what is present here and now, so for example craving a sandwhich you see in the window.

kamatanha apparently means craving intensity, so not only do you want the sandwhich (bhavataṇhā) in the distance, but also the intense sensory stimulation (kamatanha) associated with it. If you craved the sandwhich in particular because you were hungry, but didn't care for the taste, then that wouldn't be kamatanha.

If you didn't crave for the sandwhich, nor the tastes, here and now, but you have the potential to crave the sandwhich (latent tendencies), then that is vibhavataṇhā. So it seems like vibhavataṇhā is associated with potentials, which is what asavas and anusayas, are, potentials. I.e. a child may not desire sex, but he has the anusaya (potential seed) that will one day lead to a desire for sex, which a non-returner will never have becuase they have uprooted the potential for kamatanha.

So it seems like vibhavataṇhā encapsulates bhavataṇhā, which encapsulates kamataṇhā
There is only one battle that could be won, and that is the battle against the 3 poisons. Any other battle is a guaranteed loss because you're going to die either way.
sakka
Posts: 80
Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2021 11:58 am

Re: Craving for Non-Existence is not really a bad thing…

Post by sakka »

un8- wrote: Fri Jul 30, 2021 9:12 pm
sakka wrote: Thu Jul 29, 2021 9:53 pm

Craving for non-existence = Arupaloka! The 4 Arupa Jhanas… :)

Hello, do you have a sutta source that backs this claim?
Hi! :) Yes DN 1 already mentioned in the thread where The Buddha speaks of annihilationists.
The annihilationists' views corresponds to Arupaloka, the 4 arupa jhanas. :anjali:
“There are, monks, some contemplatives & brahmans who are annihilationists,23 who proclaim the annihilation, destruction, & non-becoming of an existing being [sant satta]24 on seven grounds. And with reference to what, coming from what, are these honorable contemplatives & brahmans annihilationists who proclaim the annihilation, destruction, & non-becoming of an existing being on seven grounds?
51. “There is the case where a certain contemplative or brahman is of this opinion, this view: ’When the self that is possessed of form, made of the four great elements,25 engendered by mother & father, is—with the breakup of the body—annihilated, destroyed, & does not exist after death, it’s to this extent that the self is completely exterminated.’ This is how some proclaim the annihilation, destruction, & non-becoming of an existing being.
52. “Another says to him, ‘There is, my good man, that self of which you speak. I don’t say that there’s not. But it’s not to that extent that the self is completely exterminated. There is another self—divine, possessed of form, on the sensual level, feeding on material food. You don’t know or see that, but I know it, I see it. When this self—with the breakup of the body—is annihilated, destroyed, & does not exist after death, it’s to this extent that the self is completely exterminated.’ This is how some proclaim the annihilation, destruction, & non-becoming of an existing being.
53. “Another says to him, ‘There is, my good man, that self of which you speak. I don’t say that there’s not. But it’s not to that extent that the self is completely exterminated. There is another self—divine, possessed of form,26 mind-made, complete in all its limbs, not destitute of any faculties. You don’t know or see that, but I know it, I see it. When this self—with the breakup of the body—is annihilated, destroyed, & does not exist after death, it’s to this extent that the self is completely exterminated.’ This is how some proclaim the annihilation, destruction, & non-becoming of an existing being.
54. “Another says to him, ‘There is, my good man, that self of which you speak. I don’t say that there’s not. But it’s not to that extent that the self is completely exterminated. There is another self where—with the complete transcending of perceptions of form, with the disappearance of perceptions of resistance, and not heeding perceptions of diversity, (perceiving,) ‘Infinite space’—one enters & remains in the dimension of the infinitude of space.27 You don’t know or see that, but I know it, I see it. When this self—with the breakup of the body—is annihilated, destroyed, & does not exist after death, it’s to this extent that the self is completely exterminated.’
55. “Another says to him, ‘There is, my good man, that self of which you speak. I don’t say that there’s not. But it’s not to that extent that the self is completely exterminated. There is another self where—with the complete transcending of the dimension of the infinitude of space, (perceiving,) ‘Infinite consciousness’—one enters & remains in the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness. You don’t know or see that, but I know it, I see it. When this self—with the breakup of the body—is annihilated, destroyed, & does not exist after death, it’s to this extent that the self is completely exterminated.’ This is how some proclaim the annihilation, destruction, & non-becoming of an existing being.
56. “Another says to him, ‘There is, my good man, that self of which you speak. I don’t say that there’s not. But it’s not to that extent that the self is completely exterminated. There is another self where—with the complete transcending of the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, (perceiving,) ‘There is nothing’—one enters & remains in the dimension of nothingness.28 You don’t know or see that, but I know it, I see it. When this self—with the breakup of the body—is annihilated, destroyed, & does not exist after death, it’s to this extent that the self is completely exterminated.’ This is how some proclaim the annihilation, destruction, & non-becoming of an existing being.
57. “Another says to him, ‘There is, my good man, that self of which you speak. I don’t say that there’s not. But it’s not to that extent that the self is completely exterminated. There is another self where—with the complete transcending of the dimension of nothingness—one enters & remains in the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception. You don’t know or see that, but I know it, I see it. When this self—with the breakup of the body—is annihilated, destroyed, & does not exist after death, it’s to this extent that the self is completely exterminated.’ This is how some proclaim the annihilation, destruction, & non-becoming of an existing being.
“These, monks, are the contemplatives & brahmans who are annihilationists, who proclaim the annihilation, destruction, & non-becoming of an existing being on seven grounds. And whatever contemplatives & brahmans who are annihilationists who proclaim the annihilation, destruction, & non-becoming of an existing being, they all do so on one or another of these seven grounds. There is nothing outside of this.
“With regard to this, the Tathāgata discerns that ‘These standpoints, thus seized, thus grasped at, lead to such & such a destination, to such & such a state in the world beyond.’ That the Tathāgata discerns. And he discerns what is higher than that. And yet, discerning that, he does not grasp at it. And as he is not grasping at it, unbinding [nibbuti] is experienced right within. Knowing, as they have come to be, the origination, ending, allure, & drawbacks of feelings, along with the escape from feelings, the Tathāgata, monks—through lack of clinging/sustenance—is released.
“These, monks, are the dhammas—deep, hard to see, hard to realize, tranquil, refined, beyond the scope of conjecture, subtle, to-be-experienced by the wise—that the Tathāgata proclaims, having directly known & realized them for himself, and that those who, rightly speaking in praise of the Tathāgata in line with what is factual, would speak.
un8-
Posts: 747
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2021 6:49 am

Re: Craving for Non-Existence is not really a bad thing…

Post by un8- »

sakka wrote: Fri Jul 30, 2021 10:38 pm
un8- wrote: Fri Jul 30, 2021 9:12 pm
sakka wrote: Thu Jul 29, 2021 9:53 pm

Craving for non-existence = Arupaloka! The 4 Arupa Jhanas… :)

Hello, do you have a sutta source that backs this claim?
Hi! :) Yes DN 1 already mentioned in the thread where The Buddha speaks of annihilationists.
The annihilationists' views corresponds to Arupaloka, the 4 arupa jhanas. :anjali:
But where does it say vibhavataṇhā in that Sutta?
There is only one battle that could be won, and that is the battle against the 3 poisons. Any other battle is a guaranteed loss because you're going to die either way.
un8-
Posts: 747
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2021 6:49 am

Re: Craving for Non-Existence is not really a bad thing…

Post by un8- »

In this sutta it says the disappearance (translation for vibhava) of the aggregates can lead to cutting off the 5 fetters
It’s because of the disappearance of form, feeling, perception, choices, and consciousness that a mendicant who makes such a resolution—

So rūpassa vibhavā, vedanāya vibhavā, saññāya vibhavā, saṅkhārānaṁ vibhavā, viññāṇassa vibhavā, evaṁ kho, bhikkhu,

‘It might not be, and it might not be mine. It will not be, and it will not be mine’—‘no cassaṁ, no ca me siyā, nābhavissa, na me bhavissatī’ti—

can cut off the five lower fetters.”
evaṁ adhimuccamāno bhikkhu chindeyya orambhāgiyāni saṁyojanānī”ti.
The four aggregates are still present in the arupa jhanas, so I don't see what vibhava has to do with the arupa jhanas.

It seems more like to me, with the disappearance (vibhava) of an aggregate, one grows dispassionate with impermanent, conditioned things (any aggregate, as they're all subject to disappearing), that they no longer crave absent things. Thus, they no longer seek things that are not present (vibhavatanha), nor things that are present (bhavataṇhā), nor intense sensual experiences within present things (kamataṇhā)
There is only one battle that could be won, and that is the battle against the 3 poisons. Any other battle is a guaranteed loss because you're going to die either way.
form
Posts: 3471
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2016 3:23 am

Re: Craving for Non-Existence is not really a bad thing…

Post by form »

The meaning of craving for non-existence has many interpretations. The explanation found directly from the sutta I think do not seem to be complete.
Post Reply