Do you believe Arahants have dukkha as defined in the first noble truth?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
Post Reply

Do you believe Arahants have dukkha as defined in the first noble truth?

Yes
9
29%
No
22
71%
 
Total votes: 31

un8-
Posts: 747
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2021 6:49 am

Re: Do you believe Arahants have dukkha as defined in the first noble truth?

Post by un8- »

nirodh27 wrote: Wed Nov 17, 2021 1:51 pm Are we talking about the first noble truth of the Dhammacakkappavattanasutta 56.11 right? because this seems the most dry version, the one I was talking about and doesn't contain any reference of pain. Else we should decide witch pericope we want to use and reason about. appiyehi seems to be beloved, cherished, something due to attachment (an = not, piya = dear; amiable; beloved. (masculine) the husband. (neuter) a dear thing from suttacentral's dictionary), the Arahant have nothing of the sort and It would be very surprising to me that an Arahant have something unbeloved, uncherisched, undear in the World, it would be aversion.
Now this is the noble truth of suffering. Idaṁ kho pana, bhikkhave, dukkhaṁ ariyasaccaṁ—Rebirth is suffering; old age is suffering; illness is suffering; death is suffering; association with the disliked is suffering; separation from the liked is suffering; not getting what you wish for is suffering. In brief, the five grasping aggregates are suffering. jātipi dukkhā, jarāpi dukkhā, byādhipi dukkho, maraṇampi dukkhaṁ, appiyehi sampayogo dukkho, piyehi vippayogo dukkho, yampicchaṁ na labhati tampi dukkhaṁ—saṅkhittena pañcupādānakkhandhā dukkhā. Variant: pañcu
Btw the argument that un8 proposed merit some consideration:
“And how is one afflicted in body but unafflicted in mind? There is the case where a well-instructed disciple of the noble ones—who has regard for noble ones, is well-versed & disciplined in their Dhamma; who has regard for people of integrity, is well-versed & disciplined in their Dhamma—doesn’t assume form to be the self, or the self as possessing form, or form as in the self, or the self as in form. He is not seized with the idea that ‘I am form’ or ‘Form is mine.’ As he is not seized with these ideas, that form changes & alters. From the change & alteration in the form, there do not arise in him sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair.
It seems that when one takes the body not as self (I am form) there do not arise in sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair. Here that sokaparidevadukkhadomanassupāyāsā is about mental pain.
They’re not obsessed with the thought: ‘I am form, form is mine!’
‘Ahaṁ rūpaṁ, mama rūpan’ti na pariyuṭṭhaṭṭhāyī hoti.
So when that form of theirs decays and perishes,
Tassa ‘ahaṁ rūpaṁ, mama rūpan’ti apariyuṭṭhaṭṭhāyino, taṁ rūpaṁ vipariṇamati aññathā hoti.
it doesn’t give rise to sorrow, lamentation, pain, sadness, and distress.
Tassa rūpavipariṇāmaññathābhāvā nuppajjanti sokaparidevadukkhadomanassupāyāsā.
It seems this that the first noble truth is talking about (again, actually, the first noble truth in the SN56.11 doesn't have it!).

The thing I would do would be to pass all the occurrences of sokaparidevadukkhadomanassupāyāsā in the Nikayas and see what are they talking about. I started:
For our loved ones are a source of sorrow, lamentation, pain, sadness, and distress.” Piyajātikā hi, gahapati, sokaparidevadukkhadomanassupāyāsā piyappabhavikā”ti.
Seems mental.
And, mendicants, from what are sorrow, lamentation, pain, sadness, and distress born and produced? Kiṁjātikā ca, bhikkhave, sokaparidevadukkhadomanassupāyāsā, kiṁpahotikā? It’s when an uneducated ordinary person has not seen the noble ones, and is neither skilled nor trained in the teaching of the noble ones. They’ve not seen good persons, and are neither skilled nor trained in the teaching of the good persons. Idha, bhikkhave, assutavā puthujjano ariyānaṁ adassāvī ariyadhammassa akovido ariyadhamme avinīto, sappurisānaṁ adassāvī sappurisadhammassa akovido sappurisadhamme avinīto, They regard form as self, self as having form, form in self, or self in form. rūpaṁ attato samanupassati, rūpavantaṁ vā attānaṁ; attani vā rūpaṁ, rūpasmiṁ vā attānaṁ. But that form of theirs decays and perishes, Tassa taṁ rūpaṁ vipariṇamati, aññathā ca hoti. which gives rise to sorrow, lamentation, pain, sadness, and distress. Tassa rūpavipariṇāmaññathābhāvā uppajjanti sokaparidevadukkhadomanassupāyāsā.
Seems mental.
“But are there any people here in Uruvelakappa who, if they were executed, imprisoned, fined, or condemned, it would not cause you sorrow, lamentation, pain, sadness, and distress?” “Atthi pana te, gāmaṇi, uruvelakappe manussā yesaṁ te vadhena vā bandhena vā jāniyā vā garahāya vā nuppajjeyyuṁ sokaparidevadukkhadomanassupāyāsā”ti?

“There are, sir.” “Atthi me, bhante, uruvelakappe manussā yesaṁ me vadhena vā bandhena vā jāniyā vā garahāya vā nuppajjeyyuṁ sokaparidevadukkhadomanassupāyāsā”ti.

“What’s the cause, chief, what’s the reason why, if this was to happen to some people it could cause you sorrow, while if it happens to others it does not?” “Ko nu kho, gāmaṇi, hetu, ko paccayo yena te ekaccānaṁ uruvelakappiyānaṁ manussānaṁ vadhena vā bandhena vā jāniyā vā garahāya vā uppajjeyyuṁ sokaparidevadukkhadomanassupāyāsā”ti?

“The people regarding whom this would give rise to sorrow are those I desire and love. “Yesaṁ me, bhante, uruvelakappiyānaṁ manussānaṁ vadhena vā bandhena vā jāniyā vā garahāya vā uppajjeyyuṁ sokaparidevadukkhadomanassupāyāsā, atthi me tesu chandarāgo.
Seems mental
“Just now, reverends, as I was in private retreat this thought came to mind: “Idha mayhaṁ, āvuso, rahogatassa paṭisallīnassa evaṁ cetaso parivitakko udapādi: ‘Is there anything in the world whose changing and perishing would give rise to sorrow, lamentation, pain, sadness, and distress in me?’ ‘atthi nu kho taṁ kiñci lokasmiṁ yassa me vipariṇāmaññathābhāvā uppajjeyyuṁ sokaparidevadukkhadomanassupāyāsā’ti? It occurred to me: Tassa mayhaṁ, āvuso, etadahosi: ‘There is nothing in the world whose changing and perishing would give rise to sorrow, lamentation, pain, sadness, and distress in me.’” ‘natthi kho taṁ kiñci lokasmiṁ yassa me vipariṇāmaññathābhāvā uppajjeyyuṁ sokaparidevadukkhadomanassupāyāsā’”ti.
Mental, and here it say that "nothing in the world". Unpleasant vedana are surely included in the world.

This is a rapid research, I've taken the first occurrences. It seems that the sokaparidevadukkhadomanassupāyāsā is linked to mental and nothing in the world whose change would give rise to sokaparidevadukkhadomanassupāyāsā for Sariputta, but I ask for those that are actually more interest in this to search all occurrences, using the Frankk™ method used for Vitakka&vicara that is surely the most complete way to understand a term :rofl:
Thank you for researching further :anjali:
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.
User avatar
mjaviem
Posts: 2302
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2020 5:06 pm

Re: Do you believe Arahants have dukkha as defined in the first noble truth?

Post by mjaviem »

Those of you people who vote that arahants have dukkha and say that arahants experience bodily pain and suffer due to this pain and are in pain and that say the very body is a burden for them, what is the relationship to the body and its pains? What is the link? There is this imperfect and unsatisfactory body, we all know this, how do you make a link with an arahant? How can you point with your finger to an arahant? When self-view is quenched, what is the relationship with the world?
Namo Tassa Bhagavato Arahato Sammā Sambuddhassa
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8150
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Do you believe Arahants have dukkha as defined in the first noble truth?

Post by Coëmgenu »

Earlier, the non-physical arūpya entities were brought up as a complication of the "embodied = subject to pain" argument. This is good. It shows critical thinking, but it does not show a sufficient Buddhist education.

Not all bodies are physical. We physical beings actually have a non-physical body too, the nāmakāya/manaskāya. The non-physical arūpya beings have these non-physical bodies which are naturally subject to mental pain only.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8150
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Do you believe Arahants have dukkha as defined in the first noble truth?

Post by Coëmgenu »

Here's a paper I think anyone would find interesting. It is not a historical Buddhist text. It is a contemporary report on the usage of Buddhist methods to manage pain in patients with bone cancer.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.10 ... 017-0401-5
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
User avatar
robertk
Posts: 5613
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: Do you believe Arahants have dukkha as defined in the first noble truth?

Post by robertk »

The Nettippakaraṇa:
Herein, the world is, at one time or another, somewhat free from to the unsatisfactoriness of pain (dukkhadukkhatā) as well as the unsatisfactoriness of change (vipariṇāmadukkhatā). Why is that? Because there are those in the world who have little sickness and are long-lived. But only the nibbāna component with no fuel remaining (anupādisesa nibbānadhātu) liberates from the unsatisfactoriness of fabrications (saṅkhāradukkhatā).
User avatar
mjaviem
Posts: 2302
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2020 5:06 pm

Re: Do you believe Arahants have dukkha as defined in the first noble truth?

Post by mjaviem »

I think the main disagreement in this thread is about dukkhadukkhatā. Some say that only with the breakup of the body there's true freedom from dukkha while others argue that that freedom is already accomplished before the breakup of the body. Some consider this dukkhadukkhatā goes away with a physical body turning into a corpse.
Namo Tassa Bhagavato Arahato Sammā Sambuddhassa
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22391
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Do you believe Arahants have dukkha as defined in the first noble truth?

Post by Ceisiwr »

un8- wrote: Wed Nov 17, 2021 2:21 pm
So that he can continue to teach the dhamma, and let the doctor make good merit
When Coëmgenu said your position was a gateway drug to the Mahāsāṃghika idea of a cosmic Buddha, taken up by some Mahāyāna schools of thought, this was it.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
un8-
Posts: 747
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2021 6:49 am

Re: Do you believe Arahants have dukkha as defined in the first noble truth?

Post by un8- »

Ceisiwr wrote: Wed Nov 17, 2021 3:40 pm
un8- wrote: Wed Nov 17, 2021 2:21 pm
So that he can continue to teach the dhamma, and let the doctor make good merit
When Coëmgenu said your position was a gateway drug to the Mahāsāṃghika idea of a cosmic Buddha, taken up by some Mahāyāna schools of thought, this was it.
:focus:

Keep your irrelevant opinions and thoughts to yourself. If I shared my opinion of Coemgenu and yourself, I'd probably get banned.
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.
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 12879
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
Contact:

Re: Do you believe Arahants have dukkha as defined in the first noble truth?

Post by cappuccino »

un8- wrote: Wed Nov 17, 2021 2:21 pm he stopped prolonging his life via supernatural powers, and allowed himself to die
you don't need powers to live to 80
un8-
Posts: 747
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2021 6:49 am

Re: Do you believe Arahants have dukkha as defined in the first noble truth?

Post by un8- »

cappuccino wrote: Wed Nov 17, 2021 3:50 pm
un8- wrote: Wed Nov 17, 2021 2:21 pm he stopped prolonging his life via supernatural powers, and allowed himself to die
you don't need powers to live to 80
Life expectancy isn't the same thing as life span
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.
User avatar
confusedlayman
Posts: 6231
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2019 12:16 am
Location: Human Realm (as of now)

Re: Do you believe Arahants have dukkha as defined in the first noble truth?

Post by confusedlayman »

Ontheway wrote: Wed Nov 17, 2021 12:25 pm
confusedlayman wrote: Wed Nov 17, 2021 12:22 pm no...

first noble truth is for puthukhana and people in training... if someone is already trained then he leave behind everything... physical pain is old karma
Arahat Sariputta Thera defined Dukkha Sacca in Saccavibhanga Suttanta. Physical pain is within the scope of Dukkha Sacca.
in that case it is old karma that needs to be contained... but u can take physical pain with understanding so it won't cause much mental pain
I may be slow learner but im at least learning...
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8150
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Do you believe Arahants have dukkha as defined in the first noble truth?

Post by Coëmgenu »

un8- wrote: Wed Nov 17, 2021 3:41 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Wed Nov 17, 2021 3:40 pm
un8- wrote: Wed Nov 17, 2021 2:21 pm
So that he can continue to teach the dhamma, and let the doctor make good merit
When Coëmgenu said your position was a gateway drug to the Mahāsāṃghika idea of a cosmic Buddha, taken up by some Mahāyāna schools of thought, this was it.
:focus:

Keep your irrelevant opinions and thoughts to yourself. If I shared my opinion of Coemgenu and yourself, I'd probably get banned.
I always enjoy when someone uses the :focus: emoticon before making an off-topic comment. It's actually not irrelevant, regardless your defensive reaction.
Last edited by Coëmgenu on Wed Nov 17, 2021 3:58 pm, edited 2 times in total.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
un8-
Posts: 747
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2021 6:49 am

Re: Do you believe Arahants have dukkha as defined in the first noble truth?

Post by un8- »

Coëmgenu wrote: Wed Nov 17, 2021 3:56 pm
un8- wrote: Wed Nov 17, 2021 3:41 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Wed Nov 17, 2021 3:40 pm

When Coëmgenu said your position was a gateway drug to the Mahāsāṃghika idea of a cosmic Buddha, taken up by some Mahāyāna schools of thought, this was it.
:focus:

Keep your irrelevant opinions and thoughts to yourself. If I shared my opinion of Coemgenu and yourself, I'd probably get banned.
I always enjoy when someone uses the :focus: emoticon before making an off-topic comment.
:focus:
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.
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8150
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Do you believe Arahants have dukkha as defined in the first noble truth?

Post by Coëmgenu »

We're on-topic. Are you having difficulty remembering your OP? I can summarize if you want.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
un8-
Posts: 747
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2021 6:49 am

Re: Do you believe Arahants have dukkha as defined in the first noble truth?

Post by un8- »

mjaviem wrote: Wed Nov 17, 2021 3:23 pm I think the main disagreement in this thread is about dukkhadukkhatā. Some say that only with the breakup of the body there's true freedom from dukkha while others argue that that freedom is already accomplished before the breakup of the body. Some consider this dukkhadukkhatā goes away with a physical body turning into a corpse.
The issue was never dukkhadukkhata, it was mental suffering which is influenced by several things, among them misconceiving dukkhadukkhata.
He does not assume (painful) feeling to be the self...As he is not seized with these ideas, his feeling changes & alters, but he does not fall into sorrow, lamentation, (mental) pain, distress or despair over its change & alteration.

SN 22.1
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.
Post Reply