What happenes to an Arahant after death?

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
User avatar
robertk
Posts: 5603
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: What happenes to an Arahant after death?

Post by robertk »

Seems i fit into the extintionist camp by Bodhi' s classification.
Does anyone have a copy of the article he mentions about freewill at the end of the pdf?
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: What happenes to an Arahant after death?

Post by tiltbillings »

robertk wrote:Seems i fit into the extintionist camp by Bodhi' s classification.
Does anyone have a copy of the article he mentions about freewill at the end of the pdf?
God Google provides:
http://www.alanwallace.org/buddhistviewoffreewill.pdf
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
robertk
Posts: 5603
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: What happenes to an Arahant after death?

Post by robertk »

Thanks.
Its interesting that the two scholars I like, one mahayana and one Theravada, are both wrong imho about nibbana .
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: What happenes to an Arahant after death?

Post by tiltbillings »

robertk wrote:Thanks.
Its interesting that the two scholars I like, one mahayana and one Theravada, are both wrong imho about nibbana .
Oh, yeah, big time, but after reading through that article, it is one tar-baby I will not poke.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
Mkoll
Posts: 6590
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:55 pm
Location: USA

Re: What happenes to an Arahant after death?

Post by Mkoll »

I agree with clw_uk here. My brain just kind of shuts down when faced with question like this one. It's something I've learned to do after trying many times to come to conclusions about similar "awesome" questions in the past.
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
User avatar
martinfrank
Posts: 272
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 7:55 am
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Contact:

Re: What happenes to an Arahant after death?

Post by martinfrank »

tiltbillings wrote:
robertk wrote:Thanks.
Its interesting that the two scholars I like, one mahayana and one Theravada, are both wrong imho about nibbana .
Oh, yeah, big time, but after reading through that article, it is one tar-baby I will not poke.
I agree with both of you. "I" is the Mother of All Tar-Babies... but we shouldn't use the expression because it has a nasty racial undertone.

Is there a Vinaya rule forbidding discussions about "Does an Arahat exist after death?" Could one of the Vinaya specialists please answer. Thank you!

Since we experience "world" through the filter of concepts, we cannot progress beyond the concepts we hold dear. Shouldn't we emphasize more that you cannot progress in meditation if you cannot disregard what Lord Buddha taught to disregard?
The Noble Eightfold Path: Proposed to all, imposed on none.
User avatar
robertk
Posts: 5603
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: What happenes to an Arahant after death?

Post by robertk »

Its not too hard,
Ven. Bodhi doesnt like the idea of an arahat not " existing" in some undefined form after death as this appears to be the same as what a materialist expects after death. The materialist makes no efforts and enjoys a life of wanton sense pleasures - ending in nothing. So it seems a bit trivial that an arahat after completely eliminating desire and ignorance would also simply be snuffed out.

What bodhi doesn't seem to calculate is that the materialist is wrong and as they still have desire and ignorance and wrong view they are in fact reborn and the cycle continues. They are are living in ignorant bliss but their destiny is unknown and they are in a precarious state.
The arahat on the other hand is assured of no more rebirth, .
Boris
Posts: 770
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: What happenes to an Arahant after death?

Post by Boris »

pulga wrote: ... I believe he is contending that so long as the arahat goes on living he is susceptible to papanca, only that he no longer appropriates it, and doesn't delight in it. Since he no longer appropriates it, its presence (i.e. the consciousness thereof) is non-indicative, i.e. it doesn't result in a self-consciousness in either reflexion or reflection). Liberation from papanca requires an effort on the part of the living arahat by the focusing the mind on its cessation, on what Ven. Ñanavira refers to as the “singularity of the real” (cf. SN Mano, footnote b). ...
I must say, that your ideas sounds quite strange to me. Nipapanca and nibbana are synonyms, and follow your logic we must agree on proposition that arahat has some work to do or needs effort in order "not to lose nibbana, but arahat and nibbana are also synonyms ... I see papanca only on the side of puthujjana
"Whatever in this world with its deities ... is to be seen, heard, sensed, and cognized, or reached, sought out and encompassed by the mind, that I know, that I have directly known. Now while that is recognized by a Perfect One, he nevertheless does not use it as a basis (for conceits). Were I to say of all that, that I know it not, that would be falsely spoken by me; and were I to say of it that I know it and know it not, that would be the same; and were I to say of it that I neither know it nor know it not, that would be incorrect on my part. So, having seen what can be seen, a Perfect One conceives no conceit3 of what is seen, he conceives no conceit of what is unseen, he conceives no conceit of what could be seen, he conceives no conceit of any seer. Having heard what can be heard ... Having sensed what can be sensed ... Having cognized what can be cognized ... he conceives no conceit of any cognizer. A Perfect One thus equipoised towards things seen, heard, sensed, or cognized, remains thus equipoised; and there is no other equipoise that is beyond or superior to that equipoise, I say."
A. 4:24

Arahat has worldly knowledge, that is knowledge of namarupa, but contrary to puthujjana does not use it as a basis (for conceits). But this does not require any effort from his side, freedom from conceiving is his natural state.
Last edited by Boris on Thu Jul 31, 2014 8:32 am, edited 1 time in total.
The man who wants to avoid grotesque collapses should not look for anything to fulfill him in space and time.

Nicolás Gómez Dávila
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22286
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: What happenes to an Arahant after death?

Post by Ceisiwr »

robertk wrote:Its not too hard,
Ven. Bodhi doesnt like the idea of an arahat not " existing" in some undefined form after death as this appears to be the same as what a materialist expects after death. The materialist makes no efforts and enjoys a life of wanton sense pleasures - ending in nothing. So it seems a bit trivial that an arahat after completely eliminating desire and ignorance would also simply be snuffed out.

What bodhi doesn't seem to calculate is that the materialist is wrong and as they still have desire and ignorance and wrong view they are in fact reborn and the cycle continues. They are are living in ignorant bliss but their destiny is unknown and they are in a precarious state.
The arahat on the other hand is assured of no more rebirth, .


Its also interesting that Buddha declared that out of all the specualtive theories outside of Buddhadhamma, the materialists were considered the highest as they dont cling to existence and are close to non-clinging. They just make the mistake of identifying with the aggregates, and holding wrong view.
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
SarathW
Posts: 21183
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: What happenes to an Arahant after death?

Post by SarathW »

In my opinion, materialist are worse than eternalist.
I think materialist are more ignorant.
I am not sure what Buddha said about it.
:shrug:
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22286
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: What happenes to an Arahant after death?

Post by Ceisiwr »

SarathW wrote:In my opinion, materialist are worse than eternalist.
I think materialist are more ignorant.
I am not sure what Buddha said about it.
:shrug:

Why is that?

The Buddha taught that the fatalism of the Ajivakas was the worst, then the eternalists and then the materialists as best among them. He even adopted some of the materialists language in his own teachings, obviously with a slight tweek "It might be, it might not be"
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
User avatar
Mkoll
Posts: 6590
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:55 pm
Location: USA

Re: What happenes to an Arahant after death?

Post by Mkoll »

clw_uk wrote:
SarathW wrote:In my opinion, materialist are worse than eternalist.
I think materialist are more ignorant.
I am not sure what Buddha said about it.
:shrug:

Why is that?

The Buddha taught that the fatalism of the Ajivakas was the worst, then the eternalists and then the materialists as best among them. He even adopted some of the materialists language in his own teachings, obviously with a slight tweek "It might be, it might not be"
Which sutta was that? Something in DN I think?
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22286
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: What happenes to an Arahant after death?

Post by Ceisiwr »

Mkoll wrote:
clw_uk wrote:
SarathW wrote:In my opinion, materialist are worse than eternalist.
I think materialist are more ignorant.
I am not sure what Buddha said about it.
:shrug:

Why is that?

The Buddha taught that the fatalism of the Ajivakas was the worst, then the eternalists and then the materialists as best among them. He even adopted some of the materialists language in his own teachings, obviously with a slight tweek "It might be, it might not be"
Which sutta was that? Something in DN I think?

I think its there but I'm getting all this from the SN, I have page references at home but cant post them atm as I'm on my work break lol :jumping: :popcorn:
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
User avatar
Zom
Posts: 2707
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 6:38 pm
Location: Russia, Saint-Petersburg
Contact:

Re: What happenes to an Arahant after death?

Post by Zom »

Seems i fit into the extintionist camp by Bodhi' s classification.
If we adopt the strategy Buddha offered in MN 60, then this is more wise to fit into this "extintionist camp":


“Householders, there are some recluses and brahmins whose doctrine and view is this: ‘There is definitely no cessation of being.’
“Now there are some recluses and brahmins whose doctrine is directly opposed to that of those recluses and brahmins, and they say thus: ‘There definitely is a cessation of being.’

What do you think, householders? Don’t these recluses and brahmins hold doctrines directly opposed to each other?”—“Yes, venerable sir.”

“About this a wise man considers thus: ‘These good recluses and brahmins hold the doctrine and view “there is definitely no cessation of being,” but that has not been seen by me. And these other good recluses and brahmins hold the doctrine and view “there definitely is a cessation of being,” but that has not been known by me. If, without knowing and seeing, I were to take one side and declare: “Only this is true, anything else is wrong,” that would not be fitting for me.

Now as to the recluses and brahmins who hold the doctrine and view “there definitely is no cessation of being,” if their word is true then it is certainly still possible that I might reappear [after death] among the gods of the immaterial realms who consist of perception. But as to the recluses and brahmins who hold the doctrine and view “there definitely is a cessation of being,” if their word is true then it is possible that I might here and now attain final Nibbāna.

The view of those good recluses and brahmins who hold the doctrine and view “there definitely is no cessation of being” is close to lust, close to bondage, close to delighting, close to holding, close to clinging; but the view of those good recluses and brahmins who hold the doctrine and view “there definitely is cessation of being” is close to non-lust, close to non-bondage, close to non-delighting, close to non-holding, close to non-clinging.’ After reflecting thus, he practises the way to disenchantment with being, to the fading away and cessation of being.


So the view of extintionists is close to non-lust, close to non-bondage, close to non-delighting, close to non-holding, close to non-clinging. While the view of non-extintionists is close to lust and so on, since they still desire some transcendental kind of experience and the idea that nibbana means "no experience" torments them because of this desire 8-)
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22286
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: What happenes to an Arahant after death?

Post by Ceisiwr »

Zom wrote:
Seems i fit into the extintionist camp by Bodhi' s classification.
If we adopt the strategy Buddha offered in MN 60, then this is more wise to fit into this "extintionist camp":


“Householders, there are some recluses and brahmins whose doctrine and view is this: ‘There is definitely no cessation of being.’
“Now there are some recluses and brahmins whose doctrine is directly opposed to that of those recluses and brahmins, and they say thus: ‘There definitely is a cessation of being.’

What do you think, householders? Don’t these recluses and brahmins hold doctrines directly opposed to each other?”—“Yes, venerable sir.”

“About this a wise man considers thus: ‘These good recluses and brahmins hold the doctrine and view “there is definitely no cessation of being,” but that has not been seen by me. And these other good recluses and brahmins hold the doctrine and view “there definitely is a cessation of being,” but that has not been known by me. If, without knowing and seeing, I were to take one side and declare: “Only this is true, anything else is wrong,” that would not be fitting for me.

Now as to the recluses and brahmins who hold the doctrine and view “there definitely is no cessation of being,” if their word is true then it is certainly still possible that I might reappear [after death] among the gods of the immaterial realms who consist of perception. But as to the recluses and brahmins who hold the doctrine and view “there definitely is a cessation of being,” if their word is true then it is possible that I might here and now attain final Nibbāna.

The view of those good recluses and brahmins who hold the doctrine and view “there definitely is no cessation of being” is close to lust, close to bondage, close to delighting, close to holding, close to clinging; but the view of those good recluses and brahmins who hold the doctrine and view “there definitely is cessation of being” is close to non-lust, close to non-bondage, close to non-delighting, close to non-holding, close to non-clinging.’ After reflecting thus, he practises the way to disenchantment with being, to the fading away and cessation of being.


So the view of extintionists is close to non-lust, close to non-bondage, close to non-delighting, close to non-holding, close to non-clinging. While the view of non-extintionists is close to lust and so on, since they still desire some transcendental kind of experience and the idea that nibbana means "no experience" torments them because of this desire 8-)


:goodpost: :thumbsup:
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
Post Reply