Do arahants have thoughts?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
Sam Vara
Site Admin
Posts: 13482
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Portsmouth, U.K.

Re: Do arahants have thoughts?

Post by Sam Vara »

PeterC86 wrote: Sat Nov 26, 2022 10:14 pm
Sam Vara wrote: Sat Nov 26, 2022 9:46 pm
PeterC86 wrote: Sat Nov 26, 2022 9:32 pm

Exactly, thank you for adding this sutta reference. Maybe Samvara can make up his mind with this reference, weighing it up against MN20.
No, it doesn't do anything to make my mind up. There are hundreds of references in the Nikayas to anattā, and hundreds of references to gaining control of the mind. You seem to think that these two are incompatible, and that the latter are somehow invalid. I'm asking why, if you maintain the incompatibility, the invalidity does not apply to the former.

You normally retreat into equivocation and claim that your own statements are meaningless (citations provided) but let's see...
I cannot help you read. All the best.
I'm not asking for help with reading. I'm asking you to explain why you think Theravadan invalidity doesn't apply to anattā, but does apply to advice and exhortations to control the mind. I can readily accept that you don't want to engage with this question, but it's not, as it stands, an issue to do with my reading, is it?
User avatar
nirodh27
Posts: 681
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2019 12:31 pm

Re: Do arahants have thoughts?

Post by nirodh27 »

Actually, the passages about consciousness doesn't imply that there's no possibility of controlling the mind, but only that we have not mastery and total autonomy over the state of our khandas. In one of the earliest pictures of the Anatta teaching we have that mastery paralleled to the mastery of a king over his kingdom, which can dispose of people at his will without anyone that can tell him otherwise. It is full control, full domain without influences of the external sort.

The key is the external pressure of others in getting what they want, the king has no pressure and can dispose of the things in total autonomy, others are less fortunate and are subject to luck and an unreliable context. There was a very cogent analysis about this in a book, but I don't remember which one :tongue: btw, we are the others and it is impossible to be a king.

To see that there's some mastery over the khandas would be simple. Let's take perception. Choose a book of your like. Intend to see the cover. Go to see the cover. You have now determined the perception without impediments of sorts: you have seen the cover you wanted. Ofc everything could go wrong: the building could collapse, you could get arrested in the meantime, aliens could kidnap you. And that is the point, the control about your khandas varies from total uncontrol to some degree of mastery, but what you cannot have is total domain like the king that can just have it like he wants and no-one can impede him to do as he please.

Arahant have a lot of control of internal conditions, but they could still be killed by bandits or get ill due to external conditions. They have to eat and can feel cold and heat. They might get to see something disgusting. There are even cases of internal conditions not be under control, like mental illness or dementia. The state of the five khandas is unrealiable, but there are degrees that are well depicted into the (metaphorical or not is unimportant) difference between hells and heavens, but even more so with the progress in the path.

The five khandas will never grant perfect or even reliable happiness for this reason. We will never be the king of them, but we are not passive spectators either, especially in the human realm.

P.s. And the Nikayas almost prey us not to be passive spectators if we care about our happiness, but actually work for our own salvation. This is almost in every page.
Last edited by nirodh27 on Sat Nov 26, 2022 11:13 pm, edited 3 times in total.
PeterC86
Posts: 1412
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2019 7:06 pm

Re: Do arahants have thoughts?

Post by PeterC86 »

Sam Vara wrote: Sat Nov 26, 2022 10:23 pm
PeterC86 wrote: Sat Nov 26, 2022 10:14 pm
Sam Vara wrote: Sat Nov 26, 2022 9:46 pm

No, it doesn't do anything to make my mind up. There are hundreds of references in the Nikayas to anattā, and hundreds of references to gaining control of the mind. You seem to think that these two are incompatible, and that the latter are somehow invalid. I'm asking why, if you maintain the incompatibility, the invalidity does not apply to the former.

You normally retreat into equivocation and claim that your own statements are meaningless (citations provided) but let's see...
I cannot help you read. All the best.
I'm not asking for help with reading. I'm asking you to explain why you think Theravadan invalidity doesn't apply to anattā, but does apply to advice and exhortations to control the mind. I can readily accept that you don't want to engage with this question, but it's not, as it stands, an issue to do with my reading, is it?
It has been explained and supported with a sutta reference. You will have to understand it for yourself. Goodbye.
User avatar
Sam Vara
Site Admin
Posts: 13482
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Portsmouth, U.K.

Re: Do arahants have thoughts?

Post by Sam Vara »

PeterC86 wrote: Sat Nov 26, 2022 11:03 pm
Sam Vara wrote: Sat Nov 26, 2022 10:23 pm
PeterC86 wrote: Sat Nov 26, 2022 10:14 pm

I cannot help you read. All the best.
I'm not asking for help with reading. I'm asking you to explain why you think Theravadan invalidity doesn't apply to anattā, but does apply to advice and exhortations to control the mind. I can readily accept that you don't want to engage with this question, but it's not, as it stands, an issue to do with my reading, is it?
It has been explained and supported with a sutta reference. You will have to understand it for yourself.
What has been explained and supported with a sutta reference? The reason why invalidity doesn't apply to anattā in the Pali canon, but does apply to advice and exhortations to control the mind? Which sutta reference does that?
pegembara
Posts: 3466
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 8:39 am

Re: Do arahants have thoughts?

Post by pegembara »

If you were to see the arahant as a "person, " they still have a body with thoughts and feelings. If they are no longer seen as a person, there is still a body with thoughts and feelings. The arahant no longer identifies with the body and mind. Moreover, thoughts and feelings that derive from greed, hatred, and delusion no longer arise.

When terms such as I or me are used, they are just used provisionally and do not have the same connotation as when used by the ordinary worldling.
And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called right speech.
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 12879
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
Contact:

Re: Do arahants have thoughts?

Post by cappuccino »

Sam Vara wrote: Sat Nov 26, 2022 11:09 pm What has been explained and supported with a sutta reference?
Consciousness tends to affliction

You can’t control it

Because consciousness is not self
PeterC86
Posts: 1412
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2019 7:06 pm

Re: Do arahants have thoughts?

Post by PeterC86 »

cappuccino wrote: Sun Nov 27, 2022 1:40 am
Sam Vara wrote: Sat Nov 26, 2022 11:09 pm What has been explained and supported with a sutta reference?
Consciousness tends to affliction

You can’t control it

Because consciousness is not self
Rightly so cappuccino.
justindesilva
Posts: 2602
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2016 12:38 pm

Re: Do arahants have thoughts?

Post by justindesilva »

cappuccino wrote: Sun Nov 27, 2022 1:40 am
Sam Vara wrote: Sat Nov 26, 2022 11:09 pm What has been explained and supported with a sutta reference?
Consciousness tends to affliction

You can’t control it

Because consciousness is not self
Bahiya sutta explains as was told to him
Leave what is seen as seen, what is heard as heard , what is sensed as sensed , what is cognised as cognised , This is related to arising thoughts of an arhant. Needs no more explanation.
User avatar
Sam Vara
Site Admin
Posts: 13482
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Portsmouth, U.K.

Re: Do arahants have thoughts?

Post by Sam Vara »

cappuccino wrote: Sun Nov 27, 2022 1:40 am
Sam Vara wrote: Sat Nov 26, 2022 11:09 pm What has been explained and supported with a sutta reference?
Consciousness tends to affliction

You can’t control it

Because consciousness is not self
Thanks, cap!

But my question was: if there is a perceived contradiction between those Pali suttas which refer to the person or things in general being anattā, and those which advise and exhort followers to control the mind, why are the latter considered invalid and impossible to act upon? Why are the suttas about anattā not so rejected?

There is of course a further question (posed by Sue Hamilton and to some extent by Gombrich's work) as to whether the perceived contradiction is a real one, but I'll leave that aside for the moment. Peter said that he can't help me read. Perhaps you could let me know whether I have read the little excerpt from the Anattalakkhanasutta correctly, and drawn the appropriate inference. I read it as saying that consciousness should not be considered as self (attan) because it leads to (samvattati) suffering, and one cannot have from it the assurance that it should or could (hotu) be one way or another.

Have I got that right?

If so, then the problem is, as per above, not with my reading, but with the fact that within that excerpt, there is no means of telling whether all references regarding anattā are invalid and not to be trusted, including the anattalakkhanasutta itself. If we are in the business of rejecting hundreds of suttas because they (n.b.) apparently contradict our favourite bits found elsewhere, why don't we reject all the references to anattā instead?
User avatar
nirodh27
Posts: 681
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2019 12:31 pm

Re: Do arahants have thoughts?

Post by nirodh27 »

This is the king simile btw:
"Then, Aggivessana, are you saying, 'Form is my self, feeling is my self, perception is my self, fabrications are my self, consciousness is my self'?"

"Yes, Master Gotama, I'm saying that 'Form is my self, feeling is my self, perception is my self, fabrications are my self, consciousness is my self.' As does this great multitude." [4]

"What does this great multitude have to do with you? Please focus just on your own assertion."

"Yes, Master Gotama, I'm saying that 'Form is my self, feeling is my self, perception is my self, fabrications are my self, consciousness is my self.'"

"Very well then, Aggivessana, I will cross-question you on this matter. Answer as you see fit. What do you think? Would a consecrated, noble-warrior king — such as King Pasenadi of Kosala or King Ajātasattu Vedehiputta of Magadha — wield the power in his own domain to execute those who deserve execution, to fine those who deserve to be fined, and to banish those who deserve to be banished?"

"Yes, Master Gotama, he would wield the power in his own domain to execute those who deserve execution, to fine those who deserve to be fined, and to banish those who deserve to be banished. Even these oligarchic groups, such as the Vajjians & Mallans, wield the power in their own domains to execute those who deserve execution, to fine those who deserve to be fined, and to banish those who deserve to be banished, [5] to say nothing of a consecrated, noble-warrior king such as King Pasenadi of Kosala, or King Ajātasattu Vedehiputta of Magadha. He would wield it, and he would deserve to wield it."

"What do you think, Aggivessana? When you say, 'Form is my self,' do you wield power over that form: 'May my form be thus, may my form not be thus'?"

When this was said, Saccaka the Nigaṇṭha-son was silent
.

It should be clear that this kind of power is a full autonomous, without-possibility-to-be-otherwise kind control that doesn't have to ask permission to anyone. No different outcome for the decision is even considered possibile.

This is not impossibility to get any limited control and influence over the events. Every intimation of looking for our long term welfare and happiness would be pointless and choosing Kusala over Akusala would be pointless as well if we don't have some limited space of action. This is not an argument free will vs no free will, but simply the description of the obvious: we can do something to avoid some Dukkha if the conditions are favourable and there's some space, and being human beings with th capacity of reflection is a good start.
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 12879
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
Contact:

Re: Do arahants have thoughts?

Post by cappuccino »

Sam Vara wrote: Sun Nov 27, 2022 10:01 am those which advise and exhort followers to control the mind
You should also control the mind
User avatar
Sam Vara
Site Admin
Posts: 13482
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Portsmouth, U.K.

Re: Do arahants have thoughts?

Post by Sam Vara »

cappuccino wrote: Sun Nov 27, 2022 2:08 pm
Sam Vara wrote: Sun Nov 27, 2022 10:01 am those which advise and exhort followers to control the mind
You should also control the mind
:thumbsup: I would have thought so, yes.
riceandcashews
Posts: 66
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2022 4:57 pm

Re: Do arahants have thoughts?

Post by riceandcashews »

santa100 wrote: Sat Nov 26, 2022 2:26 am
riceandcashews wrote:"Total ending" and "totally awakened" seem pretty final. Also, there are many passages that describe arahants as beyond description both in this life and after they die in the same way.
"totally awakened" doesn't automatically imply that the arahant no longer has thoughts. Afterall, even after attaining total awakening, the arahant still has to go on alms round, teaches his students, goes to the toilet, etc... all the activities that require a full engagement of the Five Aggregates: rupa/vedana/sanna/sankhara/vinnana. They're still there. They just don't operate in the usual "defiled" mode of a regular worldling, but they're still there. For if they're not there, the Buddha would: 1. no longer has a body(no rupa) 2. no longer experience painful/pleasant/neutral sensations(no vedana) 3. tell the difference between a flower versus a pile of shit(no sanna) 4. decide to teach His students or not(no sankhara) 5. a walking vegetable(no vinnana). So, unless by "thoughts" you meant something lying outside the Five Aggregates, an arahant still needs his Five Aggregates intact to carry on his daily tasks. They're still there. It's just that they no longer operate in the usual defiled mode of the common worldling.
Totally awakened does mean the arahant is 24/7 in nirvana though, which is what that comment was in response to. The user I was replying to implied that an arahant is not in nirvana 24/7 was my point with that quote, nothing more.

Regarding your general view that arahants continue to have thoughts, how do you interpret the cessation of papanca and fabrications? And in your view, what is the benefit/utility of signlessness/cessation of perception to one on the path? Is it necessary on the path, or optional? If necessary, why is it necessary? If helpful but not necessary, in what way is it helpful beyond any other meditative states? And why do the suttas seem to put some much emphasis on it? If non-thought isn't significant on the path it's role in the suttas seems to be problematic.
riceandcashews
Posts: 66
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2022 4:57 pm

Re: Do arahants have thoughts?

Post by riceandcashews »

mikenz66 wrote: Sat Nov 26, 2022 3:24 amWell, as I said, I am aware of these two main interpretations, and of course there is plenty of room for discussion. I personally find the "abiding permanently" interpretation problematical, in view of an arahant still experiencing feelings, thoughts, and so on, as discussed in this thread, so I tend to side with the interpretation of Ven Nanananda (among others) that the cessation and so on at awakening, or in the awakened samadhi that the arahant can return to, is temporary until the breakup of the body.
"Total ending" and "totally awakened" seem pretty final.
Yes, of course. It's irreversible. See, for example, MN140: https://suttacentral.net/mn140
I don't understand you here. Are you meaning to say that arahants do not abide in nirvana permanently? Or that arahants abide in nirvana permanently but that signlessness/no-thought is not equivalent to nirvana? I'm thinking you must be suggesting the latter. In that case, how do you interpret the cessation of papanca and fabrications for arahants? And why do you believe signlessness/cessation plays such a significant role in the suttas?
santa100
Posts: 6814
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: Do arahants have thoughts?

Post by santa100 »

riceandcashews wrote:Regarding your general view that arahants continue to have thoughts, how do you interpret the cessation of papanca and fabrications?
But why do you assume that all thoughts are automatically equated with papanca? Does the simple act of sanna to tell the difference between a flower and a pile of crap sound like papanca to you? Are you saying that by the time one's attained arahantship, s/he all of a sudden loses that ability to tell the difference?
Post Reply