Do arahants discard vipaka/suffering?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
piotr
Posts: 412
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 4:33 pm
Location: Khettadesa

Re: Do arahants discard vipaka/suffering?

Post by piotr »

Hi Ñāṇa,
Ñāṇa wrote:
  • Monks, when the gods with Indra, with Brahmā and with Pajāpati seek a monk who is thus liberated in mind, they do not find [anything of which they could say], “The tathāgata’s consciousness is dependent on this.” Why is that? A tathāgata, I say, is untraceable even here and now.
Elsewhere this non-abiding mind is designated as "unestablished consciousness" (appatiṭṭha viññāṇa). Ven. Ñāṇananda gets it.
On the other hand:
  • 'Monks, the body of the Tathagata stands with the link that bound it to becoming cut. As long as the body subsists, devas and humans will see him. But at the breaking-up of the body and the exhaustion of the life-span, devas and humans will see him no more. Monks, just as when the stalk of a bunch of mangoes has been cut, all the mangoes on it go with it, just so the Tathagata's link with becoming has been cut. As long as the body subsists, devas and humans will see him. But at the breaking-up of the body and the exhaustion of the life-span, devas and humans will see him no more.'

    Brahmajāla-sutta, DN 1 (translation by Maurice Walshe)
That's why we get confused, I guess.
Bhagavaṃmūlakā no, bhante, dhammā...
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Do arahants discard vipaka/suffering?

Post by tiltbillings »

piotr wrote:Hi Ñāṇa,
Ñāṇa wrote:
  • Monks, when the gods with Indra, with Brahmā and with Pajāpati seek a monk who is thus liberated in mind, they do not find [anything of which they could say], “The tathāgata’s consciousness is dependent on this.” Why is that? A tathāgata, I say, is untraceable even here and now.
Elsewhere this non-abiding mind is designated as "unestablished consciousness" (appatiṭṭha viññāṇa). Ven. Ñāṇananda gets it.
On the other hand:
  • 'Monks, the body of the Tathagata stands with the link that bound it to becoming cut. As long as the body subsists, devas and humans will see him. But at the breaking-up of the body and the exhaustion of the life-span, devas and humans will see him no more. Monks, just as when the stalk of a bunch of mangoes has been cut, all the mangoes on it go with it, just so the Tathagata's link with becoming has been cut. As long as the body subsists, devas and humans will see him. But at the breaking-up of the body and the exhaustion of the life-span, devas and humans will see him no more.'

    Brahmajāla-sutta, DN 1 (translation by Maurice Walshe)
That's why we get confused, I guess.
The question is what is meant by the non-abiding mind/unestablished consciousness. Is this a reference to a particular experience, or is the consciousness of the arahant non-abiding all the time. It the latter is the case, what does that really mean in terms of the embodied arahant.

Also, interesting thing about this text is: the body of the Tathagata stands with the link that bound it to becoming cut, but it does not say is that the other links associated with the body are not operative. It seems to suggest that they still function as part of the body, and the body really cannot function without the other khandhas being in play, even if they are mere designations.
>> 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
Nyana
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: Do arahants discard vipaka/suffering?

Post by Nyana »

tiltbillings wrote:Well, it may be mere designation, but it is still something that can be talked about. Or at least the Buddha seemed to think so, otherwise we would not have the such designation as khandhas and the "all" put forth by the Buddha as ways of talking about such stuff, even if it is mere designation.
The all is to be abandoned. The path is to be developed in order to abandon the all. The path is entirely 100% fabricated for that specific purpose. The raft is for crossing over, not for carrying around once crossed over, and certainly not for constructing philosophies.

All the best,

Geoff
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27839
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Do arahants discard vipaka/suffering?

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Tilt,
tiltbillings wrote:
retrofuturist wrote:Because of a combination of both of those factors, it doesn't adequately satisfy the challenge I laid out for Tilt.
But as Sylvester has neatly shown, the challenge is not meaningful.
No, but he has shown why it was impossible. 8-)

This is because dependent origination, as explained through the 12 nidanas, depicts the entirety of conditioned/samsaric existince, as defined by sabba (the all).

However, the nibbanic experience of an arahant is unconditioned (by greed, aversion and delusion) - it is asankhata dhamma (an unformed dhamma)

This is why I asked Sylvester to confirm he was talking about conditioned/formed (sankhata dhammas)... because that which is unconditioned (i.e. not dependent on anything) cannot possibly arise in dependence upon something.

Hence a statement like "... Paticcasamuppada, which is Dhamma, is what functions. Just not paticcasamuppada conditioned by ignorance" makes no sense whatsoever. How could the independent be dependently arisen?

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
Nyana
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: Do arahants discard vipaka/suffering?

Post by Nyana »

tiltbillings wrote:The question is what is meant by the non-abiding mind/unestablished consciousness.
Well, I'll defer that question to the arahants. SN 6.7 Kokālika Sutta:
  • What wise man here would seek to define
    A measureless one by taking his measure?
    He who would measure a measureless one
    Must be, I think, an obstructed worldling.
One can talk about an arahants experience in terms of phenomenological description, but I'm not sure what purpose it would serve? Historically, it's lead to numerous thickets of views. Better to develop the path and then taste the fruit for oneself. The gnosis and vision of liberation (vimuttiñāṇadassana) -- non-referential inner peace (ajjhattasanti) -- is to be individually experienced (paccatta veditabba). The path is to be developed to this end.

All the best,

Geoff
Nyana
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: Do arahants discard vipaka/suffering?

Post by Nyana »

piotr wrote:On the other hand:
  • 'Monks, the body of the Tathagata stands with the link that bound it to becoming cut. As long as the body subsists, devas and humans will see him. But at the breaking-up of the body and the exhaustion of the life-span, devas and humans will see him no more. Monks, just as when the stalk of a bunch of mangoes has been cut, all the mangoes on it go with it, just so the Tathagata's link with becoming has been cut. As long as the body subsists, devas and humans will see him. But at the breaking-up of the body and the exhaustion of the life-span, devas and humans will see him no more.'
Sure, an arahant has a body. But an arahant is also utterly freed from reference/classification/reckoning in terms of form (rūpasaṅkhayavimutta). The same is the case for the other aggregates.

All the best,

Geoff
User avatar
acinteyyo
Posts: 1706
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 9:48 am
Location: Bavaria / Germany

Re: Do arahants discard vipaka/suffering?

Post by acinteyyo »

Ñāṇa wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:Well, it may be mere designation, but it is still something that can be talked about. Or at least the Buddha seemed to think so, otherwise we would not have the such designation as khandhas and the "all" put forth by the Buddha as ways of talking about such stuff, even if it is mere designation.
The all is to be abandoned. The path is to be developed in order to abandon the all. The path is entirely 100% fabricated for that specific purpose. The raft is for crossing over, not for carrying around once crossed over, and certainly not for constructing philosophies.

All the best,

Geoff
:goodpost: this hits the nail on the head again! We are too often mislead still trying to describe the measureless with inapropriate means.
Thank you Geoff for reminding...

best wishes, acinteyyo
Thag 1.20. Ajita - I do not fear death; nor do I long for life. I’ll lay down this body, aware and mindful.
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27839
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Do arahants discard vipaka/suffering?

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Piotr,
piotr wrote:No, it doesn't. But now I understand what you've meant, thanks. Can you tell me how does passage quoted by me “covers the nidanas from nama-rupa through to vedana”?
I was talking about the sutta rather than the sentence you extracted from it, because context is everything.

Colour coded for your convenience...

Nama-rupa
Salayatana
Phassa
Vedana

The sutta, SN 35.237 as translated by Bhikkhu Bodhi...
"Bhikkhus, when there are hands, there is picking up and putting down...

"So too, bhikkhus, when there is the eye, pleasure and pain arise internally with eye-contact as condition.... When there is the mind, pleasure and pain arise internally with mind-contact as condition.

"When, bhikkhus, there are no hands, there is no picking up and putting down....

"So too, bhikkhus, when there is no eye... no mind, no pleasure and pain arise internally with mind-contact as condition.
Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
piotr
Posts: 412
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 4:33 pm
Location: Khettadesa

Re: Do arahants discard vipaka/suffering?

Post by piotr »

Hi Retrofuturist,

I find your explaination odd. Of course — part of this sutta is about paṭicca-samuppāda. But piece about hands and picking up and so on, in my opinion has nothing to do with p-s. In fact from context it's clear that dependence on hands of picking up and putting down is illustration for dependence on contact of pleasure and pain.
Bhagavaṃmūlakā no, bhante, dhammā...
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27839
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Do arahants discard vipaka/suffering?

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings piotr,
piotr wrote:But piece about hands and picking up and so on, in my opinion has nothing to do with p-s. In fact from context it's clear that dependence on hands of picking up and putting down is illustration for dependence on contact of pleasure and pain.
Do you think so? I just realised (.... I must be getting tired, it's getting late...) that I missed part of the sutta, denoted by the ellipsis, where I should have copied parts from SN 35.236.

The 'hands' part reads as follows......

"Bhikkhus, when there are hands, picking up and putting down are discerned. When there are feet, coming and going are discerned. When there are limbs, bending and stretching are discerned. When there is the belly, hunger and thirst are discerned"

To me that is about the designation (nama) of form (rupa).... nama-rupa.

You may however define nama-rupa differently to me... I understand it along the lines of the interpretations of Bhikkhu Nanananda, not the Mahaviharist "mind and body" interpretation.
poitr wrote:I find your explaination odd.
I'm used to that... but I'm always open to people demonstrating I am incorrect and/or deepening my understanding so don't hesitate to interrogate.

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
piotr
Posts: 412
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 4:33 pm
Location: Khettadesa

Re: Do arahants discard vipaka/suffering?

Post by piotr »

Hi Retrofuturist,

There's a Pāli word between two parts: evaṃeva — it means “so too”. It's a word which is used when simile is explained. So it's clear that first part is a simile. I'm sorry, but I can't agree with your cryptic reading of this text.
Bhagavaṃmūlakā no, bhante, dhammā...
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27839
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Do arahants discard vipaka/suffering?

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Piotr,
piotr wrote:There's a Pāli word between two parts: evaṃeva — it means “so too”. It's a word which is used when simile is explained.
It just sounds like a continuation to me. I see nothing inherent in the words "so too" to say, "this is a simile that I shall now expand upon thusly..."

In fact often when things are similes (e.g. the chariot one rides to liberation, monkey in a glue trap) it made quite literally clear that this is what they are, and the different components are often explained.
piotr wrote:So it's clear that first part is a simile. I'm sorry, but I can't agree with your cryptic reading of this text.
That's fine Piotr, you don't need to if you don't want to. So too, I was not altogether satisfied by your interpretation. So be it...

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
Sylvester
Posts: 2204
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: Do arahants discard vipaka/suffering?

Post by Sylvester »

Ñāṇa wrote:Elsewhere this non-abiding mind is designated as "unestablished consciousness" (appatiṭṭha viññāṇa).

Hi Geoff

Where may I encounter this consciousness that is unestablished?

I looked at SN 12.38 and there's a reference to -
Ārammaṇe asati patiṭṭhā viññāṇassa na hoti
When there is no basis, there is no support for the establishing of consciousness - per BB
Clearly, this is not a junction between an adjective and its noun, since both are declined differently.

I looked also at SN 12.64 which speaks of
... atthi rāgo atthi nandī atthi taṇhā, patiṭṭhitaṃ tattha viññāṇaṃ virūḷhaṃ. Yattha patiṭṭhitaṃ viññāṇaṃ virūḷhaṃ, atthi tattha nāmarūpassa avakkanti.

...if there is lust, if there is delight, if there is craving, consciousness becomes established there and comes to growth. Where consciousness becomes established and comes to growth, there is the descent of name and form.
Again, I do not see any suggestion that the above reference to "consciousness becomes established" could be grammatically transformed by a negation to be an adjective-noun junction that is appatiṭṭha viññāṇa.

How did you derive appatiṭṭha viññāṇa, as I could not find this term in the Canon? BB points to a variant "...appatitthena vinnanena ... parinibbuto" but that simply works out be being "...with consciousness unestablished ... has attained final Nibbana". The term is clearly a verb and a noun in conjunction, not an adjective and a noun in a junction. The context also reveals this, as the question that prompted the Buddha to answer in this manner was Mara's query "Where has the consciousness of the clansman Godhika been established?" per SN 4.23.

I'm not sure if we need to papancize a simple case of "no consciousness because there was no establishment" to become "an unestablished consciousness [is]"
Last edited by Sylvester on Thu Apr 07, 2011 2:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
piotr
Posts: 412
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 4:33 pm
Location: Khettadesa

Re: Do arahants discard vipaka/suffering?

Post by piotr »

Hi Retrofuturist,
retrofuturist wrote:In fact often when things are similes (e.g. the chariot one rides to liberation, monkey in a grease trap) it made quite literally clear that this is what they are, and the different components are often explained.
Often but not always. Turn one page of your Saṃyutta-nikāya translated by Bhikkhu Bodhi and read the last paragraph at the bottom of p. 1239. You'll read simile of the chariot. Evaṃeva is used. None of the components are explained, but simile is still clear. So it is in the sutta which concerned us.
Bhagavaṃmūlakā no, bhante, dhammā...
Nyana
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: Do arahants discard vipaka/suffering?

Post by Nyana »

Sylvester wrote:Where may I encounter this consciousness that is unestablished?
If you follow the noble eightfold path to its fruition and thereby eliminate passion, aggression, and delusion, then you'll have your answer. In the meantime, Ven. Ñāṇananda's Nibbāna Sermons will have to suffice:
  • Now as to this vacant gaze, there is much to be said, though one might think that it is not at all worth discussing about. If someone asks us: 'What is the object of the gaze of one with such a vacant gaze', what shall we say? The vacant gaze is, in fact, not established anywhere (appatiṭṭham). It has no existence (appavattaṃ) and it is object-less (anārammaṇaṃ). Even at the mention of these three terms, appatiṭṭham, appavattaṃ and anārammaṇaṃ, some might recall those highly controversial discourses on Nibbāna.

    Why do we call the vision of the arahant a vacant gaze? At the highest point of the development of the three characteristics impermanence, suffering and not-self, that is, through the three deliverances animitta, appaṇihita and suññata, the "signess", the "undirected" and the "void", the arahant is now looking at the object with a penetrative gaze. That is why it is not possible to say what he is looking at. It is a gaze that sees the cessation of the object, a gaze that penetrates the object, as it were.
Also, SN 12.64: "Where consciousness does not become established and come to growth, there is no decent of name-and-form." (Yattha appatiṭṭhitaṃ viññāṇaṃ avirūḷhaṃ, natthi tattha nāmarūpassa avakkanti.) Ven. Bodhi's endnote:
  • The present passage is clearly speaking of the arahant's consciousness while he is alive. Its purport is not that an "unestablished consciousness" remains after the arahant's parinibbāna, but that his consciousness, being devoid of lust, does not "become established in" the four nutriments in any way that might generate a future existence.
As for my rendering of "unestablished" (appatiṭṭha) as an adjective for a "consciousness which does not become established," this is in keeping with the sense of the above from Ven. Ñāṇananda. One could designate it as mental-consciousness (manoviññāṇa), as per MN 38: "[W]hen consciousness arises dependent on the mind and mind-objects, it is reckoned as mind-consciousness." This is what the early ābhidhammikas have decided, adding that said mental-consciousness is classified within the unincluded level (apariyāpanna bhūmi). That's fine by me, but doesn't really convey the full meaning of Ven. Ñāṇananda's interpretation of SN 12.64 and Udāna 8.1 (PTS Ud 80).

All the best,

Geoff
Post Reply