Page 1 of 1

Do Arahants have Vinnana and Namarupa?

Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 9:31 pm
by SarathW
Do Arahants have Vinnana and Namarupa?

Re: Do Arahants have Vinnana and Namarupa?

Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 11:39 pm
by dharmacorps
You mean do living human arahants have these as 2 of the 5 aggregates?

Re: Do Arahants have Vinnana and Namarupa?

Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 11:45 pm
by SarathW
dharmacorps wrote:
Sun Oct 07, 2018 11:39 pm
You mean do living human arahants have these as 2 of the 5 aggregates?
I am talking in terms of Dependent Origination.

Re: Do Arahants have Vinnana and Namarupa?

Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2018 3:21 am
by SarathW
I found the answer to the question of the consciousness of Arhant in the following audio in the Sinhalese language.

https://damsara.org/damsara_dhamma/Most ... 8-2018.mp3

In this video, it refers to as Appaticita Vinna for the Arahant consciousness. That is not established in this world or the next world.
In the case of Putujana it refers to a Patisandhi Vinnana as it is established in this world and the next world.
This matter is discussed in DN28.
===============

They understand a person’s stream of consciousness, unbroken on both sides, established in both this world and the next.

They understand a person’s stream of consciousness, unbroken on both sides, not established in either this world or the next.

https://suttacentral.net/dn28/en/sujato
============
My question:
What is the meaning of unbroken in both sides?

Re: Do Arahants have Vinnana and Namarupa?

Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2018 8:47 am
by Dinsdale
SarathW wrote:
Sun Oct 07, 2018 11:45 pm
I am talking in terms of Dependent Origination.
The question is then whether DO has fully ceased for an Arahant. And whether dukkha has fully ceased for an Arahant.

Re: Do Arahants have Vinnana and Namarupa?

Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2018 8:52 am
by SarathW
The question is then whether DO has fully ceased for an Arahant.
The answer is "Yes" as per my understanding.
Having said that his old Sankhara still will continue till his Parinibbana.

Re: Do Arahants have Vinnana and Namarupa?

Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2018 8:54 am
by SarathW
whether dukkha has fully ceased for an Arahant.
Again I would say "yes"
However, he will experience the pain. Some argue that Arahant experience Dukkha Dukkha but I disagree with this.

Re: Do Arahants have Vinnana and Namarupa?

Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2018 5:04 am
by SarathW
If living Arahants have Anidassana Vinnana they also should have the Namarupa.
I think the object of Nibbana is the Namarupa for them.
:thinking:

Re: Do Arahants have Vinnana and Namarupa?

Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2018 6:45 am
by 2600htz
Hello:

Of course, they would not be able to stay alive if they didn´t.

Regards.

Re: Do Arahants have Vinnana and Namarupa?

Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2018 7:08 am
by James Tan
SarathW wrote:
Sat Oct 13, 2018 5:04 am
If living Arahants have Anidassana Vinnana they also should have the Namarupa.
I think the object of Nibbana is the Namarupa for them.
:thinking:
What if namarupa is not what you think is ?
What if namarupa is not about aggregates only or just the mentality and materiality of a person rather the conditions of the processes .

Re: Do Arahants have Vinnana and Namarupa?

Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2018 2:45 pm
by rightviewftw
Technically the statement "Beings have Vinnana and or Namarupa" is a faulty statement.
"And how is one taken in with regard to present qualities? There is the case where an uninstructed run-of-the-mill person who has not seen the noble ones, is not versed in the teachings of the noble ones, is not trained in the teachings of the noble ones, sees form as self, or self as possessing form, or form as in self, or self as in form.

"He/she sees feeling as self, or self as possessing feeling, or feeling as in self, or self as in feeling.

"He/she sees perception as self, or self as possessing perception, or perception as in self, or self as in perception.

"He/she sees thought-fabrications as self, or self as possessing thought-fabrications, or thought-fabrications as in self, or self as in thought-fabrications.

"He/she sees consciousness as self, or self as possessing consciousness, or consciousness as in self, or self as in consciousness. This is called being taken in with regard to present qualities.

"And how is one not taken in with regard to present qualities? There is the case where a disciple of the noble ones who has seen the noble ones, is versed in the teachings of the noble ones, is well-trained in the teachings of the noble ones, does not see form as self, or self as possessing form, or form as in self, or self as in form.

"He/she does not see feeling as self, or self as possessing feeling, or feeling as in self, or self as in feeling.

"He/she does not see perception as self, or self as possessing perception, or perception as in self, or self as in perception.

"He/she does not see thought-fabrications as self, or self as possessing thought-fabrications, or thought-fabrications as in self, or self as in thought-fabrications.

"He/she does not see consciousness as self, or self as possessing consciousness, or consciousness as in self, or self as in consciousness. This is called not being taken in with regard to present qualities.
Thinking that a being has aggregates points to misunderstanding. Misunderstanding what? Misunderstanding that the existence of a person can not be pinned down;
"What do you think, Anuradha: Do you regard form as the Tathagata?"

"No, lord."

"Do you regard feeling as the Tathagata?"

"No, lord."

"Do you regard perception as the Tathagata?"

"No, lord."

"Do you regard fabrications as the Tathagata?"

"No, lord."

"Do you regard consciousness as the Tathagata?"

"No, lord."

"What do you think, Anuradha: Do you regard the Tathagata as being in form?... Elsewhere than form?... In feeling?... Elsewhere than feeling?... In perception?... Elsewhere than perception?... In fabrications?... Elsewhere than fabrications?... In consciousness?... Elsewhere than consciousness?"

"No, lord."

"What do you think: Do you regard the Tathagata as form-feeling-perception-fabrications-consciousness?"

"No, lord."

"Do you regard the Tathagata as that which is without form, without feeling, without perception, without fabrications, without consciousness?"

"No, lord."

"And so, Anuradha — when you can't pin down the Tathagata as a truth or reality even in the present life
Thus if existence of a person can not be pinned down, how can one be said to possess anything.

The question as it is posed by OP is similar to the question posed to Anuruddha;
"Do you regard the Tathagata as that which is without form, without feeling, without perception, without fabrications, without consciousness?"

"No, lord."
In conventional sense therefore Arahants can be said to not be without feeling and consciousness as is evident by this excerpt;
"What, bhikkhus, is the Nibbana-element with residue left? Here a bhikkhu is an arahant, one whose taints are destroyed, the holy life fulfilled, who has done what had to be done, laid down the burden, attained the goal, destroyed the fetters of being, completely released through final knowledge. However, his five sense faculties remain unimpaired, by which he still experiences what is agreeable and disagreeable and feels pleasure and plain. It is the extinction of attachment, hate and delusion in him that is called the Nibbana-element with residue left.
However saying that Arahants have consciousness can be problematic. Conventionally one can say that one beings senses are not the senses of another and that Arahants have their own set of aggregates but in the ultimate sense it is wrong and is somewhat similar to saying "the living room has a house". When there is a house one might conceive of a living room.

When there is consciousness there is namarupa, where there is namarupa there might be eye consciousness by which one might see forms, there might be ear consciousness by which one might hear sounds, there might be tongue-consciousness... nose-consciousness... body-consciousness... intellect-consciousness by which one might conceive of ideas and concepts. Thus when there are these types of consciousness there might arise sense-impressions dependent on the eye, ear, nose, tongue, body and intellect. When there are sense-impressions objectification of what the senses present may occur, thus one comes to think of a being, of a dog, of a tree or an Arahant. That very objectification, that very thinking is dependent on that very same intellect- consciousness and is itself a sense-impression dependent on contact at the intellect base .

Therefore the existence of beings is not postulated outside of the All;
"Monks, I will teach you the All. Listen & pay close attention. I will speak."

"As you say, lord," the monks responded.

The Blessed One said, "What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. [1] Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range."

Re: Do Arahants have Vinnana and Namarupa?

Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2018 9:31 pm
by SarathW
I have posted this question in another forum. The answers seem to be divided.
=======
So the short answer is, no, in case of an arhat there's no vijnana and namarupa - there's prajna and samskara/shunya

=========
Arahants who are still living are those with "fuel" remaining and sense faculties (salayatana) still operating. The "fuel" here refers to the five aggregates. Hence Vinnana, one of the five aggregates, is still existing. The five aggregates have stopped burning with the fires of passion, aversion and delusion, but they are like glowing embers. When the arahant passes away, then the "fuel" is no more remaining.

Then, what about namarupa? It is also still existing for living arahants. Contact (phassa) and feeling (vedana) also still exists for living arahants. However, craving (tanha) has ended for arahants. Without craving, there is no clinging (upadana). Without clinging, there is no becoming (bhava) in the future i.e. no suffering here or anywhere else after death. Arahants are also free of ignorance (avijja).

https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/ques ... 9545#29545

Re: Do Arahants have Vinnana and Namarupa?

Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2018 10:08 pm
by rightviewftw
SarathW wrote:
Sat Oct 13, 2018 9:31 pm
I have posted this question in another forum. The answers seem to be divided.
=======
So the short answer is, no, in case of an arhat there's no vijnana and namarupa - there's prajna and samskara/shunya

=========
Arahants who are still living are those with "fuel" remaining and sense faculties (salayatana) still operating. The "fuel" here refers to the five aggregates. Hence Vinnana, one of the five aggregates, is still existing. The five aggregates have stopped burning with the fires of passion, aversion and delusion, but they are like glowing embers. When the arahant passes away, then the "fuel" is no more remaining.

Then, what about namarupa? It is also still existing for living arahants. Contact (phassa) and feeling (vedana) also still exists for living arahants. However, craving (tanha) has ended for arahants. Without craving, there is no clinging (upadana). Without clinging, there is no becoming (bhava) in the future i.e. no suffering here or anywhere else after death. Arahants are also free of ignorance (avijja).

https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/ques ... 9545#29545
"And what is name-&-form? Feeling, perception, intention, contact, & attention: This is called name. The four great elements, and the form dependent on the four great elements: This is called form. This name & this form are called name-&-form.
Generally speaking;
Do Arahants see? Yes
Could seeing arise without Contact? No
Could contact occur without consciousness? No
Could consciousness occur without namarupa? No
Therefore whatever seeing there arises for an Arahant it does so dependent on Contact, dependent on Eye-Consciousness, dependent on the Eye, dependent on Forms cognizable by the Eye and is thus dependent on Namarupa. Seeing itself is in a sense namarupa.