Arahant's suicide

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
santa100
Posts: 3729
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: Arahant's suicide

Post by santa100 » Sat Aug 03, 2019 6:35 pm

Germann wrote:Bottom line is that MANIFESTATIONS are empty of self-existence. The absence of something self-existing and the MANIFESTATION of what is empty of it is simultaneously. This is called the “two truths,” which are two aspects of the same true reality.

Therefore, it is possible to talk with Subhuti - he is not something non-existent. In this case, a self-existing Subhuti is not found.
Bottom line is that MANIFESTATIONS are empty of self-existence. Talk about differentiation/prioritizing self over others is empty of self-existence. Encouraging arahants to kill themselves is empty of self-existence since the self-existing arahant is not found, etc...

chownah
Posts: 8254
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: In the Pali text "dukkha"

Post by chownah » Sun Aug 04, 2019 2:34 am

Germann wrote:
Sat Aug 03, 2019 4:22 pm
chownah wrote:
Sat Aug 03, 2019 2:28 pm
THE ONLY THING THE BUDDHA TAUGHT WAS THE END OF SUFFERING
In the Pali text "dukkha", not the more specific word "pain", etc. Khandhas is dukkha, and even if you deny any bodily discomfort to Arahant, preserving dukkha (khandkhas) is a denial of benefits - a denial of an accessible, in the form of suicide, rapid termination of dukkha. For a long time, Arahant has been giving up his profit, for the benefit of others.

In Mahayana, it is the motivation of Bodhichitta.
Your post seems muddled.....the first sentence seems to have disconnected elements....and then there is the "even if" scenario which points to a strawman arguement arising from the ambiguous "discomfort" injection.....in short it looks alot like grasping at straws.

As to suicide; suicide is an action resulting from the craving for non-existence......arahants have ended craving so your scenario of an arahant having suicide as an accessible "benefit" is a false one....an arahant would not crave for non-existence (and it seems that an arahant would be having a pleasant abiding at will but I'm not completely sure about this) and so there would be no temptation for suicide as the necessary craving for its implementation would be missing.

You seem to be obsesssed with an arahant having a miserable life.....I don't know where this comes from....everything in the suttas that I have found indicates that an arahant's life is far superior to non-arahants' lives....the buddha talks about conditions after awakening being absolutely wonderful....can you provide a sutta where the buddha (or anyone else) describes the misery of an arahant?
chownah

User avatar
Germann
Posts: 415
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2019 2:24 pm

The absence of thirst and disgust explains nothing.

Post by Germann » Tue Aug 06, 2019 6:41 pm

chownah wrote:
Sun Aug 04, 2019 2:34 am
Germann wrote:
Sat Aug 03, 2019 4:22 pm
chownah wrote:
Sat Aug 03, 2019 2:28 pm
THE ONLY THING THE BUDDHA TAUGHT WAS THE END OF SUFFERING
In the Pali text "dukkha", not the more specific word "pain", etc. Khandhas is dukkha, and even if you deny any bodily discomfort to Arahant, preserving dukkha (khandkhas) is a denial of benefits - a denial of an accessible, in the form of suicide, rapid termination of dukkha. For a long time, Arahant has been giving up his profit, for the benefit of others.

In Mahayana, it is the motivation of Bodhichitta.
Your post seems muddled.....the first sentence seems to have disconnected elements....and then there is the "even if" scenario which points to a strawman arguement arising from the ambiguous "discomfort" injection.....in short it looks alot like grasping at straws.

As to suicide; suicide is an action resulting from the craving for non-existence......arahants have ended craving so your scenario of an arahant having suicide as an accessible "benefit" is a false one....an arahant would not crave for non-existence (and it seems that an arahant would be having a pleasant abiding at will but I'm not completely sure about this) and so there would be no temptation for suicide as the necessary craving for its implementation would be missing.

You seem to be obsesssed with an arahant having a miserable life.....I don't know where this comes from....everything in the suttas that I have found indicates that an arahant's life is far superior to non-arahants' lives....the buddha talks about conditions after awakening being absolutely wonderful....can you provide a sutta where the buddha (or anyone else) describes the misery of an arahant?
chownah
Buddha taught the cessation of dukkha. Dukkha (even if it is not gross misery, not physical pain) is bad, it is a loss. The cessation of dukkha (not limited only to pain) is good, it is a gain. Khandhas are dukkha in the past, in the present and in the future.

Rejecting the immediate cessation of any dukkha, with the collapse of khandhas during suicide, Arahant clearly gives up personal gain. For what? For the good of others — for the training of monks.

In Mahayana, this approach is called Bodhichitta motivation.

The absence of an active act (such as suicide) cannot be explained by the absence of thirst and disgust. The old and decrepit Arahant has no thirst, no disgust - but he actively travels on foot along the dusty roads of hot India, goes for alms and brings food to his mouth, delivers sermons, and so on. There is no thirst and disgust, but an active act is evident. Therefore, the absence of thirst and disgust explains nothing.

chownah
Posts: 8254
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: The absence of thirst and disgust explains nothing.

Post by chownah » Wed Aug 07, 2019 1:46 am

Germann wrote:
Tue Aug 06, 2019 6:41 pm
The absence of an active act (such as suicide) cannot be explained by the absence of thirst and disgust.
Perhaps the absence of suicide CAN be explained by noting that the arahant does not suffer and has a pleasant abiding available at all times.....and also by noting that suicide arises as a form of desperation born of aversion and that arahants who do not suffer do not suffer from aversion.
chownah

User avatar
Germann
Posts: 415
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2019 2:24 pm

Traditional Commentary

Post by Germann » Wed Aug 07, 2019 4:05 am

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html

According to the traditional Commentary on this Sutta (SN 54.9), some of the suicides were Arahants, weren't they? As can be seen in this example, the absence of thirst and disgust does not in the least prevent Arahant from committing suicide.

User avatar
Germann
Posts: 415
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2019 2:24 pm

Re: The absence of thirst and disgust explains nothing.

Post by Germann » Wed Aug 07, 2019 4:08 am

chownah wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 1:46 am
Germann wrote:
Tue Aug 06, 2019 6:41 pm
The absence of an active act (such as suicide) cannot be explained by the absence of thirst and disgust.
Perhaps the absence of suicide CAN be explained by noting that the arahant does not suffer and has a pleasant abiding available at all times.....and also by noting that suicide arises as a form of desperation born of aversion and that arahants who do not suffer do not suffer from aversion.
chownah
It doesn’t matter if there is pain or not - as long as there is khandhas, there is dukkha. Dukkha is a loss, it is bad. Stopping dukkha is a gain, it is good. Renouncing his profit for the benefit of others, Arahant acts as a Bodhisattva in the Mahayana.

The absence of thirst and aversion does not mean the absence of an active act. Arakhant performs active actions (traveling, collecting alms, preaching - the same suicide, according to the Commentary), although Arakhant has no thirst and no disgust.

chownah
Posts: 8254
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Arahant's suicide

Post by chownah » Wed Aug 07, 2019 9:47 am

Please bring the commentary you refer to .


chownah

User avatar
Germann
Posts: 415
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2019 2:24 pm

Theravada.ru

Post by Germann » Wed Aug 07, 2019 2:39 pm

chownah wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 9:47 am
Please bring the commentary you refer to .
On a Theravada site about this comment:
"Some of these monks were ordinary people, some who entered the stream, once-returning, non-returning, and arahants.

http://www.theravada.ru/Teaching/Canon/ ... .htm#link1
"Некоторые из этих монахов были заурядными людьми, некоторые – вступившими в поток, однажды-возвращающимися, не-возвращающимися, и арахантами."

User avatar
Pseudobabble
Posts: 937
Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2017 11:11 am
Location: London

Re: Arahant's suicide

Post by Pseudobabble » Wed Aug 07, 2019 2:49 pm

Germann wrote:
Sat Jul 27, 2019 6:55 pm
Is Arahant's suicide a GOOD completion of the Path? If it is not, then why Arahant is not the Mahayana Bodhisattva (placing Benefit-For-The Other above Benefit-For-Itself)? Suicide frees Arahant from two types of dukkha: dukkhadukkhatā and saṅkhāradukkhatā. The continuation of life is the continuation of dukkha.
Again you start with the wrong premise. The continuation of the upadanakkhanda is the continuation of dukkha. Upadanakkhanda is not jiva.
"Does Master Gotama have any position at all?"

"A 'position,' Vaccha, is something that a Tathagata has done away with. What a Tathagata sees is this: 'Such is form, such its origination, such its disappearance; such is feeling, such its origination, such its disappearance; such is perception...such are fabrications...such is consciousness, such its origination, such its disappearance.'" - Aggi-Vacchagotta Sutta


'Dust thou art, and unto dust thou shalt return.' - Genesis 3:19

'Some fart freely, some try to hide and silence it. Which one is correct?' - Saegnapha

chownah
Posts: 8254
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Theravada.ru

Post by chownah » Wed Aug 07, 2019 3:23 pm

Germann wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 2:39 pm
chownah wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 9:47 am
Please bring the commentary you refer to .
On a Theravada site about this comment:
"Some of these monks were ordinary people, some who entered the stream, once-returning, non-returning, and arahants.

http://www.theravada.ru/Teaching/Canon/ ... .htm#link1
"Некоторые из этих монахов были заурядными людьми, некоторые – вступившими в поток, однажды-возвращающимися, не-возвращающимися, и арахантами."
I think this is not a Commentary. If it is then bring us a link in english.
Do you now what a Commentary (with a capital C) is in theravada?
chownah

User avatar
Germann
Posts: 415
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2019 2:24 pm

Re: Theravada.ru

Post by Germann » Wed Aug 07, 2019 5:17 pm

chownah wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 3:23 pm
Germann wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 2:39 pm
chownah wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 9:47 am
Please bring the commentary you refer to .
On a Theravada site about this comment:
"Some of these monks were ordinary people, some who entered the stream, once-returning, non-returning, and arahants.

http://www.theravada.ru/Teaching/Canon/ ... .htm#link1
"Некоторые из этих монахов были заурядными людьми, некоторые – вступившими в поток, однажды-возвращающимися, не-возвращающимися, и арахантами."
I think this is not a Commentary. If it is then bring us a link in english.
Do you now what a Commentary (with a capital C) is in theravada?
chownah
This is a story about the content of the Comment.
Yes, it means āṭṭhakathā.

User avatar
Germann
Posts: 415
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2019 2:24 pm

Re: Arahant's suicide

Post by Germann » Wed Aug 07, 2019 5:42 pm

Pseudobabble wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 2:49 pm
Germann wrote:
Sat Jul 27, 2019 6:55 pm
Is Arahant's suicide a GOOD completion of the Path? If it is not, then why Arahant is not the Mahayana Bodhisattva (placing Benefit-For-The Other above Benefit-For-Itself)? Suicide frees Arahant from two types of dukkha: dukkhadukkhatā and saṅkhāradukkhatā. The continuation of life is the continuation of dukkha.
Again you start with the wrong premise. The continuation of the upadanakkhanda is the continuation of dukkha. Upadanakkhanda is not jiva.
SN 22.10

Kālat­ta­ya­duk­kha­sutta
https://legacy.suttacentral.net/pi/sn22.10
https://legacy.suttacentral.net/en/sn22.10

Khandhi is dukkha in the past, present and future (in the three tenses). There can be no such thing that in the future - when there is no more upadana - the khandhas stop being dukkha.

User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 2905
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am

Re: Arahant's suicide

Post by cappuccino » Wed Aug 07, 2019 6:30 pm

Keep Calm
:coffee:

chownah
Posts: 8254
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Theravada.ru

Post by chownah » Thu Aug 08, 2019 2:49 am

Germann wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 5:17 pm
chownah wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 3:23 pm
Germann wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 2:39 pm

On a Theravada site about this comment:
"Some of these monks were ordinary people, some who entered the stream, once-returning, non-returning, and arahants.

http://www.theravada.ru/Teaching/Canon/ ... .htm#link1
"Некоторые из этих монахов были заурядными людьми, некоторые – вступившими в поток, однажды-возвращающимися, не-возвращающимися, и арахантами."
I think this is not a Commentary. If it is then bring us a link in english.
Do you now what a Commentary (with a capital C) is in theravada?
chownah
This is a story about the content of the Comment.
Yes, it means āṭṭhakathā.
So....it is a comment on a Commentary?......bring the Commentary's name in english and perhaps even a link so we can see if the Commentary supports what you are saying or whether it is just someones comment on the Commentary which might be what you claim as support.
chownah

User avatar
Germann
Posts: 415
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2019 2:24 pm

Theravada.ru

Post by Germann » Thu Aug 08, 2019 1:43 pm

chownah wrote:
Thu Aug 08, 2019 2:49 am
Germann wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 5:17 pm
chownah wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 3:23 pm

I think this is not a Commentary. If it is then bring us a link in english.
Do you now what a Commentary (with a capital C) is in theravada?
chownah
This is a story about the content of the Comment.
Yes, it means āṭṭhakathā.
So....it is a comment on a Commentary?......bring the Commentary's name in english and perhaps even a link so we can see if the Commentary supports what you are saying or whether it is just someones comment on the Commentary which might be what you claim as support.
chownah
This is a story about the content of the canonical Commentary on the website of the Theravadin community. The site is blessed by the hierarchy of Sri Lanka's Amarapura-Maha-Nikaya, who speaks Russian.

"According to the Commentary, these five hundred monks used to be hunters in the distant past. Because of this, they were reborn in hell, but then due to good kamma they were able to be born people and become monks during the life of the Buddha. However, part of the bad kamma remained, and it matured in the form of murders or the intention to take its own life. Buddha foresaw this and knew that he could not do anything. He instructed them in meditation on the abomination of the body, so that, having cast off attachment to the body, they could lose the fear of death and be reborn in the heavenly worlds. Therefore, he gave such instruction to help them, and not to praise death. Realizing that he could not change the course of events, he went into retreat so as not to be present at the time of ripening the fruits of their kamma. Some of these monks were ordinary people, some who entered the stream, once-returning, non-returning, and arahants."

Are you claiming that Theravada.ru community misinforms about the content of the canonical Commentary?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 77 guests