Why does arahant's Cetana not produce kamma/vipaka?
Why does arahant's Cetana not produce kamma/vipaka?
If Kamma is Cetana, why does an Arahant's Cetana not produce kamma-vipaka? Does it have something to do with the lack of ignorance in the Cetana?
"If beings knew, as I know, the results of giving & sharing, they would not eat without having given, nor would the stain of miserliness overcome their minds. Even if it were their last bite, their last mouthful, they would not eat without having shared."
Iti 26
Iti 26
Re: Why does arahant's Cetana not produce kamma/vipaka?
"But when one doesn't intend, arrange, or obsess [about anything], ...
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
Re: Why does arahant's Cetana not produce kamma/vipaka?
ground, I don't think that really answers Coyote's question. Another way to phrase the question in terms of that sutta is, What's different about an arahant's intention, given that there is no production of renewed becoming? How do you eat, talk or travel about without intention? Does being an arahant mean disidentifying from the intentions and becomings which seem, from a conventional point of view, to be necessary to these activities?
Re: Why does arahant's Cetana not produce kamma/vipaka?
That's true. Since ignorance has been abandoned, the self views of "I", "mine", "myself" also cease. So if there's no "self" who intends, kamma no longer be constructed upon that "self". For example, a worlding who intends to give food to a hungry beggar will receives good kamma in the future since s/he still sees a "self" who's giving something to the other. The arahant spontaneously gives without any "self" involved. Thus no future kamma..Coyote wrote:If Kamma is Cetana, why does an Arahant's Cetana not produce kamma-vipaka? Does it have something to do with the lack of ignorance in the Cetana?
- male_robin
- Posts: 17
- Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 8:32 pm
Re: Why does arahant's Cetana not produce kamma/vipaka?
I think, yes, the lack of kilesas; of afflicted motivation.Coyote wrote:If Kamma is Cetana, why does an Arahant's Cetana not produce kamma-vipaka? Does it have something to do with the lack of ignorance in the Cetana?
That is from AN 6.63 Nibbedhika Sutta
The passage in transliterated Pali:
Cetanāhaṃ, bhikkhave, kammaṃ vadāmi. Cetayitvā kammaṃ karoti: kāyena, vācāya, manasā.
The next passage seems to be saying that kamma originates from contact.
Katamo ca, bhikkhave, kammānaṃ nidāna-sambhavo? Phasso, bhikkhave, kammānaṃ nidāna-sambhavo.
The section goes on to explain that kamma is experienced in the 5 realms of living beings. Next, that the fruit of kamma can arise immediately, later in life, or the next life. After that is explains that cessation (nirodha) of kamma is from the cessation of contact via the noble eight branched path. It then talks about understanding all that in terms of discerning the penetrative holy life.
Prior to that, the Sutta talks about the cessation of sensual lust, feelings (vedana), sanna, and asavas in the same way. After kamma, it discusses the cessation of dukkha in the same. The focus seems to be on cessation of phassa (contact) via the 8-fold path, which leads to or is followed by the penetrative holy life. Cessation (nirodha) of contact leads to nirodha of lust, feelings / sensations, conceptions / perceptions, inflows / outflows, kamma, and dukkha,
A key here might be understanding what is nirodha. I do not think it means total cessation, but rather the cessation or restraint of the three root kilesas. I think there is still contact between the 6 bases and their objects. However, sensual lust does not arise. There are still the three kinds of vedana and sanna. However, things are seen as they are without attachment or revulsion, so there are no inflows / outflows, no kamma generated, and no being overwhelmed by dukkha.
From what I i just looked at, निरोध nirodha can mean restraint, control, prevention ...
नि ni- orनिर् nir- can mean down, below, into, or out?
रोध rodha can mean growing, sprouting. Also impeding or blocking?
This is all tentative.
Re: Why does arahant's Cetana not produce kamma/vipaka?
Hello all
This previous thread may be of interest:
Arahants and kamma
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=232
With metta,
Chris
This previous thread may be of interest:
Arahants and kamma
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=232
With metta,
Chris
---The trouble is that you think you have time---
---Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe---
---It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---
---Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe---
---It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---
Re: Why does arahant's Cetana not produce kamma/vipaka?
ground, I don't think that really answers Coyote's question. an arahant must intend. intention was included by Buddha as one of the four nutriments & thus necessities of life. here, Buddha appeared to explain good intention & bad intention (two strong men) drag a person to the vipaka (result) of a pit of fire. here, Buddha agreed with the saying: 'the road to hell is paved with good intentions'. but Right Intention (Samma Sankappa), the 2nd Path Factor, does not lead to the pit of fire. also, being completely cleansed from the three kinds of craving & particularly self-view certainly helps in the occurring of no vipaka (resultant suffering).ground wrote:"But when one doesn't intend, arrange, or obsess [about anything], ...
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
- retrofuturist
- Posts: 27858
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: Why does arahant's Cetana not produce kamma/vipaka?
Greetings,
Actually, I think ground's response does answer the question.
Or to put it another way, an arahant neither generates nor sustains any sankharas (including kamma) founded in avijja.
Metta,
Retro.
Actually, I think ground's response does answer the question.
Or to put it another way, an arahant neither generates nor sustains any sankharas (including kamma) founded in avijja.
So yes... think of it in terms of paticcasamuppada (i.e. dependent arising of samsaric experience) if that helps.Coyote wrote:If Kamma is Cetana, why does an Arahant's Cetana not produce kamma-vipaka? Does it have something to do with the lack of ignorance in the Cetana?
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."
Re: Why does arahant's Cetana not produce kamma/vipaka?
fivebells wrote:ground, I don't think that really answers Coyote's question.
Zakattack wrote:ground, I don't think that really answers Coyote's question.
I agree with retrofuturist.retrofuturist wrote:Actually, I think ground's response does answer the question.
The issue however is that the wording is "answer Coyote's question" while fivebells can only refer to his own doubt and Zakattack can only refer to his own doubt and retrofuturist can only refer to his own certainty and ground can only refer to his own certainty.
It is likely that Coyote's doubt ressembles the doubts of fivebells and Zakattack whatever the reason may be if it is so.
- tiltbillings
- Posts: 23046
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Re: Why does arahant's Cetana not produce kamma/vipaka?
Good heavens.ground wrote:fivebells wrote:ground, I don't think that really answers Coyote's question.Zakattack wrote:ground, I don't think that really answers Coyote's question.I agree with retrofuturist.retrofuturist wrote:Actually, I think ground's response does answer the question.
The issue however is that the wording is "answer Coyote's question" while fivebells can only refer to his own doubt and Zakattack can only refer to his own doubt and retrofuturist can only refer to his own certainty and ground can only refer to his own certainty.
It is likely that Coyote's doubt ressembles the doubts of fivebells and Zakattack whatever the reason may be if it is so.
>> 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
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
Re: Why does arahant's Cetana not produce kamma/vipaka?
i think
Arahant has intention without passion (dispassion)
while the worldling has intention with passion
there is two types of aggregates
the clinging aggregates
the aggregates with delight and passion
and aggregates with out delight and passion
metta
Arahant has intention without passion (dispassion)
while the worldling has intention with passion
there is two types of aggregates
the clinging aggregates
the aggregates with delight and passion
and aggregates with out delight and passion
metta
Re: Why does arahant's Cetana not produce kamma/vipaka?
OK, but they do generate sankharas? How does this look, outside of the chain of DO? Is it like the conscious fabrication of jhana, just without attachment/clinging?retrofuturist wrote:an arahant neither generates nor sustains any sankharas (including kamma) founded in avijja.
- retrofuturist
- Posts: 27858
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: Why does arahant's Cetana not produce kamma/vipaka?
Greetings,
As for what is experienced, I'll defer and allow an arahant to respond to your question. It would not be proper for me to do so, as I am not.
Metta,
Retro.
Not sankharas dependent upon avijja... hence,fivebells wrote:OK, but they do generate sankharas?
Yes, outside of it. Paticcasamuppada has no revelance once its source is destroyed.fivebells wrote:How does this look, outside of the chain of DO?
As for what is experienced, I'll defer and allow an arahant to respond to your question. It would not be proper for me to do so, as I am not.
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."
Re: Why does arahant's Cetana not produce kamma/vipaka?
Friend. There is appreciation (mudita) for your metta towards Ground. But the omission of crucial conditions of avijja (ignorance), craving (tanha) & sakkaya ditthi (self-view) are where Ground's reply falls short to some. The way it is, without doubt, is arahants produce taintless sankhara. To the novice, Ground's reply may give rise to the mistaken view an arahant's kamma ends due to non-thinking & non-doing (rather than due to the remainderless extinguishing of self-view).retrofuturist wrote:Actually, I think ground's response does answer the question. Or to put it another way, an arahant neither generates nor sustains any sankharas (including kamma) founded in avijja.
When an arahant speaks, if they do not engage/produce vaci sankhara, how do they speak?And the Blessed One said: "Whosoever, Ananda, has developed, practiced, employed, strengthened, maintained, scrutinized, and brought to perfection the four constituents of psychic power could, if he so desired, remain throughout a world-period or until the end of it. The Tathagata, Ananda, has done so. Therefore the Tathagata could, if he so desired, remain throughout a world-period or until the end of it."
And at the Capala shrine the Blessed One thus mindfully and clearly comprehending renounced his will to live on. And upon the Lord's renouncing his will to live on, there came a tremendous earthquake, dreadful and astonishing, and thunder rolled across the heavens.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .vaji.html
The above quote not only shows arahants produce/engage verbal sankhara but also are liberated from kamma vipaka due to an absence of conceit (aka self-view).Having first directed one's thoughts and made an evaluation, one then breaks out into speech. That's why directed thought & evaluation are verbal sankhara.
MN 44
Bonds are gone for him without conceits,
All delusion's chains are cast aside:
Truly wise, he's gone beyond such thoughts.
That monk still might use such words as "I,"
Still perchance might say: "They call this mine."
Well aware of common worldly speech,
He would speak conforming to such use.
SN 1.25 Araha.m Sutta: The Arahant
To borrow a phrase from the Tao Te Ching: "The true sage can talk all day without getting hoarse, so complete is his harmony".
As for the quote below, is shows arahants function as pure aggregates, including sankhara aggregate.
"Then, friend Yamaka, how would you answer if you are thus asked: A monk, a worthy one (arahant), with no more mental effluents: what is he on the break-up of the body, after death?"
"Thus asked, I would answer, 'Form is inconstant... Feeling... Perception... Fabrications (Sankhara)... Consciousness is inconstant. That which is inconstant is unsatisfactory. That which is unsatisfactory has ceased and gone to its end."
"Very good, my friend Yamaka. Very good.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
Re: Why does arahant's Cetana not produce kamma/vipaka?
Without any idea of a self, there is no one doing the deed or receiving its consequences. The arahant has no such burden left.
Inappropriate attention leads to thinking in terms of kamma-vipaka.
Only the aggregates remain ie. nibbana with depersonalised aggregates.There is the deed but no doer; there is suffering but no sufferer; there is the path no one to enter it; and there is liberation but no one to attain it.
"What do you think: 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, my friend."
"Do you regard the Tathagata as that which is without form, without feeling, without perception, without fabrications, without consciousness?"
"No, my friend."
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
Inappropriate attention leads to thinking in terms of kamma-vipaka.
"And what are the ideas fit for attention that he does not attend to? Whatever ideas such that, when he attends to them, the unarisen fermentation of sensuality does not arise in him, and the arisen fermentation of sensuality is abandoned; the unarisen fermentation of becoming does not arise in him, and arisen fermentation of becoming is abandoned; the unarisen fermentation of ignorance does not arise in him, and the arisen fermentation of ignorance is abandoned. These are the ideas fit for attention that he does not attend to. Through his attending to ideas unfit for attention and through his not attending to ideas fit for attention, both unarisen fermentations arise in him, and arisen fermentations increase.
"This is how he attends inappropriately: 'Was I in the past? Was I not in the past? What was I in the past? How was I in the past? Having been what, what was I in the past? Shall I be in the future? Shall I not be in the future? What shall I be in the future? How shall I be in the future? Having been what, what shall I be in the future?' Or else he is inwardly perplexed about the immediate present: 'Am I? Am I not? What am I? How am I? Where has this being come from? Where is it bound?'
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called right speech.