Is MN 140 a fake sutta?

[salayatananirodha]

I am acquainted with the word jara marana( DO). But not param marana. May I know the proper english translation for param marana, please.

Beyond, or after, death.

Beyond death would make sense, especially if we wrote it 'breaking up of the body, beyond death,...'

[DooDoot]

Beyond death would make sense, especially if we wrote it 'breaking up of the body, beyond death,...'

Thanks S.N.

The key issue raised in the topic is many suttas appear to say arahants or a Tathagata do not experience "death" ("marana"); that generally the term "marana" ("death"; which has the same root at "Mara") is distinguished from the "termination of life" or "end of/finished time" ("kālaṃ kata").

Regards

[salayatananirodha]

I understand. What I mean is what this sutta could fathomably say is that the arahant is beyond death, and I'm no pali scholar, but from what Sam Vara said that is one way to interpret it.

[sphairos]

So I see no problem that the building block was used here as in other hundreds times in PC.

Hi Sphairos

The building block above is generally in relation to the puthujjhana and not the Arahant. MN 140 is about the Arahant & Nibbana-without-residue.

Regards

Not really, research better.

Your sentence doesn't really make sense : they are always speculating if the TathAgata (the Buddha) exists after death:

Santi paneke samaṇabrāhmaṇā evaṃvādino evaṃdiṭṭhino – ‘‘na hoti tathāgato paraṃ maraṇā, idameva saccaṃ moghamañña’’nti. Santeke samaṇabrāhmaṇā evaṃvādino evaṃdiṭṭhino – ‘‘hoti ca na ca hoti tathāgato paraṃ maraṇā, idameva saccaṃ moghamañña’’nti. Santi paneke samaṇabrāhmaṇā evaṃvādino evaṃdiṭṭhino – ‘‘neva hoti na na hoti tathāgato paraṃ maraṇā, idameva saccaṃ moghamañña’’nti.

[DooDoot]

Not really, research better.

The "research" was done a long long time ago; eradicating "beginner" status.

Heedfulness is the path to the Deathless. Heedlessness is the path to death. The heedful die not. The heedless are as if dead already

Dhp 21

Bhikkhu, ‘I am’ is a conceiving; ‘I am this’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall not be’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be possessed of form’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be formless’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be percipient’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be non-percipient’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be neither-percipient-nor-non-percipient’ is a conceiving. Conceiving is a disease, conceiving is a tumour, conceiving is a dart. By overcoming all conceivings, bhikkhu, one is called a sage at peace. And the sage at peace is not born, does not age, does not die; he is not shaken and does not yearn. For there is nothing present in him by which he might be born. Not being born, how could he age? Not ageing, how could he die? Not dying, how could he be shaken? Not being shaken, why should he yearn?

MN 140 https://suttacentral.net/mn140/en/bodhi

On seeing a form with the eye, he does not lust after it if it is pleasing; he does not dislike it if it is unpleasing. He abides with mindfulness of the body established, with an immeasurable mind, and he understands as it actually is the deliverance of mind and deliverance by wisdom wherein those evil unwholesome states cease without remainder. Having thus abandoned favouring and opposing, whatever feeling he feels, whether pleasant or painful or neither-painful-nor-pleasant, he does not delight in that feeling, welcome it, or remain holding to it. As he does not do so, delight in feelings ceases in him. With the cessation of his delight comes cessation of clinging; with the cessation of clinging, cessation of being; with the cessation of being, cessation of birth; with the cessation of birth, ageing and death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and despair cease. Such is the cessation of this whole mass of suffering.

MN 38

[sphairos]

Not really, research better.

The "research" was done a long long time ago; eradicating "beginner" status.

Heedfulness is the path to the Deathless. Heedlessness is the path to death. The heedful die not. The heedless are as if dead already

Dhp 21

Bhikkhu, ‘I am’ is a conceiving; ‘I am this’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall not be’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be possessed of form’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be formless’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be percipient’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be non-percipient’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be neither-percipient-nor-non-percipient’ is a conceiving. Conceiving is a disease, conceiving is a tumour, conceiving is a dart. By overcoming all conceivings, bhikkhu, one is called a sage at peace. And the sage at peace is not born, does not age, does not die; he is not shaken and does not yearn. For there is nothing present in him by which he might be born. Not being born, how could he age? Not ageing, how could he die? Not dying, how could he be shaken? Not being shaken, why should he yearn?

MN 140 https://suttacentral.net/mn140/en/bodhi

On seeing a form with the eye, he does not lust after it if it is pleasing; he does not dislike it if it is unpleasing. He abides with mindfulness of the body established, with an immeasurable mind, and he understands as it actually is the deliverance of mind and deliverance by wisdom wherein those evil unwholesome states cease without remainder. Having thus abandoned favouring and opposing, whatever feeling he feels, whether pleasant or painful or neither-painful-nor-pleasant, he does not delight in that feeling, welcome it, or remain holding to it. As he does not do so, delight in feelings ceases in him. With the cessation of his delight comes cessation of clinging; with the cessation of clinging, cessation of being; with the cessation of being, cessation of birth; with the cessation of birth, ageing and death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and despair cease. Such is the cessation of this whole mass of suffering.

MN 38

Don't quote Suttacentral - it gives out your beginners status. It was your words that the passage is not attributed to arahant, but a faulty person. I refuted it, showing, that even TathAgata is questioned about that. You were beat.

Download CST4 and search for all the occurences, you will be surprized, novice.

[DooDoot]

Don't quote Suttacentral

The Pali suttas were quoted, with various translations by Buddharakkhita and Bhikkhu Bodhi. What else should be quoted if not the Pali suttas?

it It was your words that the passage is not attributed to arahant

The passage appears attributed to arahant practise; although I do recall posting the Pali issue may be due to the listener (Pukkusati ) not being an Arahant . This is why the thread was started. But it was already answered the Pali text differs in different editions. I was satisfied with that answer by Pulga.

I refuted it...

No. What you posted was one sutta while ignoring many other suttas. You refuted nothing; apart from your own opinion. The translators have chosen to ignore translating "marana". This is why the thread was started. Regardless, since I started the thread, my opinion is you have not contributed any compelling answers to the thread. In other words, your answers are off-topic to me, the questioner. If you wish the believe Arahants and Buddhas "die" ("marana"), you are free to believe this.

Download CST4 and search for all the occurences, you will be surprized, novice.

Please do your own work. Arahants obviously do not "marana" according to the Pali suttas.

[sphairos]

Don't quote Suttacentral

The Pali suttas were quoted, with various translations by Buddharakkhita and Bhikkhu Bodhi. What else should be quoted if not the Pali suttas?

it It was your words that the passage is not attributed to arahant

The passage appears attributed to arahant practise; although I do recall posting the Pali issue may be due to the listener (Pukkusati ) not being an Arahant . This is why the thread was started. But it was already answered the Pali text differs in different editions. I was satisfied with that answer by Pulga.

I refuted it...

No. What you posted was one sutta while ignoring many other suttas. You refuted nothing; apart from your own opinion. The translators have chosen to ignore translating "marana". This is why the thread was started. Regardless, since I started the thread, my opinion is you have not contributed any compelling answers to the thread. In other words, your answers are off-topic to me, the questioner. If you wish the believe Arahants and Buddhas "die" ("marana"), you are free to believe this.

Download CST4 and search for all the occurences, you will be surprized, novice.

Please do your own work. Arahants obviously do not "marana" according to the Pali suttas.

Don''t waste my time , young man.

"The Pali suttas were quoted, with various translations by Buddharakkhita and Bhikkhu Bodhi. What else should be quoted if not the Pali suttas? "

The commentated competent scholarly translations along with the research. '

Suttacentral is not a scholarly resource, especially with Sujato's "easy English" translations.

[DooDoot]

Don''t waste my time , young man.

It is you that is wasting your own time making unsubstantiated posts of insubstantial nothingness.

Suttacentral is not a scholarly resource, especially with Sujato's "easy English" translations.

Suttacentral has translations by Sujato, Bodhi, Horner, Thanissaro, Brahmali, Mills, Ireland, Anandajoti, Buddharakkhita & others. It is not a cult.