You have been arguing that pain isn’t dukkha, but it’s our mental reaction to it which is.
Was the Buddha’s body originated by ignorance, yes or no? He did still have a body after all.
Furthermore if pain isn’t dukkha why then would the Buddha have to enter into meditation to get away from it, if it’s completely non-dukkha to him according to you?
yes, because there is ignorance and then our reactions are with akusala factors and so on.
You and RobertK both have a high knowledge of Dhamma. I’m starting to suspect if maybe you are bored and getting some entertainment with me…
you know the Buddha was born like Siddharta and he had ignorance. When there is birth of a human being there is ignorance and the acquisition of a gross -self which include rupa. The rupa of the body should follow its own kamma course until its decay.
The aggregate of form is the only aggregate with a cause not related with nama:
“Monk, the four great existents (earth, water, fire, & wind) are the cause, the four great existents the condition, for the delineation of the aggregate of form. Contact is the cause, contact the condition, for the delineation of the aggregate of feeling. Contact is the cause, contact the condition, for the delineation of the aggregate of perception. Contact is the cause, contact the condition, for the delineation of the aggregate of fabrications. Name-&-form is the cause, name-&-form the condition, for the delineation of the aggregate of consciousness.”
MN 109
yes, according the Suttas it was to avoid the troubles of physical pain.
I don’t have a remote idea about how it could be experienced, although when there are injuries or illnesses also there are many related phenomena in the body to impede the normal activity (inflammations, fatigue, clumsiness, slow motion, fever… The survival reactions developed by the body to protect itself. And even without dukkha such changes can force an stop and a rest.
It would be interesting knowing the case of those few person who cannot experience physical pain. Sure this is not the same thing, although there is that relation in a disjoinment of mind and body regarding pain.
In which case, it shouldn’t be in the 1st NT but it is there. Therefore, pain itself is dukkha. Its not just our mental reactions to things, although that is obviously a big part of it. And no, I’m not playing with you at all.
you know the Buddha was born like Siddharta and he had ignorance. When there is birth of a human being there is ignorance and the acquisition of a gross -self which include rupa. The rupa of the body should follow its own kamma course until its decay.
The aggregate of form is the only aggregate with a cause not related with nama:
That there was past ignorance is key here. In the past, for him, there was ignorance. With ignorance comes a mind and body, both of which are dukkha. Whilst walking around teaching the Dhamma he experienced those dhammas, which arose because of dependent origination. Whatever is dependently originated is dukkha.
yes, according the Suttas it was to avoid the troubles of physical pain.
I don’t have a remote idea about how it could be experienced, although when there are injuries or illnesses also there are many related phenomena in the body to impede the normal activity (inflammations, fatigue, clumsiness, slow motion, fever… The survival reactions developed by the body to protect itself. And even without dukkha such changes can force an stop and a rest.
It would be interesting knowing the case of those few person who cannot experience physical pain. Sure this is not the same thing, although there is that relation in a disjoinment of mind and body regarding pain.
Which doesn’t make sense according to your exegesis. If physical pain wasn’t dukkha at all for him, there would be no need to enter a refined meditative state to gain some respite from it. It does make sense though if pain itself is dukkha, which is what he taught in the 4NT.
1 Like
Glad we agree that the three marks are inherent to existence.
But why do you think saṅkhāradukkhatā doesn’t apply to Buddha and arahats?
2 Likes
From Milindapanha
Translation by U Pu
p.98
QUESTION WHETHER OR NOT ONE WHO WILL NOT BE REBORN EXPERIENCES ANY DISAGREEABLE
FEELING
(patisandahanapuggalavediyapanha)
4. King Milinda said: “Does an individual (arahat) who will not be reborn, O Venerable Nagasena, experience any disagreeable feeling (dukkha vedana)?’’
The Elder replied: “Some disagreeable feeling he experience and some, not.”
“Which (disagreeable feeling) does he experience and which does he not?”
“He experiences, O King, the bodily disagreeable feeling (kayika dukkha vedana) but not the mentally disagreeable feeling (cetasika dukkha vedana).”
“How does he, O Venerable One, experience the bodily disagreeable feeling, but not the mentally disagreeable feeling?”
“Whatsoever, O King, is the causal factor that brings about the experiencing of the bodily disagreeable feeling, the presence of such a factor conduces to one experiencing the bodily disagreeable feeling. Whatsoever is the causal factor that brings about the experiencing of the mentally disagreeable feeling, the absence of such a factor conduces to one not experiencing the mentally disagreeable feeling. The Exalted Buddha has, O King, declared: ‘The one (arahat) that will not be reborn, experiences only the bodily disagreeable feeling, but not the mentally disagreeable feeling.” (So explained the Elder.)
1 Like
Yes. 
3 Likes
pain itself is dukkha for us, for those who the 4NT are applied.
This is no for the arhant. The arhant doesn’t have to realize the 4NT neither the path for the eradication of dukkha appearing inside the 4NT. It was already accomplished.
The 4NT are only a teaching to realize what the arhant already has realized.
Whilst walking around teaching the Dhamma he experience the anatta of dhammas and the cease of dependent origination.
The experience of Reality according dependent origination is the delusion of Reality, our reality. The arhant has realized the teaching of the Buddha and the cease of dependent origination.
Dependent origination is the experience of a Reality conditioned by ignorance. And then: “From the cessation of ignorance comes the cessation of fabrications From the cessation of fabrications …Such is the cessation of this entire mass of suffering & stress.”
there is no contradiction when reading the Buddha was in bad health or he was aware about the necessity of rest, a meditation or even medical attention. It doesn’t mean that dukkha was present in the Buddha like some materialist/secularists explain.
As I tried to explain with Suttas and examples, there is a disjointment between the physical pain and mind. And then there is no dukkha because the physical pain.
Do we experience dukkha when seeing a TV film with killed people?. If there is detachment there is no dukkha. We could say that the killing in itself is dukkha but then the question would be : dukkha exists in Who?
Dukkha is not a dhamma. There is no possibility of dukkha without the clinging to an existing -self to sustain dukkha. We can name that TV image “dukkha” but this is just the sustaining of a concept, this is not the description of a reality with dukkha.
I want to remember that the thread is originated in the claim Buddha and Arhants still have dukkha to be eradicated according those new EBT interprets. They say that only after death dukkha is eradicated in Buddha and arhants. This is a wrong view, at least to me.
therefore, How can you agree about the Buddha and arhants still have dukkha to be eradicated at death like those EBT people says?
because dukkha is completely eradicated in both Buddha and arhants.
saṅkhāradukkhatā only exists for the arhant in the terms of SN 12.27:
“Then is it that Master Gotama does not know and see suffering?”
“It is not that I do not know and see suffering, Kassapa. I know suffering, I see suffering.”
they know and see suffering but without experience of suffering. Such thing is not possible after the cease of ignorance, consciousnes… clinging, becoming and so on.
There is no Reality arising conditioned by ignorance and giving rise to dukkha. Please also read my previous answer to @Ceiswr
I suspect the core of the the apparent disagreement is in what I wrote to @Ceiswr:
Dukkha is not a dhamma. There is no possibility of dukkha without the clinging to an existing -self to sustain dukkha. We can name that TV image “dukkha” but this is just the sustaining of a concept, this is not the description of a reality with dukkha.
If you or @Ceiswr check any contradiction please explain this with detail. I would be glad to know. .
All dhammas have the nature (dhammā) of dukkha.
All dhammas have the nature of anatta (no dukkha)
Then?
Dear Zerotime,
thank you for continuing the discussion.
What is new EBT? The points I put forward I try to ensure are ancient orthodox Theravada, given of course that Dhamma is deep and I may make errors at times.
Just trying to understand this. Are you saying that while alive the Buddha and arahats had no consciousness, vinnana? (Did they also have no salayatana, the sense bases?)
You are basing this on Paṭiccasamuppāda I think.
Avijjāpaccayā, bhikkhave, saṅkhārā;
saṅkhārapaccayā viññāṇaṁ;
Consciousness is a condition for name and form.
viññāṇapaccayā nāmarūpaṁ;
Name and form are conditions for the six sense fields.
nāmarūpapaccayā saḷāyatanaṁ;
The six sense fields are conditions for contact.
saḷāyatanapaccayā phasso;
Contact is a condition for feeling.
But the orthodox view is that while the arahats have indeed eliminated igorance and craving there is still the remnant of the fire of samsara, the cooling embers, until khandha parinibbana.
That is why there is sopadisesa nibbana-dhatu and anupadisesa nibbana-dhatu (final extinguishment).
If the Buddha and arahats had no consciousness, vinnana, they could not see or hear or think .
Or perhaps you think they had a special type of seening, hearing, tasting , touching, thinking that is not viññāṇa khanda? Please explain.
On the other hand you cite Nina Van Gorkom’s book on Abhidhamma.
This is all true. However, kiriya cittas and vipaka cittas are just as much sankhara dukkha as any other citta.
So certainly there is a difference between the arahat and others in that the javana process is with kiriya cittas rather then the akusala and kusala cittas of the non-arahat. Thus they are not making new kamma, not adding fuel, they are no longer extending samsara. But still they have to wait until final khandha parinibbana until the khandas -which include vinnana, finally cease. Then all that is left is the physical remains.
It is good to remember that Buddha or arahats are just conventional terms,useful designations. In the deepest sense there are only conditioned moments of arising and ceasing - dukkha. Sunnata.
You might like to read this thread about Yamaka -who wrongly thought there was a being who was annihilated
.> Bodhi: Spk: If he had thought, “Formations arise and cease; a simple process of
formations reaches nonoccurrence, this would not be a view (diṭṭhigata) but
> knowledge in accordance with the Teaching .But since he thought, A being is
annihilated and destroyed,” this becomes a view. What follows is paralleled by
MN I 130-31 and I 256-57.
152 Spk: At the end of this teaching on the three characteristics Yamaka became
a stream-enterer. Sāriputta asks the following questions to examine him and to
get him to show that he has given up his wrong view.
Spk glosses tathāgata here as “a being” (satta), which I think does not quite
hit the mark. I take the subject of the discussion to be, not a being in general, but
the arahant conceived as a being, as a substantial self. Thus the catechism will
show that Yamaka has abandoned his identity view (sakkāyadiṭṭhi) regarding the
arahant, and therewith his view of the arahant as a self that undergoes
annihilation. We find a similar transition from the arahant (vimuttacitta bhikkhu)
to the Tathāgata at MN I 140,3-7 and I 486-88.
The three marks (characteristics), tilakkhana only apply to actual dhammas, realities. Concepts like TV or self are not included.
Right, the three marks, anicca, dukkha and anatta are characteristics of dhammas, the nature of dhammas, not dhammas themselves:
Vism XXI note 4.“These modes, [that is, the three characteristics,] are not included in the aggregates because they are states without individual essence (asabháva-dhammá); and they are not separate from the aggregates because they are unapprehendable without the aggregates. But they should be understood as appropriate conceptual differences (paññatti-visesá) that are reason for differentiation in the explaining of dangers in the five aggregates, and which are allowable by common usage in respect of the five aggregates” (Vism-mhþ 825).
1 Like
A post was split to a new topic: While alive, the Buddha and arahats had already cessation of consciousness?
Then what happens, dukkha-vedana can no longer be called dukkha-vedana? Without suffering as a defining property, bodily dukkha vedana loses its defining characteristic, which distinguishes it from a pleasant and neutral sensation. Since when did one of the three vedanas cease to exist among the arahants? And where in the suttas/commentaries is it said that the emergence of dukkha-vedana (physical at least) depends directly on ignorance, and not on contact?
No, Buddha literally called pain suffering within the 1 Noble Truth: “pain is suffering.” If pain were not suffering, then the Buddha would not have gone away from it into jhana and animitta samadhi (mahasunyata sutta, majima nikaya)
No, it’s the same thing. Buddha says: “the cause of suffering is also suffering” (in one of the suttas of the Sanyuta Nikaya).
Bodily pain is, as already mentioned above, in any case not a neutral feeling, but dukkha-vedana. And she cannot be any other. The defining characteristic of dukkha vedana is suffering.
The body does not experience suffering, its consciousness experiences it due to the presence of painful contact, and the latter experiences its own. the queue is generated by the karma produced by past clinging. And so, clinging is the ultimate cause of dukkha in any case. If it were not for clinging, this dukkha-producing mechanism would not have been generated. This mechanism, this givenness of dukkha simply exists as long as the conditions have already developed. But the Arahant sees that the process of suffering is empty of the Self. And that’s why he doesn’t suffer mentally. When, after a conversation with Sariputta, Yamaka understood the Dhamma, he answered the question about the afterlife of the Arahant as follows: that which is impermanent (formed) is suffering, that suffering has ceased and faded away. As you see, even the aggregates of the Arahant are suffering, and their cessation is happiness and nirvana. But there is no such personality or essence of the arahant (only suffering arises and ends).
1 Like
suffering arise in dependence of clinging. In the arhant there is no clinging and it will be only bodily pain
this was already commented. The four noble truths are a teaching to be free. For the arhant there are no more 4 noble truths to be applied.
1- dukkha doesn’t exist anymore
2- the cause of dukkha was eradicated
3- as the cause was eradicated, dukkha was eradicated
4- there is no more eightfold path to be followed
Pain is an unpleasant feeling. Buddha and arhants known what was pleasant and unpleasant. The absence of clinging cause no more dukkha although it doesn’t mean a lost of intelligence ( see previous SN 12.17)
The defining characteristic of dukkha vedana is the presence of dukkha vedana. It will cause suffering depending of clinging.
This is how somebody should train the understanding of both according Buddha:
"As he is touched by that painful feeling, he is not resistant. No resistance-obsession with regard to that painful feeling obsesses him. Touched by that painful feeling, he does not delight in sensual pleasure. Why is that? Because the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones discerns an escape from painful feeling aside from sensual pleasure.
[…]
Sensing a feeling of pleasure, he senses it disjoined from it. Sensing a feeling of pain, he senses it disjoined from it. Sensing a feeling of neither-pleasure-nor-pain, he senses it disjoined from it. This is called a well-instructed disciple of the noble ones disjoined from birth, aging, & death; from sorrows, lamentations, pains, distresses, & despairs. He is disjoined, I tell you, from suffering & stress."SN 36.6
the Buddha clearly taught the escape from the dukkha caused by bodily pain. In fact there is no more case here. At least to me, this is quite obvious.
so first you was rejecting my phrase: “this wouldn’t be right because the pain is not the same thing than suffering” saying:
- No, Buddha literally called pain suffering within the 1 Noble Truth: “pain is suffering.”
and now you writes: “The body does not experience suffering, its consciousness experiences it”
so I don’t understand. Do you agree there is a difference between arising of bodily pain and dukkha in the arhant?. This is what the thread is about.
There is some people today explaining the Buddha and arhants still should experience dukkha until death. This is the cause of this thread.
Yes, but you are ignoring the fact that clinging does not condition direct vedana (at least it conditions only the part of mental dukhavedana associated with defilements of the mind, domanasa). From the twelve-link chain of dependent arising we do not see such a connection: upadana>dukkha. But upadana determines bhava, and bhava, in turn, determines birth, and then the entire bulk of dukkha.
Further, bodily pain is dukkha. Firstly, it is called dukkha according to the 1st noble truth, secondly, pain is dukkha-vedana, as was already said above, and the defining characteristic of dukkha-vedana is suffering. If this characteristic disappeared, then we would simply talk about the disappearance of one of the three components of the second khandha in the arahant, which is not in the suttas.
According to Yamaka Sutta, Vajira Sutta and Silavanta Sutta, they are applicable. Dukkha has a certain inertia until it finally extinguishes completely with the disintegration of the araharta body and the extinction of all aggregates (which are dukkha personified). You are wrong on this issue.
It exists until the 5 aggregates are extinguished. All three suttas to which I referred just above directly state this.
Literally dukkha [vedana]
No, this is suffering in itself, direct suffering. And clinging causes suffering for two reasons. 1. generates painful mental vedana here and now and 2. bodily painful vedana in the future through rebirth, illness, aging and death. But both are associated with a painful feeling, which is the experience of dukkha. There is no other apparatus for experiencing and sensing dukkha other than vedana.
There is another sutta on the same topic about two darts. The trained disciple is struck by only one dart (bodily dukkha-vedana), but not by the second dart (mental dukkha-vedana). If the Buddha had not considered bodily pain to be suffering, he would not have called it such a brightly emotionally colored object (a sharp dart) and would not have compared these two types of dukkha with the same object - a dart.
The Buddha’s words must be understood in the context of the entire body of teachings. Here he taught the disconnected experience of pain and pleasure, that is, the experience in such a way that the second dart did not hit the student along with the first dart.
Yes, because pain is vedana, which in turn is mental khandha.
Dukkha is a product of past causes and conditions. The Arahants and Buddhas stopped producing these conditions and causes so that dukkha would not arise in the future. Moreover, their mental dukkha has largely ceased. But there are serious reasons to believe that there is also mental dukkha that is not associated with mental defilements. This is fatigue from the disturbance of the senses and the burden of constantly arising and disintegrating phenomena, tormenting the mind through contact. From them, according to tradition and visudhimagga, arahants and anagamins hide for a while in nirodha-samapati.
2 Likes
well, the connection is not only very clear but in fact clinging is the kernel of dependent origination.
If you don’t see the connection maybe you can read this Sutta which is directly devoted to explain the connection (SN 12.52)
Dwelling at Savatthi. There the Blessed One said to the monks: "In one who keeps focusing on the allure of clingable phenomena (or: phenomena that offer sustenance = the five aggregates), craving develops. From craving as a requisite condition comes clinging/sustenance. From clinging/sustenance as a requisite condition comes becoming. From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth. From birth as a requisite condition, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair come into play. Such is the origin of this entire mass of suffering & stress.
[…]
In the same way, in one who keeps focusing on the drawbacks of clingable phenomena, craving ceases. From the cessation of craving comes the cessation of clinging/sustenance. From the cessation of clinging/sustenance comes the cessation of becoming. From the cessation of becoming comes the cessation of birth. From the cessation of birth, then aging, illness & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair all cease. Such is the cessation of this entire mass of suffering & stress."
bodily pain is bodily pain. Bodily pain is named dukkha as also sickness, old age, and so on. In fact all the reality is marked by dukkha.
However, the experience of conditioned reality (including body pain) will cause suffering depending of clinging and akusala factors.
Note that if you would be right the whole Buddhist teaching would be useless because dukkha will be something inhabiting in the objects instead in -self clinging.
And this would be a materialism, discarded by the Buddha.
I cannot find in these Suttas any mention about arhants still should be trained in following the noble truths and the eightfold noble Path. As far I understand, from always it was considered that the arhant is free of dukkha and no more training is required.
Please, Can you quote the Sutta paragraphs from where you extract that conclusion?
this is not applied to arhants regarding dukkha because the cease of feeling is part of the cease of the dependent origination. The pain is leaved as it is, without arising of dukkha in the mind.
dukkha is product from clinging and becoming. At the cease of clinging there is no more becoming and no more dukkha. This was the Buddha teaching.
You and others can have “serious reasons to believe” any other thing but it lacks of
logics according the dependent origination. Because the cease of feeling and the rest of links until birth and dukkha are included.
Fatigue will be dukkha depending of clinging. Taking a rest will be attachment to body also depending of clinging.
The non-clinging to the arising of unpleasurable feelings is something difficult to conceive to us, although precisely this is the goal of the Buddha teaching: be free from dukkha.
When the Buddha and arhants knew the arising of bodily pain they were searching for a rest or a meditation. Also they preferred pleasurable places instead unpleasurable. Non-clinging and anatta don’t convert a person into an ignorant machine unaware of Reality.
If their bodies needed a rest then a rest was made. As also is better be seated under a tree shadow than under sun at 40 Celsius degrees. That’s common sense.
This is not because still there is suffering. On the contrary we would be talking about people who become more ignorant after their awakening.
Admin Note: Dear zerotime
We have allowed you some leeway to explain your views
You are welcome to keep posting but please do not continue to promote ideas that are not Theravada. It will be better if you listen and consider the many citations shown to you rather than sticking to your beliefs…
1 Like
ok. The discussion is respectful but if you think this is problematic we leave here. Anyway, I think it has been clarifying in some points, at least to me.
Just to say that I believe that I was explaining what the Orthodox Theravada teaching says. Because in the teaching it is very clear the existence of the Cease of dukkha from the aggregates.
I suggest an investigation in this issue inside the sources because also more people could realize it.
Thanks anyway for keeping the discussion
In the clinging aggregates(upadanakkhandha), eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, nose-consciousness, tongue-consciousness, body-consciousness, mind-consciousness, each has the characteristic of being delightful and pleasurable. When this Craving is abandoned, it is abandoned there; when it ceases, it ceases there.
…
Bhikkhus, this is called the Noble Truth of the Cessation of Dukkha.DN 22 Upadana Sutta: Clinging
At Savatthi. “Monks, I will teach you the burden, the carrier of the burden, the taking up of the burden, and the casting off of the burden. [1] Listen & pay close attention. I will speak.”
“As you say, lord,” the monks responded.
The Blessed One said, "And which is the burden? ‘The five clinging-aggregates,’ it should be said. Which five? Form as a clinging-aggregate, feeling as a clinging-aggregate, perception as a clinging-aggregate, fabrications as a clinging-aggregate, consciousness as a clinging-aggregate. This, monks, is called the burden.
"And which is the carrier of the burden? ‘The person,’ it should be said. This venerable one with such a name, such a clan-name. This is called the carrier of the burden.
"And which is the taking up of the burden? The craving that makes for further becoming — accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now here & now there — i.e., craving for sensual pleasure, craving for becoming, craving for non-becoming. This is called the taking up of the burden.
“And which is the casting off of the burden? The remainderless fading & cessation, renunciation, relinquishment, release, & letting go of that very craving. This is called the casting off of the burden.”
A burden indeed are the five aggregates,
and the carrier of the burden is the person.
Taking up the burden in the world is stressful.
Casting off the burden is bliss.
Having cast off the heavy burden and not taking on another,
pulling up craving, along with its root, one is free from hunger, totally unbound.SN 22.22 Bhāra Sutta: The Burden
Just so the aggregates and elements,
And these six bases of sensory contact,
Have come to be dependent on a cause;
When the cause dissolves they will cease.SN 5.9 Sela Sutta: Sister Sela