Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
What did the Buddha say happens to a liberated being after they die?
ajnast4r
Veteran
Did the Buddha even say what happens to an totally liberated person after they die?
0
Comments
Sorry I don't have links this is off the top of my head.
When pressed further, the Buddha would counter by asking you whether form, feeling, perception, mental fabrications and consciousness are constant or inconstant. If you were to answer constant to any of these, he'd probably proceed to give you a discourse on the aggregates and dependent co-arising. If you were to answer inconstant, then he'd ask you whether it's proper to regard what's inconstant, stressful and subject to change as: "This is mine. This is my self. This is what I am."
If you were to answer yes, he'd probably proceed to give you a discourse on the not-self characteristic. If you were to answer no, then he would ask whether you regard form, feeling, perception, mental fabrications or consciousness as the Tathagata.
If you were to answer yes to any of these, he'd remind you that all these phenomena are inconstant and not fit to be called 'me' or 'mine.' If you were to answer no, then he'd ask whether you regard the Tathagata as being in form, feeling, perception, mental fabrications and consciousness, or elsewhere than form, feeling, perception, mental fabrications or consciousness.
If you were to answer yes to any of these, he'd remind you that all these phenomena are inconstant and not fit to be called 'me' or 'mine.' If you were to answer no, then he'd ask whether you regard the Tathagata as form-feeling-perception-fabrications-consciousness [i.e., taken together], or as that which is without form, without feeling, without perception, without fabrications, without consciousness [i.e., without any relation to the aggregates, and by consequence, the sense bases].
If you were to answer yes to the former, he'd remind you that these phenomena are inconstant and not fit to be called 'me' or 'mine.' If you were to answer yes to the latter, he'd probably ask you on what basis you'd make such an assertion since the description of such a self lies beyond the range of explanation. If you were to answer no, then he'd say, "So, my friend — when you can't pin down the Tathagata as a truth or reality even in the present life — is it proper for you to declare, 'The Tathagata exists after death', 'The Tathagata does not exist after death', 'The Tathagata both exists and does not exist after death' or 'The Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist after death'," and proceed to give a discourse such as this:
The Avyaakatas
The state of Nibbana after the death of the arahant is nowhere discussed in the Pali Canon. The four alternatives put forward regarding this state, namely: Does the Perfect One exist after death, does he not, does he and does he not, does he neither exist nor not exist after death, are all left aside unanswered. These questions are put aside because they are not useful to human happiness and understanding, not concerned with the Dhamma, not helpful for the higher life, not conducive to disenchantment and detachment, not conducive to cessation of misery, to tranquillity of the mind, to higher knowledge, to insight, and to peace (Nibbana).
The Aggivacchagotta Sutta cites a simile in this connection which illustrates that the questions themselves are meaningless. If there is a fire burning and if the fire goes out without fuel, can one ask the question: "In which direction did the fire go, east, south, west, or north?" The question itself is inappropriate as it assumes that fire can have existence independent of fuel. The nun Khemaa points out that the state of the Tathaagata after death is immeasurable. Just as it is impossible to calculate the drops of water in the ocean and the grains of sand in the earth, so it is impossible to conceptualize the state of Nibbana after the demise of the arahant. The Anuraadha Sutta states that the five aggregates of grasping, or the personality factors, are impermanent, unsatisfactory, and non-self. Therefore the noble disciple is detached from them. He wins freedom, and after death becomes completely untraceable. The Alagadduupama Sutta maintains that the Tathaagata cannot be identified with the personality factors even during his lifetime, so how can he be identified after death?
Again my understanding can be totally wrong.
However to me an aspect of enlightenment is not being separate from anything, so after death they would become part of the everything that is, which includes enlightened and non-enlightened, and all would be Buddha whether they realize it or not.
So if we in this forum are like nirmanakaya then the truth is coming to us in a certain energy.
Shakyamuni Buddha was the actual undistorted nirmanakaya who had overcome the suffering.
"Previously, my friend Sariputta, I did foolishly hold that evil supposition. But now, having heard your explanation of the Dhamma, I have abandoned that evil supposition, and have broken through to the Dhamma."
"Then, friend Yamaka, how would you answer if you are thus asked: A monk, a worthy one, 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... Consciousness is inconstant. That which is inconstant is stressful. That which is stressful has ceased and gone to its end."
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.085.than.html