Why did the Buddha not answer Vacchagotta (SN 44.10), but did answer the monks (MN 140)?
score:1
The questions are similar in that the existence of self appears to be discussed.
In Vacchagotta's question, a nonsensical demand about the question of existence of self is simply ignored as nonsense.
However, in the case of the monks, they are simply using the convention "he" as a proxy for "that aggregate known as Pukkusāti". And the question is about kamma, not self. The monks are not asserting Pukkusāti's literal existence any more than saying "what will happen to this piece of toast tomorrow?" Indeed, if the monks had asked "where has Vacchagotta been reborn in the next life?", the answer might not be so bright. Vacchagotta's rebirth might be a bit like the plastics in the ocean. Not extinguished, entangled in notions of a self.
Upvote:-1
In MN 140, the monks asked the question: "Tassa kā gati, ko abhisamparāyo". There is an exact sutta in the Majjhima Nikaya, namely, MN 68, which ends with the Buddha explaining why he answers this very question. MN 68 says, per Horner translation:
The Tathāgata, Anuruddha, does not have the purpose of defrauding people nor the purpose of cajoling people nor the purpose of gains, honour, fame and material advantages, nor the thought: ‘Let people know me thus’ when he explains the uprising (upapattīsu; noun; locative case) in which are disciples who have deceased and passed away, saying: ‘Such and such a one has uprisen (uapanno; verb; past participle) in one, such a one has uprisen (upapanno) in another.’ But there are, Anuruddha, young men of family who have faith and are of great enthusiasm, of great joyousness, and who, having heard this, focus their minds on suchness. Anuruddha, this will be for their weal and happiness for a long time.
In summary, the question by the monks is answered for the sake of explaining the Path progress of the deceased for the purpose of generating faith in the community. The question is not answered for the purpose of generating belief in reincarnation or self.
Where as Vacchagotta was a befuddled wanderer and his question was not related to any aspect of the Path.
END of ANSWER
Note: Ven. Sujato translates MN 68 as:
"What advantage does the Realized One see in declaring the rebirth of his disciples who have passed away:
kaṁ atthavasaṁ sampassamāno tathāgato sāvake abbhatīte kālaṅkate upapattīsu byākaroti:
Bhikkhu Bodhi translates "upapattīsu" here as "reappearance".
The above appears more evidence supporting the assertion of Ven. Yuttadhammo on BSE and also DD there is no Pali word that means "rebirth" because when the Buddha declares a deceased disciple is an Arahant obviously this is not a declaration of a "rebirth" or "reappearance" because Arahants are not subject to any "rebirth" or "reappearance".
Upvote:0
I don't see the similarity
Vaccagotta asks whether there is a self or not and i assert that meaning is close to whether there is a soul-consciousness.
Bhikkhus ask where was Pukkusati reborn.
A person can be said to be reborn without there being an assertion of the persistence of consciousness.
Like knowledge is transferred from a teacher to student or how a family lineage is perpetually upheld without there being same anything transmigating from one to another but yet we say it is the same knowledge being transferred or same lineage being upheld.
So monks too can say that a being is reborn without making the redundant assertions because when one speaks of a being one speaks in terms of the doctrine of self, whether this doctrine is agreed upon as being a grasping with wrong view is what separates ariya from common people.
Imo it is most evident in questions Buddha would ask to have one pin down the existence of self.
- Are the body/intellect/feelings/perceptions a self? No
- Is the self without body/intellect/feelings/perceptions? No
- Is the self in, apart from or is the body/intellect/feelings/perception taken together? No
So, one asserts the terms of the doctrine but it does not align with inferable elements and is therefore a lie basically or a grasping with wrong view of some sort.
When it comes to inferable elements this is the very basis for the doctrine of dependent origination.
In it's most basic form there is a discussion or pondering about "something" because there is a pondering and it has an object and the object's particulars which can be agreed upon due to inference and demonstration.
It can agreed upon that there is seeing, smelling, hearing, feeling, tasting & thinking and it can be agreed upon that these depend on certain requisite conditions.
Seeing depends on the eye, when there is no eye there is no seeing. Seeing depends on the visible form, when there is no lights forms do not become visible. Seeing depends on the eye-consciousness, an unconscious person doesn't see even if there is an eye & light by which forms are made visible.
We know even from QM physics or philosophical paradoxes that the eye in no way persists over time so why would one assume this about consciousness.
Yet one can speak about an eye persisting or a person getting a new eye without any issues and likewise it is in the texts.
More post
- 📝 What does random Images flashing during mediation mean ,if anything at all?
- 📝 Why do I get a feeling on my forehead as if someone is touching it during meditation?
- 📝 How does kamma create a new set of aggregates for a rebirth; how do the mechanics of this process work?
- 📝 Does being in a commited married life make it impossible to attain Nirvana? If not, how can one progress towards Nirvana?
- 📝 Conscience and Buddhism
- 📝 Best Meditation for Stress
- 📝 Dhamma and Buddha Dhamma
- 📝 Is identifying with the good always a problem?
- 📝 Can meditation change your hormone and neurotransmitter system?
- 📝 How could craving be the habit of reification?
- 📝 Seven 10-day and one 20-day Goenka Course but no "good results"
- 📝 Are the titles “lama” and “rinpoche” given or self-proclaimed?
- 📝 If I'm reborn as a Deva, how long will my lifespan be?
- 📝 Why are there are only one Buddha per universe?
- 📝 looking for a particular sutta
- 📝 Longest meditation period of historical Buddha
- 📝 Buddha teaches the extinguishing of suffering, what if an individual is okay with suffering?
- 📝 Buddhist's teaching on grief?
- 📝 How does a monk address parents and relatives?
- 📝 Eating meat and buying meat
- 📝 Concept of Vedana as expounded in Theravada Buddhism
- 📝 Causing lose of property, wealth, access in modern times: downfall transgression or just a 'virtual gaming'?
- 📝 Is it bad karma to think but not claim that one is enlightened, or just bad for your practice?
- 📝 Other physical (samatha) meditation objects besides breath?
- 📝 How did ancient Indian Buddhists describe causation vs correlation? Why were they concerned with this?
- 📝 Do the same rules of Karma apply to animals?
- 📝 Which is this sutta, which describes a monk prepared to travel and to experience violence?
- 📝 What is the significance of Commentaries (Atthakatha) to the Suttas?
- 📝 Is the Tipitaka considered infallible in Theravada Buddhism?
- 📝 Mindfulness and mental habits
Source: stackoverflow.com
Search Posts
Related post
- 📝 Why did the Buddha not answer Vacchagotta (SN 44.10), but did answer the monks (MN 140)?
- 📝 Why did the Buddha suffer before he died?
- 📝 Attachment is a poison. Why is attachment to the Buddha and to Buddhist philosophy not a problem?
- 📝 Why does the Buddha always answer a question if asked three times?
- 📝 If there is no soul or self, why did the Buddha speak of his past lives?
- 📝 Why did the Buddha touch the earth at his enlightenment?
- 📝 Why did physical representations of the Buddha only start to appear a few centuries after his death?
- 📝 There is a text where Buddha says that the Dharma he teaches is not a secret doctrine so why are there sects which maintain secrecy?
- 📝 Why did the Buddha contradict about His teachings in these two different suttas?
- 📝 Why did the Lord Buddha criticize natthikavādaṃ (moral nihilism)?
- 📝 Why did Buddha use the 'Raft Simile'?
- 📝 Are monks allowed to have prescriptions? What did the Buddha say of medicine?
- 📝 Why did the Buddha teach how to escape Samsara if there is no soul?
- 📝 The Buddha spoke to many individuals. Did the Buddha ever tell an individual who did not believe in rebirth, that they must in order to be liberated?
- 📝 Why did the buddha teach the mahayana?
- 📝 Western scholars: Did the Buddha not speak the Digha Nikaya?
- 📝 Why did the Buddha take 7 years to attain Nirvana?
- 📝 Animals: why did the Buddha remain silent?
- 📝 Why did Buddha refrain from finding knowledge of the whole universe?
- 📝 Why did Buddha praise the vedic Agnihotra as the foremost sacrifice?
- 📝 Where is the Buddha quoted as saying do not believe anything I say until you can prove it by yourself?
- 📝 Why does the Buddha call himself the Tathāgata?
- 📝 Did the Buddha speak Pali? Are the suttas his word verbatim?
- 📝 What language did the Buddha speak?
- 📝 Why is contributing to the market demand for meat not wrong?
- 📝 Why the Buddha didn't originally allow ordination of women
- 📝 Did the Buddha really say that "life is suffering"?
- 📝 Why did Mahayana leave out the Pali Canon?
- 📝 Why is the Buddha described as trackless?
- 📝 Did the Buddha ever delve on the dangers of one's own spirtual achievements feeding the ego?