Must an Arahant stay forever in their place of enlightenment?

Upvote:0

Possibly the translation of "anubandhitabbo" is too rigid.

That mendicant should follow that person for the rest of their life. They shouldn’t leave them, even if sent away.

Tena, bhikkhave, bhikkhunā yāvajīvampi so puggalo anubandhitabbo, na pakkamitabbaṁ, api panujjamānenapī”ti.

anubandhitabba future passive participle adjective anubandhati

anubandhati present 3 singular follows; keeps close to, attends closely; pursues

While the use of anubandhitabbo appears in all other cases to refer to "physically following a person around", in MN 17 it may mean to "mentally keep close to in the heart". Therefore, for example, a monk may go wandering but always periodically return to that benefactor or forest grove, such as during the rainy season retreat.

Upvote:0

Must an Arahant stay forever in their place of enlightenment?

I think it does not fit with what we're told in many other suttas -- in that the suttas mentioned many Arahants by name, including the Buddha himself, travelling from place to place. I don't remember reading any rule like that in the Vinaya, either.

As for this sutta the word in question, which is translated "for the rest of their life", is yāvajīva (from jīva) -- and I see no hint in the online dictionaries that this word has a idiomatic or non-literal meaning.

But one thing that puts me in mind of is this episode from the Buddha's life -- Buddha meditation under the bodhi tree. That shows some movement e.g. for necessities. That's from before the Buddha's final enlightenment or becoming "unbound", i.e. it's while seeking, during the Noble Search..

And there's this version of that story -- Where is the description of the vow and the Bodhi tree? -- which (in my words) implies that the Buddha vows to stay there for the rest of his life if necessary.

The other thing is, I read the whole sutta as saying that the place doesn't matter so much, what does matter is whether the place is conducive -- i.e. it's not important whether it's in a jungle thicket or not, what's important is whether the mind becomes established -- and, especially until or before the mind becomes established, the seeker should seek and remain in a good environment which makes that possible.

Upvote:1

There is no such requirement of staying in any place for an Arhant.

But the sutta you refer is specifically related to vanapattha paryaya (monastic practice). Where the Dhamma practitioner feels that s/his mindfulness becomes established, their mind becomes immersed in samādhi, their defilements comes to an end, it means the place is suitable and helpful for the person to arrive at Nirvana. Such places should not be left, as one needs every bit oh help that they can get in order to become an Arhant. If the surroundings are helping, such surroundings should not be left.

The sutta does not describe an Arhant, rather someone who is yet to obtain enlightenment.

More post

Search Posts

Related post