Reply To: Post on Misconceptions on the Topics the Buddha “Refused to Answer”

#40808
dosakkhayo
Participant

“hoti tathāgato paraṁ maraṇā, idameva saccaṁ moghamaññanti vā; na hoti tathāgato paraṁ maraṇā, idameva saccaṁ moghamaññanti vā; hoti ca na ca hoti tathāgato paraṁ maraṇā, idameva saccaṁ moghamaññanti vā; neva hoti na na hoti tathāgato paraṁ maraṇā, idameva saccaṁ moghamaññanti vā;”

I have carefully thought about what those phrases meant. As I pointed out above(sassato loko, asassato loko), I found that other sentences also express conclusions drawn from a false understanding of PS. It’s like the story of blind men and the elephant. Each sentence does not comprehensively understand the whole of PS, but only partially.

(i)
‘hoti tathāgato paraṁ maraṇā’

This is the view of equating Nibbana with samsara. In other words, it considers that the way of being in samsara(ayatana, bhava, jati, etc) can apply to Nibbana. But Nibbana and samsara are mutually exclusive. Therefore it is wrong.

(ii)
‘na hoti tathāgato paraṁ maraṇā’

It is the view that the ending of samsara is a complete extinction of existence(not only in samsara but also Nibbana). The below post can explain this.

Fear of Nibbāna (Enlightenment)

#1
A given life-stream evolves according to causes (kamma.) When the ability for past kamma to bring their vipāka is stopped (i.e., taṇhā or upādāna stopped,) then that process will stop and one merges with Nibbāna at the death of that last physical body.

I inferred that the other two(‘hoti ca na ca hoti tathāgato paraṁ maraṇā’, ‘neva hoti na na hoti tathāgato paraṁ maraṇā’) are also conclusions from not understanding PS, but it is difficult to explain how they get the wrong end of the stick. So I’d like your help on this point.

Of course, I know that this task is something of little importance to achieve maggaphala. To conclude, if one understands PS correctly, the whole problem is solved. However, considering that many people do not accept the issue as a result of a false understanding of PS, I think it would be helpful to clarify how these two went wrong.

I’m not sure exactly what the word jīva means. I would like to get more information about it. Does jīva mean life-stream? Or just life in the sense of ‘being’?