Does the Buddha Exist After His Death?

• marcteng

  4 Jan 07, 03:14

  The question: 'Does the Buddha exist after His death or not', is not a new question. The same question was put to the Buddha during His lifetime.
  
  When a group of ascetics came and asked the same question from certain disciples of the Buddha, they could not get a satisfactory answer from them. Anuradha, a disciple, approached the Buddha and reported to Him about their conversation. Considering the understanding capacity of the questioners, the Buddha usually observed silence at such questions. However in this instance, the Buddha explained to Anuradha in the following manner:
  
  'O Anuradha, what do you think, is the form (Rupa) permanent or impermanent?'
  
  'Impermanent, Sir.'
  
  'Is that which is impermanent, painful or pleasant?'
  
  'Painful, Sir.'
  
  'Is it proper to regard that which is impermanent, painful and subject to change as: 'This is mine; this is I, this is my soul or permanent substance?'
  
  'It is not proper, Sir.'
  
  'Is feeling permanent or impermanent?'
  
  'Impermanent, Sir.'
  
  'Is that which is impermanent, painful or pleasant?'
  
  'Painful, Sir.'
  
  'Is it proper to regard that which is impermanent, painful and subject to change as 'This is mine, this is I, this is my soul'?'
  
  'It is not proper, Sir.'
  
  'Are perfection, formative tendencies and consciousness, permanent or impermanent?'
  
  'Impermanent, Sir.'
  
  'Is that which is impermanent, painful or pleasant?'
  
  'Painful, Sir.'
  
  'Is it proper to regard that which is impermanent, painful and subject to change as: 'This is mine, this is I, this is my soul?'?'
  
  'It is not proper, Sir.'
  
  
• marcteng

  4 Jan 07, 03:15

  'Therefore whatever form, feeling, perception, formative tendencies, consciousness which have been, will be and is now connected with oneself, or with others, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near; all forms, feelings, perceptions, formative tendencies and consciousness should be considered by right knowledge in this way: 'This is not mine; this not I; this is not my soul.' Having seen thus, a noble, learned disciple becomes disenchanted with the form, feeling, perception, formative tendencies and consciousness. Becoming disenchanted, he controls his passion and subsequently discards them.'
  
  'Being free from passion he becomes emancipated and insight arises in him: 'I am emancipated.' He realizes: 'Birth is destroyed, I have lived the holy life and done what had to be done. There is no more birth for me.'
  
  'What do you think, Anuradha, do you regard the form as a Tathagata?'
  
  'No, Sir.'
  
  'O Anuradha, what is your view, do you see a Tathagata in the form?'
  
  'No, Sir.'
  
  'Do you see a Tathagata apart from form?'
  
  'No, Sir.'
  
  'Do you see a Tathagata in feeling, perception, formative tendencies, consciousness?'
  
  'No, Sir.'
  
  'O Anuradha, what do you think, do you regard that which is without form, feeling, perception, formative tendencies and consciousness as a Tathagata?'
  
  'No, Sir.'
  
  
• marcteng

  4 Jan 07, 03:17

  'Now, Anuradha, since a Tathagata is not to be found in this very life, is it proper for you to say: 'This noble and supreme one has pointed out and explained these four propositions:
  
  A Tathagata exists after death;
  
  A Tathagata does not exist after death;
  
  A Tathagata exists and yet does not exist after death;
  
  A Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist after death?'
  
  'No, Sir.'
  
  'Well and good, Anuradha. Formerly and now also I expound and point out only the truth of Suffering and cessation of Suffering.' (Anuradha Sutta---Samyutta Nikaya.)
  
  The above dialogue between the Buddha and Anuradha may not be satisfactory to many, since it does not satisfy the inquiring mind of the people. Truth is such that it does not give satisfaction to the emotion and intellect. Truth happens to be the most difficult thing for man to comprehend. It can only be fully comprehended by Insight. Buddhahood is nothing but the embodiment of all the great virtues and supreme enlightenment. That is why Buddhas who could enlighten others are very rare in this world.
  
  
• An Eternal Now

  4 Jan 07, 14:57

  Yes an enlightened one is traceless and cannot be tracked.
  
  

  Not Identifible, Not Comprehendible, Not Traceable
  
  Since the Tathagata, the liberated one does NOT identify himself with the five aggregates because of that very reason he is not comprehendible. We cannot comprehend him. If he does not identify himself with any of the aggregates, how can we identify him? He becomes unidentifiable in relation to the five aggregates. Because it is categorically stated, that material form by which one may weaken Tathagata, that material form had been completely eliminated in the case of the Tathagata. That feeling, that perception, those mental formation, that consciousness, on the basis of which one may describe the Tathagata, all those factors as far as the Tathagata is concerned had been completely eliminated, eradicated and destroyed. Therefore the Tathagata is not comprehendible even in this very life.
  
  Dittheva dhamme saccato thetato anupalabbhiya-mana = in this very life the Tathagata is not comprehendible, he is not identifiable, he is not traceable.
  
  Because he is called the traceless one = apada. Apada means the traceless one, as he leaves no trace. The liberated saint is the traceless one because he leaves no trace.

• Darkness_hacker99

  4 Jan 07, 15:00

  is this something like the trukus?
• longchen

  4 Jan 07, 15:14

  This is a question that is of no concern when a person becomes enlightened.
  
  It is just another round of mental tidbit that is totally irrelevant. Don't waste time on these type of mental chitchat..lah.
• marcteng

  4 Jan 07, 15:56

  Originally posted by Darkness_hacker99:

  is this something like the trukus?

  whats a trukus?
• Darkness_hacker99

  4 Jan 07, 16:33

  Originally posted by marcteng:

  whats a trukus?

  reincarnation of someone. I saw it at either discovery channel or national geographic channel. Let me check with the program again.
• marcteng

  4 Jan 07, 17:17

  Originally posted by Darkness_hacker99:

  reincarnation of someone. I saw it at either discovery channel or national geographic channel. Let me check with the program again.

  is it a lama? I have a feeling it has to do with Tibetan
• An Eternal Now

  4 Jan 07, 17:35

  Originally posted by Darkness_hacker99:

  reincarnation of someone. I saw it at either discovery channel or national geographic channel. Let me check with the program again.

  It is known as Tulkus.
  
  But I don't quite understand what you are asking.
• sinweiy

  4 Jan 07, 18:12

  also quoted in Lotus Sutra, Chapter 16 : The Thus Come OneÂ’s Life Span.
  
  I expediently manifest Nirvana.
  But in truth I do not pass into quiescence.
  I remain here, always speaking the Dharma.
  I always stay right here,
  And using the power of spiritual penetrations,
  I cause inverted living beings,
  Although near me, not to see me.
  
  ....
  
  Where I say to living beings
  That I am always here and never cease to be.
  But using the power of expedient devices
  I manifest "ceasing" and "not ceasing" to be.
  For living beings in other lands,
  Reverent, faithful, and aspiring,
  I speak the Unsurpassed Dharma.
  But you who do not hear this
  Think that I have passed into quiescence.
  
  ....
  
  All who have cultivated merit and virtue,
  Who are compliant, agreeable, and honest
  They all see me
  Here, speaking the Dharma.
  
  http://web.archive.org/web/20060519131953/www.buddhistdoor.com/resources/sutras/lotus/sources/lotus16.htm
  
  /\
  
• marcteng

  4 Jan 07, 18:54

  Originally posted by sinweiy:

  also quoted in Lotus Sutra, Chapter 16 : The Thus Come OneÂ’s Life Span.
  
  I expediently manifest Nirvana.
  But in truth I do not pass into quiescence.
  I remain here, always speaking the Dharma.
  I always stay right here,
  And using the power of spiritual penetrations,
  I cause inverted living beings,
  Although near me, not to see me.
  
  ....
  
  Where I say to living beings
  That I am always here and never cease to be.
  But using the power of expedient devices
  I manifest "ceasing" and "not ceasing" to be.
  For living beings in other lands,
  Reverent, faithful, and aspiring,
  I speak the Unsurpassed Dharma.
  But you who do not hear this
  Think that I have passed into quiescence.
  
  ....
  
  All who have cultivated merit and virtue,
  Who are compliant, agreeable, and honest
  They all see me
  Here, speaking the Dharma.
  
  http://web.archive.org/web/20060519131953/www.buddhistdoor.com/resources/sutras/lotus/sources/lotus16.htm
  
  /\
  

  Does Theravada agree on this, the lotus sutra?
  
  
• Watch It!

  4 Jan 07, 20:12

  ... there is no Buddha ...
• An Eternal Now

  4 Jan 07, 20:32

  Originally posted by marcteng:

  Does Theravada agree on this, the lotus sutra?
  
  

  I think Sinweiy is talking about another thing... that is according to Mahayana, Buddhas does return to samsara due to compassionate vows, they do not just abide in nirvana with disregards to samsara. They manifest to sentient beings. Theravada did not speak about this, however, many Theravada masters and arhants like Ajahn Maha Boowa and others have claimed to meet Shakyamuni Buddha and other arhats who are supposedly having passed into nirvana.
  
  This however does not contradict the fact that the 4 propositions are false:
  
  A Tathagata exists after death;
  A Tathagata does not exist after death;
  A Tathagata exists and yet does not exist after death;
  A Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist after death
  
  In fact these 4 propositions also wrong even when Shakyamuni Buddha is supposedly alive 2500 years ago, and as my previous post have said, enlightened beings are traceless. Ultimately, there is no birth, no death, no coming, no going. Buddhas appear in their Nirmanakaya to benefit sentient beings.
  
  I have also posted this in Daily Verses topic:
  
  

  Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
  Buddha's body is always apparent,
  Filling the entire cosmos,
  Always intoning far-reaching sound
  Shaking all lands in all quarters.
  
  Buddha manifests bodily everywhere,
  Entering into all worlds,
  Revealing occult spiritual power
  According to the inclinations of beings.
  
  Buddha appears before all beings
  In accordance with their minds;
  What the sentient beings see
  Is the Buddha's mystic power.
  
  His radiance has no bounds
  And his teaching too is infinite;
  Buddha children enter and observe
  According to their knowledge.
  
  The Buddha's body has no birth
  Yet can appear to be born.
  The nature of reality is like space:
  Therein do the Buddhas dwell.
  
  No abiding, yet no departing:
  Everywhere the Buddha's seen;
  His light reaches everywhere,
  His fame is heard afar.
  
  No substance, no abode,
  And no origin that can be found;
  No signs, no form:
  What appears is like reflections.
  
  - Avatamsaka Sutra p. 164-165[/b]

• An Eternal Now

  4 Jan 07, 20:42

  Originally posted by Watch It!:

  ... there is no Buddha ...

  You're saying this in the ultimate or relative sense?
  
  As I have mentioned, ultimately Buddha cannot be identified with the 5 skhandas/aggregates (i.e 5 skhandas are empty of self) -- in fact that applies to us as well even though we may not realise it. Therefore, the four proposition is baseless -- that the tathagatha exists, or ceases to exist/not exist, both, or neither.
  
  On a relative sense, the Buddha as we know "existed" 2500 years ago in India, he attained enlightenment and taught the dharma for 49 years, and the teachings remained till this day. Uncountable of his followers in the past and today has awakened and become enlightened, even in this forum there are highly enlightened people as well.. so we cannot say that there are no enlightened beings.
• Watch It!

  4 Jan 07, 21:21

  ... you will 'know' what i mean if you truly 'understand' ...
  ... textual references and expressions are only vehicles to get you there ...
  ... break free ... realise it ... then release it ...
  ... there is no Buddha ...
• An Eternal Now

  4 Jan 07, 21:32

  Originally posted by Watch It!:

  ... you will 'know' what i mean if you truly 'understand' ...
  ... textual references and expressions are only vehicles to get you there ...
  ... break free ... realise it ... then release it ...
  ... there is no Buddha ...

  Then you are speaking in the ultimate sense.
  
  However, the proposition 'there is no Buddha' is also not ultimately right since emptiness is not non-existence, but the emptiness of inherent existence, non-existence, both and neither. No dualistic concepts (i.e existence or non existence) is ultimately correct.
• Watch It!

  4 Jan 07, 22:19

  ...
• Watch It!

  4 Jan 07, 22:21

  Originally posted by An Eternal Now:

  Then you are speaking in the ultimate sense.
  
  However, the proposition 'there is no Buddha' is also not ultimately right since emptiness is not non-existence, but the emptiness of inherent existence, non-existence, both and neither. No dualistic concepts (i.e existence or non existence) is ultimately correct.

  ... there is no NO dualistic concepts ...
  ... 'go' beyond that ...
  ... there is no ultimate ...
  ... there is no ultimately correct ...
  ... do not be trapped in a helix like you here ...
  ... looks like converging but not quite ...
  ... there is no spiral ...
  ... 'realised' that long time ago ...
  
• An Eternal Now

  4 Jan 07, 22:32

  Originally posted by Watch It!:

  ... there is no NO dualistic concepts ...
  ... 'go' beyond that ...
  ... there is no ultimate ...
  ... there is no ultimately correct ...
  ... do not be trapped in a helix like you here ...
  ... looks like converging but not quite ...
  ... there is no spiral ...
  ... 'realised' that long time ago ...
  

  ... there is no NO dualistic concepts ...
  ... an 'ultimate' is also unnecessary
  ... neither is there a you nor me
  ... all these require no realization
  ... in the great instability of every arising and ceasing
  ... rest!
• An Eternal Now

  4 Jan 07, 22:37

  Take out the "it!" from "watch it!". Yet that is still not good enough!
• Watch It!

  4 Jan 07, 22:53

  Originally posted by An Eternal Now:

  Take out the "it!" from "watch it!". Yet that is still not good enough!

  ... there is no watch it! ...
  ... there is no eternal now ...
• An Eternal Now

  4 Jan 07, 22:58

  Originally posted by Watch It!:

  ... there is no watch it! ...
  ... there is no eternal now ...

  Watch it! Now!
• Eric Cartman

  4 Jan 07, 22:59

  so what if you watch it?
• An Eternal Now

  4 Jan 07, 23:01

  Originally posted by Eric Cartman:

  so what if you watch it?

  All is gone!