What happens to an Arhat after death?

[santamonicacj]

A friend who is very well read regarding Buddhist topics and I were talking tonight. We had very different ideas of what how Nirvana was conceived in the Theravada. Specifically what we discussed was what happened to an Arhat at death. I said that it was oblivion, "like a candle burning out", meaning that nothing at all happened next.

My buddy disagreed and said that was a misunderstanding the 19th century translators had, that Nirvana was a state of peace, and therefore had to imply a mental continuum. Also the Buddha achieved Nirvana during life, so it couldn't be just oblivion.

Any good references from the Pali to share?

(I know it's a dumb question, but asking questions is the only way to learn.)

[ground]

Any good references from the Pali to share?

"Furthermore, as if he were to see a corpse cast away in a charnel ground — one day, two days, three days dead — bloated, livid, & festering, he applies it to this very body, 'This body, too: Such is its nature, such is its future, such its unavoidable fate'...
 
"Or again, as if he were to see a corpse cast away in a charnel ground, picked at by crows, vultures, & hawks, by dogs, hyenas, & various other creatures... a skeleton smeared with flesh & blood, connected with tendons... a fleshless skeleton smeared with blood, connected with tendons... a skeleton without flesh or blood, connected with tendons... bones detached from their tendons, scattered in all directions — here a hand bone, there a foot bone, here a shin bone, there a thigh bone, here a hip bone, there a back bone, here a rib, there a breast bone, here a shoulder bone, there a neck bone, here a jaw bone, there a tooth, here a skull... the bones whitened, somewhat like the color of shells... piled up, more than a year old... decomposed into a powder: He applies it to this very body, 'This body, too: Such is its nature, such is its future, such its unavoidable fate.'
 
"In this way he remains focused internally on the body in & of itself, or externally on the body in & of itself, or both internally & externally on the body in & of itself. Or he remains focused on the phenomenon of origination with regard to the body, on the phenomenon of passing away with regard to the body, or on the phenomenon of origination & passing away with regard to the body. Or his mindfulness that 'There is a body' is maintained to the extent of knowledge & remembrance. And he remains independent, unsustained by (not clinging to) anything in the world. This is how a monk remains focused on the body in & of itself.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.010.than.html

[santamonicacj]

"Furthermore, as if he were to see a corpse cast away in a charnel ground — one day, two days, three days dead — bloated, livid, & festering, he applies it to this very body, 'This body, too: Such is its nature, such is its future, such its unavoidable fate'...

Sounds more like a meditation to foster renunciation.

[ground]

"Furthermore, as if he were to see a corpse cast away in a charnel ground — one day, two days, three days dead — bloated, livid, & festering, he applies it to this very body, 'This body, too: Such is its nature, such is its future, such its unavoidable fate'...

Sounds more like a meditation to foster renunciation.

Applied observations may entail renunciation. Renunciation may entail cessation of speculation.

[t]

Every time this question is posed, whether in reference to a Samma Sambuddha, Pacceka Buddha and an Arahant, all three classes of awakened and liberated ones, these passages comes to mind...

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.036.than.html
Brahman, the fermentations...Those are abandoned by Me, their root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.086.than.html
"What do you think, Anuradha: Is form constant or inconstant?" "Inconstant, Lord."
"And is that which is inconstant easeful or stressful?" "Stressful, Lord."
"And is it proper to regard what is inconstant, stressful, subject to change as: 'This is mine. This is my self. This is what I am'?" "No, Lord."
"Is feeling constant or inconstant?" "Inconstant, Lord."...
"Is perception constant or inconstant?" "Inconstant, Lord."...
"Are fabrications constant or inconstant?" "Inconstant, Lord."...
"Is consciousness constant or inconstant?" "Inconstant, Lord."
"And is that which is inconstant easeful or stressful?" "Stressful, Lord."
 
"And is it proper to regard what is inconstant, stressful, subject to change as: 'This is mine. This is my self. This is what I am'?" "No, Lord."
 
"What do you think, Anuradha: Do you regard form... feeling... perceptions... fabrications... consciousness... as the Tathagata?" "No, Lord."
 
"What do you think, Anuradha:
Do you regard the Tathagata as being in form?... Elsewhere than form?... In feeling?... Elsewhere than feeling?... In perception?... Elsewhere than perception?... In fabrications?... Elsewhere than fabrications?... In consciousness?... Elsewhere than consciousness?" "No, Lord."
 
"What do you think: Do you regard the Tathagata as form-feeling-perception-fabrications-consciousness?" "No, Lord."
 
"Do you regard the Tathagata as that which is without form, without feeling, without perception, without fabrications, without consciousness?" "No, Lord."
 
"And so, Anuradha — 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, 'Friends, the Tathagata — the supreme man, the superlative man, attainer of the superlative attainment — being described, is described otherwise than with these four positions:
The Tathagata exists after death, does not exist after death, both does & does not exist after death, neither exists nor does not exist after death'?" "No, Lord."
 
"Very good, Anuradha. Very good. Both formerly & now, it is only stress that I describe, and the cessation of stress."

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn44/sn44.008.than.html
"Does the Tathagata exist after death?"... "Does the Tathagata not exist after death?"...
"Does the Tathagata both exist and not exist after death?"... "Does the Tathagata neither exist nor not exist after death?"
"Vaccha, that too has not been declared by Me: 'The Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist after death."
 
"Now, Master Gotama, what is the cause, what is the reason why — when wanderers of other sects are asked in this way, they answer that 'The cosmos is eternal' or 'The cosmos is not eternal' or 'The cosmos is finite' or 'The cosmos is infinite' or 'The body is the same as the soul' or 'The body is one thing and the soul another' or 'The Tathagata exists after death' or 'The Tathagata does not exist after death' or 'The Tathagata both exists and does not exist after death" or 'The Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist after death,' yet when Master Gotama is asked in this way, he does not answer that 'The cosmos is eternal' or 'The cosmos is not eternal' or 'The cosmos is finite' or 'The cosmos is infinite' or 'The body is the same as the soul' or 'The body is one thing and the soul another' or 'The Tathagata exists after death' or 'The Tathagata does not exist after death' or 'The Tathagata both exists and does not exist after death" or 'The Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist after death'?"
 
"Vaccha, the members of other sects assume form to be the self, or the self as possessing form, or form as in the self, or the self as in form.
"They assume feeling... perception... fabrications... consciousness... to be the self or the self as possessing consciousness, or consciousness as in the self, or the self as in consciousness.
That is why, when asked in this way, they answer that 'The cosmos is eternal'... or that 'The Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist after death.'
 
"But the Tathagata, Worthy and Rightly Self-Awakened, does not assume form to be the self, or the self as possessing form, or form as in the self, or the self as in form.
"He does not assume feeling... perception... fabrications... consciousness to be the self or the self as possessing consciousness, or consciousness as in the self, or the self as in consciousness.
That is why, when asked in this way, he does not answer that 'The cosmos is eternal'... or that 'The Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist after death.'"

http://www.vipassana.com/canon/majjhima/mn63.php
"It's not the case that when there is the view, 'After death a Tathagata exists,' there is the living of the holy life.
And it's not the case that when there is the view, 'After death a Tathagata does not exist,' there is the living of the holy life.
And it's not the case that when there is the view, 'After death a Tathagata both exists & does not exist,' there is the living of the holy life.
And it's not the case that when there is the view, 'After death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist' there is the living of the holy life.
 
When there is the view,
'After death a Tathagata exists'...'After death a Tathagata does not exist'...'After death a Tathagata both exists & does not exist'...'After death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist,'
there is still the birth, there is the aging, there is the death, there is the sorrow, lamentation, pain, despair, & distress whose destruction I make known right in the here & now.

"So, Malunkyaputta, remember what is undisclosed by Me as undisclosed, and what is disclosed by Me as disclosed.

And what is undisclosed by Me?
...'After death a Tathagata exists'...'After death a Tathagata does not exist'...'After death a Tathagata both exists & does not exist'...'After death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist,' is undisclosed by Me.

"And why are they undisclosed by Me?
Because they are not connected with the goal, are not fundamental to the holy life.
They do not lead to disenchantment, dispassion, cessation, calming, direct knowledge, self-awakening, Unbinding.
That's why they are undisclosed by Me.

"And what is disclosed by Me?
'This is stress,' is disclosed by Me.
'This is the origination of stress,' is disclosed by Me.
'This is the cessation of stress,' is disclosed by Me.
'This is the path of practice leading to the cessation of stress,' is disclosed by Me.

And why are they disclosed by Me?
Because they are connected with the goal, are fundamental to the holy life. They lead to disenchantment, dispassion, cessation, calming, direct knowledge, self-awakening, Unbinding.
That's why they are disclosed by Me.

[Spiny le Norman]

My buddy disagreed and said that was a misunderstanding the 19th century translators had, that Nirvana was a state of peace, and therefore had to imply a mental continuum. Also the Buddha achieved Nirvana during life, so it couldn't be just oblivion.

Some good quotes here already.  This is actually a very good question, but one that seems not to have been answered definitively by the Buddha.
Traditionally there is a distinction between Nibbana ( enlightenment ) and Pari-nibbana ( the physical death of an Arahant ).

Spiny

[santamonicacj]

Traditionally there is a distinction between Nibbana (enlightenment) and Pari-nibbana (the physical death of an Arahant).

Thanks. Had not understood the distinction before. I thought the Pari-nibbana was specifically referring to Sakyamuni's death.

And what is undisclosed by Me?
...'After death a Tathagata exists'...'After death a Tathagata does not exist'...'After death a Tathagata both exists & does not exist'...'After death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist,' is undisclosed by Me.

Bingo. Although it leaves the question open that would be what I was looking for. Thanks.

[lankaman]

Existence of Thathaagatha is a ideation by the layman who do not know the noble truth. For Thathaagatha there is no such "thing" exists. That's why the question is invalid.

[Spiny le Norman]

Existence of Thathaagatha is a ideation by the layman who do not know the noble truth. For Thathaagatha there is no such "thing" exists. That's why the question is invalid.

This is one possible explanation, but taking the suttas as a whole I don't find it entirely convincing.

Spiny

[Hanzze]

So which "thing" could be called existing according the suttas? Maybe its just a question of what existing actually means. *smile*

[santamonicacj]

It is important to remember that EVERY school of Buddhism emphasizes that emptiness DOES NOT equal nonexistence!

But my question has already been answered to my satisfaction.

[Hanzze]

Yes, but maybe it is sometimes easier to understand then such recourse into fantasies of various kinds of eternity  *smile* What a mass of unsatisfactory.
I guess that was what lankaman wanted to point on.

"Neither nor" is hard to take, but possible to take it as an impulsion when ever seen one of the pair and its equation.

[dhammaseeker51]

I've always assumed that after death an enlightened being would dwell in the deathless state, rather than just cease to exist  (eg. conciousness would continue indefinitely in Nibbana)
The Buddhist equivalent of heaven surely.
 
with Metta

[lankaman]

This is one possible explanation, but taking the suttas as a whole I don't find it entirely convincing.

Spiny

I like to know about these suttas. 

[Spiny le Norman]

This is one possible explanation, but taking the suttas as a whole I don't find it entirely convincing.

Spiny

I like to know about these suttas. 

This is a really good site, you can search for topics.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/search_results.html?cx=015061908441090246348%3Aal1bklhbjbi&cof=FORID%3A9%3BNB%3A1&ie=UTF-8&q=suttas