"Buddha visiting", "eternal citta", help to reconcile some of the Thai Forest teachings?

The Watercooler
1

Dear Bhante Sujato and community,

I have a question that has been troubling me, and I would be very grateful for your perspective.

From studying the early suttas and reading your work, I have understood that an arahant, including the Buddha after parinibbāna, is not described as continuing to exist in some spiritual realm. My understanding is that the Buddha consistently declined to answer whether a Tathāgata exists, does not exist, both exists and does not exist, or neither exists nor does not exist after death, indicating that these categories no longer apply.

However, I have encountered teachings within the Thai Forest tradition that seem difficult to reconcile with this understanding.

For example, Ajahn Martin has written about an “eternal citta” that remains after liberation. I have also heard respected Thai Forest teachers whom I greatly admire express ideas that seem broadly similar—for example, that the Buddha may still appear at important spiritual events, or that highly accomplished meditators may encounter the Buddha or arahants. The biography of Ajahn Mun also contains accounts of meetings with the Buddha and arahants, and I have heard Ajahn Wan Chai teach that when meditation becomes sufficiently refined, the Buddha and arahants may come and visit the practitioner.

I want to emphasize that I have great respect for these teachers and have benefited enormously from their teachings. My question is not intended as a criticism of them, but rather as an attempt to understand how these ideas fit with the Buddha’s teachings in the early discourses.

To me, the notion of an eternal citta or an enduring liberated essence seems closer to Vedānta than to the teachings of anattā and dependent origination found in the Nikāyas. That may simply reflect my own misunderstanding, which is why I am asking.

Should these accounts of encounters with the Buddha and arahants be understood as subjective meditative experiences, symbolic expressions, later developments within the tradition, or as literal events? Is there any support in the early Buddhist texts for the idea of an eternal citta, or would that be incompatible with the Buddha’s teaching?

As a lay practitioner trying to understand the Dhamma, I find it difficult to know how to navigate these differing presentations while remaining faithful to the earliest teachings.

Thank you very much for your time and for your invaluable work in translating and explaining the early Buddhist texts.

With mettā,

Natalia-Nirodha

4 Likes
3

This is what I would do if I had that kind of question..

Asking Bhante Sujato: good idea. (Friday nights 7pm AEST on monksincyberspace on jitsi )

Asking Ajahn Suchart: good idea. (Tuesday 11pm AEST on Facebook Group has a zoom session so can ask him, if you just go in the zoom chat he eventually asks people. Reason I mention is he started practicing just because read suttas… then lived with maha boowa) Anyway.

metta, karuna, all that! ciao

4 Likes
4

ah thank you so much! I will try this :folded_hands:

2 Likes
5

I think it is important to remember that (as far as I know) the Thai Forest tradition makes no claims of being centered on the early Buddhist texts. In fact, I believe many of these teachers arose in opposition to the state sponsored monastic educational institutions in favor of personal experience in meditation.

So that you would find contradictions is not something surprising. (I hope it’s obvious that I am not saying everything in their tradition contradicts the EBTs)

7 Likes
7

I see..I am coming from Sri Lanka tradition and things are quite clear and more aligned with the early suttas there. I have just started exploring the Thai forest because I found much inspiration in the Thai monasteries but sometimes it’s hard to make sense of teachings - some parts are as if it’s a different religion altogether! Anyway, thank you so much for your help!

2 Likes
8

Indeed there is! No question about that.

Sri Lankan traditions will also often depend on Abhidhamma and the ancient commentaries, especially the Visuddhimagga. So in that way also you can find things not explicitly mentioned in the EBTs in those traditions too.

4 Likes
9

That’s also true! But at least they clearly say it’s based on Abidhamma and commentaries, so I know what I am learning and I can accept it or not. In Thai Forest, I got confused because different teachers say different things without much references (I am still super inspired tho)!

3 Likes
10

For a long time, I was wondering about the same thing. The story about a Buddha and his arahant disciples visiting Ajahn Mun is maybe a combination of visions seen in meditation and a symbolic, traditional writing style. Recently I came across a remark in the book Breathing Mindfulness by Sarah Shaw. She writes:

Cholvijarn points out Ajahn Mun’s association with another core Boran understanding: that one can contact beings of a particular level when one attains that level oneself. At the end of Ajahn Mun’s life, apparently an earlier Buddha and hundred of thousands of arhats from the past came to visit his solitary meditations and greet him: the explanation is that the brightness of their minds cannot be eradicated, despite their leaving samsara; they come to acknowledge someone attaining their level. Within the style and manner of his life story, it feels entirely natural that his spiritual attainment is articulated within traditional South and Southeast Asian visual and meditative culture. Such framings are sophisticated in their deployment of symbol and the language of dreams, though remain, of course, puzzling to many in the rationalist and literalist West. p. 134-135

Boran is the name old meditative traditions of Southeast Asia. I have no knowledge whatsoever about those traditions, and I don’t think it gives the full answer to this problem, but for me, Shaw’s remark offers an interessting perspective.

4 Likes
11

I think the Thai Forest Tradition being in clash with the institutions is well documented - but it was my understanding that Ajahn Mun’s point was precisely a revival of Early Buddhism, centered on Vinaya and Suttas (and so rather than Abhidhamma / Commentaries / local folks beliefs).

So, while this idea (that TFT is less based on Suttas and more on personal practice) is a popular idea I’ve heard, I’m not sure how it reflects the nuance of it.

Anyway, we have plenty of Ajahns who can elaborate more on these points hopefully! :smiley:

3 Likes
12

Thank you so much! Ajahn Mun speaking with devas or brahmas fits comfortably within Theravāda cosmology (or Boran) and it doesn’t trouble me much - It’s the visits and conversations with arahants who had already attained parinibbāna that is much more difficult to reconcile for me.

2 Likes
13

I don’t know the specifics of their claims or encounters, but (I think Buddhavamsa?) has details of past Budhas appearing and talking, though that seems to be considered a “late text” by some.

Buddha of the Nikayas also seems to have recollection of past Buddhas in intimate details, as well as being privy to the names of hundreds of Private Buddhas. Was it just his different past lives or specifically what allowed these knowledges, there’s little elaborating.

So I suppose these details might be explained in some fashion — depending on how liberal one is with poetic language

To be fair with TFT, “Eternal Citta” is a very widespread idea across all sects of Buddhism, especially in Mahāyāna.

It’s easy to discard it all as “craving for existence”, but perhaps there’s a way to reconcile it with early texts, after all.

What might seem like an eternal mind, the Buddha might’ve had good reasons not to call it as such, to his audience. He might’ve rightly wanted to dispell any sense of concepts in his disciples heads.

However, taken out of context, Buddha’s words might be taken to mean something like what Bhikkhu Bodhi calls “An atheist’s idea of death”.

So to dispell this kind of misconception, perhaps the Venerables of many traditions talk about an eternal mind.

I make no assumptions to either case, just offering how some challenging ideas might be reconciled. I am just as ignorant on the nature of these things as a student.

1 Like
14

Sarah Shaw was writing specifically about past Buddhas and arhats in the quote that I posted. I forgot to mention that. Here is the full quote.

Cholvijarn points out Ajahn Mun’s association with another core Boran understanding: that one can contact beings of a particular level when one attains that level oneself. At the end of Ajahn Mun’s life, apparently an earlier Buddha and hundred of thousands of arhats from the past came to visit his solitary meditations and greet him: the explanation is that the brightness of their minds cannot be eradicated, despite their leaving samsara; they come to acknowledge someone attaining their level. Within the style and manner of his life story, it feels entirely natural that his spiritual attainment is articulated within traditional South and Southeast Asian visual and meditative culture. Such framings are sophisticated in their deployment of symbol and the language of dreams, though remain, of course, puzzling to many in the rationalist and literalist West. p. 134-135

15

Yes, the Buddha remembers details of past Buddhas while they were alive; he doesn’t speak of any encounters after their parinibbana.

8 Likes
16

This is what I was thinking too. How the Buddha was able to recall not just his own past lives, but other beings.

These present time encounters seem very different though.

17

“Don’t rely on the Abhidhamma; rely on the Teacher’s teachings.” That feels a bit strange to me, because the Abhidhamma is the Teacher’s teaching.

18

There’s a few reasons to have a reasonable suspicion of this claim — while the Nikayas of the early schools show a more or less a coherent vision of teaching, the Abhidharmas of early schools vary greatly.

So it isn’t easily apparent which Abhidharmic tradition (if any at all) would be the Buddha’s teaching.

But of course, this is a different discussion than the one at the opening post. :slight_smile:

19

I can see lots of “yeah, but” here etc.

20

I think you misunderstood what I meant. What I meant is that it is the Teacher’s teaching.

1 Like
21

Which teacher do you mean?

22

People generally speaking past each other - what happens is someone is awakened, develops followers, followers start using language in funny ways, people talk past each other, etc.