Metaphor and Literalism in Buddhism: The ... - misterdanger.net

THE TWO NIRVANA THEORY IN THE EARLY CANON
one to ask the fate of Kappayana at death. The question is: ‘Did he gain
quenching (without grasping) or did he have some grasping remaining?’ 124
At first glance, it looks as if it is a question of whether he died as a saint
(arahant), referred to by the word nibbAyi, or as a non-returner, referred to
by the word saupAdiseso. However, it is a question whether he passed away
as a saint (arahant) or as one of the three lower noble persons. In fact, the
commentary seems to follow this interpretation: ‘How was he released? Was it
through anupAdisesa nibbAnadhAtu like asekha, or was it through sa-upAdisesa
like sekha?’ 125
As Norman has pointed out, the nirvana element (nibbAnadhAtu) is not
applied to saupAdisesa, while it is applied to anupAdisesa. 126 In fact, only a
saint (arahant), asekha, can automatically pass away through anupAdisesa
nibbAnadhAtu. That is to say, saupAdisesa here is used not in the context of
the two nirvana theory but in the context of the four noble persons. If the
word upAdi in the saupAdisesa has got the subjective meaning, i.e. defilements
or fetters, how many nirvanas are we to accept? From Table 2.2 we may
have to say that even saddhAnusArin and dhammAnusArin, two sub-categories
of gotrabhE, have attained nirvana.
Moreover, the answer from the blessed one confirms the Theravada
exegetical tradition: ‘He has cut off craving for name-and-form in this world.
He has passed beyond all birth and death, the stream of thirst, which has
long been latent (in him).’ 127 In other words, he has been a saint (arahant)
for a long time through the saupAdisesa nibbAnadhAtu and now he is finally
liberated through the anupAdisesa nibbAnadhAtu.
Another piece of textual evidence presented is the passage in which a
remainder of clinging (upAdisesa) is used to describe a pair along with perfect
knowledge (aññA). It says that if a monk has faith in the Buddha’s instruction
and lives in unison with it, he expects one of two fruits: ‘One of two
fruits is to be expected: perfect knowledge (aññA) in this very life, or if there
is a remainder of clinging (upAdisesa), the state of non-return.’ 128 The assumption
that a remainder of clinging (upAdisesa) is a yardstick to distinguish
a non-returner (anAgAmin) from a saint (arahant) is largely based on this
passage. 129
It looks as if the word upAdisesa was used in the context of the two
nirvana theory, which would not be quite satisfactory if we consider some
passages in the early canon in which perfect knowledge is used together with
the four noble persons. I. B. Horner argued, though not precisely, that the
alternative in this passage hinges not on the presence of a remainder of
clinging but on the presence of perfect knowledge in the monk: either he has
achieved perfect knowledge (aññA) or not. 130
In the NaTakapAnasutta in the MajjhimanikAya, 131 although the description
of the four noble persons is almost the same as that of typical nikAya
passages seen above, 132 the description of the saint (arahant) is ‘established in
perfect knowledge (aññA)’ instead of the usual ‘vanishing of cankers (AsavA)’.
29