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

THE TWO NIRVANA THEORY IN THE EARLY CANON
Considering that the idea of non-return could be widely spread among
Brahmans and their followers, the Buddha seems to use this term as a kind
of metaphor for the laity’s equivalent of the recluse’s sainthood (arahant).
This could explain why the expression ‘in nature not to return from that
world (anAvatti-dhammo tasmA lokA)’ was repeatedly applied to laity when it
appeared independently. Placing it below the state of sainthood (arahant)
could also have another meaning: it seems to allude to the Brahmanical
liberation by saying that our ideal is higher than yours.
As seen above, a non-returner (anAgAmin) is, by definition, one who will
experience nirvana while alive in the pure abodes and then go beyond rebirths.
Although he will not come back to the human condition due to the lack of
the five lower fetters that bound him into the world of desire (kAmadhAtu),
he still needs to destroy the higher fetters (uddhambhAgiya-saNyojana) to
attain nirvana after his spontaneous uprising (opapAtika) in the pure abodes
in the world of form (rEpadhAtu). In this respect, it can be regarded as the
final departure from the human condition; it cannot be regarded as nirvana
or liberation. Thus, it seems to be far-fetched to say that the original pair of
the two nirvana theory were non-returner (anAgAmin) and sainthood
(arahant).
The double aspect of the word upAdi seems to cause many exegetical
problems in the abhidharma tradition. In fact, the MahAvibhALAUAstra, 175 the
exegesis of the JñAnaprasthAna, was well aware of the two different meanings
of the word: upadhi as defilement (kleUopadhi) and upadhi as birthbody
( janmakAyopadhi). Thus we need to treat this problem from a wide
abhidharmic perspective.
35