The Buddhist Cosmos

by Punnadhammo Mahathero

  On three specific occasions, the Suddhāvāsa brahmās make prophetic announcements which cause a “great uproar” (kolāhala)812 amongst the human population. One thousand years before the appearance of a Buddha, they don the ornaments and head-gear of brahmās and go about among humans joyfully extolling the virtues of a Buddha. Later, there comes a time when there is a “great uproar” among both humans and devas vociferously debating what constitutes the “auspicious” (maṅgala).813 At this juncture, the Suddhāvāsa brahmās announce that in twelve years the Buddha will settle the question by preaching the Maṅgala Sutta. Likewise, seven years before the Buddha gives the teaching of the three purities, the Moneyya Sutta, they cause an uproar by going about predicting this.814

  It can be seen by these examples that the Suddhāvāsa brahmās, although they are classified as belonging to the fourth jhāna level, cannot abide in a continual state of jhāna. They are far too active for that. We do not have any parallel examples from the texts concerning the second, third and ordinary fourth jhāna level brahmās, as they abide in a state of jhānic absorption. Furthermore, we know some of the individual Suddhāvāsa brahmās by name but none of these others.

  Ghatīkāra815 was a potter at the time of Kassapa Buddha. He was a devout lay follower of the Buddha and a good friend to Jotīpāla, a brahmin student who was a previous birth of Gotama Buddha. Ghatīkāra did not ordain as a bhikkhu because his blind and aged parents depended upon him for their support. However, he lived as much like a bhikkhu as is possible for a layman. Ghatīkāra remained celibate and did not dig for the clay needed for his pottery, taking instead only that which had been dug up by animals or other people. Furthermore, he did not engage in trade involving gold and silver coins but practised instead a kind of gift economy. He laid out the finished pots outside his dwelling and made it known that anyone who wished could take one, and that anyone who wished could leave rice and other provisions for him and his parents.

  Ghatīkāra was also a generous supporter of Kassapa Buddha and the Saṅgha. He made it known that they could take whatever they needed from his stores. It came to pass that one rainy season Kassapa Buddha’s hut began to leak. The bhikkhus took thatch from the roof of Ghatīkāra’s hut and left it “open to the sky.” However, by the power of Ghatīkāra’s merit, no rain fell upon his dwelling every again. Indeed, no rain will ever fall upon that spot for the duration of the kappa. Because of his exemplary life, Ghatīkāra attained to the state of an anāgāmī and when he died was reborn in the Avihā realm.816

  It was the Suddhāvāsa brahmā Ghatīkāra who presented the Bodhisatta Siddhattha with the bhikkhu’s requisites at his going forth from the home life, the same eight requisites which had appeared in the lotus at the beginning of the kappa (Jāt-nid 2), this honour falling to him because of his ancient friendship with the Bodhisatta. One subsequent conversation between the Buddha and the Suddhāvāsa brahmā Ghatīkāra is recorded. He informed the Buddha that seven of his bhikkhus had now been reborn in Avihā (SN 1:50). One of these was Upaka, who in his previous human state had been the Ājīvaka ascetic whom the Buddha encountered on the road shortly after his awakening. At that time, Upaka had been doubtful of the Buddha’s attainment, saying merely, “May it be so, friend,” (hupeyyapāvuso) wagging his head in the Indian fashion and going off by a side-road. Much later, after a period as a married house-holder he ordained as a bhikkhu and became an anāgāmī (Vin Mv 1 & Dhp-a 24:9). Another was Pukkusāti. He had been the king of Takkasilā, but renounced his throne to seek out the Buddha and ask for the going forth. On his journey, he shared a chance lodging the Buddha without at first recognizing him. Hearing the teachings from the Buddha, Pukkusāti attained to the state of an anāgāmī then and there but was shortly afterward killed by a mad cow and reborn in Avihā (MN 140). The identities of the other five are more doubtful, and even the spelling of some of their names differs between recensions of the canon.817

  Another story concerns a group of seven bhikkhus during the dispensation of Kassapa Buddha:

  At the time when the religion of Kassapa Buddha was in decline, seven bhikkhus seeing the alteration in the novices and so on, decided that while the religion had not yet disappeared, they should make their own refuge secure. So they paid homage to the golden cetiya (the stupa enshrining the relics of Kassapa Buddha) and entered the forest. Seeing a certain mountain they said, “Let those who are attached to life turn back. Let those seeking release ascend the mountain.” Seeing a flight of steps, they all together climbed the mountain and there performed the duties of samaṇas.

  The eldest among them attained to arahatta in a single night and in the morning went to Lake Anotatta where he rinsed his mouth and cleaned his teeth with a tooth-stick. Then he went for alms to Uttarakuru (the northern continent, on the far side of Mt Sineru). When he returned, he said to the others, “I have gone for alms in Uttarakuru. Did we not agree that the first to obtain arahantship would go for alms so that the others may eat?” They replied, “It is not so, friend (no hetaṃ, āvuso). When we have produced an attainment like yours, then we shall eat.” On the second day the next bhikkhu became an anāgāmī and he also went for alms and offered to share with the others, but they again refused. Of these, the first bhikkhu eventually entered parinibbāna (i.e. died as an arahant without further rebirth) and the anāgāmī was reborn in the brahmaloka. The other five were unable to attain nibbāna and wasted away after seven days and were reborn in the devaloka. At the time of Gotama Buddha they all passed away from there and were reborn into human families. (MN-a 23)

  That the arahant bhikkhu went for his morning rounds to such impossibly distant places indicates the use of psychic power. Perhaps he intended to demonstrate his attainment by the presentation to the others of the exquisite food of Uttarakuru. In any case, it does not seem to have worked. The reply of the others implies that they did not believe him; they addressed him with the familiar āvuso and not the respectful bhante. The brahmaloka to which the anāgāmī went was of course one of the Suddhāvāsa worlds.

  All of the five unsuccessful ones became bhikkhus again under Gotama Buddha and all eventually attained arahantship. The Suddhāvāsa being who had been their companion continued to watch over them and he came to the assistance of two of them. He appeared before the young bhikkhu Kumāra Kassapa in a radiant form and set him a series of riddles which the Buddha later solved. By contemplating the Buddha’s answers, insight arose in Kumāra Kassapa and he attained arahantship (MN-a 23). Bāhiya Dārucīriya (the second element of the name means “bark clad”) was a well-known and revered ascetic who had arrived at the false view that he was an arahant. The same Suddhāvāsa being appeared before him and disabused him of that conceit and advised him to seek out the Buddha,818 in none of these texts is the deity himself named.

  One of the Buddha’s foremost lay disciples was Hatthaka of Āḷavi.819 After he died as an anāgāmī he was reborn in Aviha. Shortly after that he came back to earth to see the Buddha:

  At one time the Blessed One was dwelling in Savatthī … during the night the devaputta Hatthaka approached, brilliantly illuminating almost the entire grove. Thinking, “I will stand before the Blessed One,” but he sank down and became submerged (into the earth) and was unable to remain standing. It was as if oil or ghee had been sprinkled onto sand …

  The Blessed One addressed him, “Hatthaka, create a gross body” (oḷārikaṃ attabhāvaṃ abhinimmināhi). The devaputta Hatthaka obeyed; he created a gross body, saluted the Blessed One and stood to one side.820

  As a brand new Suddhāvāsa brahmā, Hatthaka had not yet learned the knack of manifesting himself in lower planes. This passage is a neat illustration of the relative subtlety of matter in the higher brahmā worlds.

  On the occasion of the Great Assembly recorded in the Mahāsamaya Sutta,821 when a great concourse of devas and other powerful beings assembled in the presence of the Buddha and a saṅgha of five hundred arahant bhikkhus, it was four Suddhāvāsa beings who opened
the proceedings by uttering verses in praise of the Saṅgha. The commentary says they had been in meditation when the other deities began assembling and were at first curious as to why the brahmā worlds all seemed empty. Realizing that they were late, they decided they had better not arrive empty handed and agreed to each bring a verse of praise.822

  CHAPTER SEVEN—THE ARŪPA PLANE

  3:7:1 ARŪPA—THE FORMLESS REALMS

  Beyond the plane of sense-desire and the plane of form there exists the “formless plane”, arūpabhūmi. This is a realm inhabited by beings that are made up of mental factors only, without any trace of physical form. They are mind-only and have no bodies. This makes them very difficult for us to imagine and impossible to visualize. Within the arūpabhūmi there are four planes of existence:

  ākāsānañcāyatana—the sphere of boundless space

  viññāṇañcāyatana—the sphere of boundless consciousness

  ākiñcaññāyatana—the sphere of nothingness

  nevasaññānāsaññāyatana—the sphere of neither-perception-nor-nonperception.

  Each of these corresponds to a meditative state which may be experienced here in the human realm. Collectively, these are called the arūpa jhānas. They may be considered refinements of the fourth jhāna as they have the same two factors: ekaggatā (“unity of mind” or “one-pointedness”) and upekkhā (“equanimity”). They differ from fourth jhāna, however, in each having a specific and successively refined immaterial object.823 One who has mastery of the formless attainments here on earth may be reborn into one of the formless realms after death (AN 4: 171).

  3:7:2 IMMATERIAL NATURE

  In all other forms of existence, mind occurs only in association with a physical base. This makes it difficult for us to conceptualize the mode of existence of beings dwelling in the arūpabhūmi. It should not be imagined that these beings have some kind of ghostly or immaterial form, they do not. No physical form means just that. This has some intriguing implications. For one thing, the existence of this realm serves as an illustration of the principle that, in Buddhist theory, mind is not derivative of matter but an independent factor. For another, the non-physical nature of these beings implies that they have no physical attributes which would include extension and location. They cannot be properly said to be anywhere at all, except perhaps for the lowest realm of boundless space which can be understood as existing everywhere at once.824

  Perhaps because of these startling implications, not all early Buddhist schools were in agreement on the immaterial nature of the arūpa realms, although both the Theravāda and the Sarvāstivāda were. The Kathāvatthu records a controversy with the Andhaka School (“among others”) who argued that the non-existence of matter would violate the dependent origination which states that “because of consciousness there comes to be body and mind.” These theorists postulated a subtle matter still present in the arūpa realms, an idea firmly repudiated by the Theravāda interlocutor.825 The Abhidharmakośa of the Sarvāstivāda also supports the view that “no matter” means “no matter” and also reports that there were other views extant. The text specifically mentions three alternate interpretations: that there exists “subtle matter”, or “tiny matter” (i.e. that the beings are infinitesimally small) or “transparent matter” (AK 8:1, p.1221f.).

  The difficulty of comprehending such an alien form of existence is no reason to reject the clear intention of the texts. If the arūpa plane possessed some kind of subtle matter there would be no reason to set it up as a category separate from the rūpa plane of which subtle matter is already posited. Further, just as the plane of form is said to be the escape from sense-desire, so the plane of the formless is said to be the escape from form (rūpa) (DN-a 33). This would not be so if form still existed on that plane. The only way to think about these realms is in terms of pure mind.

  3:7:3 EXISTENCE IN THE ARŪPABHŪMI

  Beings that exist in the arūpa state are at the very summit of saṃsāric existence, not of course in a spatial sense, but in the sense of being the most refined and subtle form of existence. Evil, unskillful states (pāpakā akusalā dhammā) arise only in association with form, not without form (AN 2:83, eng. 2:82). The happiness of the formless exceeds the happiness based on form.826

  Among the five destinations (of rebirth) those of the devas827 are the best (seṭṭha). Among these, those of the formless beings are the most glorious (ukkaṭṭha). They are very far removed from defilement (kilesa) and suffering (dukkha). Their abidings (vihāra, lit. “dwelling”) are endowed with tranquillity, excellence (paṇīta), imperturbability (āneñja). Their life-spans are exceedingly long.828

  The duration of these lifespans is given as 20,000 kappas for the ākāsānañcāyatana, 40,000 for the viññāṇañcāyatana, 60,000 for the ākiñcaññāyatana and 84,000 for the nevasaññānāsaññāyatana.829 The Dhātuvibhanga Sutta (MN 140) tells us that if a meditator directs his mind with purified equanimity to the base of boundless space, with his mind dependent (taṃnissita) on that, it can remain there for a very long time, which the commentary specifies as 20,000 kappas. The word āneñja meaning “steadfast, immoveable, imperturbable” is sometimes used as a synonym for the formless sphere.830

  Whereas the brahmās of the rūpabhūmi are said to be “mind-made” (manomaya) the beings of the arūpabhūmi are “perception-made” (saññāmaya). “Use of sticks and swords, quarrels, abuse, slander and false speech occur on account of form (rūpa). But none of these exist in the immaterial (arūpa) sphere” (MN 60). The arūpa beings, having no bodies, do not possess physical senses, but experience only the mind-sense (Vibh 18). This implies that these beings are self-contained, living entirely within a self-generated world of mind objects. The outer universe is no concern of theirs. On those occasions in which all the devas assemble, even from thousands of world-systems, specific exceptions are made for the arūpa devas and the asaññasatta (unconscious beings) (DN-a 20 & It-a 3:4,3). No individual in these realms is named for us in the texts, nor are there any stories about them.

  Existence here is considered to be a spiritually advanced state, but it is not complete liberation. The rūpa plane is called a “fleshy” or “carnal” liberation (vimokkho sāmiso), whereas the arūpa plane is a “spiritual” or “non-carnal” liberation (nirāmiso vimokkho). However, arahantship is “more spiritual than the spiritual” (nirāmisā nirāmisataro vimokkho) (SN 36:31). Although these beings exist on a very refined plane, they are still subject to some degree of defilement. Although the root defilement of ill-will (dosa) cannot arise in their minds, the other two roots of desire (lobha) and delusion (moha) can (Vibh 18:3,2). Desire here takes the form of the craving for immaterial existence (Vibh 17:3). The defilement of delusion occurs among them in the form of not understanding the Third Noble Truth, that of cessation (nirodha) (SN-a 5:6).

  So refined are these states, whether accessed in meditation or as a post-mortem destination, that many ascetics of the Buddha’s time mistook them for full liberation. This is the case for the two teachers of the Bodhisatta during his years of seeking: Āḷāra Kālāma who taught the way to the ākiñcaññāyatana and Uddaka Rāmaputta who taught the nevasaññānāsaññāyatana (MN 26). Among the false views listed by the Buddha, we find the teaching that the self is immaterial and survives death (DN1 & MN 102). and this may be explicitly identified with one or the other of the arūpa states. For instance, some “samaṇas and brahmins” hold that:

  Perception is a disease, a boil, perception is a dart. But non-perception is idiocy (sammoha). This then is the excellent condition: nevasaññānāsaññaṃ (neither perception nor nonperception). (MN 102)

  The difference between the four planes within the arūpabhūmi may be understood as an increasing refinement of perception. Within each successive level perception (saññā) takes an increasingly subtle object and because of that becomes increasingly subtle itself.

  The ākāsānañcāyatana, the base of boundless space, as a meditative state is achieved by �
�surmounting the perception of diversity” (MN 66). The multiplicity of objects in the world are no longer apparent, perception is focussed on the boundless emptiness of space in which these objects are situated.

  We must make a short digression here and clarify what the ancient Buddhists understood by space, which is a little different from the modern concept. Some schools, among them the Sarvāstivāda, held space to be unconditioned (asaṅkhata),,831 but for the Theravadins, nibbāna is the only unconditioned element. Space (ākasa) exists in three modes: as delimited (paricchedākāsa), as abstracted from the object (kasiṇugghāṭimākāsa) and as openness or emptiness (ajaṭākāso) (Kv-a 6:6). The first refers to such examples as the space defined by the walls of a room or the opening of a well. The second refers specifically to the procedure in meditation when the yogi removes the kasiṇa object (e.g. the mental image of a coloured disk) to meditate upon the space left behind. The third is close to what we mean by space today: an emptiness that can be filled with objects whose distance from one another may be defined as taking up some unit of space which may be measured in kilometres or yojana. Of these, only the first, space as delimited, refers to something real and it is obviously conditioned in that we can dig or fill in a well and thereby condition the space within. The other two are, to the Theravadins, mere concepts without ontological substance.832 The boundless space which is the domain of the ākāsānañcāyatana beings is thus doubly empty: it is the merest shadow of a ghost of the material universe. Beings in this state of existence are said to experience the supreme perception (AN 5: 170).