Skip to content
buddhavacana

Does a Tathāgata Remain After Death? A Tetralemma

· 47 min read

This is a group of suttas relating to the infamous "tetralemma" which has puzzled Buddhists for centuries.

This is a group of suttas relating to the infamous “tetralemma” which has puzzled Buddhists for centuries. As can be seen from the explanation, the key to understanding the tetralemma is to realise the concept of a Tathāgata (someone who is liberated from the five collections) cannot be associated with the concept of paraṃ maraṇā (after death) since the concepts of “existence” and “death” are intrinsically linked with the five collections (and the mistaken concept of a permanent, eternal “self”).

“Death” implies the cessation of “existence”, but someone who is liberated understands that existence implies persistence of a stable entity, and since our sense of “self” (comprising the five collections) is impermanent and ephemeral, “existence” is non-applicable, and therefore neither is “death”.

Note that hoti can have multiple meanings including “become/exist/stay/remain”. I have chosen to translate it as “remain” in the tetralemma because that makes the most sense.

13S4/10.1.1 Khemāsutta

Section titled “13S4/10.1.1 Khemāsutta”

1749. At one time the Bhagavā was dwelling at Sāvatthī, in Jeta’s Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika’s Park. Now, at that time, the bhikkhunī Khemā, while wandering in the Kosalas, had arrived at Toraṇavatthu, between Sāvatthī and Sāketa, for a stay. Then King Pasenadi of Kosala, while travelling from Sāketa to Sāvatthī, stopped for a night at Toraṇavatthu, between Sāketa and Sāvatthī. Then King Pasenadi of Kosala addressed a certain man: “Come, good man, find out if there is any wanderer or brahmin of such a nature in Toraṇavatthu whom I might visit today.”

The king was told there were no suitable wanderers or brahmins, but the bhikkhunī Khemā, who was a disciple of the Buddha, had a good reputation. So the king decided to pay homage to her.

1752. Then King Pasenadi of Kosala approached the bhikkhunī Khemā. Having approached, he bowed to the bhikkhunī Khemā and sat down to one side. Seated to one side, King Pasenadi of Kosala said this to the bhikkhunī Khemā:

“Ayye, does a Tathāgata remain after death?”

“Mahārāja, this has been undeclared by the Bhagavā: ‘a Tathāgata remains after death.’”

“But Ayye, does a Tathāgata not remain after death?”

“Mahārāja, this too has been undeclared by the Bhagavā: ‘a Tathāgata does not remain after death.’”

“Ayye, does a Tathāgata both remain and not remain after death?”

“Mahārāja, this has been undeclared by the Bhagavā: ‘a Tathāgata both remains and does not remain after death.’”

“But Ayye, does a Tathāgata neither remain nor not remain after death?”

“Mahārāja, this too has been undeclared by the Bhagavā: ‘a Tathāgata neither remains nor does not remain after death.’”

Naturally puzzled, the king sought an explanation.

1754. “Then, Mahārāja, I shall question you in return about this very matter. You should answer it as you see fit. Mahārāja, what do you consider: do you have any accountant, reckoner, or enumerator who is able to count the sand of the Ganges — saying, ‘There are so many grains of sand,’ or ‘so many hundreds of grains of sand,’ or ‘so many thousands of grains of sand,’ or ‘so many hundreds of thousands of grains of sand’?”

“Of course not, Ayye.”

“But do you have any accountant, reckoner, or enumerator who is able to count the water in the great ocean — saying, ‘There are so many measures of water,’ or ‘so many hundreds of measures of water,’ or ‘so many thousands of measures of water,’ or ‘so many hundreds of thousands of measures of water’?”

“Of course not, Ayye.”

“For what reason?”

“Mahāyye, the ocean is deep, immeasurable, and unfathomable.”

“In the same way, Mahārāja, that form by which one would define a Tathāgata — that rūpaṃ (form) has been given up by the Tathāgata, its root cut off, made like a palm stump, annihilated, not subject to future arising. The Tathāgata, Mahārāja, is freed from reckoning by form. He is deep, immeasurable, unfathomable — just like the great ocean.

  • It does not apply to say ‘the Tathāgata remains after death’;
  • it does not apply to say ‘the Tathāgata does not remain after death’;
  • it does not apply to say ‘the Tathāgata both remains and does not remain after death’;
  • it does not apply to say ‘the Tathāgata neither remains nor does not remain after death’.”
  • any vedanā (feelings) by which one would define a Tathāgata …
  • any saññā (apperceptions) by which one would define a Tathāgata …
  • any saṅkhārā (mental constructions) by which one would define a Tathāgata …
  • any viññāṇaṃ (consciousness) by which one would define a Tathāgata …

13S4/10.1.2 Anurādhasutta

Section titled “13S4/10.1.2 Anurādhasutta”

1763. At one time the Bhagavā was dwelling at Vesālī, in the Great Wood, at the Gabled Hall. Now, at that time, āyasmā Anurādha was dwelling in a forest hut not far from the Bhagavā. Then many wanderers of other sects approached āyasmā Anurādha. Having approached, they exchanged cordial greetings with āyasmā Anurādha. Having concluded their cordial and polite talk, they sat down to one side. Seated to one side, those wanderers of other sects said this to āyasmā Anurādha:

“Friend Anurādha, that Tathāgata, the supreme person, the ultimate person, who has attained the ultimate attainment — does the Tathāgata declare him in these four ways:

  • ‘a Tathāgata remains after death,’ or
  • ‘a Tathāgata does not remain after death,’ or
  • ‘a Tathāgata both remains and does not remain after death,’ or
  • ‘a Tathāgata neither remains nor does not remain after death’?”

“Friend, that Tathāgata, the supreme person, the ultimate person, who has attained the ultimate attainment — the Tathāgata declares him apart from these four ways:

  • ‘a Tathāgata remains after death,’ or
  • ‘a Tathāgata does not remain after death,’ or
  • ‘a Tathāgata both remains and does not remain after death,’ or
  • ‘a Tathāgata neither remains nor does not remain after death’.”

When this was said, those wanderers of other sects said this to āyasmā Anurādha:

“This bhikkhu must be new, recently ordained, or else an elder who is foolish and inexperienced.”

Then those wanderers of other sects, having disparaged āyasmā Anurādha with words of being new and words of being foolish, rose from their seats and departed.

Clearly, Anurādha is confused, and believed the solution to the tetralemma is a fifth (unpostulated) state (“apart from these four ways”).

He seeks clarification from the Buddha, who teaches a variation of the Second Discourse (13S3/1.2.1.7 Anattalakkhaṇasutta) to him, and then queries him whether the Tathāgata can be regarded as

  • any of the five collections, or
  • within the five collections, or
  • distinct from the five collections, or
  • possessing any of the five collections,
  • without any of the five collections.

Anurādha answers no to all the above questions. The Buddha then continues:

1779. “Anurādha, what do you consider: do you regard form, feeling, apperception, mental constructions, consciousness as a Tathāgata?”

“Of course not, Bhante.”

“Anurādha, what do you consider: do you regard this as a Tathāgata who is formless, feeling-less, apperception-less, mental-construction-less, consciousness-less?”

“Of course not, Bhante.”

“And here, Anurādha, since the Tathāgata is not found by you as true and real in this very life, is it proper for you to make that declaration:

‘Friend, that Tathāgata, the supreme person, the ultimate person, who has attained the ultimate attainment — the Tathāgata declares him apart from these four ways:

  • “a Tathāgata remains after death,” or
  • “a Tathāgata does not remain after death,” or
  • “a Tathāgata both remains and does not remain after death,” or
  • “a Tathāgata neither remains nor does not remain after death”’?”

“Of course not, Bhante.”

“Excellent, Anurādha. Both formerly, Anurādha, and now, I declare only suffering and the cessation of suffering.”

13S4/10.1.3 Paṭhamasāriputtakoṭṭhikasutta

Section titled “13S4/10.1.3 Paṭhamasāriputtakoṭṭhikasutta”

The context is that at one time, āyasmā Sāriputta and āyasmā Mahākoṭṭhika were staying at Bārāṇasī, in Isipatana, the Deer Park. Then, in the evening, āyasmā Mahākoṭṭhika, rising from seclusion, approached āyasmā Sāriputta. Having approached, he exchanged cordial greetings with āyasmā Sāriputta. Having concluded their cordial and polite talk, he sat down to one side. Seated to one side, āyasmā Mahākoṭṭhika asked āyasmā Sāriputta about the tetralemma.

Sāriputta gave a variation of the answer, by pointing out the four statements of the tetralemma are intrinsically linked with the concept of the five collections.

  • 1784. “‘A Tathāgata remains after death’ — this, friend, pertains to form.
  • ‘A Tathāgata does not remain after death’ — this pertains to form.
  • ‘A Tathāgata both remains and does not remain after death’ — this pertains to form.
  • ‘A Tathāgata neither remains nor does not remain after death’ — this pertains to form.

[the tetralemma also pertains to feelings, apperceptions, mental constructions, consciousness]

This, friend, is the reason, this is the cause, why this has been undeclared by the Bhagavā.”

13S4/10.1.4 Dutiyasāriputtakoṭṭhikasutta

Section titled “13S4/10.1.4 Dutiyasāriputtakoṭṭhikasutta”

Another variation, linking the answer to truly knowing and seeing the four realisations in the context of the five collections.

1787. And indeed, friend, for one who

  • knows and sees form as it really is,
  • knows and sees the origin of form as it really is,
  • knows and sees the cessation of form as it really is,
  • knows and sees the path leading to the cessation of form as it really is, for him:
  • ‘a Tathāgata remains after death’ does not occur;
  • ‘a Tathāgata does not remain after death’ does not occur;
  • ‘a Tathāgata both remains and does not remain after death’ does not occur;
  • ‘a Tathāgata neither remains nor does not remain after death’ does not occur.

[similar for feelings, apperceptions, mental constructions, consciousness]

This, friend, is the reason, this is the cause, why this has been undeclared by the Bhagavā.

Other variations

Section titled “Other variations”

Backlinks