Early Monastic Buddhism v2.c34.s3.22

v2.c34.s3.22

Neither the above discussions in the *Kathāvatthu* nor the terse statements of Vasumitra help us much in finding out the real difference between the Andhakas and the Theravādins about the position of an Arhat. The Mahāyāna works point out the distinction thus: Arhats, who are perfect Śrāvakas, get rid of only *kleśāvaraṇa*, i.e., the veil of impurities consisting of *rāga*, *dosa*, *moha*, *sīlabbataparāmāsa*, and *vicikicchā* but not of *jñeyāvaraṇa*, i.e., the veil which conceals the truth—the veil which can only be removed by realising the Dharma-śūnyatā or Tathatā.¹ It is the Buddha alone who is perfectly emancipated having both *kleśāvaraṇa* and *jñeyāvaraṇa* removed. That the Mahāsanghikas appear to be groping to get at this clear distinction will be evident from two other topics discussed in the *Kvu.* but not referred to in Vasumitra's treatise. The topics are,—*atthi kiñci saññojanam appahāya parinibbānan ti?* (XXII. 1) or *arahattappattīti?* (XXI. 3). To these the Mahāsanghikas replied in the affirmative, saying that an arhat is *nikkileso* (free from impurities) and does attain *parinibbāna* or *arhatta* but as he is not cognizant of all that is *Buddhavisaya* (domain of Buddha's knowledge), it must be admitted that some *saññojanas* are left in him. This opinion may be taken as a hint that the arhats do not remove the *jñeyāvaraṇa*.²