However, I think he is saying something more than that, when he says, about Nibbana:
tiltbillings wrote:Actually, for the most part, the language clear, in that it refers to a person freed from greed, hatred, and delusion.
Here "the person" is being grasped as Nibbana. A person of a particular sort, namely, one with no greed, hatred or delusion. So, somebody please show me where it says Nibbana refers to a person. Because a person - what's that? Form, feeling, perceptions, fabrications, consciousness? Is there anywhere where Nibbana is defined as form, feelings, perceptions, fabrications, consciousness?
As for, "a person" I would have to say that that is a conventional usage. I am not referring to "a person" as an existing entity, since none "exists." Language is a tricky thing. How about you answer this, which goes directly to the point, which I put to you above: "Also, what is "the Deathless" in relation to a tathagata/to a buddha/to an arahant/to bodhi?"
Maybe that might help you understand my point.
kirk5a wrote: tiltbillings wrote:
kirk5a wrote:What would your view be in Pali?
natthi amata dhatu?
Is there any expression of that in the canon?
What do you mean by dhatu? You brought it up, now you get to explain it. Right now, I am off to bed after a long night of tending to the needs of the patients under my care, so you should have plenty of time to look at this word in its various usages. A good place to start is to ask: What other words get put in front of it?
"amata dhatu" is explained in the quotes which we have been discussing.
Since you seem to fail at understanding the question, let me try again. Where is the "property" of amata? If there were at this time no arahants or ariyas of any sort, would there be, at this time, a "property of amata," would there be amata at all?
As a separate, but related matter, can you show where there is support for your view that Nibbana refers to a person?
I already have, in detail, and actually, so has Ñāṇa here: viewtopic.php?f=13&t=10569&start=180#p196339
But let us keep in mind that "a person" is a conventional" expression, not referring to any sort of self-existent thingie, which is why I asked you "Also, what is "the Deathless" in relation to a tathagata/to a buddha/to an arahant/to bodhi?"
I recommended this essay -- A Verb for Nirvana
and you did not see the point of it. Second paragraph:
Now that nirvana has become an English word, it should have its own English verb to convey the sense of "being unbound" as well. At present, we say that a person "reaches" nirvana or "enters" nirvana, implying that nibbana is a place where you can go. But nirvana is most emphatically not a place. It's realized only when the mind stops defining itself in terms of place: of here, or there, or between the two. [My emphasis]
And there's the answer. In other words, the "person" -- the paticcasamuppada mind -- is nibbana-ized, unbound. The destruction of greed, hatred and delusion is nibbana/amata.
-- S.N. IV 251 and IV 370-1. No more rebirth, no more aging, and no more death