Parinibbana - a question.

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism

Parinibbana - a question.

Postby srivijaya » Thu Mar 04, 2010 8:11 am

I have a question regarding Parinibbana.

Is it said to be cognizant or incognizant?

Namaste
srivijaya
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 8:31 pm

Re: Parinibbana - a question.

Postby Kenshou » Thu Mar 04, 2010 8:25 am

Non-cognizant, I believe. Consciousness is a phenomena dependent upon conditions which at the point of exit from samsara, cease entirely.

Related: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dham ... bbana.html
Kenshou
 
Posts: 1029
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 12:03 am
Location: Minneapolis, MN

Re: Parinibbana - a question.

Postby tiltbillings » Thu Mar 04, 2010 8:31 am

Kenshou wrote:Non-cognizant, I believe. Consciousness is a phenomena dependent upon conditions which at the point of exit from samsara, cease entirely.

Related: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dham ... bbana.html

I would wonder if either choice is appropriate.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 18983
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Location: Turtle Island

Re: Parinibbana - a question.

Postby tiltbillings » Thu Mar 04, 2010 8:36 am

Since a tathagata, even when actually present, is incomprehensible, it is inept to say of him – of the Uttermost Person, the Supernal Person, the Attainer of the Supernal – that after death the tathagata is, or is not, or both is and is not, or neither is nor is not SN III 118, which seems to suggest that the question cognizant or incognizant does not fit, given that seems to imply some sort of being.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 18983
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Location: Turtle Island

Re: Parinibbana - a question.

Postby Kenshou » Thu Mar 04, 2010 8:38 am

I suppose both knowing and non-knowing etc. are attributes which require a reference point, which nibbana cannot be said to have.

It's kind of a dance at the edge of the capabilities of language, trying to describe such a thing. But I haven't been there, so I'll leave it at that.
Kenshou
 
Posts: 1029
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 12:03 am
Location: Minneapolis, MN

Re: Parinibbana - a question.

Postby tiltbillings » Thu Mar 04, 2010 8:44 am

srivijaya wrote:I have a question regarding Parinibbana.

Is it said to be cognizant or incognizant?

Namaste

Why do you ask, if I may ask?
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 18983
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Location: Turtle Island

Re: Parinibbana - a question.

Postby srivijaya » Thu Mar 04, 2010 9:31 am

Kenshou wrote:Non-cognizant, I believe.

Many thanks for the reply and the link Kenshou.

From the link:
"There is, monks, an unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated. If there were not that unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated, there would not be the case that emancipation from the born — become — made — fabricated would be discerned. But precisely because there is an unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated, emancipation from the born — become — made — fabricated is discerned." Ud 8.3


A non-cognizant is, by definition, unable to "discern" wouldn't you say?

Tilt, I ask, as I consider it important.

Namaste
srivijaya
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 8:31 pm

Re: Parinibbana - a question.

Postby Alex123 » Thu Mar 11, 2010 2:58 am

srivijaya wrote:I have a question regarding Parinibbana.

Is it said to be cognizant or incognizant?

Namaste



If you mean when the Arahant dies, then this is what happens:


""Then, friend Yamaka, how would you answer if you are thus asked: A monk, a worthy one, with no more mental effluents: what is he on the break-up of the body, after death?"

"Thus asked, I would answer, 'Form is inconstant... Feeling... Perception...Fabrications... Consciousness is inconstant. That which is inconstant is stressful. That which is stressful has ceased and gone to its end."" - SN22.85
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

"With the breakup of the body, following the exhaustion of life, all that is felt, not being delighted in, will become cool right here; mere bodily remains will be left" - SN 12.51(1) Thorough investigation

The body disintegrated, perception ceased, pain & rapture were entirely consumed, fabrications were stilled: consciousness has come to its end.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html



With metta,


Alex
I was not; I was; I am not; I do not care."
User avatar
Alex123
 
Posts: 2792
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Parinibbana - a question.

Postby vinasp » Thu Mar 11, 2010 12:02 pm

Hi srivijaya,

A complex and difficult question. First, the term 'parinibbana', the Buddhist Dictionary by Nyanatiloka says:

"Parinibbana : 'full nibbana', is a synonym for nibbana; this term, therefore, does not refer exclusively to the extinction of the 5 groups of existence at the death of the Holy One, though often applied to it. Cf. nibbana."

I agree that 'parinibbana' seems to be used sometimes to refer to enlightenment attained in this life. I disagree with the rest of the definition.

If you are asking what happens after the literal death of a tathagata or arahant, the teachings do not say anything (except that 'he' is not reborn?).

The passage that you quote from Ud 8.3 may be describing a stage of enlightenment which is attained in this life. If so, then one would still be conscious.

The problem is made more complicated by the difficulty of defining what, exactly, is meant by the 'five aggregates' ( I believe that they can cease before death).

It is even possible that many passages which appear to be describing someones death are in fact describing a higher stage of enlightenment. Idiomatic expressions are frequently used - 'he makes an end', or 'he uses the knife' (a symbol of wisdom).
Even the word 'death' does not have to be taken only in a literal sense.

It is doubtful whether 'vinnana' really means consciousness - perhaps it means a certain kind of knowing. A knowing in terms of self?

My ideas are controversial and outside mainstream thinking, I would not wish to mislead beginners, you must start with the commonly accepted view.

Best wishes, Vincent.
vinasp
 
Posts: 1160
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 7:49 pm
Location: Bristol. United Kingdom.

Re: Parinibbana - a question.

Postby srivijaya » Fri Mar 12, 2010 9:42 am

Alex123 wrote:If you mean when the Arahant dies

Hi Alex,
Thanks for the reply. I didn't quite mean that, as I feel that the question is wonderfully addressed by Sariputta in the Yamaka Sutta you linked.
Now, at that time this evil supposition had arisen to Ven. Yamaka: "As I understand the Teaching explained by the Blessed One, a monk with no more (mental) effluents, on the break-up of the body, is annihilated, perishes, & does not exist after death."

"And so, my friend Yamaka — when you can't pin down the Tathagata as a truth or reality even in the present life — is it proper for you to declare, 'As I understand the Teaching explained by the Blessed One, a monk with no more effluents, on the break-up of the body, is annihilated, perishes, & does not exist after death'?"

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

The question was rather a difficult one (I admit).

Vincent, I was intrigued by this:
It is doubtful whether 'vinnana' really means consciousness - perhaps it means a certain kind of knowing. A knowing in terms of self?

Very plausible explanation.

At the end of the Kevatta Sutta we have the following:
Consciousness without feature,
without end,
luminous all around:

Here water, earth, fire, & wind
have no footing.
Here long & short
coarse & fine
fair & foul
name & form
are all brought to an end.
With the cessation of [the activity of] consciousness
each is here brought to an end.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... n.html#t-1

Could the cessation of the activity of consciousness simply mean the cessation of the fabricated self and of suffering? In the footnotes we find:
Viññanam anidassanam. This term is nowhere explained in the Canon, although MN 49 mentions that it "does not partake in the allness of the All" — the "All" meaning the six internal and six external sense media (see SN 35.23). In this it differs from the consciousness factor in dependent co-arising, which is defined in terms of the six sense media. Lying outside of time and space, it would also not come under the consciousness-aggregate, which covers all consciousness near and far; past, present, and future.


Many thanks for the replies.
Namaste
srivijaya
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 8:31 pm


Return to General Theravāda discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests