Viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ= undefiled mind =nibbana?

[starter]

Hello Teachers/Friends,

Thanks for Mike's very helpful link [http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 5&start=60]. After pondering over the relevant teachings, I came to the following tentative conclusion:

viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ" [non-manifestive mind = mind (is) non-indicative or non-manifestive or empty of volitions and defilements, free from name and form = appatiṭṭha viññāṇa, unestablished mind (with consciousness unestablished/unstationed), not established upon name and form = "mind without barriers" ("unrestricted mind"), pure mind devoid of defilements and = living arahant’s mind = nibbana
Here are the teachings on which I base my conclusion:

1) Unestablished (unstationed) mind = mind with consciousness unestablished:

SN 22.87: [http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/nirvanaverb.html]
That is Mara, the Evil One. He is searching for the consciousness of Vakkali the clansman: "Where is the consciousness of Vakkali the clansman established?" But, monks, it is through unestablished (unstationed) mind that Vakkali the clansman has become totally unbound.


How does consciousness become unestablished? It's through the abandonment of delight, craving and attachment to name and form or the five aggregates:

SN 22.53 Upaya Sutta (Ven.Bhikkhu Bodhi):

"Bhikkhus, one who is engaged is unliberated; one who is disengaged is liberated. Consciousness, bhikkhus, while standing, might stand engaged with form […]; based upon form, established upon form, with a sprinkling of delight, it might come to growth, increase, and expansion. Or consciousness, while standing, might stand [engaged with feeling..., engaged with perception...] engaged with volitional formations; based upon volitional formations, established upon volitional formations, with a sprinkling of delight, it might come to growth, increase and expansion.

Bhikkhus, though someone might say: 'apart from form, apart from feeling, apart from perception, apart from volitional formations, I will make known the coming and going of consciousness, its passing away and rebirth, its growth, increase and expansion'--that is impossible.

Bhikkhus, if a bhikkhu has abandoned lust for the form element, with the abandoning of lust, the basis is cut off, there is no support for the establishing of consciousness. If he has abandoned lust for the feeling element...for the perception element...for the volitional formations element...for the consciousness element, with the abandoning of lust the basis is cut off. There is no support for the establishing of consciousness.

When that consciousness is unestablished, not coming to growth, nongenerative, it is liberated. By being liberated, it is steady; by being steady, it is content; by being content, he is not agitated. Being unagitated, he personally attains nibbaana. He understands: 'Destroyed is birth , the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more for this state of being.'"

SN 12.64:
"Just as if there were a roofed house or a roofed hall having windows on the north, the south, or the east. When the sun rises, and a ray has entered by way of the window, where does it land?"

"On the western wall, lord."

"And if there is no western wall, where does it land?"

"On the ground, lord."

"And if there is no ground, where does it land?"

"On the water, lord."

"And if there is no water, where does it land?"

"It does not land, lord."

"In the same way, where there is no passion for the nutriment of physical food ... contact ... intellectual intention ... consciousness, where there is no delight, no craving, then consciousness does not land there or grow. Where consciousness does not land or grow, name-&-form does not alight. Where name-&-form does not alight, there is no growth of fabrications. Where there is no growth of fabrications, there is no production of renewed becoming in the future. Where there is no production of renewed becoming in the future, there is no future birth, aging, & death. That, I tell you, has no sorrow, affliction, or despair."

AN 10.81:
Freed, dissociated, and released from ten things, Bahuna, the Tathagata dwells with unbound mind. Which ten? Freed, dissociated, and released from form, the Tathagata dwells with unrestricted awareness. Freed, dissociated, and released from feeling... from perception... from fabrications... from consciousness... from birth... from aging... from death... from stress... Freed, dissociated, and released from defilement, the Tathagata dwells with unbound mind.

Just as a red, blue, or white lotus born in the water and growing in the water, rises up above the water and stands with no water adhering to it, in the same way the Tathagata — freed, dissociated, and released from these ten things — dwells with unbound mind.

DN 15:
If consciousness were not to gain a foothold in name-and-form, would a coming-into-play of the origination of birth, aging, death, and stress in the future be discerned?"

2) "viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ" = "cessation of consciousness":

DN 11:

‘Viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ, anantaṃ sabbatopabhaṃ;
Ettha āpo ca pathavī, tejo vāyo na gādhati.
Ettha dīghañca rassañca, aṇuṃ thūlaṃ subhāsubhaṃ;
Ettha nāmañca rūpañca, asesaṃ uparujjhati;
Viññāṇassa nirodhena, etthetaṃ uparujjhatī’ti.

Mind empty/non-manifestive of volitions and defilements, boundless (without barriers of defilements), unlimited (by defilements). 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 consciousness each is here brought to an end.

MN 49 Brahma-nimantanika Sutta:

Mind empty/non-manifestive of volitions and defilements, without barriers (of defilements), unlimited (by defilements). does not partake of the solidity of earth, the liquidity of water, the radiance of fire, the windiness of wind, the divinity of devas [and so on through a list of the various levels of godhood to] the allness of the All."

3) What is nibbana?

This is the peaceful; this is the sublime; the stilling of all volitions/formations; the relinquishing of all foundations (of existence); the ending of craving; dipassion; cessation; nibbana"

Udana – Inspiration: I - 10 which has similar phrases as DN11:
On realizing the importance of this incident the Blessed One exclaimed:
Where neither solidity, fluidity, heat nor motion find any footing,
there no sun, moon nor star ever shines. There is neither any light,
yet nor is there any darkness! When the Noble,
through stilling of all volitions, through quieting of all formations,
directly experiences this, then is he freed from both form & formlessness,
then is he released from both pleasure and all pain ....

AN 4.174:
[Sariputta:] "The statement, 'With the remainderless stopping & fading of the six contact-media [vision, hearing, smell, taste, touch, & intellection] is it the case that there is anything else?' proliferates [papañcize] non-proliferation [papañca]. The statement, '... is it the case that there is not anything else ... is it the case that there both is & is not anything else ... is it the case that there neither is nor is not anything else?' proliferates non-proliferation. However far the six contact-media go, that is how far proliferations goes. However far proliferation goes, that is how far the six contact media go. With the remainderless fading & stopping of the six contact-media, there comes to be the stopping, the allaying [relieving] of papanca [proliferation].

Please note that Ven. Sariputta, to my understanding, clearly defined nibbana as non-proliferation (non-papanca) instead of as "anything" [any conditioned thing] or as the cessation of awareness/consciousness. Since all manifestations/fabrications/proliferations are caused by incoming defilements, nibbana is the stilling of such manifestations/fabrications/proliferations as the result of the "consciuousness"/"mind" being devoid of incoming defilements and hence not being conditioned by the defilements anymore (though could still being with residue -- during the arahant's lifetime, and without residue -- after the arahant's lifetime).

AN1:
"Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is defiled by incoming defilements. The uninstructed run-of-the-mill person doesn't discern that as it actually is present, which is why I tell you that — for the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person — there is no development of the mind."
"Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming defilements. The well-instructed disciple of the noble ones discerns that as it actually is present, which is why I tell you that — for the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones — there is development of the mind."

4) Does living arahant’s mind = nibbana?

We know that the living arahants are in nibbana "with residue" [five aggregates]. But does an arahant's mind become annihilated upon his death? Judging from the following two suttas, I'd say it's not annihilated.

SN 22.87: [http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/nirvanaverb.html]
That is Mara, the Evil One. He is searching for the consciousness of Vakkali the clansman: "Where is the consciousness of Vakkali the clansman established?" But, monks, it is through consciousness unestablished that Vakkali the clansman has become totally unbound.

A. N. ii.47.Paharada Sutta:
"Just as in the great ocean neither a decrease nor an increase will appear though all the streams of the world flow into it and rains fall into it from the sky; even so in the Nibbana datu that is without a remainder of substrata of existence; there is no decrease nor increase even if many monks enter it. [-- because these monks don’t have any conditioned existence anymore, but rather the unconditioned, the pure imperturbable "mind" devoid of defilements and unestablished upon name and form].

MN 72:
"But, Master Gotama, the monk whose mind is thus released: Where does he reappear? ... when Master Gotama is asked if the monk reappears... does not reappear... both does & does not reappear... neither does nor does not reappear, he says, '... doesn't apply' in each case." ... "Deep, Vaccha, is this Dhamma [Nibbana], hard to see, hard to realize, tranquil, refined, beyond the scope of conjecture, subtle, to-be-experienced by the wise. For those with other views, other practices, other satisfactions, other aims, other teachers, it is difficult to know." ...

"And suppose someone were to ask you, 'This fire that has gone out in front of you, in which direction from here has it gone? East? West? North? Or south?' Thus asked, how would you reply?"

"That doesn't apply, Master Gotama. Any fire burning dependent on a sustenance of grass & timber, being unnourished — from having consumed that sustenance and not being offered any other — is classified simply as 'out' (unbound)."

"Even so, Vaccha, any physical form by which one describing the Tathagata would describe him: That the Tathagata has abandoned, its root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising. Freed from the classification of form, Vaccha, the Tathagata is deep, boundless, hard to fathom, like the sea. 'Reappears' doesn't apply. 'Does not reappear' doesn't apply. 'Both does & does not reappear' doesn't apply. 'Neither reappears nor does not reappear' doesn't apply.

"Any feeling... Any perception... Any mental fabrication...

"Any consciousness by which one describing the Tathagata would describe him: That the Tathagata has abandoned, its root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising. Freed from the classification of consciousness, Vaccha, the Tathagata is deep, boundless, hard to fathom, like the sea. 'Reappears' doesn't apply. 'Does not reappear' doesn't apply. 'Both does & does not reappear' doesn't apply. 'Neither reappears nor does not reappear' doesn't apply."

Please note: the "fire" burned out here refers to the release from the five aggregates [and defilements of course]. This sutta actually conveys the same meaning as the other cited suttas:

... then owing to the abandonment of passion, the support is cut off, and there is no base for consciousness. Mind, thus unestablished, not proliferating, not performing any function, is released.

... where there is no delight, no craving, then consciousness does not land there or grow. Where consciousness does not land or grow, name-&-form does not alight. Where name-&-form does not alight, there is no growth of volitions. Where there is no growth of volitions, there is no production of renewed becoming in the future...

Since the Buddha clearly indicated that "Freed from the classification of [the aggregate of consciousness], Vaccha, the Tathagata [the unestablished mind] is deep, boundless, hard to fathom, like the sea. 'Reappears' doesn't apply. 'Does not reappear' doesn't apply. 'Both does & does not reappear' doesn't apply. 'Neither reappears nor does not reappear' doesn't apply."", the unestablished mind of an arahant doesn't appear to be annihilated at all, but rather it's the deathless, the unconditioned, nibbana.

Welcome your helpful input. Please read these suttas carefully without any previously formed bias/notions before you make your judgments. Metta to all,

Starter

[tiltbillings]

Hello Teachers/Friends,

Thanks for Mike's very helpful link [http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 5&start=60]. After pondering over the relevant teachings, I came to the following tentative conclusion:

viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ" [non-manifestive consciousness) = consciousness (is) non-indicative or non-manifestive or empty [of fabrications] = consciousness [is] ceased [no fabrications, no defilements] = unestablished consciousness (appatiṭṭha viññāṇa)= living arahant’s consciousness = nibbana.

Simply, consciousness that does not "establish" itself in term of greed, hatred, and delusion -- that is, it is a consciousness that does not establish itself by grasping after what reinforces a sense of self, by pushing away what threatens a sense of self, and by delusively thinking in terms of a self. No need to make this more complicated than it is.

[kirk5a]

Regarding the DN11 passage, It has occured to me whether "Viññāṇassa nirodhena" in the last line, is in fact just another expression for "Viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ" in the first line. Whether they are in fact just synonyms, picking out different aspects. And where the confusion comes in is in this translation of "nirodha" as "cessation." What if "anidassanam" and "nirodhena" are both just descriptions for the very same thing?

I offer the following in support:

As for nirodha in the third Noble Truth (or the Dependent Origination cycle in cessation mode), although it also describes a natural process, its emphasis is on practical considerations. It is translated in two ways in the Visuddhimagga. One way traces the etymology to "ni" (without) + "rodha" (prison, confine, obstacle, wall, impediment), thus rendering the meaning as "without impediment," "free of confinement." This is explained as "free of impediments, that is, the confinement of samsara." Another definition traces the origin to anuppada, meaning "not arising", and goes on to say "nirodha here does not mean bhanga, breaking up and dissolution."

http://www.buddhanet.net/cmdsg/coarisea.htm

[Alex123]

Unestablished consciousness is merely an exalted state of consciousness that is not established on greed, anger or delusion. It doesn't crave for anything.

This however should NOT imply as being something other than what belongs to Viññāṇa-khandha. And as Viññāṇa khandha, it will also cease. The DN11 is clear on that.

[Kenshou]

It has occured to me whether "Viññāṇassa nirodhena" in the last line, is in fact just another expression for "Viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ" in the first line. Whether they are in fact just synonyms, picking out different aspects. And where the confusion comes in is in this translation of "nirodha" as "cessation." What if "anidassanam" and "nirodhena" are both just descriptions for the very same thing?

I believe that this would be relevant to that, and to this whole thread in general: http://www.beyondthenet.net/calm/nibbana07.htm

No time to pick out quotes, but it's not really that much material.

[ground]

Contact ceasing, nama rupa ceases, consciousness ceases. No establishment.

Kind regards

[Sylvester]

Hi starter

I think it's worth reflecting that how "vinnanam anidassanam" (noun+predicates nexus or noun+adjective junction?) or the elusive "appatiṭṭha viññāṇa" (no such term in the Canon, but if it existed is it a verb formation or noun+adjective junction?) etc are translated or interpreted turns very much on whether (i) one follows the traditional 3 Lives model of DO, versus the One Life model, and (ii) one interprets Namarupa as an experiential category (ie equivalent to the 5 Aggregates, plus some) or as a functionalist one in terms of the types of contacts it yields.

[Dmytro]

Hi,

I think it's worth reflecting that how "vinnanam anidassanam" (noun+predicates nexus or noun+adjective junction?)

It's unlikely even to be a noun:
viewtopic.php?f=23&t=5618

so "non-manifestive consciousness" is just a popular modern interpretation.

or the elusive "appatiṭṭha viññāṇa" (no such term in the Canon, but if it existed is it a verb formation or noun+adjective junction?)

There is such a term in the Canon:

“ Yato ca kho, bhikkhave, no ceva ceteti no ca pakappeti no ca anuseti, ārammaṇametaṃ na hoti viññāṇassa ṭhitiyā Ārammaṇe asati patiṭṭhā viññāṇassa na hoti. Tadappatiṭṭhite viññāṇe avirūḷhe āyatiṃ punabbhavābhinibbatti na hoti. Āyatiṃ punabbhavābhinibbattiyā asati āyatiṃ jātijarāmaraṇaṃ sokaparidevadukkhadomanassupāyāsā nirujjhanti. Evametassa kevalassa dukkhakkhandhassa nirodho hotī”ti

"But when one doesn't intend, arrange, or obsess [about anything], there is no support for the stationing of consciousness. There being no support, there is no landing of consciousness. When that consciousness doesn't land & grow, there is no production of renewed becoming in the future. When there is no production of renewed becoming in the future, there is no future birth, aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, or despair. Such is the cessation of this entire mass of suffering & stress."

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

‘‘Phasse ce, bhikkhave, āhāre… manosañcetanāya ce, bhikkhave, āhāre… viññāṇe ce, bhikkhave, āhāre natthi rāgo natthi nandī natthi taṇhā, appatiṭṭhitaṃ tattha viññāṇaṃ avirūḷhaṃ. Yattha appatiṭṭhitaṃ viññāṇaṃ avirūḷhaṃ, natthi tattha nāmarūpassa avakkanti. Yattha natthi nāmarūpassa avakkanti, natthi tattha saṅkhārānaṃ vuddhi. Yattha natthi saṅkhārānaṃ vuddhi, natthi tattha āyatiṃ punabbhavābhinibbatti. Yattha natthi āyatiṃ punabbhavābhinibbatti, natthi tattha āyatiṃ jātijarāmaraṇaṃ. Yattha natthi āyatiṃ jātijarāmaraṇaṃ asokaṃ taṃ, bhikkhave, adaraṃ anupāyāsanti vadāmī’’ti.

"In the same way, where there is no passion for the nutriment of physical food... contact... intellectual intention... consciousness, where there is no delight, no craving, then consciousness does not land there or increase. Where consciousness does not land or increase, there is no alighting of name-&-form. Where there is no alighting of name-&-form, there is no growth of fabrications. Where there is no growth of fabrications, there is no production of renewed becoming in the future. Where there is no production of renewed becoming in the future, there is no future birth, aging, & death. That, I tell you, has no sorrow, affliction, or despair."

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

SN XXII.53 Upaya Sutta (Engagement), in the translation of Ven.Bhikkhu Bodhi:

At Saavatthi:

Bhikkhus, one who is engaged is unliberated; one who is disengaged is liberated. Consciousness, bhikkhus, while standing, might stand engaged with form; based upon form, established upon form, with a sprinkling of delight, it might come to growth, increase, and expansion. Or consciousness, while standing, might stand [engaged with feeling..., engaged with perception...] engaged with volitional formations; based upon volitional formations, established upon volitional formations, with a sprinkling of delight, it might come to growth, increase and expansion.

Bhikkhus, though someone might say: 'apart from form, apart from feeling, apart from perception, apart from volitional formations, I will make known the coming and going of consciousness, its passing away and rebirth, its growth, increase and expansion'--that is impossible.

Bhikkhus, if a bhikkhu has abandoned lust for the form element, with the abandoning of lust, the basis is cut off, there is no support for the establishing of consciousness. If he has abandoned lust for the feeling element...for the perception element...for the volitional formations element...for the consciousness element, with the abandoning of lust the basis is cut off. There is no support for the establishing of consciousness.

When that consciousness is unestablished, not coming to growth, nongenerative, it is liberated. By being liberated, it is steady; by being steady, it is content; by being content, he is not agitated. Being unagitated, he personally attains nibbaana. He understands: 'Destroyed is birth , the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more for this state of being.'


Upayasuttaṃ

53. Sāvatthinidānaṃ. ‘‘Upayo [upāyo (bahūsu)], bhikkhave, avimutto, anupayo vimutto. Rūpupayaṃ vā, bhikkhave, viññāṇaṃ tiṭṭhamānaṃ tiṭṭheyya, rūpārammaṇaṃ rūpappatiṭṭhaṃ nandūpasecanaṃ vuddhiṃ virūḷhiṃ vepullaṃ āpajjeyya. Vedanupayaṃ vā…pe… saññupayaṃ vā…pe… saṅkhārupayaṃ vā, bhikkhave, viññāṇaṃ tiṭṭhamānaṃ tiṭṭheyya, saṅkhārārammaṇaṃ saṅkhārappatiṭṭhaṃ nandūpasecanaṃ vuddhiṃ virūḷhiṃ vepullaṃ āpajjeyya’’.

‘‘Yo, bhikkhave, evaṃ vadeyya – ‘ahamaññatra rūpā aññatra vedanāya aññatra saññāya aññatra saṅkhārehi viññāṇassa āgatiṃ vā gatiṃ vā cutiṃ vā upapattiṃ vā vuddhiṃ vā virūḷhiṃ vā vepullaṃ vā paññāpessāmī’ti, netaṃ ṭhānaṃ vijjati.

‘‘Rūpadhātuyā ce, bhikkhave, bhikkhuno rāgo pahīno hoti. Rāgassa pahānā vocchijjatārammaṇaṃ patiṭṭhā viññāṇassa na hoti. Vedanādhātuyā ce, bhikkhave… saññādhātuyā ce bhikkhave… saṅkhāradhātuyā ce bhikkhave… viññāṇadhātuyā ce, bhikkhave, bhikkhuno rāgo pahīno hoti. Rāgassa pahānā vocchijjatārammaṇaṃ patiṭṭhā viññāṇassa na hoti. Tadappatiṭṭhitaṃ viññāṇaṃ avirūḷhaṃ anabhisaṅkhaccavimuttaṃ. Vimuttattā ṭhitaṃ. Ṭhitattā santusitaṃ. Santusitattā na paritassati. Aparitassaṃ paccattaññeva parinibbāyati. ‘Khīṇā jāti, vusitaṃ brahmacariyaṃ, kataṃ karaṇīyaṃ, nāparaṃ itthattāyā’ti pajānātī’’ti.

Metta, Dmytro

[Ñāṇa]

Simply, consciousness that does not "establish" itself in term of greed, hatred, and delusion

Indeed, this is what is important.

All the best,

Geoff

[Sylvester]

Thank you, Dmytro. I can always count on you to furnish the text.

When I said that "appatiṭṭha viññāṇa" does not exist as a term in the Canon, I was referring to those variants of this term "designating" something that is an "unestablished consciousness". I believe there's been a fulsome discussion of whether those suttas you cited (+ SN 4.23) establish (i) an "unestablished consciousness" (per Ven Nanananda) or (ii) simply the phenomenon of consciousness not being established (per "classical" Theravada). There were canvassed previously at -

viewtopic.php?f=13&t=8064&p=129246&hilit=unestablished#p129245
viewtopic.php?f=13&t=8064&p=129210&hilit=edible#p129203
viewtopic.php?f=29&t=7464&p=126920&hilit=+unestablished#p126920
viewtopic.php?f=13&t=6382&p=126436&hilit=+unestablished#p126436
viewtopic.php?f=25&t=7415&start=40#p118001

For me, I think the weight of the Canon tilts in favour of the classical interpretation.

[Ñāṇa]

I believe there's been a fulsome discussion of whether those suttas you cited (+ SN 4.23) establish (i) an "unestablished consciousness" (per Ven Nanananda) or (ii) simply the phenomenon of consciousness not being established (per "classical" Theravada).

Both expressions arrive at the same place: consciousness not being established in relation to passion, aggression, or delusion. It seems to me that what Ven. Ñāṇananda is getting at is that the object-basis of supramundane consciousness isn't some sort of "Unconditioned Realm" existing somewhere outside of time and space. Rather, it is a cognition which perceives the absence of specific fetters.

All the best,

Geoff

[tiltbillings]

I believe there's been a fulsome discussion of whether those suttas you cited (+ SN 4.23) establish (i) an "unestablished consciousness" (per Ven Nanananda) or (ii) simply the phenomenon of consciousness not being established (per "classical" Theravada).

Both expressions arrive at the same place: consciousness not being established in relation to passion, aggression, or delusion. It seems to me that what Ven. Ñāṇananda is getting at is that the object-basis of supramundane consciousness isn't some sort of "Unconditioned Realm" existing somewhere outside of time and space. Rather, it is a cognition which perceives the absence of specific fetters.

Such would be dictated by Occam's Razor.

[Sylvester]

Except that the "ontic" consequences of either interpretation would differ.

For Ven Nanananda's interpretation, the "establishment" is on Namarupa as he understands it to be naming and striking. A consciousness that is unestablished would "be" for the Arahant.

For the classical interpretation, the "establishment" is on Namarupa's descent, which given DN 15's very literal "womb" reference would not lend itself to being a metaphor. This interpretation would lead to consciousness "not being" in the future.

[tiltbillings]

Except that the "ontic" consequences of either interpretation would differ.

For Ven Nanananda's interpretation, the "establishment" is on Namarupa as he understands it to be naming and striking. A consciousness that is unestablished would "be" for the Arahant.

For the classical interpretation, the "establishment" is on Namarupa's descent, which given DN 15's very literal "womb" reference would not lend itself to being a metaphor. This interpretation would lead to consciousness "not being" in the future.

Do you think you and Geoff are that far apart in this? Or is it picking nits?

[Sylvester]

Hi Tilt

I read the "establishment" as having a different temporal location, given my belief that the vinnana in the 2nd and 3rd nidanas refer to rebirth consciousness. I'm unable to make any statement at all about the living Arahant's consciousness in terms of "establishment", since I interpret that term strictly in the context of rebirth, and not in the context of freedom from the asavas. You might recall SN 12.38 where a distinction is drawn between (i) kamma and anusaya, versus (ii) establishment of consciousness.

What one intends, and what one plans, and whatever one has a tendency towards: this becomes a basis for the maintenance of consciousness. When there is a basis there is a support for the establishing of consciousness. When consciousness is established and has come to growth, there is the production of future renewed existence. When there is the production of future renewed existence, future birth, aging-and-death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, displeasure, and despair come to be. Such is the origin of this whole mass of suffering.

Yañca, bhikkhave, ceteti yañca pakappeti yañca anuseti, ārammaṇametaṃ hoti viññāṇassa ṭhitiyā. Ārammaṇe sati patiṭṭhā viññāṇassa hoti. Tasmiṃ patiṭṭhite viññāṇe virūḷhe āyatiṃ punabbhavābhinibbatti hoti. Āyatiṃ punabbhavābhinibbattiyā sati āyatiṃ jāti jarāmaraṇaṃ sokaparidevadukkhadomanassupāyāsā sambhavanti. Evametassa kevalassa dukkhakkhandhassa samudayo hoti.

In my view, "establishment" is the result of the kamma and anusaya (std 2nd Nidana), which is why I don't conflate them to say that a non-Arahant's consciousness is established in kamma, anusayas or asavas.

[tiltbillings]

. . . .

Thanks. Let me think about this for a bit.

[Ñāṇa]

Except that the "ontic" consequences of either interpretation would differ.

For Ven Nanananda's interpretation, the "establishment" is on Namarupa as he understands it to be naming and striking. A consciousness that is unestablished would "be" for the Arahant.

I can't speak for Ven. Ñāṇananda, but it seems to me that he is just borrowing a page from Nāgārjuna to demonstrate that nibbāna isn't an ultimately existing unconditioned realm (an idea that has gained currency in Theravāda circles).

There is a long history in Mahāyāna exegesis of pointing out the selflessness of phenomena (dharmanairātmya) and thereby describing consciousness as appatiṭṭha (Skt. apratiṣṭha) and anidassana (Skt. anidarśana). (Cf. Kāśyapaparivarta Sūtra, Sarvadharmāpravṛttinirdeśa Sūtra, Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Sūtra, Ratnagotravibhāga Śāstra, etc.. Also, Nāgārjuna quotes the passage from DN 11 in his Ratnāvalī.)

Similarly, Ven. Ñāṇananda describes supramundane consciousness as "seeing through the object" (i.e. realizing the essencelessness of concomitant mental phenomena). But where Ñāṇananda differs from Nāgārjuna, et al, is that Ñāṇananda explicitly rejects the possibility of any post-mortem continuum for an arahant.

All the best,

Geoff

[Dmytro]

Thank you, Sylvester, your evidence is impressive.

What would you say about 'anissita'? In Mahasatipatthana sutta it is mentioned as a state in which one abides, and it's not unconsciousness:

“Yāvadeva ñāṇamattāya paṭissatimattāya anissito ca viharati, na ca kiñci loke upādiyati.”

And he remains independent, unsustained by (not clinging to) anything in the world.

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


MN 22: Alagaddūpama Sutta:

"And how is a monk a noble one with banner lowered, burden placed down, unfettered? There is the case where a monk's conceit 'I am' is abandoned, its root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising. This is how a monk is a noble one with banner lowered, burden placed down, unfettered.

"And when the devas, together with Indra, the Brahmas, & Pajapati, search for the monk whose mind is thus released, they cannot find that 'The consciousness of the one truly gone (tathagata) [11] is dependent on this.' Why is that? The one truly gone is untraceable even in the here & now. [12]

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

Kathañca, bhikkhave, bhikkhu ariyo pannaddhajo pannabhāro visaṃyutto hoti? Idha, bhikkhave, bhikkhuno asmimāno pahīno hoti, ucchinnamūlo tālāvatthukato anabhāvaṃkato , āyatiṃ anuppādadhammo. Evaṃ kho, bhikkhave, bhikkhu ariyo pannaddhajo pannabhāro visaṃyutto hoti.

Evaṃ vimuttacittaṃ kho, bhikkhave, bhikkhuṃ saindā devā sabrahmakā sapajāpatikā anvesaṃ nādhigacchanti – ‘idaṃ nissitaṃ tathāgatassa viññāṇa’nti. Taṃ kissa hetu? Diṭṭhevāhaṃ, bhikkhave, dhamme tathāgataṃ ananuvijjoti vadāmi.

http://nikaya.wikidot.com/appatittha-vinnana

'Anissita' is very close to 'appatiṭṭha' in the sense of 'unsupported':

Nissita (adj.) [Sk. niśrita, pp. of nissayati, corresp. in meaning to Sk. āśrita] hanging on, dependent on, inhabiting; attached to, supported by, living by means of, relying on, being founded or rooted in, bent on. As -- ˚ often in sense of a prep.=by means of, on account of, through, esp. with pron. kiŋ˚ (=why, through what) Sn 458; taŋ˚ (therefore, on acct. of this) S iv.102. <-> For combn with var. synonyms see Nd2 s. v. & cp. Nd1 75, 106. -- S ii.17 (dvayaŋ; cp. iii.134); iv.59, 365; v.2 sq., 63 sq.; A iii.128; Dh 339 (rāga˚); Sn 752, 798, 910; J i.145; Nd1 283; Pv i.86 (sokaŋ hadaya˚ lying in); ii.66 (paṭhavi˚ supported by); Vbh 229; Nett 39 (˚citta); Miln 314 (inhabiting); PvA 86 (māna˚). -- anissita unsupported, not attached, free, emancipated Sn 66, 363, 753, 849, 1069 (unaided); J i.158; Miln 320, 351. -- Cp. apassita.

Metta, Dmytro

[starter]

Hello, your very helpful input has been very appreciated.

"Ñāṇananda explicitly rejects the possibility of any post-mortem continuum for an arahant."

-- How did or would he explain the following suttas:

1) MN 22: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
"And when the devas, together with Indra, the Brahmas, & Pajapati, search for the monk whose mind is thus released, they cannot find that 'The consciousness of the one truly gone (tathagata) is dependent on this [name and form].' Why is that? The one truly gone is untraceable even in the here & now. [See SN 22.85 and SN 22.86. Also, compare Dhp 92-93]."

-- The "unestablished consciousness" is untraceable by the beings in the worlds because it's impossible for the beings to reach/know such unconditioned, supramundane "consciousness", like the fish doesn't reach/know the land. This sentence "The one truly gone is untraceable even in the here & now" implies that the one truly gone is just untraceable by the beings both before or after his death, instead of becoming annihilated.

2) MN 72:
"But, Master Gotama, the monk whose mind is thus released: Where does he reappear? ..."

"Freed from the classification of [the aggregate of consciousness], Vaccha, the Tathagata is deep, boundless, hard to fathom, like the sea. 'Reappears' doesn't apply. 'Does not reappear' doesn't apply. 'Both does & does not reappear' doesn't apply. 'Neither reappears nor does not reappear' doesn't apply."".

-- The Buddha was answering the question about the reappearance of an arahant after his death, and described the post-mortem continual of "the Tathagata" [the unestablished consciousness] : 'Reappears' doesn't apply. 'Does not reappear' doesn't apply. 'Both does & does not reappear' doesn't apply. 'Neither reappears nor does not reappear' doesn't apply."", which are typical descriptions of the deathless or the unconditioned (that are beyond the descriptions of the conditioned terminology). Can the deathless/the unconditioned be annihilated upon an arahant's death?

By the way, I found the following info in the link kindly provided by Dymtro [http://nikaya.wikidot.com/appatittha-vinnana] about appatiṭṭha Viññāṇa, Unestablished Consciousness:
"Appamāṇacetasa: Measureless Mind A distinction between the “limited mind” (parittacetasa) and the “measureless mind” (appamāṇacetasa) is found in a number of discourses (S iv 119, S iv 186, S iv 189, S iv 199, & MN 38: Mahātaṇhāsaṅkhaya Sutta)."

Thanks and metta to all,

Starter

[Alex123]

"Untraceable here and now" - IMHO it means that one cannot find that which an Arahant identifies himself with. Usually ordinary people have things they identify with, and have certain kinds of temperaments based on defilements. Buddha/Arhat cannot be identified as greedy, angry, deluded, or someone who can be manipulated in this or that way.

I don't think that "Untraceable here and now" means that an Arahant wears some sort of stealth-cloak that makes him visually invisible.

As for MN72, it is clear. Arahant cannot be found after death, just as an extinguished flame doesn't go anywhere when it is extinguished. It is simply reckoned as 'out'. An Arahant isn't even found as an Existing Being in-itself, so the final cessation is just a cessation of essence-less process.


With metta,

Alex