Nibbana is the unconditioned dhamma, or is not a dhamma?

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
nibbuti
Posts: 155
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 11:36 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Nibbana is the unconditioned dhamma, or is not a dhamma?

Post by nibbuti »

tiltbillings wrote:So, nibbana is a natural thing existing someplace, somehow, and it can condition other things, but itself has no condition – which means there is nothing by which we can locate it and how can something that has no attributes relative to the conditioned condition that which requires attributes for being conditioned? That is a lot like of the idea of an absolute, unchanging god interacting with the relative and changing.
tiltbillings wrote:Well, that may be one way to interpret that passage, but if it is so, then the Buddha is, in fact, advocating an existing, unchanging entity, thing, which is a definition for atta/atman.
Hi Tilt

It is not "one way to interpret that passage".

I've just quoted the Buddha replacing Nibbana-synonyms with 'Nibbana' .

You, however, seem to be suggesting that the Buddha taught Nibbana is Atta.
But since there is a not-born, a not-brought-to-being, a not-made, a not-conditioned, therefore an escape is discerned from what is born, brought-to-being, made, conditioned. - Ud 8.3
___
tiltbillings wrote:If there where at this time no awakened individuals, where is nibbana?
tiltbillings wrote:but I wonder if for the person who becomes an arahant if there is not a transformation
tiltbillings wrote:So, after the arahant dies, where does the nibbana go?
For your consideration:
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 rain falls into it from the sky; even so, even if many monks attain final Nibbana in the Nibbana element that is without residue left, there is no decrease or increase in the Nibbana element that is without residue left. This is the fifth wonderful and marvellous quality in this Dhamma and Discipline…. - A 8.19
tiltbillings wrote:Am I talking from direct experience? Interesting question...
Indeed.

:anjali:
User avatar
DAWN
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 5:22 pm

Re: Nibbana is the unconditioned dhamma, or is not a dhamma?

Post by DAWN »

In DN 16 Mahaparinibbana sutta, Buddha said also this :
Anupadisesaya nibbana-dhatuya parinibbayati : 'enters the Nibbana-element without the groups (of attachement) remaining' M. Walshe
Sabbe dhamma anatta
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english
User avatar
Alobha
Posts: 565
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2011 8:27 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Nibbana is the unconditioned dhamma, or is not a dhamma?

Post by Alobha »

DAWN wrote:Nibbana is the unconditioned dhamma?
Yes. Nibbana is unconditioned.
User avatar
DAWN
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 5:22 pm

Re: Nibbana is the unconditioned dhamma, or is not a dhamma?

Post by DAWN »

Alobha wrote:
DAWN wrote:Nibbana is the unconditioned dhamma?
Yes. Nibbana is unconditioned.
:anjali:

Is somethink what is unconditioned take a place of condition to the rest? What is your opinion?
Sabbe dhamma anatta
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Nibbana is the unconditioned dhamma, or is not a dhamma?

Post by tiltbillings »

nibbuti wrote:
You, however, seem to be suggesting that the Buddha taught Nibbana is Atta.
Obviously you are not reading carefully what I have written. I am suggesting that your "understanding" of what the Buddha taught about nibbana points to an atman/atta.

And interestingly, you list a number of question I directly asked which you have refused to directly answer.

As for your quotation of Udana 80, see:
ALot wrote:
DAWN wrote:There is, monks, an unborn[1] — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated. If there were not that unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated, there would not be the case that escape from the born — become — made — fabricated would be discerned. But precisely because there is an unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated, escape from the born — become — made — fabricated is discerned.[2]
Another translation and opinion:
http://www.seeingthroughthenet.net/file ... _ednref493" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Atthi, bhikkhave, ajātaṃ abhūtaṃ akataṃ asaṅkhataṃ. No ce taṃ, bhikkhave, abhavissa ajātaṃ abhūtaṃ akataṃ asaṅkhataṃ, nayidha jātassa bhūtassa katassa saṅkhatassa nissaraṇaṃ paññāyetha. Yasmā ca kho, bhikkhave, atthi ajātaṃ abhūtaṃ akataṃ asaṅkhataṃ, tasmā jātassa bhūtassa katassa saṅkhatassa nissaraṇaṃ paññāyati.[493]

"Monks, there is a not-born, a not-become, a not-made, a not-compounded. Monks, if that not-born, not-become, not-made, not-compounded were not, there would be no stepping out here from what is born, become, made and compounded. But since, monks, there is a not-born, a not-become, a not-made, a not-compounded, therefore there is a stepping out from what is born, become, made and compounded."

The terms ajātaṃ, not-born, abhūtaṃ, not-become, akataṃ, not-made, and asaṅkhataṃ, not-compounded, are all epithets for Nibbāna. The Buddha declares that if not for this not-born, not-become, not-made, not-compounded, there would be no possibility of stepping out or release here, that is, in this very world, from the born, the become, the made and the compounded.

The second half of the passage rhetorically reiterates and emphasises the same fact. Now as to the significance of this profound declaration of the Buddha, we may point out that the terms not-born, not-become, not-made, not-compounded, suggest the emancipation of the arahant's mind from birth, becoming and preparations, saṅkhārā. They refer to the cessation of birth, becoming and preparations realized by the arahant. So then the significance of these terms is purely psychological.

But the commentator, the Venerable Dhammapāla, pays little attention to the word idha, "here", in this passage, which needs to be emphasized. The fact that there is a possibility here and now, of stepping out from the state of being born, become, made and compounded, surely deserves emphasis, since, until then, release from decay and death was thought to be possible only in another dimension of existence, that is, after death.

The prospect of stepping out from decay and death here and now in this very world has to be asserted for its novelty, which is why the declaration opens with the word atthi, "there is". However, most of the scholars who tried to interpret this passage in their discussion on Nibbāna, instead of laying stress on the word idha, "here", emphasize the opening word atthi, "there is", to prove that Nibbāna is some form of reality absolutely existing somewhere.

As that passage from the Dhatuvibhaṅgasutta on maññanā, which we discussed, has shown us, the terms ajātaṃ abhūtaṃ akataṃ and asaṅkhataṃ have to be understood in a deeper sense.

Existence is a conceit deep rooted in the mind, which gives rise to a heap of pervert notions. Its cessation, therefore, has also to be accomplished in the mind and by the mind. This is the gist of the Buddha's exhortation.



For your consideration:
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 rain falls into it from the sky; even so, even if many monks attain final Nibbana in the Nibbana element that is without residue left, there is no decrease or increase in the Nibbana element that is without residue left. This is the fifth wonderful and marvellous quality in this Dhamma and Discipline…. - A 8.19
Since you used it, please define "element" -- dhatu. Also, keep in mind that you are the one who talks about dhatu as being a conditioning, existing "thing" separate from any individual who has attained it.

Basically, you are advocating an idea of nibbana that exists even if there are no ariya. Where is it? and how does an unconditioned, unchanging thing conditioned something that changes and is conditioned?
tiltbillings wrote:Am I talking from direct experience? Interesting question...
Indeed.
And since you brought this question up, I see that you are refusing to address it.

If you expect me to answer question, then you need to answer the questions put to you. You are ignoring most of what I am saying here.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
DAWN
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 5:22 pm

Re: Nibbana is the unconditioned dhamma, or is not a dhamma?

Post by DAWN »

It's not separate from fenomena (being).
Nibbana-dhatu mean, perharps, dhatu for the mind until the mind is suppordet by the body? And with cessetion of body this dhatu (for the mind) have no place.

Nibbana-dhatu = Brahrmanhood = Buddhahood ?
Sabbe dhamma anatta
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english
User avatar
Rahula
Posts: 252
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2012 10:34 am

Re: Nibbana is the unconditioned dhamma, or is not a dhamma?

Post by Rahula »

Whom we are to debate about Nibbana, when we our-self had not attain it?
How does anybody, who didn't attain Nibbana describe it?
We all can make wild guesses, it is this, it is that, do anybody will ever know it without attaining it?
What's the point arguing over other persons opinion when you can not be very sure about your own?

Rather, the question we all should be addressing is why nobody is attaining Nibbana nowadays?
What is wrong with us?
May you be happy, healthy & successful in everything you do! :anjali:
User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: Nibbana is the unconditioned dhamma, or is not a dhamma?

Post by ground »

Rahula wrote:What is wrong with us?
Nothing. :sage:
User avatar
Rahula
Posts: 252
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2012 10:34 am

Re: Nibbana is the unconditioned dhamma, or is not a dhamma?

Post by Rahula »

ground wrote:
Rahula wrote:What is wrong with us?
Nothing. :sage:
Thank you very much for answering my last question, I guess you only know answer to that.

But my friend there is something seriously wrong with us. Otherwise there should be people who attained Nibbana. The problem could be that you think there is nothing wrong with us and continue to argue with others on matters beyond our knowledge. It could be that we don't realize that we are in wrong view. May be what we know as right view is actually not.

If you think clearly it's obvious that without right view, there will be no Nibbana.
If there is no Nibbana, it's only because of wrong view.

.
May you be happy, healthy & successful in everything you do! :anjali:
User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: Nibbana is the unconditioned dhamma, or is not a dhamma?

Post by ground »

Rahula wrote:
ground wrote:
Rahula wrote:What is wrong with us?
Nothing. :sage:
Thank you very much for answering my last question, I guess you only know answer to that.

But my friend there is something seriously wrong with us. ....
Since you can only speak from within your own sphere what you are saying may hold true for your own sphere. :sage:
User avatar
Rahula
Posts: 252
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2012 10:34 am

Re: Nibbana is the unconditioned dhamma, or is not a dhamma?

Post by Rahula »

ground wrote:Since you can only speak from within your own sphere what you are saying may hold true for your own sphere. :sage:
Yes, you are correct. It's just my understanding and opinion.

Please be kind to share your opinion on what I had mentioned on above posts.

Thank you very much.
May you be happy, healthy & successful in everything you do! :anjali:
User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: Nibbana is the unconditioned dhamma, or is not a dhamma?

Post by ground »

Rahula wrote:Please be kind to share your opinion on what I had mentioned on above posts.

Thank you very much.
Please accept that I have decided that if I had opinions that these are not worth to be mentioned in this context. :sage:
User avatar
equilibrium
Posts: 522
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2012 11:07 am

Re: Nibbana is the unconditioned dhamma, or is not a dhamma?

Post by equilibrium »

ground wrote:
Rahula wrote:What is wrong with us?
Nothing. :sage:
This is getting very interesting.....wonder if Rahula has any "realizations" based on the above word?.....or what it actually means?
User avatar
Rahula
Posts: 252
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2012 10:34 am

Re: Nibbana is the unconditioned dhamma, or is not a dhamma?

Post by Rahula »

equilibrium wrote:
ground wrote:
Rahula wrote:What is wrong with us?
Nothing. :sage:
This is getting very interesting.....wonder if Rahula has any "realizations" based on the above word?.....or what it actually means?
Frankly, I don't have any realizations based on that word. I guess I don't know what it actually means.

I also don't wont to start any debate over understanding of words, as I don't see any value in that. Neither do I want any debate over nothingness.

Only thing I like to talk about here is this question; if you like.

Why there is nobody that attained Nibbana in present?
(at-least not known to us)
May you be happy, healthy & successful in everything you do! :anjali:
nibbuti
Posts: 155
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 11:36 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Nibbana is the unconditioned dhamma, or is not a dhamma?

Post by nibbuti »

tiltbillings wrote:Obviously you are not reading carefully what I have written.
Hi Tilt. You may consider not using this phrase inflationary.
tiltbillings wrote:Since you used it, please define "element" -- dhatu.
Done:
nibbuti wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:Element here is dhatu. Since you are the one using it, you should be the one to be able to explain its actual mraning. Please do.
An element, whether itself conditioned or not, is a natural 'thing' which can 'con-dition' (lat. together-speak, agree with, situate or come before) other things.

'Natural thing' can be understood as a potential for experience (rather than a created thing), including both suffering and non-suffering.
tiltbillings wrote:Also, keep in mind that you are the one who talks about dhatu as being a conditioning, existing "thing" separate from any individual who has attained it.
Where?

Seperatedness or non-seperatedness does not apply, because for "one who has attained it" there is not 'I'-making or 'mine'-making.

But it may be separated from the 1. fetter: individuality-belief.
tiltbillings wrote:I am suggesting that your "understanding" of what the Buddha taught about nibbana points to an atman/atta.
This may be the case if one understands Nibbana as some kind of 'Arahant consciousness-individuality'.

Which in reality is backdoor Brahminism or Deism.

:toilet:
Post Reply