the great Nibbana = annihilation, eternal, or something else thread

[Alex123]

So, what is the answer?

Already given to you above.

You mean

What is clear is that there is no way to measure what is trackless. Remains, does not remain, both remains and does not remain, and neither remains nor does not remain do not apply. All just lost in words. You can bend your self into pretzels over this, but I see no reason to not take the Buddha seriously.
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 00#p121802" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I've heard it all before about God being indescribable, beyond all words, and all the hindu talk about being beyond all words/dualities and descriptions. Non-manifest consciousness, the ground of all being, etc etc, was said by others.


Fortunately the Buddha was clear:
"there is no form... no feeling... no perception... there are no fabrications... there is no consciousness that is constant, lasting, eternal, not subject to change, that will stay just as it is as long as eternity". - SN 22.97
"The body disintegrated, perception ceased, pain & rapture were entirely consumed, fabrications were stilled: consciousness (Viññāṇaṃ) has come to its end.” – Ud 8.9

The difficulty is in accepting this strait description. Craving to be, even in some indescribable way (Remains, does not remain, both remains and does not remain, and neither remains nor does not remain do not apply), is strong.

[tiltbillings]

The difficulty is in accepting this strait description. Craving to be, even in some indescribable way (Remains, does not remain, both remains and does not remain, and neither remains nor does not remain do not apply), is strong.

There is no difficulty in accepting what the Buddha said. I am simply not limiting my choice of his words the way you are.

The five aggregates contains only conditioned dhammas by defintion of "aggregate"-- there cannot be an aggregate of cessation, or an aggregate of nibbana. By contrast, the twelve ayatanas can and do contain "all" experience, including Nibbana (when there is cessation of greed, hatred, and delusion), thusly, "The All."

"Whoever frees himself from the passions of greed, hatred, and ignorance, they call him, one who is self developed, made divine, thus-gone (tathagata), awake (buddha), one who has left fear and hatred, and one who has let go of all." Itivuttaka 57

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.

You are still stuck trying to define the Buddha/awakening in terms of the conditioned, the aggregates, which is why arguing with you is not really positive use of time.

[Alex123]

Tilt,

You are still stuck trying to define the Buddha/awakening in terms of the conditioned, the aggregates, which is why arguing with you is not really positive use of time.

I do not define the Buddha as being in or outside of the aggregates. Thus no annihilationism and no suicide stuff that you've called my post.

. . .

Oh, dear, back to your it is suicide stuff again.
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 60#p121750" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Tilt, do you believe the Buddha is not part of conditioned aggregates?

How can anything, anyone, whatever describable or not, reasonably be postulated when 5 aggregates and ALL consciousness ceases at parinibbāna?

It seems to me that you consciously or subconsciously postulating survive of some indescribable sort, even without 5 aggregates. But there isn't anything (describable or not) that is eternal, etc.

[tiltbillings]

It seems to me that you consciously or subconsciously postulating survive of some indescribable sort, even without 5 aggregates. But there isn't anything (describable or not) that is eternal, etc.

This one of the reason why I am not going to deal with you. You keep trying to play this game of what motivates what others say, which is why I could just as easily say that your limited interpretation is driven by your preoccupation with suicide.

But to address your point, I am not postulating anything. As for "anything that is eternal," that is not an issue. You may want to frame it in those terms, but I am not.

[beeblebrox]

I thought the Buddha said that talking about what happens beyond nibbāna is going "beyond the range," and that this would only lead to a lot of frustration... I assume not only for oneself, but everyone else, too.

[Orlando]

Here in Thailand I would imagine the majority of lay people hope for rebirth in the heaven realms, perhaps because they are afraid of Nibbana.
Heaven can be imagined but Nibbana cannot. They do not want to stop existing and suspect that that is what Nibbana is. Certainly Nibbana is no more rebirth (as we understand it)...in all the 31 realms of Samsara.

Interesting. I feel drawn to some aspects of Buddhism, but find there is something unsatisfactory about the ultimate goal, which just sounds too much like just not existing/being anihilated. Well I can have that as an atheist, not like it much, but just decide to focus on what enjoyment I can get out of life first. Whereas in Buddhism, we are supposed to aspire to this nothingness, this loss of our self -- or if it is not so, then why can no one explain what it really is? And just to say it's something good but beyond all words and explanation seems a bit of a cop out, like a Christian making claims about the Trinity or something.

Also, a base of Buddhism is that life is unsatisfactory therefore we should seek to leave incarnation behind, and yet at the same time it teaches ways to change your outlook so you experience a life characterised by inner peace and compassion. What's so bad about that kind of life we should want it to cease in favour of some state of nothingness? Is the fact no life can be devoid of painful events and thoughts enough reason to not want to be alive, if that life also contains enjoyable events and happy thoughts and we can increase the likelihood of this by Buddhist meditation and ethics etc?

When people speak of the Buddha "passing away" into Nirvana it makes it sound even more unappealing..

[Orlando]

Not my interpretation at all....but perhaps that of many Thais and Thai monks.
Personally I think that once having reached Arahant and died from this final existence in Samsara then perhaps it is like entering a new dimension. This would be unexplainable to us, stuck in our little three dimensional world, incomprehensible.
Ajarn Mun talked about past Buddhas and Arahants visiting him to teach him the Dhamma after he had attained to Arahant. Whether they came taking a physical form, or as Nimitta during meditation, they obviously have not just disappeared and are able to interact with those still stuck in Samsara.

OK, that is helpful

[Aloka]

I thought the Buddha said that talking about what happens beyond nibbāna is going "beyond the range," and that this would only lead to a lot of frustration... I assume not only for oneself, but everyone else, too.

Certainly regarding speculation about 'the Buddha range of the Buddha's,' The Buddha said :

"There are these four unconjecturables that are not to be conjectured about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about them. Which four?

"The Buddha-range of the Buddhas is an unconjecturable that is not to be conjectured about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about it.

"The jhana-range of a person in jhana...

"The [precise working out of the] results of kamma...

"Conjecture about [the origin, etc., of] the world is an unconjecturable that is not to be conjectured about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about it.

"These are the four unconjecturables that are not to be conjectured about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about them."

AN 4.77 Unconjecturable

[tiltbillings]

I thought the Buddha said that talking about what happens beyond nibbāna is going "beyond the range," and that this would only lead to a lot of frustration... I assume not only for oneself, but everyone else, too.

Certainly regarding speculation about 'the Buddha range of the Buddha's,' The Buddha said :

"There are these four unconjecturables that are not to be conjectured about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about them. Which four?

"The Buddha-range of the Buddhas is an unconjecturable that is not to be conjectured about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about it.

And what is true about the Buddha would be as true about the arahant, given that there is no difference in the bodhi of the arahant from that of a Buddha, according to the suttas.

[Alex123]

You keep trying to play this game of what motivates what others say, which is why I could just as easily say that your limited interpretation is driven by your preoccupation with suicide.

What preoccupation with suicide? I don't believe in truly existing Being, that can get annihilated when parinibbana occurs. There cannot be annihilation of that which doesn't exist. Parinibbana is not annihilation for that reason.

But to address your point, I am not postulating anything. As for "anything that is eternal," that is not an issue. You may want to frame it in those terms, but I am not.

You are not postulating anything?

There is no way to measure the nibbaized individual, dead or alive.
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 60#p121755" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
There is no measurement possible while alive or dead of the "individuall."
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 60#p121760" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The individual, alive or dead, is beyond measure, trackless.
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 80#p121780" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Others can make up their mind as the nature of the trackless arahant before and after death.
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 80#p121787" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
What is clear is that there is no way to measure what is trackless. Remains, does not remain, both remains and does not remain, and neither remains nor does not remain do not apply.
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 00#p121802" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Please explain what you have postulated many times. Do you believe in the existence of trackless arahant that cannot be measured as "Remains, does not remain, both remains and does not remain, and neither remains nor does not remain" ?


With metta,

Alex

[tiltbillings]

You are not postulating anything?

If you had really been paying attention, you would see that I am not postulating anything, so I have not a thing to explain to you.

[Alex123]

You are not postulating anything?

If you had really been paying attention, you would see that I am not postulating anything, so I have not a thing to explain to you.

To clarify:
So trackless arahant, or "The individual, alive or dead, is beyond measure, trackless." is not anything?

[tiltbillings]

To clarify:
So trackless arahant, or "The individual, alive or dead, is beyond measure, trackless." is not anything?

You obviously have not been paying attention.

[Alex123]

To clarify:
So trackless arahant, or "The individual, alive or dead, is beyond measure, trackless." is not anything?

You obviously have not been paying attention.

To what? You kept saying

There is no way to measure the nibbaized individual, dead or alive.
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 60#p121755" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
There is no measurement possible while alive or dead of the "individuall."
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 60#p121760" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The individual, alive or dead, is beyond measure, trackless.
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 80#p121780" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Others can make up their mind as the nature of the trackless arahant before and after death.
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 80#p121787" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
What is clear is that there is no way to measure what is trackless. Remains, does not remain, both remains and does not remain, and neither remains nor does not remain do not apply.
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 00#p121802" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Then you have said:

If you had really been paying attention, you would see that I am not postulating anything, so I have not a thing to explain to you.
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 44#p121943" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I have asked you

To clarify: So trackless arahant, or "The individual, alive or dead, is beyond measure, trackless." is not anything?
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 44#p121944" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And you have said:

You obviously have not been paying attention.
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 44#p121945" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So what is this indescribable and trackless individual and arahant that you keep talking about?
What wasn't I paying attention to?

[tiltbillings]

So what is this indescribable and trackless individual and arahant that you keep talking about? What wasn't I paying attention to?

Already has been explained to you. If paid attention, rather than focusing on your , you would see that I am not postulating anything.