Two Nibbana elements

[auto]

in order to not clutter other thread.

Hello auto,

what is the difference in parinibbana and nibbana? does arhant experience nibbana all the time?

There are two nibbana elements:

“What, bhikkhus, is the Nibbāna-element with residue left? Here a bhikkhu is an arahant, one whose taints are destroyed, the holy life fulfilled, who has done what had to be done, laid down the burden, attained the goal, destroyed the fetters of being, completely released through final knowledge. However, his five sense faculties remain unimpaired, by which he still experiences what is agreeable and disagreeable and feels pleasure and pain. It is the extinction of attachment, hate, and delusion in him that is called the Nibbāna-element with residue left.

“Now what, bhikkhus, is the Nibbāna-element with no residue left? Here a bhikkhu is an arahant … completely released through final knowledge. For him, here in this very life, all that is experienced, not being delighted in, will be extinguished. That, bhikkhus, is called the Nibbāna-element with no residue left.

https://suttacentral.net/iti44/en/ireland

the first nibbana element, there are agreeable and disagreeable, feelings of pleasure and pain.
in case of nibbana with no residue left the experiences what are not delighted in are extinguished.

It seem on the second case what feels painful and disagreeable is extinguished.

Nibbana is not final goal? one can further meditate.

[DooDoot]

the first nibbana element, there are agreeable and disagreeable, feelings of pleasure and pain.

Yes. It appears so.

in case of nibbana with no residue left the experiences what are not delighted in are extinguished.

Yes. It appears the term "delight" does not refer to "agreeable and disagreeable, feelings of pleasure and pain". Instead, the experiences not delighted in are those feelings. So, it is the feelings that appear to be extinguished, as well as any experience of consciousness.

It seem on the second case what feels painful and disagreeable is extinguished.

Yes. Sounds correct to me.

Nibbana is not final goal? one can further meditate.

The 1st Nibbana appears said to be the final goal. The 2nd Nibbana appears to follow naturally from the 1st.

"Delight" ("nandi") is generally a synonym for "attachment". For example, MN 38 says "delight in feelings is attachment". Attachment is said to be extinguished in the 1st nibbana. Therefore, I think the 2nd Nibbana is just saying everything experienced is extinguished when life ends.

I think you helped me understand this teaching better, Auto.

[confusedlayman]

nibbana- no mental suffering (non arising of mental pleasure or displeassure in first place including when doing 1,2,3 jhana) but body pain arise and go
parinibbana- no suffering whatssoever as no mind, no body

I might have misrepresented bless one if so correct me now

[Volo]

Just a short notice: as K.R. Norman pointed out, there is no difference between Nibbāna and Parinibbāna - they are synonymous, and taking Parinibbāna as a designation for Nibbāna after death of an Arahant is a misconception, which probably arrised due to the name of the Mahāparinibbāna sutta, and further strengthened by PED.

[confusedlayman]

Just a short notice: as K.R. Norman pointed out, there is no difference between Nibbāna and Parinibbāna - they are synonymous, and taking Parinibbāna as a designation for Nibbāna after death of an Arahant is a misconception, which probably arrised due to the name of the Mahāparinibbāna sutta, and further strengthened by PED.

So nibbana means buddha never had physical pain while using his body? also there is spelling difference btween two

[Volo]

So nibbana means buddha never had physical pain while using his body?

The point is these two words are used synonymously in the Pali texts, parinibbāna and its derivatives are not reserved exclusively for the death of an arahant.

[Ceisiwr]

Just a short notice: as K.R. Norman pointed out, there is no difference between Nibbāna and Parinibbāna - they are synonymous, and taking Parinibbāna as a designation for Nibbāna after death of an Arahant is a misconception, which probably arrised due to the name of the Mahāparinibbāna sutta, and further strengthened by PED.

There is of course just one Nibbana, but what the sutta is pointing out is that whilst alive the Arahant still has to experience past kamma in the form of the aggregates whilst at the end of life these aggregates cease without remainder. Obviously any speculation beyond that is not wise. Do you agree?

[NuanceOfSuchness]

Just a short notice: as K.R. Norman pointed out, there is no difference between Nibbāna and Parinibbāna - they are synonymous, and taking Parinibbāna as a designation for Nibbāna after death of an Arahant is a misconception, which probably arrised due to the name of the Mahāparinibbāna sutta, and further strengthened by PED.

There is of course just one Nibbana, but what the sutta is pointing out is that whilst alive the Arahant still has to experience past kamma in the form of the aggregates whilst at the end of life these aggregates cease without remainder. Obviously any speculation beyond that is not wise. Do you agree?

[Volo]

There is of course just one Nibbana, but what the sutta is pointing out is that whilst alive the Arahant still has to experience past kamma in the form of the aggregates whilst at the end of life these aggregates cease without remainder. Obviously any speculation beyond that is not wise. Do you agree?

There is surely saupādisesa nibbana and anupādisesa nibbana. My remark was purely linguistic. In English literature people often use parinibbāna exclusively to refer to the death of an enlightened being. This is not the case in Pali texts, where nibbana and parinibbana are synonyms.

[DooDoot]

The point is these two words are used synonymously in the Pali texts, parinibbāna and its derivatives are not reserved exclusively for the death of an arahant.

Do you mean such as:

Not grasping, they’re not anxious. Not being anxious, they personally become extinguished.

Anupādiyaṃ na paritassati, aparitassaṃ paccattaññeva parinibbāyati

Therefore, are you saying the Nibbāna-element with no residue left is not specifically Parinibbana? If so, this sounds reasonable. Thanks

[DooDoot]

There is of course just one Nibbana, but what the sutta is pointing out is that whilst alive the Arahant still has to experience past kamma in the form of the aggregates whilst at the end of life these aggregates cease without remainder. Obviously any speculation beyond that is not wise. Do you agree?

Kamma is a mundane dhamma. You appear to be imputing the mundane upon the supramundane. AN 6.63 says the Noble Path ends kamma. To say the Buddha was experiencing physical pain due to "past volition" sounds a bit far fetched. Regards

[mikenz66]

So nibbana means buddha never had physical pain while using his body?

The point is these two words are used synonymously in the Pali texts, parinibbāna and its derivatives are not reserved exclusively for the death of an arahant.

Yes, see Bhikkhu Bodhi's discussion here: https://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.p ... 40#p209545


Mike

[Volo]

Therefore, are you saying the Nibbāna-element with no residue left is not specifically Parinibbana? If so, this sounds reasonable. Thanks

Yes, that's what I meant.

[anthbrown84]

There is of course just one Nibbana, but what the sutta is pointing out is that whilst alive the Arahant still has to experience past kamma in the form of the aggregates whilst at the end of life these aggregates cease without remainder. Obviously any speculation beyond that is not wise. Do you agree?

Kamma is a mundane dhamma. You appear to be imputing the mundane upon the supramundane. AN 6.63 says the Noble Path ends kamma. To say the Buddha was experiencing physical pain due to "past volition" sounds a bit far fetched. Regards

I'm about 99.9999% certain he mentioned he experienced a bad back because as a wrestler in a past life he broke someones back

[DooDoot]

I'm about 99.9999% certain he mentioned he experienced a bad back because as a wrestler in a past life he broke someones back

sounds like a Dhammapada commentary or something

i am not aware of the Buddha himself ever teaching in the style you have mentioned, otherwise the suttas would be full of it

the past life determinism you have posted appears definitely the stuff of later writings

regards