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

[Goofaholix]

The flame goes away when the wood is over.

Where did the flame go?
To the North?
To the South?
To the East?
To the West?

Why would you assume it went in a direction? the causes and conditions ceased so the flame ceased.

[cappuccino]

the flame ceased.

Resulting in coolness

[Goofaholix]

Resulting in coolness

cool

[Lucas Oliveira]

If consciousness/knowing is always conditional, how can a consciousness that arises dependent on conditions be conscious of the unconditional?

If Nibbana is utterly without any awareness/knowing, how could the Buddha and arahants even report about it – not just in terms of trying to express the inexpressable – without some awareness of the unconditional, and to teach a path to realize it?

Clearly, such awareness/knowing would not be conditional; and yet, As Ajahn Sujato says, the suttas never mention an unconditional awareness.
Put another way, how is the unconditional realized, so to speak, without any form of consciousness/knowing?

Consciousness and Nibbana
https://discourse.suttacentral.net/t/co ... bana/23071

A monk learns cause and effect. Learns how effects arise with the emergence of causes; he knows how effects cease with the cessation of causes; and how with the final destruction of the causes, the effects finally cease. This does not need to be experienced at the level of sensory experience. It is necessary to know this with wisdom, to penetrate into the principle of the given event. Nibbana is not seen on the “screen of the mind”, “with the inner eyes of the imagination” - it is perceived by wisdom. Wisdom comprehends its meaning - the cessation of aggregates through the destruction of causes. Another way is to contemplate this dhamma together with the complete extinction of all other conditioned consciousnesses and experiences. By itself, the experience of this annihilation of all conditioned objects in the nibbana-object speaks of its nature of purity, freedom from everything conditioned. In this case, Nibbana is not experienced by the body (through the extinction of one’s own mind and body in real time), but by wisdom. That is, the quality of the state in which all aggregates fade away are cognized. This condition is observed from the side, as if under laboratory conditions, under a microscope. But there is a special state when nibbana is experienced by the “body” - nirodha samapati. When a monk enters this meditative state, his mind is gradually extinguishing and he is aware of the extinguishing of the mind to complete cessation. Then there is continued cessation and all experience and awareness are terminated. then the first flashes of the mind arise, which become aware of its own arising. and finally, after coming out of this state, the monk sees that his mind was completely inactive, his defilements, if any, are now destroyed. And consciousness is perceived as something that can fade away and stop, i. e. It’s empty. This is how Nibbana is cognized by one’s own experience, by the “body”. Finally, there is a third way to know Nibbana. Through non-clinging, the mind is liberated. There is no sense of “I” in aggregates or elsewhere. Without dwelling anywhere, thus the complete extinction of “bhava” is achieved. It is no longer important whether the aggregates last or they disintegrate. They are like a house in which no one lives. The abandoned house decays and falls apart, but no one cares anymore.

https://discourse.suttacentral.net/t/co ... a/23071/16

Hi, thanks for the reply, and I’m happy I could help.

You’re probably referring to SN 35.117: “So you should understand that dimension where the eye ceases and perception of sights fades away. […] mind ceases and perception of thoughts fades away.” (transl. Sujato) The Bahiya Sutta (Udana 1.10) has the same problem. It’s to do with the word ‘understand’.

This is an example of how much influence the translator’s ideas have. The word for ‘should understand’ some render as ‘should experience’. But that is wrong. The word is veditabba (or vedi in the Bahiya sutta), a form of the verb vedeti, related to the more familiar vedāna, ‘feeling’ or ‘experience’. When the six senses cease, vedāna (i.e. experience) ceases too, so it is clear that the meaning of the verb here is not ‘experience’. Instead it is indeed ‘understand’, as Venerable Sujato and Venerable Bodhi have it correctly. This is a very well established meaning of the verb, and the PTS Pali-English dictionary even mentions it as option A.

Of course the rendering ‘understand’ instead of ‘experience’ changes the meaning totally. It comes down to what I said before: an enlightened one (or any noble one for that matter) understands that the six senses will cease after death, and they realize what that entails–which, spoilers, is not a kind of consciousness–but they don’t experience it consciously. However, they do experience the cessation of the defilements consciously.

Though Florian also has a point: a temporary cessation of consciousness can be remembered afterwards. That is not called nibbāna in the suttas, however. So although some may say stream enterers “experienced nibbāna”, that is technially not how the suttas use the word. In the suttas nibbāna, though all noble ones have no doubt about what it is, is exclusive to the fully enlightened ones. Again, it only means either (a) the cessation of the defilements after enlightenment or (b) the cessation of the aggregates after death, never something temporary. And never a kind of consciousness.

https://discourse.suttacentral.net/t/co ... a/23071/30

[Rahula]

The flame goes away when the wood is over.

Where did the flame go?
To the North?
To the South?
To the East?
To the West?

Why would you assume it went in a direction? the causes and conditions ceased so the flame ceased.

Exactly, I don't assume, this is a question that the Buddha asked from someone.
The answer is there itself.

[Alex123]

The flame goes away when the wood is over.

Where did the flame go?
To the North?
To the South?
To the East?
To the West?

Why would you assume it went in a direction? the causes and conditions ceased so the flame ceased.

Exactly, I don't assume, this is a question that the Buddha asked from someone.
The answer is there itself.

The answer is not so clear. There can be additional directions that we, 3d beings simply cannot comprehend.
There can be as high as 11 dimensions.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimension

Also, a flame can go into some sort of un-manifest potentiality. Definitely it still "exists" in the past (if time is a dimension like space).

[cappuccino]

Also, a flame can go into some sort of un-manifest potentiality.

You have to understand without thinking of annihilation

[Alex123]

2. However, after parinibbana – all aggregates of the arahat X fall away, so there’s no more consciousness that can cognise nibbana – i.e. there’s no more citta that can have nibbana as its object.
...

So, I’m struggling to understand how can parinibbana be anything else other than total extinction for our arahat X?

Thanks

There is probably some sort of "citta" OUTSIDE of 5 aggregates, otherwise the whole theory falls apart.


1) When one reaches saññāvedayitanirodha ("cessation of perception and feeling") there supposedly isn't any mental aggregate present. But then, how does one KNOW when to come out? What causes 4 aggregates to resume with the EXACT memory and other accumulations (parami, vipāka, etc) being intact?

2) When one is reborn in asaññasatta world, there is rūpa only. No 4 aggregates are present.
Question: How is this world different from being a rock? How can unconscious form resume long ceased stream of 4 aggregates?

[Ceisiwr]

2. However, after parinibbana – all aggregates of the arahat X fall away, so there’s no more consciousness that can cognise nibbana – i.e. there’s no more citta that can have nibbana as its object.
...

So, I’m struggling to understand how can parinibbana be anything else other than total extinction for our arahat X?

Thanks

There is probably some sort of "citta" OUTSIDE of 5 aggregates, otherwise the whole theory falls apart.


1) When one reaches "cessation of perception and feeling" there supposedly isn't any mental aggregate present. But then, how does one KNOW when to come out? What causes 4 aggregates to resume with memory and other accumulations (parami, vipāka, etc) being intact?

2) When one is reborn in asaññasatta world, there is rūpa only. No 4 aggregates are present.
Question: How is this world different from being a rock? How can unconscious form resume long ceased stream of 4 aggregates?

Sounds like you are arguing for the Bhavaṅga or Ālaya-vijñāna.

[cappuccino]

Sounds like you are arguing for the Bhavaṅga or Ālaya-vijñāna.

Just consciousness

[equilibrium]

There is probably some sort of "citta" OUTSIDE of 5 aggregates, otherwise the whole theory falls apart.

Everything depends on something else. …. for there to be an outside, there must be an inside.

This is the world of duality….. but the outside is merely a fabrication and impermanent…..hence conditioned….. to be transcended…. the escape from the born.

In reality, there is no outside nor inside. Just this dimension, unconditioned, transcendent….. permanent.

ud 8.1:
There is that dimension, monks, where there is neither earth, nor water, nor fire, nor wind; neither dimension of the infinitude of space, nor dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, nor dimension of nothingness, nor dimension of neither perception nor non-perception; neither this world, nor the next world, nor sun, nor moon.

And there, I say, there is neither coming, nor going, nor staying; neither passing away nor arising: unestablished, unevolving, without support [mental object].

This, just this, is the end of stress.

Unconditioned:

Bhikkhus, there are these three characteristics that define the unconditioned. What three? No arising is seen, no vanishing is seen, and no alteration while it persists is seen. These are the three characteristics that define the unconditioned.

[Ceisiwr]

There is probably some sort of "citta" OUTSIDE of 5 aggregates, otherwise the whole theory falls apart.

Everything depends on something else. …. for there to be an outside, there must be an inside.

This is the world of duality….. but the outside is merely a fabrication and impermanent…..hence conditioned….. to be transcended…. the escape from the born.

In reality, there is no outside nor inside. Just this dimension, unconditioned, transcendent….. permanent.

Sounds like Gauḍapāda.

[cappuccino]

Sounds like Gauḍapāda.

Sounds like Buddhism

“There is that sphere where there is no earth, no water, no fire nor wind; no sphere of infinity of space, of infinity of consciousness, of nothingness or even of neither-perception-nor non-perception; there, there is neither this world nor the other world, neither moon nor sun; this sphere I call neither a coming nor a going nor a staying still, neither a dying nor a reappearance; it has no basis, no evolution and no support: this, just this, is the end of dukkha.”
~ Ud 8.1

[clarity1982]

Personally, I think there is a greater and more intimate connection between the NIkayas and Classical Samkhya than scholars have hitherto recognized. On the Buddhism side, the confusion stems from the fact that scholars tend to reify concepts in the Nikayas into ontological statements forgetting that the texts, first and foremost, only make sense in the context of a meditation tradition and not a philosophy that was divorced from praxis.

For Samkhya, scholars with a Hindu bent, translate that mysterious concept, "Purusha," into "Self" even though neither Patanjali or the Samkhya-karika define it as such. "Purusha" is really just a placeholder term for an unconditioned "something" that can't be defined. I suspect Samkhya is an ontological version of what is being taught in the Nikayas (in broad strokes, if not in all the details).

If one looks at the Thai Forest Tradition, for example, all of the first generation monks who were direct disciples of Ajahn Mun were basically teaching what Patanjali was teaching (if one disregards the "Ishvara" teaching which seems to be a later interpolation into the Yoga Sutra anyway). Ajahn Maha Boowa's exposition, in particular, makes this abundantly clear. The "luminous mind" is the last attachment to let go of before realizing Nibbana. Patanjali and the Samkhya-karika make exactly the same claim in the teaching that attachment to the "pure" sattvic, luminous mind developed in samadhi is the last attachment to let go of before realizing "Purusha."

[Ceisiwr]

Personally, I think there is a greater and more intimate connection between the NIkayas and Classical Samkhya than scholars have hitherto recognized. On the Buddhism side, the confusion stems from the fact that scholars tend to reify concepts in the Nikayas into ontological statements forgetting that the texts, first and foremost, only make sense in the context of a meditation tradition and not a philosophy that was divorced from praxis.

For Samkhya, scholars with a Hindu bent, translate that mysterious concept, "Purusha," into "Self" even though neither Patanjali or the Samkhya-karika define it as such. "Purusha" is really just a placeholder term for an unconditioned "something" that can't be defined. I suspect Samkhya is an ontological version of what is being taught in the Nikayas (in broad strokes, if not in all the details).

If one looks at the Thai Forest Tradition, for example, all of the first generation monks who were direct disciples of Ajahn Mun were basically teaching what Patanjali was teaching (if one disregards the "Ishvara" teaching which seems to be a later interpolation into the Yoga Sutra anyway). Ajahn Maha Boowa's exposition, in particular, makes this abundantly clear. The "luminous mind" is the last attachment to let go of before realizing Nibbana. Patanjali and the Samkhya-karika make exactly the same claim in the teaching that attachment to the "pure" sattvic, luminous mind developed in samadhi is the last attachment to let go of before realizing "Purusha."

I'd say Samkhya was more comparable with the Abhidhamma than the suttas.