Nibbana is bliss

[asahi]

Where in the sutta Buddha said nibbana is bliss ? Or nibbana is a state of bliss .

[Nicolas]

I have heard that on one occasion Ven. Sāriputta was staying near Rājagaha in the Bamboo Forest, the Squirrels’ Sanctuary. There he said to the monks, “This unbinding is pleasant, friends. This unbinding is pleasant.”

When this was said, Ven. Udāyin said to Ven. Sāriputta, “But what is the pleasure here, my friend, where there is nothing felt?”

“Just that is the pleasure here, my friend: where there is nothing felt. [...]”

[equilibrium]

Whenever one experiences the arising and passing away of the mental and physical processes, he enjoys bliss and delight.
He attains the deathless as attained by the wise.

DN16:
Impermanent are compounded things, prone to rise and fall.

Having risen, they are destroyed, their passing is truest bliss.

Any sensual bliss in the world, any heavenly bliss, isn’t worth one sixteenth-sixteenth of the bliss of the ending of craving.

[dicsoncandra]

More important to note is that Nibbāna is bliss free from delight.

[asahi]

I have heard that on one occasion Ven. Sāriputta was staying near Rājagaha in the Bamboo Forest, the Squirrels’ Sanctuary. There he said to the monks, “This unbinding is pleasant, friends. This unbinding is pleasant.”

When this was said, Ven. Udāyin said to Ven. Sāriputta, “But what is the pleasure here, my friend, where there is nothing felt?”

“Just that is the pleasure here, my friend: where there is nothing felt. [...]”

I notice the pali is sukha , so , what could be the different here ? Doez the sukha here is a feeling ? Could it be similar to jhanic feeling ? Sukha that is delightless ? How does it reconcile with notion of anicca ie dukkha ?

[un8-]

If you see anything that is conditioned (arises and ceases) as painful, then anything that doesn't arise and cease is seen as blissful.

[asahi]

If you see anything that is conditioned (arises and ceases) as painful, then anything that doesn't arise and cease is seen as blissful.

You are assuming there is something that not arise n cease .

[Spiny Norman]

If you see anything that is conditioned (arises and ceases) as painful, then anything that doesn't arise and cease is seen as blissful.

You are assuming there is something that not arise n cease .

Nibbana is unconditioned, so it's not subject to arising and ceasing. It's described as the "escape" from the conditioned.
It's described in terms of both presence and absence, eg the presence of bliss, and the absence of the taints.

[Disciple]

Nibbana is unconditioned, so it's not subject to arising and ceasing. It's described as the "escape" from the conditioned.
It's described in terms of both presence and absence, eg the presence of bliss, and the absence of the taints.

How is it bliss if there's no feeling?

[Nicolas]

Doez the sukha here is a feeling ? [...] Sukha that is delightless ?

How is it bliss if there's no feeling?

Now, it’s possible, Ānanda, that some wanderers of other persuasions might say, ‘Gotama the contemplative speaks of the cessation of perception & feeling and yet describes it as pleasure. What is this? How is this?’ When they say that, they are to be told, ‘It’s not the case, friends, that the Blessed One describes only pleasant feeling as included under pleasure. Wherever pleasure is found, in whatever terms, the Blessed One describes it as pleasure.’

“This unbinding is pleasant, friends. This unbinding is pleasant.”
[...] “But what is the pleasure here, my friend, where there is nothing felt?”
“Just that is the pleasure here, my friend: where there is nothing felt. [...]”

[asahi]

Doez the sukha here is a feeling ? [...] Sukha that is delightless ?

How is it bliss if there's no feeling?

Now, it’s possible, Ānanda, that some wanderers of other persuasions might say, ‘Gotama the contemplative speaks of the cessation of perception & feeling and yet describes it as pleasure. What is this? How is this?’ When they say that, they are to be told, ‘It’s not the case, friends, that the Blessed One describes only pleasant feeling as included under pleasure. Wherever pleasure is found, in whatever terms, the Blessed One describes it as pleasure.’

“This unbinding is pleasant, friends. This unbinding is pleasant.”
[...] “But what is the pleasure here, my friend, where there is nothing felt?”
“Just that is the pleasure here, my friend: where there is nothing felt. [...]”

It appear the pleasure described here not categorized as one class of feeling in this case . But then this is out of our mundane six sense field scope .

[mjaviem]

How can it be understood both these two statements?:

... When desire has subsided, and thought has subsided, and perception has subsided, there is also feeling with that as condition. There is effort for the attainment of the as-yet-unattained. When that stage has been reached, there is also feeling with that as condition.’”

... “This unbinding is pleasant, friends. This unbinding is pleasant.”

When this was said, Ven. Udāyin said to Ven. Sāriputta, “But what is the pleasure here, my friend, where there is nothing felt?”

[santa100]

How can it be understood both these two statements?

The contexts of SN 45.12 and AN 9.34 are different, hence the seemingly contradictory phrases. In SN 45.12, Vedana/feeling was spoken by the Buddha in the context of His own experience on the supramundane level(the same experience right after He became fully enlightened and later on, after emerging from the three-month seclusion). There He mentioned that even for the "attainment of the as-yet-unattained [ie. the fruit of arahantship], when that stage has been reached, there is also feeling with that as condition [ie. the supramundane vedana/feeling accompanying the four paths]"; while in AN 9.34, Ven. Sariputta was explaining to Ven. Udayin and his fellow monks the "nothing felt" Vedana/feeling based on the simple line of logical reasoning: If whatever is an affliction is considered suffering, then by this line of reasoning, it naturally follows that [ie. it may be known/understood that] Unbinding/Nibbana is happiness [without involving Vedana to feel anything].

[mjaviem]

... In SN 45.12... there is also feeling with that as condition [ie. the supramundane vedana/feeling accompanying the four paths]"...

What kind of vedana is that? Is it one of the hundred and eight in SN 36..22?

Is it bodily feeling or mental feeling?

Is it pleasant, painful, or neither-pleasant-nor-painful?

Is it the pleasure faculty, the pain faculty, the joy faculty, the displeasure faculty, the equanimity faculty?

Is it feeling born of eye-contact … feeling born of mind-contact?

Is it one of the six examinations accompanied by joy, six examinations accompanied by displeasure, six examinations accompanied by equanimity?

Is it one of the six types of joy based on the household life, six types of joy based on renunciation; six types of displeasure based on the household life, six types of displeasure based on renunciation; six types of equanimity based on the household life, six types of equanimity based on renunciation?

Is it one of the above thirty-six feelings in the past, the above thirty-six feelings in the future, the above thirty-six feelings at present?

[santa100]

What kind of vedana is that? Is it one of the hundred and eight in SN 36..2?

In brief, the 108 mentioned in SN 36.22 are composed of:
[3 basic modes(pain/pleasure/neutral)] x [6 contacts(eye/ear/.../mind-contact)] x [6 sense objects(form/sound/...mind-object)] = 108
There's no distinction of mundane or supra-mundane feelings in SN 36.22 so one'd have to surmise the types mentioned in SN 45.12 is some supra-mundane version of SN 36.22.