how can thoughtless state of non conciousness state of parinibbana be self when no awareness exist?
how can "understanding process" of dependent origination and dependent cessation be self? they are also thoughts arising and passing away !
From the classical position only, in which nibbana is not self nor consciousness, why isn't nibbana self?
- confusedlayman
- Posts: 6231
- Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2019 12:16 am
- Location: Human Realm (as of now)
Re: From the classical position only, in which nibbana is not self nor consciousness, why isn't nibbana self?
I may be slow learner but im at least learning...
- Noble Sangha
- Posts: 94
- Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2021 5:27 pm
Re: From the classical position only, in which nibbana is not self nor consciousness, why isn't nibbana self?
I mean . . . has it ever occur to others that the teaching of anatta might not even be about "no / none self" . . .?
I am a Buddhist that doesn't practice Buddhism. What I practice is nekkhamma, abyāpāda, avihiṁsā, viraga, nirodha or the Noble Eight Fold Path. The elimination / eradication / extermination of defilements, kilesa's, raga, dosa, moha and asava's.
Lineage: Buddha > Sthaviravada > Vibhajjavada > Theravada > Striving for Nibbana.
Lineage: Buddha > Sthaviravada > Vibhajjavada > Theravada > Striving for Nibbana.
Re: From the classical position only, in which nibbana is not self nor consciousness, why isn't nibbana self?
Assuming you're promoting the idea that something survives parinibbana as a kind of eternal citta or something, you're the charlatan.
Assume all of my words on dhamma could be incorrect. Seek an arahant for truth.
"If we base ourselves on the Pali Nikayas, then we should be compelled to conclude that Buddhism is realistic. There is no explicit denial anywhere of the external world. Nor is there any positive evidence to show that the world is mind-made or simply a projection of subjective thoughts. That Buddhism recognizes the extra-mental existence of matter and the external world is clearly suggested by the texts. Throughout the discourses it is the language of realism that one encounters.
-Y. Karunadasa
"If we base ourselves on the Pali Nikayas, then we should be compelled to conclude that Buddhism is realistic. There is no explicit denial anywhere of the external world. Nor is there any positive evidence to show that the world is mind-made or simply a projection of subjective thoughts. That Buddhism recognizes the extra-mental existence of matter and the external world is clearly suggested by the texts. Throughout the discourses it is the language of realism that one encounters.
-Y. Karunadasa
Re: From the classical position only, in which nibbana is not self nor consciousness, why isn't nibbana self?
The word "anatta" literally translates to "not self." The Buddha explains and substantiates this in context throughout the suttas, as well, and it is elucidated in depth in the commentaries. So, only people who have a serious misunderstanding of Pali, the Buddha's teachings and the commentaries might think that, inexplicably, anatta "might not even be about no/none self"Noble Sangha wrote: ↑Tue May 09, 2023 10:40 pm I mean . . . has it ever occur to others that the teaching of anatta might not even be about "no / none self" . . .?
Assume all of my words on dhamma could be incorrect. Seek an arahant for truth.
"If we base ourselves on the Pali Nikayas, then we should be compelled to conclude that Buddhism is realistic. There is no explicit denial anywhere of the external world. Nor is there any positive evidence to show that the world is mind-made or simply a projection of subjective thoughts. That Buddhism recognizes the extra-mental existence of matter and the external world is clearly suggested by the texts. Throughout the discourses it is the language of realism that one encounters.
-Y. Karunadasa
"If we base ourselves on the Pali Nikayas, then we should be compelled to conclude that Buddhism is realistic. There is no explicit denial anywhere of the external world. Nor is there any positive evidence to show that the world is mind-made or simply a projection of subjective thoughts. That Buddhism recognizes the extra-mental existence of matter and the external world is clearly suggested by the texts. Throughout the discourses it is the language of realism that one encounters.
-Y. Karunadasa
Re: From the classical position only, in which nibbana is not self nor consciousness, why isn't nibbana self?
There's defilement free state beyond rebirth. Sutta says they who have gone beyond understand rightly.
Also if you keep saying stupid things, i will lash out at some point.https://dictionary.sutta.org/browse/p/p%C4%81rag%C5%AB/ wrote: Concise Pali-English Dictionary by A.P. Buddhadatta Mahathera
pāragū:[adj.] gone beyond; passed; crossed.
Pali-Dictionary Vipassana Research Institute
pāragū:and (pārago) One who has crossed to the other side,who has passed beyond ,escaped from; one who is accomplished or versed in
In meditation, if want make breakthrough it is a must to know the unchanging thing and go for it.
Re: From the classical position only, in which nibbana is not self nor consciousness, why isn't nibbana self?
Your attitude is appalling.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
- cappuccino
- Posts: 12876
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
- Contact:
Re: From the classical position only, in which nibbana is not self nor consciousness, why isn't nibbana self?
Inconstancy is the thing for practice
Re: From the classical position only, in which nibbana is not self nor consciousness, why isn't nibbana self?
Unproduced, always been there. If you cease fabricated things, it is there what is left. Psychic point in the head corresponds with it too, it is preceded by two other minor openings. It is concentrated on with special concentration method, which is discovered from another state of utter stillness.
Inconstancy is when you practice and difficult thing arise.. then think it is not self, it will cease at some point if you persist enough(takes many tries and cultivation). And that thing is to be tamed and used in meditation so at this point you would want it to arise..
- cappuccino
- Posts: 12876
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
- Contact:
Re: From the classical position only, in which nibbana is not self nor consciousness, why isn't nibbana self?
Going forth is hard;
houses are hard places to live;
the Dhamma is deep;
wealth, hard to obtain;
it's hard to keep going
with whatever we get:
so it's right that we ponder
continually
continual
inconstancy.
Jenta (Thag 1.111)
Re: From the classical position only, in which nibbana is not self nor consciousness, why isn't nibbana self?
ok
offtopic to the thing you posted,
per the sutta. The form, feeling, perception, choice elements still house the consciousness but its unsettled.https://suttacentral.net/sn22.3/en/sujato?layout=sidebyside&reference=main¬es=asterisk&highlight=false&script=latin wrote: ‘After leaving shelter to migrate unsettled,
‘Okaṁ pahāya aniketasārī,
anyway you veered the the snippet off the meditation. Better i should have not responded.
Re: From the classical position only, in which nibbana is not self nor consciousness, why isn't nibbana self?
And this is to be realized.
"This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications, the relinquishment of all acquisitions, the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Nibbana." — AN 3.32
"I tell you, the ending of the mental fermentations depends on the first jhana... the second jhana... the third... the fourth... the dimension of the infinitude of space... the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness... the dimension of nothingness. I tell you, the ending of the mental fermentations depends on the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception.
"'I tell you, the ending of the mental fermentations depends on the first jhana.' Thus it has been said. In reference to what was it said? There is the case where a monk, secluded from sensuality, secluded from unskillful qualities, enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born of seclusion, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. He regards whatever phenomena there that are connected with form, feeling, perception, fabrications, & consciousness, as inconstant, stressful, a disease, a cancer, an arrow, painful, an affliction, alien, a disintegration, an emptiness, not-self. He turns his mind away from those phenomena, and having done so, inclines his mind to the property of deathlessness: 'This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.'
https://accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an ... .than.html
"There is, monks, an unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated. If there were not that unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated, there would not be the case that emancipation from the born — become — made — fabricated would be discerned. But precisely because there is an unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated, emancipation from the born — become — made — fabricated is discerned."
— Ud 8.3
And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called right speech.
Re: From the classical position only, in which nibbana is not self nor consciousness, why isn't nibbana self?
amato, a desire rooted dhamma which has culminated in deathless and has nibbana as its final end(perfection/osāna)pegembara wrote: ↑Thu May 25, 2023 4:06 amAnd this is to be realized.
"This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications, the relinquishment of all acquisitions, the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Nibbana." — AN 3.32
https://suttacentral.net/an10.58/en/sujato?layout=sidebyside&reference=none¬es=asterisk&highlight=false&script=latin wrote:‘Reverends, all things are rooted in desire. Attention produces them. Contact is their origin. Feeling is their meeting place. Immersion is their chief. Mindfulness is their ruler. Wisdom is their overseer. Freedom is their core. They culminate in the deathless. And extinguishment is their final end.’
deathless is a substance(breath) circulating in body. It's the nectar of gods(shen). That breath is let out to emptiness(shen). At least books tell this work is not in vain or something what counts for nothing, means the writers are aware of the problem of what the parinibbana would imply at first glance and imagine if you lean towards annihilation.https://dictionary.sutta.org/browse/a/amata/ wrote:PTS Pali-English dictionary The Pali Text Society's Pali-English dictionary
Amata,1 (nt.) [a + mata = mṛta pp. of mṛ,Vedic amṛta = Gr. a]--m(b)rot-o & a]mbrosi/a = Lat. im-mort-a(lis) 1. The drink of the gods,ambrosia,water of immortality,(cp. BSk. amṛta-varṣa “rain of Ambrosia” Jtm 221). -- 2. A general conception of a state of durability & non-change,a state of security i. e. where there is not any more rebirth or re-death.
Re: From the classical position only, in which nibbana is not self nor consciousness, why isn't nibbana self?
To assume there is a self to be annihilated, that would be the belief of annihilation (Ucchedaditthi). Which is a wrong view.
To assume there is a self that will survive after death or Parinibbana, that would be the belief of eternity (Sassataditthi). Which is a wrong view too.
Either way also subscribe to a belief that there is a self, which is Sakkaya Ditthi belief. And it is a wrong view according to the Buddha.
It is very clear that Buddha's teachings as preserved in Vibhajjavada, don't subscribe to both wrong views as mentioned above.
To assume there is a self that will survive after death or Parinibbana, that would be the belief of eternity (Sassataditthi). Which is a wrong view too.
Either way also subscribe to a belief that there is a self, which is Sakkaya Ditthi belief. And it is a wrong view according to the Buddha.
It is very clear that Buddha's teachings as preserved in Vibhajjavada, don't subscribe to both wrong views as mentioned above.
Hiriottappasampannā,
sukkadhammasamāhitā;
Santo sappurisā loke,
devadhammāti vuccare.
https://suttacentral.net/ja6/en/chalmer ... ight=false
sukkadhammasamāhitā;
Santo sappurisā loke,
devadhammāti vuccare.
https://suttacentral.net/ja6/en/chalmer ... ight=false
Re: From the classical position only, in which nibbana is not self nor consciousness, why isn't nibbana self?
"There is that"auto wrote: ↑Thu May 25, 2023 4:37 pm deathless is a substance(breath) circulating in body. It's the nectar of gods(shen). That breath is let out to emptiness(shen). At least books tell this work is not in vain or something what counts for nothing, means the writers are aware of the problem of what the parinibbana would imply at first glance and imagine if you lean towards annihilation.
“The Unborn”, “The Deathless” ,”The Unconditioned”, "The Other Shore", "The Island"
There is an island, an island which you cannot go beyond. It is a place of nothingness, a place of nonpossession and of nonattachment. It is the total end of death and decay, and this is why I call it Nibbāna.
In terms of direct experience, this comes the closest. Everything else is what someone else says nibbana is.
"This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications, the relinquishment of all acquisitions, the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Nibbana." — AN 3.32
Last edited by pegembara on Fri May 26, 2023 3:19 am, edited 2 times in total.
And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called right speech.