Nibbana is the unconditioned dhamma, or is not a dhamma?

[DAWN]

Nibbana is the unconditioned dhamma? or not?

Some speaks about Nibbana like the unconditioned dhamma. Ven. Thannisaro say "Unconditioned"
Others speaks about Nibbana like just detachment.

In otherwords:
Nibbana can be experianced?
Or Nibbana is not any experiance, without experiance?

In otherwords:
Nibbana is an attainment?
Or Nibbana is not an object to attainment, but to not-attainment?

In otherwords:
Nibbana - "to go"?
Or Nibbana - "to stop"?

[cooran]

Hello DAWN,

These may be of interest:

What is Nibbāna? - Bhikkhu Pesala
http://www.aimwell.org/Books/Pesala/Nib ... bbana.html

Nibbana- Venerable K. Sri Dhammananda Maha Thera
http://www.budsas.org/ebud/whatbudbeliev/102.htm

with metta
Chris

[Aloka]

Hi Dawn,

Its possible that this talk from Ajahn Sumedho "What Is The Unconditioned ?" might be helpful.

http://dharmaseed.org/talks/audio_player/10/5381.html

with kind wishes,

Aloka

[DAWN]

Thanks you Alokha and Cooran, i will read it today

Hello DAWN,

These may be of interest:

What is Nibbāna? - Bhikkhu Pesala
http://www.aimwell.org/Books/Pesala/Nib ... bbana.html

Here, Nibbana is present like a unconditioned dhamma. Somethink beyond impermanence.
I'am alredy read it.
Complitely egree with all here said, i see the same directly. But when you try to explain it, by similies, by quotations, by logic, peoples not agree, they say that this is Not Nibbana, Lord Buddha dont teach it.

[ground]

It is a shy deer. Everybody knows deer, right?

[DAWN]

I think i see what is actualy difference between a wiev of Nibbana like unconditioned element, and wiev of Nibbana like not-element.

In the first case, detachement is consequence of insight of Nibbana, so the one become naturaly detached, free from all conditioned impermanence, dwell beyond it, in Buddhahood.
This Nibbana is unconditioned. This Nibbana is condition to detachment.

In the second case, detachement is condition to Nibbana, so the one's mind is dwelling here but detached from all conditioned impermanence.
This Nibbana is conditioned. This Nibbana is consequence of detachment.

So actualy is funny, because
in the case when Nibbana is seen like unconditioned element, Nibbana is not a dhamma, because is cause of detachment, so unconditioned and take a role of condition from the rest without be conditioned.
and in the case when Nibbana is seen like detachment, Nibbana is a dhamma, because is consequence of detachment, so conditioned and impermanent.

Ud 8.1-4
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,[1] unevolving, without support [mental object].[2] This, just this, is the end of stress.

It's hard to see the unaffected,
for the truth is not easily seen.
Craving is pierced
in one who knows;
For one who sees,
there is nothing.

There is, monks, an unborn[1] — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated. If there were not that unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated, there would not be the case that escape from the born — become — made — fabricated would be discerned. But precisely because there is an unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated, escape from the born — become — made — fabricated is discerned.[2]

One who is dependent has wavering. One who is independent has no wavering. There being no wavering, there is calm. There being calm, there is no yearning. There being no yearning, there is no coming or going. There being no coming or going, there is no passing away or arising. There being no passing away or arising, there is neither a here nor a there nor a between-the-two. This, just this, is the end of stress.[1]

[ALot]

There is, monks, an unborn[1] — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated. If there were not that unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated, there would not be the case that escape from the born — become — made — fabricated would be discerned. But precisely because there is an unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated, escape from the born — become — made — fabricated is discerned.[2]

Another translation and opinion:
http://www.seeingthroughthenet.net/file ... _ednref493

Atthi, bhikkhave, ajātaṃ abhūtaṃ akataṃ asaṅkhataṃ. No ce taṃ, bhikkhave, abhavissa ajātaṃ abhūtaṃ akataṃ asaṅkhataṃ, nayidha jātassa bhūtassa katassa saṅkhatassa nissaraṇaṃ paññāyetha. Yasmā ca kho, bhikkhave, atthi ajātaṃ abhūtaṃ akataṃ asaṅkhataṃ, tasmā jātassa bhūtassa katassa saṅkhatassa nissaraṇaṃ paññāyati.[493]

"Monks, there is a not-born, a not-become, a not-made, a not-compounded. Monks, if that not-born, not-become, not-made, not-compounded were not, there would be no stepping out here from what is born, become, made and compounded. But since, monks, there is a not-born, a not-become, a not-made, a not-compounded, therefore there is a stepping out from what is born, become, made and compounded."

The terms ajātaṃ, not-born, abhūtaṃ, not-become, akataṃ, not-made, and asaṅkhataṃ, not-compounded, are all epithets for Nibbāna. The Buddha declares that if not for this not-born, not-become, not-made, not-compounded, there would be no possibility of stepping out or release here, that is, in this very world, from the born, the become, the made and the compounded.

The second half of the passage rhetorically reiterates and emphasises the same fact. Now as to the significance of this profound declaration of the Buddha, we may point out that the terms not-born, not-become, not-made, not-compounded, suggest the emancipation of the arahant's mind from birth, becoming and preparations, saṅkhārā. They refer to the cessation of birth, becoming and preparations realized by the arahant. So then the significance of these terms is purely psychological.

But the commentator, the Venerable Dhammapāla, pays little attention to the word idha, "here", in this passage, which needs to be emphasized. The fact that there is a possibility here and now, of stepping out from the state of being born, become, made and compounded, surely deserves emphasis, since, until then, release from decay and death was thought to be possible only in another dimension of existence, that is, after death.

The prospect of stepping out from decay and death here and now in this very world has to be asserted for its novelty, which is why the declaration opens with the word atthi, "there is". However, most of the scholars who tried to interpret this passage in their discussion on Nibbāna, instead of laying stress on the word idha, "here", emphasize the opening word atthi, "there is", to prove that Nibbāna is some form of reality absolutely existing somewhere.

As that passage from the Dhatuvibhaṅgasutta on maññanā, which we discussed, has shown us, the terms ajātaṃ abhūtaṃ akataṃ and asaṅkhataṃ have to be understood in a deeper sense.

Existence is a conceit deep rooted in the mind, which gives rise to a heap of pervert notions. Its cessation, therefore, has also to be accomplished in the mind and by the mind. This is the gist of the Buddha's exhortation.

[tiltbillings]

. . .

If there where at this time no awakened individuals, where is nibbana?

[DAWN]

Another translation and opinion:
http://www.seeingthroughthenet.net/file ... _ednref493

Atthi, bhikkhave, ajātaṃ abhūtaṃ akataṃ asaṅkhataṃ. No ce taṃ, bhikkhave, abhavissa ajātaṃ abhūtaṃ akataṃ asaṅkhataṃ, nayidha jātassa bhūtassa katassa saṅkhatassa nissaraṇaṃ paññāyetha. Yasmā ca kho, bhikkhave, atthi ajātaṃ abhūtaṃ akataṃ asaṅkhataṃ, tasmā jātassa bhūtassa katassa saṅkhatassa nissaraṇaṃ paññāyati.[493]

"Monks, there is a not-born, a not-become, a not-made, a not-compounded. Monks, if that not-born, not-become, not-made, not-compounded were not, there would be no stepping out here from what is born, become, made and compounded. But since, monks, there is a not-born, a not-become, a not-made, a not-compounded, therefore there is a stepping out from what is born, become, made and compounded."

The terms ajātaṃ, not-born, abhūtaṃ, not-become, akataṃ, not-made, and asaṅkhataṃ, not-compounded, are all epithets for Nibbāna. The Buddha declares that if not for this not-born, not-become, not-made, not-compounded, there would be no possibility of stepping out or release here, that is, in this very world, from the born, the become, the made and the compounded.

The second half of the passage rhetorically reiterates and emphasises the same fact. Now as to the significance of this profound declaration of the Buddha, we may point out that the terms not-born, not-become, not-made, not-compounded, suggest the emancipation of the arahant's mind from birth, becoming and preparations, saṅkhārā. They refer to the cessation of birth, becoming and preparations realized by the arahant. So then the significance of these terms is purely psychological.

But the commentator, the Venerable Dhammapāla, pays little attention to the word idha, "here", in this passage, which needs to be emphasized. The fact that there is a possibility here and now, of stepping out from the state of being born, become, made and compounded, surely deserves emphasis, since, until then, release from decay and death was thought to be possible only in another dimension of existence, that is, after death.

The prospect of stepping out from decay and death here and now in this very world has to be asserted for its novelty, which is why the declaration opens with the word atthi, "there is". However, most of the scholars who tried to interpret this passage in their discussion on Nibbāna, instead of laying stress on the word idha, "here", emphasize the opening word atthi, "there is", to prove that Nibbāna is some form of reality absolutely existing somewhere.

As that passage from the Dhatuvibhaṅgasutta on maññanā, which we discussed, has shown us, the terms ajātaṃ abhūtaṃ akataṃ and asaṅkhataṃ have to be understood in a deeper sense.

Existence is a conceit deep rooted in the mind, which gives rise to a heap of pervert notions. Its cessation, therefore, has also to be accomplished in the mind and by the mind. This is the gist of the Buddha's exhortation.

Thanks you for this quotation.

Nibbana can't be some physical place. It's impossible, because we can not reborn in the place free from borning. So, logicaly, it's impossible.
Nibbana is a refuge from annica and dukkha, refuge from memory (I, my, mine,me) conditioning, the other-side, other coast, beyond.

Actualy, Nibbana can be experianced only during the existance (physical or mental), only here and now. Because, in other way, if there is no any existance, there is nothink to be freed.

[tiltbillings]

Actualy, Nibbana can be experianced only during the existance (physical or mental), only here and now. Because, in other way, if there is no any existance, there is nothink to be freed.

So, where is nibbana when there are no arahants?

[DAWN]

. . .

If there where at this time no awakened individuals, where is nibbana?

Beyond one's mind.

This "beyond" is the same for every "mind", thats why, the one who is awakened, feel freedom from all realm or sort of existance.
Thats why, it's said, that, all living being can be freed, can reach Nibbana, have Buddha-element.
Thats why, it's said, that, Nibbana is unconditioned, because it's not conditioned by sort of existance, sort of mind, sort of ego, knowledge, from all sort of sankhara, and all sort of dhamma.

[tiltbillings]

. . .

If there where at this time no awakened individuals, where is nibbana?

Beyond one's mind.

Seriously? So, you are saying that nibbana is a self-existant thing that exists independent of awakened individuals.

Nibbana is unconditioned, because it's not conditioned by sort of existance, sort of mind, sort of ego, knowledge, from all sort of sankhara, and all sort of dhamma.

Interestingly, the Buddha carefully defined nibbana and the "unconditioned" and it does not quite agree with you. You might also reread: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=15025&p=216946#p216936 You have not quite grasp what is being said there.

[DAWN]

Seriously? So, you are saying that nibbana is a self-existant thing that exists independent of awakened individuals..

Nibbana (as unconditioned element) "exist" until the being exist.
When the being die (parinibbana), there is no any Nibbana (liberation) who still here, because there is nothink more to be liberated.


Ud 8.10

Just as the destination of a glowing fire
struck with a [blacksmith's] iron hammer,
gradually growing calm,
isn't known:[1]
Even so, there's no destination to describe
for those rightly released
— having crossed over the flood
of sensuality's bond —
for those who've attained
unwavering bliss.

Interestingly, the Buddha carefully defined nibbana and the "unconditioned" and it does not quite agree with you. You might also reread: http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 46#p216936 You have not quite grasp what is being said there.

Unborn=Unconditioned
It's impossible to have an element wich is just unborn, but conditioned. And an another, wich is born, but unconditioned. Unconditioned is necessarily unborn.
Budhha use "unborn" to designate Nibbana. So Nibbana is unborn and unconditioned.

Can you explain or show me why you think that Nibbana and Unconditioned is not the same element?
I'am sorry, i reread, but i dont see what i could misunderstand or contradict in Alot's post. If you show me, i could explain.

[tiltbillings]

Seriously? So, you are saying that nibbana is a self-existant thing that exists independent of awakened individuals..

Nibbana (as unconditioned element) "exist" until the being exist.

One needs to be very careful with the word "dhatu." So, where does this "element" exist when there are no arahants?

When the being die (parinibbana), there is no any Nibbana (liberation) who still here, because there is nothink more to be liberated.

"Nothink?" Do you mean "nothing?" So, after the arahant dies, where does the nibbana go?

Unborn=Unconditioned

Unborn, however, in the context it is actually used in the suttas means that one is no longer born after attaining nibbana.

It's impossible to have an element wich is just unborn, but conditioned. And an another, wich is born, but unconditioned. Unconditioned is necessarily unborn. Budhha use "unborn" to designate Nibbana. So Nibbana is unborn and unconditioned.

You are working really hard here to turn nibbana into a self-existing thing.

Can you explain or show me why you think that Nibbana and Unconditioned is not the same element?

I never made that claim. Asankhata, freedom from conditioning, is defined in exactly the same way same as nibbana.

I'am sorry, i reread, but i dont see what i could misunderstand or contradict in Alot's post. If you show me, i could explain.

Your problem is that you want nibbana to be some sort of self-existing thing.

[DAWN]

Your problem is that you want nibbana to be some sort of self-existing thing.

Actualy is not so.
I dont know what simily to use, for better demonstration.

I will try. There is no methaphysic.

Imagine a tire of a car.
Tire is a circle. All circle have a center.
This center is out of circle, and actualy dont exist, because there is nothink in the middle of circle.
When tire is used off by car, and destroyed, where is a center of tire?

Do circle exist without his center? No. Because without it, it's not a circle.
Do center exist without circle? No. Because there is no any independant, self-existant center.

Do center exist? Yes. Until circle exist.
Do center have any existance? No. Center have no any substance, have no atta. It's void.

Do center turn with circle of tire? No. Because he still at his place.
Do center is infuenced by road? No. Because there is no contact.
Do center can tuch the road? No. Because there is nothink what can tuch road.
Do center beyond a tire, on other side? Yes.

Ignorant being thinkg that he is a tire, identificate with it, putt "self" in it.
Enlightened being... There is no enlightened being, there is tire, wich turning, used off, and burned on the fire.

Still tire react on the road's impermanence and imperfection of his surface until he is no yet used off? Yes. Thats why arahant keep form, feeling, perception, volitional formation and consciosness.
Still tire exist after his burning? Yes. Like a smoke. (of ground fertilizer)
Still tire's center exist after tire's burning? Non. Because center have never exist.

So where is mind of Arahant?
Where is Nibbana?




Ud 8.10
Just as the destination of a glowing fire
struck with a [blacksmith's] iron hammer,
gradually growing calm,
isn't known:[1]
Even so, there's no destination to describe
for those rightly released
— having crossed over the flood
of sensuality's bond —
for those who've attained
unwavering bliss.
--
SN 22.87
"Do you see, bhikkhus,that cloud of smoke, that swirl of darkness, moving to the east, then to the west, to the north, to the south, upwards, downwards, and to the intermadiate quarters?3
"Yes, venerable sir."
"That, bhikkhus, is Mara the Evil One searching: 'Where now has the consciosness of clansman Vakkali been established?' However, bhikkhus, with consciousness unestablished, the clansman Vakkali has attained final Nibbana."

[tiltbillings]

. . .

So, does nibbana exists if there are no awakened individuals? And you are still trying to tell us that nibbana is some sort of canvas thing?

[DAWN]

. . .

So, does nibbana exists if there are no awakened individuals? And you are still trying to tell us that nibbana is some sort of canvas thing?

Nibbana as freedom, yes, Nibbana as canvas (or somethink else), no.
But Nibbana as nature of no awakened individuals, yes.

[tiltbillings]

. . .

So, does nibbana exists if there are no awakened individuals? And you are still trying to tell us that nibbana is some sort of canvas thing?

So, does nibbana exists if there are no awakened individuals?

That is what I am asking you.

Nibbana as freedom, yes

Freedom is some sort of thing that exists all by itself in relation to no thing whatsoever?

Nibbana as canvas no.

That is a good change from you.

But Nibbana as nature of no awakened individuals, yes

Your English is fractured. I have no idea what you are trying to say here.

[DAWN]

That is what I am asking you.

I'am sorry, i would fracture your question, but was answered at the same moment, and forgot to delete your question.

Freedom is some sort of thing that exists all by itself in relation to no thing whatsoever?

Freedom is free from existance, unborn, uncreated, unconditioned. Thats why it's called Nibbana.

That is a good change from you.

Change of similie.
Similie with cercle is better rather with wave.

Your English is fractured. I have no idea what you are trying to say here.

I try to say, that, like a hole of center is a nature of circle, so Nibbana is a nature of all living beings.

[tiltbillings]

Freedom is free from existance, unborn, uncreated, unconditioned. Thats why it's called Nibbana.

It is called nibbana because one is unbound to the conditioning of greed, hatred, and delusion. One no longer makes, creates, puts together based upon greed, hatred, and delusion, and one is free from birth because one is no longer re-born.

so Nibbana is a nature of all living beings.

The Buddha never said such a thing, and if that were true, then there would be no need for any sort of practice, there would be no ignorance, no conditioning based upon greed, hatred, and delusion.