Nibbana as a dhamma in Classical Theravāda

A forum for members who wish to develop a deeper understanding of the Pali Canon and associated Commentaries, which for discussion purposes are both treated as authoritative.

Moderator: Mahavihara moderator

User avatar
Twilight
Posts: 413
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2016 10:43 pm

Re: Nibbana as a dhamma in Classical Theravāda

Postby Twilight » Tue Jan 03, 2017 1:26 pm

spacenick wrote:
Twilight wrote:What I was speaking about are views expressed in the suttas. I am not familiar with those views and would be interested to hear what they are about.


http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

Research vinnana anidassanam, the synonym for Nibbana

Oh boy. Good old idealist Thanissaro, still believing in a self and in nibbana as a realm or some form of infinite consciousness... Completely ignoring the whole pali canon in favor of a wrong interpretation of an obscure verse.

That has been discussed here: viewtopic.php?t=12510

Bhikkhu Bhodi:
n the first edition, I retained Ñm’s own translation of these lines, which read:

The consciousness that makes no showing,
Nor has to do with finiteness,
Not claiming being with respect to all.

In retrospect, I find this rendering far from satisfactory and thus here offer my own. These lines (which also appear as part of a full verse at DN 11.85/i.223) have been a perennial challenge to Buddhist scholarship, and even Ācariya Buddhaghosa seems to founder over them. MA takes the subject of the sentence to be Nibbāna, called “consciousness” (viññāṇṁ) in the sense that “it can be cognized” (vijānitabbaṁ). This derivation is hardly credible, since nowhere in the Nik̄yas is Nibb̄na described as consciousness, nor is it possible to derive an active noun from the gerundive. MA explains anidassanaṁ as meaning invisible, “because it (Nibbāna) does not come within range of eye-consciousness,” but again this is a trite explanation. The word anidassana occurs at MN 21.14 in the description of empty space as an unsuitable medium for painting pictures; thus the idea seems to be that of not making manifest.

MA offers three explanations of sabbato pabhaṁ: (1) completely possessed of luminosity (pabhā); (2) possessing being (pabhū̇taṃ) everywhere; and (3) a ford (pabhaṁ) accessible from all sides, i.e., through any of the thirty-eight meditation objects. Only the first of these seems to have any linguistic legitimacy. Ñm, in Ms, explains that he takes pabhaṁ to be a negative present participle of pabhavati—apabhaṁ—the negative-prefix a dropping off in conjunction with sabbato: “The sense can be paraphrased freely by ‘not predicating being in relation to “all,”’ or ‘not assuming of “all” that it is or is not in an absolute sense.’” But if we take pabhaṁ as “luminous,” which seems better justified, the verse links up with the idea of the mind as intrinsically luminous (pabhassaram idaṁ cittaṁ , AN i.10) and also suggests the light of wisdom (pa), called the best of lights (AN ii.139). I understand this consciousness to be, not Nibbāna itself, but the arahant’s consciousness during the meditative experience of Nibb̄na. See in this connection AN v.7–10, 318–26. Note that this meditative experience does not make manifest any conditioned phenomena of the world, and thus may be truly described as “non-manifesting.”


Bhante Sujato:
“I’ve just read yet another assertion that tries to slip a ‘cosmic consciousness’ Nibbana into the Suttas. In these kinds of arguments the same mistakes are made again and again, and you should beware of them.

One popular argument is based on the famous passage:

viññāṇāṁ anidassanaṁ anantaṁ sabbato pabhaṁ
‘Consciousness non-manifest, infinte, radiant all around.’

This is sometimes said to be a term for Nibbana, although since it is an obscure poetic passage of dubious meaning we should not infer any major conclusions from it.

This obscure passage has been often exalted to the revelation of the highest teachings of Nibbana. One of the arguments one hears is that viññāṇa normally means ‘separative consciousness’, and that this has been revalued to refer to an infinite awareness. This argument is wrong. ...”

https://sujato.wordpress.com/2011/05/13 ... E2%80%99t/
You'll have a better chance finding a moderate rebel in Ildib than finding a buddhist who ever changed his views. Views are there to be clung to. They are there to be defended with all one's might. Whatever clinging one will removed in regards to sense pleasures by practicing the path - that should be compensated with increased clinging to views. This is the fundamental balance of the noble 8thfold path. The yin and yang.
----------
Consciousness and no-self explained in drawings: link
How stream entry is achieved. Mahasi / Zen understanding vs Sutta understanding: link

User avatar
Twilight
Posts: 413
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2016 10:43 pm

Re: Nibbana as a dhamma in Classical Theravāda

Postby Twilight » Tue Jan 03, 2017 1:38 pm

It is in the next lines of the verse, which are usually overlooked by the viññāṇa = Nibbana school, that the Buddha’s true position is stated. With the cessation of viññāṇa all this comes to an end. The ‘infinite consciousness’ is merely the temporary escape from the oppression of materiality, but true liberation is the ending of all consciousness.

‘Kattha āpo ca pathavī,
Tejo vāyo na gādhati;
Kattha dīghañca rassañca,
Aṇuṃ thūlaṃ subhāsubhaṃ;
Kattha nāmañca rūpañca,
Asesaṃ uparujjhatī’ti.

Where does water and earth
fire, air not find a footing?
Where does long and short
Small, gross, fair and ugly,
Where does name and form
Without remainder cease?

Tatra veyyākaraṇaṃ bhavati—
For that the explanation is:

‘Viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ,
Anantaṃ sabbatopabhaṃ;
Ettha āpo ca pathavī,
Tejo vāyo na gādhati.

Viññāṇa non-manifest
Infinite, radiant all-round
There water and earth
fire, air do not find a footing

Ettha dīghañca rassañca,
Aṇuṃ thūlaṃ subhāsubhaṃ;
Ettha nāmañca rūpañca,
Asesaṃ uparujjhati;
Viññāṇassa nirodhena,
Etthetaṃ uparujjhatī’”ti.

There does long and short
Small, gross, fair and ugly,
There does name and form
Without remainder cease:
With the cessation of viññāṇa
There this ceases.

The problem is not so much the interpretation of viññāṇa as such, but the syntax of the verses – which is one reason why poetry should not decide doctrine. The Buddha rephrases the original question, but his rephrasing has three question words and two verbs. It may be read as a single complex question, but this assumes that the two verbs mean the same thing (which they don’t: na gādhati means ‘does not find a firm footing’, like a man crossing a ford, while uparujjhati means ‘ceases’) – and that viññāṇa means ‘infinite consciousness of Nibbana’ in the first occurrence and ‘separative sense consciousness’ in the second.

https://sujato.wordpress.com/2011/05/13 ... E2%80%99t/
You'll have a better chance finding a moderate rebel in Ildib than finding a buddhist who ever changed his views. Views are there to be clung to. They are there to be defended with all one's might. Whatever clinging one will removed in regards to sense pleasures by practicing the path - that should be compensated with increased clinging to views. This is the fundamental balance of the noble 8thfold path. The yin and yang.
----------
Consciousness and no-self explained in drawings: link
How stream entry is achieved. Mahasi / Zen understanding vs Sutta understanding: link

User avatar
spacenick
Posts: 99
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2016 7:31 pm

Re: Nibbana as a dhamma in Classical Theravāda

Postby spacenick » Tue Jan 03, 2017 1:49 pm

I wholeheartedly disagree with a lot of Ven. Sujato's work and interpretation (for instance his stance on vegetarianism shows a profound misunderstanding of the goal of the Dhamma), so I am absolutely not surprised to find him quoted here! :p

PS: Bhikkhu Bodhi has not attained any stage of awakening. I'd be careful following the commentaries of unenlightened beings. You're taking the words of someone who has *not* experienced Nibbana to talk about... Nibbana.

I recommend the following reading about vinnanam anidassanam (Nibbana): http://obo.genaud.net/dhammatalk/dhamma ... tm#vinnana (Ven. Sujato's post is referred to in that discussion)
"Essential Dhamma, a collection of essays by Michael M. Olds" now available in PDF

User avatar
Twilight
Posts: 413
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2016 10:43 pm

Re: Nibbana as a dhamma in Classical Theravāda

Postby Twilight » Tue Jan 03, 2017 2:22 pm

You are discussing the person, not the ideas. And by the way, what is Sujato stance regarding vegetarianism ? You made me curious.
You're taking the words of someone who has *not* experienced Nibbana to talk about... Nibbana.

I am not taking the words of somebody who had not exerienced nibbana to talk about nibbana. This is because my position is based on my personal reading of the pali canon. Therefore it is based on the position of Buddha and on my own understanding. It just so happens that B.Bhodi has the same opinion.

I suggest reading the pali canon for yourself so you won't have to rely on famous monks, judging them by what positions they have on vegetarianism or things like that.
You'll have a better chance finding a moderate rebel in Ildib than finding a buddhist who ever changed his views. Views are there to be clung to. They are there to be defended with all one's might. Whatever clinging one will removed in regards to sense pleasures by practicing the path - that should be compensated with increased clinging to views. This is the fundamental balance of the noble 8thfold path. The yin and yang.
----------
Consciousness and no-self explained in drawings: link
How stream entry is achieved. Mahasi / Zen understanding vs Sutta understanding: link

User avatar
spacenick
Posts: 99
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2016 7:31 pm

Re: Nibbana as a dhamma in Classical Theravāda

Postby spacenick » Tue Jan 03, 2017 3:14 pm

Twilight wrote:You are discussing the person, not the ideas. And by the way, what is Sujato stance regarding vegetarianism ? You made me curious.
You're taking the words of someone who has *not* experienced Nibbana to talk about... Nibbana.

I am not taking the words of somebody who had not exerienced nibbana to talk about nibbana. This is because my position is based on my personal reading of the pali canon. Therefore it is based on the position of Buddha and on my own understanding. It just so happens that B.Bhodi has the same opinion.

I suggest reading the pali canon for yourself so you won't have to rely on famous monks, judging them by what positions they have on vegetarianism or things like that.


Here's the post I referred to about vegetarianism: https://sujato.wordpress.com/2012/01/28 ... xtra-cute/

It is a typical Mahayanist position, and has nothing to do (it is in fact opposed to) the original goal of the Dhamma, which is the abandoning of the world (letting go or self-surrender). Of course it is not directly related to that topic but shows a profound misunderstanding of the direction of the Dhamma by Ven. Sujato.

I am just pointing at the fact that one shouldn't blindly believe translators such as Vens. Bodhi & Sujato just based on their voluminous and scholarly work. As you correctly stated, we shouldn't rely on famous monks *unless* we suspect for ourselves that they are enlightened (and if you know the Pali canon for yourself you know this is defined by the Buddha as observing a person for a long period of time, facing adversity, etc)

I have given a link that discusses the idea itself, and I cannot do better than to just link it. Anything else would be parroting.
"Essential Dhamma, a collection of essays by Michael M. Olds" now available in PDF

User avatar
Twilight
Posts: 413
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2016 10:43 pm

Re: Nibbana as a dhamma in Classical Theravāda

Postby Twilight » Tue Jan 03, 2017 3:25 pm

I have just read B. Sujato case for vegetarianism and I do not agree with it. As expected, he is not stupid and makes a good case while also mentioning all the uncomfortable facts about his case. Problem is that kamma is not an ethical moral code. It has nothing to do with ethics, it is just a law that works like the law of gravity. For example kiling an animal produces negative kamma because it develops/strenthens a tendency in the human that does the killing. If one just eats meat without personally killing the animal, it brings no bad kamma to him.

Simillary, been a butcher is one of the worst jobs to have in terms of negative kamma. If kamma would have anything to do with ethics, this would not be so because the person just has a normal job that somebody has to do. But kamma is not an ethical code, it is just a law like the law of gravity. The person develops bad tendencies if he kills other living beings. Kamma is therefore unfair and unethical sometimes.

The reason Buddha gave those rules for monks about trying not to step on insects etc. is for them to develop a tendency of caring about other beings. This produces good kamma/tendencies. They are not there as some rigid ethical rules. And that is why there is no rule about monks not eating meat. That would produce bad kamma/tendencies because of refusing a gift.
There are some things that the scriptures simply get wrong. The Suttas make no critique of slavery, for example, and yet for us this is one of the most heinous of all crimes.

I also smell some idealism in B. Sujato too giving this paragraph. I'm a little surprise giving his good understanding of dhamma.

So there are things I do not agree about Sujato too. And I also have things I don't agree with from B. Bhodi such as his involvement into politics. I am sure there are opinions of mine about wordly matters that many would disagree with. But I consider both B.Bhodi and B.Sujato very knowledgeable when it comes to the dhamma.

PS: An how can you, a fan of idealist Thanissaro be against this idealist position of Sujato ? :mrgreen:
You'll have a better chance finding a moderate rebel in Ildib than finding a buddhist who ever changed his views. Views are there to be clung to. They are there to be defended with all one's might. Whatever clinging one will removed in regards to sense pleasures by practicing the path - that should be compensated with increased clinging to views. This is the fundamental balance of the noble 8thfold path. The yin and yang.
----------
Consciousness and no-self explained in drawings: link
How stream entry is achieved. Mahasi / Zen understanding vs Sutta understanding: link

User avatar
spacenick
Posts: 99
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2016 7:31 pm

Re: Nibbana as a dhamma in Classical Theravāda

Postby spacenick » Tue Jan 03, 2017 3:35 pm

Twilight wrote:I have just read B. Sujato case for vegetarianism and I do not agree with it. As expected, he is not stupid and makes a good case while also mentioning all the uncomfortable facts about his case. Problem is that kamma is not an ethical moral code. It has nothing to do with ethics, it is just a law that works like the law of gravity. For example kiling an animal produces negative kamma because it develops/strenthens a tendency in the human that does the killing. If one just eats meat without personally killing the animal, it brings no bad kamma to him.


Agree in essence. I'll just add that killing an animal produces negative kamma not because it strengthens the tendency to do so again in the future (which is more known as conditioning habits, or setting up the underlying tendency of the mind, which is closely related to kamma but not exactly the same thing), but because acting with the intention of causing pain returns to the 'sender' in the form of pain (however since the form in which you 'receive' the fruits of kamma that can be changed, it is not 1 for 1, but dependent on the current state of mind. The return of killing an animal can be experienced as hell for an eon, or as a headache).

Simillary, been a butcher is one of the worst jobs to have in terms of negative kamma. If kamma would have anything to do with ethics, this would not be so because the person just has a normal job that somebody has to do. But kamma is not an ethical code, it is just a law like the law of gravity. The person develops bad tendencies if he kills other living beings. Kamma is therefore unfair and unethical sometimes.


Agree again and I always use the simile of the law of gravity too.

The reason Buddha gave those rules for monks about trying not to step on insects etc. is for them to develop a tendency of caring about other beings. This produces good kamma/tendencies. They are not there as some rigid ethical rules. And that is why there is no rule about monks not eating meat. That would produce bad kamma/tendencies because of refusing a gift.
There are some things that the scriptures simply get wrong. The Suttas make no critique of slavery, for example, and yet for us this is one of the most heinous of all crimes.

I also smell some idealism in B. Sujato too giving this paragraph. I'm a little surprise giving his good understanding of dhamma.

So there are things I do not agree about Sujato too. And I also have things I don't agree with from B. Bhodi such as his involvement into politics. I am sure there are opinions of mine about wordly matters that many would disagree with. But I consider both B.Bhodi and B.Sujato very knowledgeable when it comes to the dhamma.

PS: An how can you, a fan of idealist Thanissaro be against this idealist position of Sujato ? :mrgreen:


Let me just isolate one sentence here that is crucial to me:

is for them to develop a tendency of caring about other beings


This is where you and many others (including Bhikkhu Bodhi & Ven. Sujato) go into Mahayana mode. This is Mara talking. The Dhamma is not set up to care about other beings. In fact, the destiny of others is a matter of indifference. If we can help others in the process, good. And by the way, the best way to help them is to show by example: which is why the Buddha always praised seclusion & living remotely, not entangled in wordly affairs. Remember that the Buddha praised a monk (forgot his name) that was practicing while the Buddha was dying. He praised seclusion & non-entanglement again and again and again..

Do you get it? Every time you 'buy into' the illusion that your senses offer, Mara has a grip. 'Caring about other beings' is buying into the illusion. The Buddha sets up all these rules not to care about other beings, but because causing bad kamma by killing insects and other things returns in the form of negative energy and that is a hindrance to liberation.

The main goal of the Dhamma is to let go of the world. If my words are shocking, good! The True Dhamma goes against the stream of the world, the stream of craving.

I am not particularly a fan of Thanissaro, even though I usually agree with him more than with the Australian crew. I just think what he's pointing at (and what Gotama is pointing at) is misunderstood because it is intellectually extremely difficult to conceptualize anything outside of nama/rupa+consciousness. There's no way that Thanissaro 'believes' in the Eternal Self thing.

I will link again the discussion which is to me the highest intellectual exposition on Nibbana and vinnanam anidassam I've come across: http://obo.genaud.net/dhammatalk/dhamma ... n-made.htm
"Essential Dhamma, a collection of essays by Michael M. Olds" now available in PDF

theY
Posts: 195
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 12:07 pm
Contact:

Re: Nibbana as a dhamma in Classical Theravāda

Postby theY » Tue Jan 03, 2017 4:17 pm

If you talking about thai monks.
viewtopic.php?f=19&t=28376
Above message maybe out of date. Latest update will be in massage's link.
--------------------------------------------------
Tipitaka memorization is a rule of monks. It isn't just a choice. They must done it.
bahussuto nāma tividho hoti – nissayamuccanako, parisupaṭṭhāpako, bhikkhunovādakoti.
http://UnmixedTheravada.blogspot.com/2016/09/tipitaka-memorization-is-rule-of-monks.html

Bakmoon
Posts: 613
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2012 3:14 pm

Re: Nibbana as a dhamma in Classical Theravāda

Postby Bakmoon » Tue Jan 03, 2017 11:30 pm

Twilight wrote:Oh boy. Good old idealist Thanissaro, still believing in a self and in nibbana as a realm or some form of infinite consciousness... Completely ignoring the whole pali canon in favor of a wrong interpretation of an obscure verse.

These are very harsh and shocking allegations. I don't agree with all the details of Ajahn Thanissaro's presentation of Nibbana, but that is a total caricature. Ajahn Thanissaro is one of the most quick to criticize other presentations of Buddhism for straying into 'atman' territory, and he regards Nibbana as a state in which consciousness has abandoned all objects, not as a state in which it is absorbed in a perception of consciousness.
The non-doing of any evil,
The performance of what's skillful,
The cleansing of one's own mind:
This is the Buddhas' teaching.

theY
Posts: 195
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 12:07 pm
Contact:

Re: Nibbana as a dhamma in Classical Theravāda

Postby theY » Tue Jan 03, 2017 11:34 pm

This forum have many topic of nibbana. So I make a new topic, that covered all topic. See:
http://unmixedtheravada.blogspot.com/2017/01/anyone-attention-in-nibbana-have-you.html
Last edited by theY on Wed Jan 04, 2017 10:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Above message maybe out of date. Latest update will be in massage's link.
--------------------------------------------------
Tipitaka memorization is a rule of monks. It isn't just a choice. They must done it.
bahussuto nāma tividho hoti – nissayamuccanako, parisupaṭṭhāpako, bhikkhunovādakoti.
http://UnmixedTheravada.blogspot.com/2016/09/tipitaka-memorization-is-rule-of-monks.html

User avatar
Twilight
Posts: 413
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2016 10:43 pm

Re: Nibbana as a dhamma in Classical Theravāda

Postby Twilight » Wed Jan 04, 2017 12:45 am

@spacenick: I agree and good point. Compassion, wisdom, mindfulness etc. are qualities that help towards the goal. They are what is called "a raft" that helps one reach the goal. They are developed for the purpose of attaining a goal. In the end, they will cease to exist too. Compassion as a quality that is to be developed in a person, does not require or imply attachment. In some cases such as relatives it is linked with attachment, in other cases such as strangers it is not.

@Bakmoon: I agree Thanissaro is a knowledgeable guy. This is why I still don't understand him. He simply had not understood how the aggregates work. He has not understood the main idea. As you say, he believs nibbana is some form of consciousness that has abandoned all objects. Name you however poetic you want, but "consciousness that has abandoned all objects" is a thing that exists and is even an aggregate.

The suttas could not be more clear, could not stress more, could not clarify the situation more: There is no consciousness or anything else in Nibbana. For crying out loud - consciousness is one of the aggregates and nibbana is the end of existence of these 5 aggregates. There are so many suttas where consciousness is explained:
https://justpaste.it/p6gg

This is also listed in the wrong view section. He has clinging to consciousness. He has not understood consciousness. It is one of the most difficult things to understand from the the fundamental doctrine or the 5 aggregates. But I find it strange how a famous bhikkhu, admonished by other famous bhikkhus in debates about the problem, still continues to hold this view.


PS: May I ask a tricky question to those holding Thanissaro view ? Well: To whom does this consciousness that has abandoned all objects belong to ?
You'll have a better chance finding a moderate rebel in Ildib than finding a buddhist who ever changed his views. Views are there to be clung to. They are there to be defended with all one's might. Whatever clinging one will removed in regards to sense pleasures by practicing the path - that should be compensated with increased clinging to views. This is the fundamental balance of the noble 8thfold path. The yin and yang.
----------
Consciousness and no-self explained in drawings: link
How stream entry is achieved. Mahasi / Zen understanding vs Sutta understanding: link

User avatar
Mkoll
Posts: 5953
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:55 pm
Location: California

Re: Nibbana as a dhamma in Classical Theravāda

Postby Mkoll » Wed Jan 04, 2017 3:06 am

Twilight wrote:But I find it strange how a famous bhikkhu, admonished by other famous bhikkhus in debates about the problem, still continues to hold this view.

He may or he may not continue to hold those views AFAIK. Those ATI pages were written quite a few years back and his views may have changed. Does anyone who has actually interacted with Ven. Thanissaro recently know if he talks about these views? Either way, I find it unlikely they play a big role in his teaching.
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa

User avatar
aflatun
Posts: 56
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2016 2:40 pm
Location: Bay Area, CA

Re: Nibbana as a dhamma in Classical Theravāda

Postby aflatun » Wed Jan 04, 2017 3:30 am

Twilight wrote:@spacenick: I agree and good point. Compassion, wisdom, mindfulness etc. are qualities that help towards the goal. They are what is called "a raft" that helps one reach the goal. They are developed for the purpose of attaining a goal. In the end, they will cease to exist too. Compassion as a quality that is to be developed in a person, does not require or imply attachment. In some cases such as relatives it is linked with attachment, in other cases such as strangers it is not.

@Bakmoon: I agree Thanissaro is a knowledgeable guy. This is why I still don't understand him. He simply had not understood how the aggregates work. He has not understood the main idea. As you say, he believs nibbana is some form of consciousness that has abandoned all objects. Name you however poetic you want, but "consciousness that has abandoned all objects" is a thing that exists and is even an aggregate.

The suttas could not be more clear, could not stress more, could not clarify the situation more: There is no consciousness or anything else in Nibbana. For crying out loud - consciousness is one of the aggregates and nibbana is the end of existence of these 5 aggregates. There are so many suttas where consciousness is explained:
https://justpaste.it/p6gg

This is also listed in the wrong view section. He has clinging to consciousness. He has not understood consciousness. It is one of the most difficult things to understand from the the fundamental doctrine or the 5 aggregates. But I find it strange how a famous bhikkhu, admonished by other famous bhikkhus in debates about the problem, still continues to hold this view.


PS: May I ask a tricky question to those holding Thanissaro view ? Well: To whom does this consciousness that has abandoned all objects belong to ?


Was there an actual debate between Ven. T and another Bhikkhu regarding this issue, or do you mean he's been debated metaphorically and indirectly on various internet venues?

I don't want to derail this thread, and I certainly don't pretend to have any definitive answers regarding "consciousness in Nibbana," but its worth nothing that even restricting our purview to Theravada the views of Ven. Nanananda and Professor Peter Harvey fall into the same qualitative field as his in this regard (yes there are some distinctions), and there are probably others (Ajahn Amaro, Ajahn Sumedho, etc, I'm less in a position to be specific in these cases if asked for examples, just a Gestalt). There are threads that are quite specific to this question already in existence and I guess further discussion would be best directed there. I'm happy to engage in this conversation there or in PM as I find it interesting and don't have a hard position on it either way! :hug:
We approach the Buddha’s teaching with our precast pigeonholes: either it has to be idealism, or it must be realism. If one really wants to call this an ‘ism’, they should be calling it ‘let-go-ism’. One picks up only to make use of and let go.

Ñāṇananda

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 14343
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Nibbana as a dhamma in Classical Theravāda

Postby mikenz66 » Wed Jan 04, 2017 3:47 am

Without wanting to get into the actual debate, a sort of true-self/eternalistic thing does seem quite prevalent among Thai Forest Ajahns:
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... =80#p57673
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?t=23338

Ajahn Thanissaro seems to be part of that milieu.

:anjali:
Mike

User avatar
spacenick
Posts: 99
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2016 7:31 pm

Re: Nibbana as a dhamma in Classical Theravāda

Postby spacenick » Wed Jan 04, 2017 8:21 am

Twilight wrote:PS: May I ask a tricky question to those holding Thanissaro view ? Well: To whom does this consciousness that has abandoned all objects belong to ?


This question does not apply.

The aggregate of consciousness specifically pertains to the consciousness bound to nama/rupa. An individualized, personalized, own-made consciousness. It is a consciousness that arises as a result of a previous consciousness identified with name & form (a 'being'). Thinking of an Eternal Self or the Bodhi Mind and all that is still having a consciousness bound to nama/rupa (which can be formless). This is not what Thanissaro and Gotama are saying.

And it is exactly why there's a distinction with the 'not down-bound' (anidassanam) consciousness, which is the nature of Nibbana. It is a type of consciousness that hasn't been own-made, therefore doesn't exist, therefore cannot die. If you run into an arahant one day, even though you might see him move and talk and all that; he doesn't exist.

http://obo.genaud.net/dhammatalk/dhammatalk_forum/dhamma_talk/dt_009.conditioned.vs.own-made.htm wrote:Consciousness of consciousness free from consciousness with an existing thing as it's object.
Not annihilation. What is annihilated is the own-made.
Not: No Consciousness. No consciousness as an individual.
Not: Having attained an awakened consciousness. Having created by eradicating own-making, the conditions necessary for consciousness of an awakened consciousness.
"Essential Dhamma, a collection of essays by Michael M. Olds" now available in PDF

atipattoh
Posts: 77
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2011 8:28 am

Re: Nibbana as a dhamma in Classical Theravāda

Postby atipattoh » Wed Jan 04, 2017 8:41 am

The link you provide
spacenick wrote:http://obo.genaud.net/dhammatalk/dhammatalk_forum/dhamma_talk/dt_009.conditioned.vs.own-made.htm#vinnana

mention
there does not exist any consciousness that is stable.
Consciousness that has not been own-made, that has not been fueled by lust for form, sense-experience, perception, own-making or consciousness, has not come into existence, is un-stuck, stuck only on freedom from being stuck, and is a name for Nibbana.

can help to expend your understanding on Nibbana statement above especially the bold remark?
Just curious. Thanks!

Oh btw, if i'm not mistaken, in one of BB's talk, there was one question on non-self not-self & no-self, his answer (obscurely made) seems to be of the same camp with BT.

User avatar
spacenick
Posts: 99
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2016 7:31 pm

Re: Nibbana as a dhamma in Classical Theravāda

Postby spacenick » Wed Jan 04, 2017 8:51 am

atipattoh wrote:The link you provide
spacenick wrote:http://obo.genaud.net/dhammatalk/dhammatalk_forum/dhamma_talk/dt_009.conditioned.vs.own-made.htm#vinnana

mention
there does not exist any consciousness that is stable.
Consciousness that has not been own-made, that has not been fueled by lust for form, sense-experience, perception, own-making or consciousness, has not come into existence, is un-stuck, stuck only on freedom from being stuck, and is a name for Nibbana.

can help to expend your understanding on Nibbana statement above especially the bold remark?
Just curious. Thanks!

Oh btw, if i'm not mistaken, in one of BB's talk, there was one question on non-self not-self & no-self, his answer (obscurely made) seems to be of the same camp with BT.


This is almost a Zen-like statement. This is the kind of stuff you take into contemplation. Nibbana is defined as non-greed, non-hatred, non-delusion. This is basically what he's saying; the Nibbanic mind is free from being stuck in craving, being, existing, which inevitably leads to suffering. The liberated mind then never 'moves' from this unlimited freedom because it knows (vijja) the consequences of doing so (dukkha).

If you have practiced for some time (which I assume you have since you are on this forum), then you must start to perceive the nature of release. It isn't a thing, but closer to a 'non-thing'. You know it's like when you catch yourself rambling in obsessive thinking but suddenly you snap out of it. You get released from it, you are free from it. In that very moment of snapping out, it isn't a pleasant sensation per se; but it is a complete detachment (snapping out) from dukkha. Sure, following that, the untrained mind will delight in that which is another form of attachment. But in that split second of letting go there's freedom.

We experience mini-instances of Nibbana all the time, we are just not aware of it* because we do not understand the nature of freedom (the underlying tendency to ignorance). We want eternal bliss, or pleasant sensations. It is only when we truly let go of any hope to find that in any of the 5 aggregates (the world, or the 6 senses) that there's a possibility to open up to true peace.

*And it is why the 'real thing' is to actually become conscious of this freedom, of this possibility. This is also why he uses that redundant formulation (consciousness of consciousness free from consciousness bound to nama/rupa). It has to be made conscious and then train the mind to abide more and more in freedom. In my sense, arahantship is attained when the mind never ever moves again from that freedom. "Ananda, I abide in the fullness of emptiness" (MN 121)
Last edited by spacenick on Wed Jan 04, 2017 9:05 am, edited 3 times in total.
"Essential Dhamma, a collection of essays by Michael M. Olds" now available in PDF

atipattoh
Posts: 77
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2011 8:28 am

Re: Nibbana as a dhamma in Classical Theravāda

Postby atipattoh » Wed Jan 04, 2017 8:58 am

Thanks!
Perhaps if you don't hold on to
"stuck only on freedom from being stuck", you may have freedom from "stuck only on freedom from being stuck"

:anjali:

User avatar
spacenick
Posts: 99
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2016 7:31 pm

Re: Nibbana as a dhamma in Classical Theravāda

Postby spacenick » Wed Jan 04, 2017 9:03 am

atipattoh wrote:Thanks!
Perhaps if you don't hold on to
"stuck only on freedom from being stuck", you may have freedom from "stuck only on freedom from being stuck"

:anjali:


Haha, yeah! Well I think this is when we reach the limit of intellectualization, and that the wise ones understand that it's about shutting up & sitting quietly ;'p
"Essential Dhamma, a collection of essays by Michael M. Olds" now available in PDF

atipattoh
Posts: 77
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2011 8:28 am

Re: Nibbana as a dhamma in Classical Theravāda

Postby atipattoh » Wed Jan 04, 2017 9:37 am

spacenick wrote:Haha, yeah! Well I think this is when we reach the limit of intellectualization, and that the wise ones understand that it's about shutting up & sitting quietly ;'p


:mrgreen:


Return to “Classical Theravāda”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

Google Saffron, Theravada Search Engine