I can sort of see why the condition of there being a lack of samsaric conditions can be said to have these three marks of the unconditioned.
Once this unconditioned condition is discerned it does not arise, pass away or change.
(I think this may be what my teacher is missing. I will have to talk with him about this.)
I dont see why this means we cant also associate this unconditioned condition with other wholesome conditions which do arise, pass away, and change.
This is what I meant when I said...
MettaI think Nirvanna is best described as lacking conditions which cause suffering but I also think we can associate it with eternally ever changing conditions free of outflows.
Gabriel