the great Nibbana = annihilation, eternal, or something else thread

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
Prasadachitta
Posts: 974
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 6:52 am
Location: San Francisco (The Mission) Ca USA
Contact:

Re: Nibbana vs. annihilation?

Post by Prasadachitta »

Someone help me here. What is it in pali that we might call "awareness" ?
"Beautifully taught is the Lord's Dhamma, immediately apparent, timeless, of the nature of a personal invitation, progressive, to be attained by the wise, each for himself." Anguttara Nikaya V.332
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 3477
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Nibbana vs. annihilation?

Post by Alex123 »

gabrielbranbury wrote:Someone help me here. What is it in pali that we might call "awareness" ?

Whatever it is, it cannot be without conscious or mind or intellect

Wrong View #8
"Herein, bhikkhus, recluse or a certain brahmin is a rationalist, an investigator. He declares his view — hammered out by reason, deduced from his investigations, following his own flight of thought — thus: 'That which is called "the eye," "the ear," "the nose," "the tongue," and "the body" — that self is impermanent, unstable, non-eternal, subject to change. But that which is called "mind" (citta) or "mentality" (mano) or "consciousness" (viññāṇa) — that self is permanent, stable, eternal, not subject to change, and it will remain the same just like eternity itself.'
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .bodh.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
But what's called 'mind,' 'intellect,' or 'consciousness' by day and by night arises as one thing and ceases as another. Just as a monkey, swinging through a forest wilderness, grabs a branch. Letting go of it, it grabs another branch. Letting go of that, it grabs another one. Letting go of that, it grabs another one. In the same way, what's called 'mind,' 'intellect,' or 'consciousness' by day and by night arises as one thing and ceases as another.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Without permanent citta, mano, viññāṇa - there simply can't be permanent awareness.

And the Buddha did state on many occasions in one way or another that:
I, too, do not envision a possession, the possession of which would be constant, permanent, eternal, not subject to change, that would stay just like that for an eternity.
...
"Monks, where a self or what belongs to self are not pinned down as a truth or reality, then the view-position — 'This cosmos is the self. After death this I will be constant, permanent, eternal, not subject to change. I will stay just like that for an eternity' — Isn't it utterly & completely a fool's teaching?"
"What else could it be, lord? It's utterly & completely a fool's teaching."
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Oh, another interesting point that "where a self or what belongs to self are not pinned down as a truth or reality," so how can there be any possession (such as awareness) that survives Parinibbana?


With metta,

Alex
"Life is a struggle. Life will throw curveballs at you, it will humble you, it will attempt to break you down. And just when you think things are starting to look up, life will smack you back down with ruthless indifference..."
Individual
Posts: 1970
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 2:19 am

Re: Nibbana vs. annihilation?

Post by Individual »

gabrielbranbury wrote:Someone help me here. What is it in pali that we might call "awareness" ?
Mindfulness: Sati
Discernment: Panna
Perception: Sanna
Consciousness: Vinnana
Mind: Nama, Mano
Contact (between sensory organs and sensory info): Phassa
Insight: Vipassana

There might be other words I'm forgetting.

There is also "Bodhi," but I don't think that would be the same as what we mundanely refer to as mere "awareness".
Last edited by Individual on Wed Oct 13, 2010 4:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The best things in life aren't things.

The Diamond Sutra
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 3477
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Nibbana vs. annihilation?

Post by Alex123 »

tiltbillings wrote:
mikenz66 wrote:. . .
. . . "Bhava-nirodho nibbnam" - "Nibbana is the cessation of existence." (SN 12, 68)
All depends upon what you hang on the word bhava.
According to pali lookup program that I have:

bhava = the state of existence.

Bhava [cp. Sk. bhava, as philosophical term late, but as N. of a deity Vedic; of bhū, see bhavati] "becoming," (form of) rebirth, (state of) existence, a "life."
http://dsal.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/philol ... li.1753255" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"Life is a struggle. Life will throw curveballs at you, it will humble you, it will attempt to break you down. And just when you think things are starting to look up, life will smack you back down with ruthless indifference..."
User avatar
Prasadachitta
Posts: 974
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 6:52 am
Location: San Francisco (The Mission) Ca USA
Contact:

Re: Nibbana vs. annihilation?

Post by Prasadachitta »

Alex123 wrote: Whatever it is, it cannot be without conscious or mind or intellect
OK. :roll:
"Beautifully taught is the Lord's Dhamma, immediately apparent, timeless, of the nature of a personal invitation, progressive, to be attained by the wise, each for himself." Anguttara Nikaya V.332
User avatar
Prasadachitta
Posts: 974
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 6:52 am
Location: San Francisco (The Mission) Ca USA
Contact:

Re: Nibbana vs. annihilation?

Post by Prasadachitta »

Individual wrote:
gabrielbranbury wrote:Someone help me here. What is it in pali that we might call "awareness" ?
Mindfulness: Sati
Discernment: Panna
Perception: Sanna
Consciousness: Vinnana
Mind: Nama
Contact (between sensory organs and sensory info): Phassa
Insight: Vipassana

There might be other words I'm forgetting.

There is also "Bodhi," but I don't think that would be the same as what we mundanely refer to as mere "awareness".
Thanks Individual,

I am "aware" :jumping: of all of those. I think its helpful for us to keep in mind how nuanced aspects of what we call "awareness" can be.

Metta

Gabe
"Beautifully taught is the Lord's Dhamma, immediately apparent, timeless, of the nature of a personal invitation, progressive, to be attained by the wise, each for himself." Anguttara Nikaya V.332
Sunrise
Posts: 199
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2010 2:26 pm

Re: Nibbana vs. annihilation?

Post by Sunrise »

These three are the beings: `tayo 'me àvuso bhavà'. Being is the mind's behaviour in sensual thoughts, thinking about material and maintaining the mind in immaterial states.
Nibbana is the cessation of all these mental manifestations (bhava). It has nothing to do with ending physical existence.
User avatar
Prasadachitta
Posts: 974
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 6:52 am
Location: San Francisco (The Mission) Ca USA
Contact:

Re: Nibbana vs. annihilation?

Post by Prasadachitta »

Hi all,
It is my understanding that the principle of Paṭicca-samuppāda can be perceived in all instances of change. To perceive this principle regardless what it is that changes is the middle way. It is ignorance when a subject is added to this. In the perception of Paṭicca-samuppāda there is no addition of a subject. All ways of understanding what this means without being enlightened are provisional. The idea that Paṭicca-samuppāda can only be represented by one set of 12 or 24 conditions is common but I simply cant see how that is tenable. For me it is the principle which conveys contingency as a quality regardless of how we bifurcate a situation. To say that the Buddha continues to perceive Paṭicca-samuppāda after her body breaks up makes no sense whatsoever. But to differentiate between what she is before that break up and what she is after also makes no ultimate sense. It only makes conventional sense. Conventional sense is bound up with suffering. We should do our best not to project our suffering onto the Buddha. If we do I think its best that we project the most lofty, exalted and (dare I say) godlike suffering onto her. But of course we should not. :anjali:

With Metta


Gabe
"Beautifully taught is the Lord's Dhamma, immediately apparent, timeless, of the nature of a personal invitation, progressive, to be attained by the wise, each for himself." Anguttara Nikaya V.332
Sunrise
Posts: 199
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2010 2:26 pm

Re: Nibbana vs. annihilation?

Post by Sunrise »

Btw, the Buddha was a guy you know
User avatar
Prasadachitta
Posts: 974
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 6:52 am
Location: San Francisco (The Mission) Ca USA
Contact:

Re: Nibbana vs. annihilation?

Post by Prasadachitta »

Sunrise wrote:Btw, the Buddha was a guy you know
The Buddha is Awake.

Sidartha was a guy. :rofl:


With Metta

Gabe
"Beautifully taught is the Lord's Dhamma, immediately apparent, timeless, of the nature of a personal invitation, progressive, to be attained by the wise, each for himself." Anguttara Nikaya V.332
Sunrise
Posts: 199
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2010 2:26 pm

Re: Nibbana vs. annihilation?

Post by Sunrise »

gabrielbranbury wrote:
Sunrise wrote:Btw, the Buddha was a guy you know
The Buddha is Awake.

Sidartha was a guy. :rofl:


With Metta

Gabe
You take your time :mrgreen:
Individual
Posts: 1970
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 2:19 am

Re: Nibbana vs. annihilation?

Post by Individual »

Hanzze wrote:Seems there is a lot of monkey discrimination here, but the only thing he would need is to give up grabs another branch.

no mind, no intellect, no consciousness :rofl:

just a self reflection :D
:thumbsup:
The best things in life aren't things.

The Diamond Sutra
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23044
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Nibbana vs. annihilation?

Post by tiltbillings »

Alex123 wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:]All depends upon what you hang on the word bhava.
According to pali lookup program that I have:

bhava = the state of existence.

Bhava [cp. Sk. bhava, as philosophical term late, but as N. of a deity Vedic; of bhū, see bhavati] "becoming," (form of) rebirth, (state of) existence, a "life."
http://dsal.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/philol ... li.1753255" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Depends upon what you mean by existence. Clearly existence is not a measurement appropriate to a tathagata.
Since a tathagata, even when actually present, is incomprehensible, it is inept to say of him – of the Uttermost Person, the Supernal Person, the Attainer of the Supernal – that after death the tathagata is, or is not, or both is and is not, or neither is nor is not - SN III 118

"And when the devas, together with Indra, the Brahmas, & Pajapati, search for the monk whose mind is thus released, they cannot find that 'The consciousness of the one truly gone (tathagata) is dependent on this.' Why is that? The one truly gone is untraceable even in the here & now. – MN I 139
One cannot say exist or does not exist (both or neither) in relation to a tathagata. The "consciousness" process is no longer conditioned by - dependent on this - greed, hatred, or delusion.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23044
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Nibbana vs. annihilation?

Post by tiltbillings »

Individual wrote:
Hanzze wrote:Seems there is a lot of monkey discrimination here, but the only thing he would need is to give up grabs another branch.

no mind, no intellect, no consciousness :rofl:

just a self reflection :D
:thumbsup:
Huh? No self reflection without consciousness.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 3477
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Nibbana vs. annihilation?

Post by Alex123 »

tiltbillings wrote: Depends upon what you mean by existence. Clearly existence is not a measurement appropriate to a tathagata. One cannot say exist or does not exist (both or neither) in relation to a tathagata. The "consciousness" process is no longer conditioned by - dependent on this - greed, hatred, or delusion.
The tetralemma was used in reference to state AFTER death of an Arahant mispercieved as a self-existing Being. The tetralemma was rejected because it implied that an Arahant existed as self-existing Being.

But the 5 aggregates did exist that were called "The Buddha", and they were conditioned by certain causes such as:
Dependent on the eye & forms there arises consciousness at the eye. Dependent on the ear & sounds there arises consciousness at the ear. Dependent on the nose & aromas there arises consciousness at the nose. Dependent on the tongue & flavors there arises consciousness at the tongue. Dependent on the body & tactile sensations there arises consciousness at the body. Dependent on the intellect & ideas there arises consciousness at the intellect.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
the above and similar type of conditionality applies even to Arhats/Buddha. It is only that certain mental elements (from eradicated fetters) do not occur.
"Life is a struggle. Life will throw curveballs at you, it will humble you, it will attempt to break you down. And just when you think things are starting to look up, life will smack you back down with ruthless indifference..."
Post Reply