Nirodha, could it be a fake attainment ?

[Layt]

Rapture and happiness don't mean anything, or rather they could mean way too many different things, so they're irelevant.

Calm depends on feelings, and equanimity isn't a feeling.

You don't enter legendary esoteric mental states simply through calm.

Still no link between Infinite Space and Nothingness, you're just saying that "this comes after that" without giving any sort of logical explanation.

There is no perception when you're sleeping, so according to your precious Theravāda sleep is Nirodha. Then go sleep and stop saying non-sense.

The Mahāyana ? Really ? These guys don't have anything to do with buddhism.

[Dhammarakkhito]

friend, early buddhism posits the four main pāḷi nikāyas as being mostly authentic. unless there is some new early buddhism -- even classical theravada considers these texts to be likely spoken by the buddha (or disciples)
i was actually looking for a source outside of AN 8.51 saying the true dhamma would last uncorrupted for 500 years. ven anālayo brought the authenticity of that sutta into question in one of his papers
The true Dhamma doesn't disappear the way a boat sinks all at once.
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
for the arrival at authenticity of the early buddhist texts, see here https://ocbs.org/wp-content/uploads/201 ... ticity.pdf
and in the third link of my signature

i thought dn 16 mentioned the buddha felt comfortable in the last part of his life only when in the dimension of cessation of perception and feeling (cpf), did i have that wrong?
https://suttacentral.net/dn16/en/anandajoti
it certainly mentions cpf more than once

"Now, lady, how does the attainment of the cessation of perception & feeling come about?"

"The thought does not occur to a monk as he is attaining the cessation of perception & feeling that 'I am about to attain the cessation of perception & feeling' or that 'I am attaining the cessation of perception & feeling' or that 'I have attained the cessation of perception & feeling.' Instead, the way his mind has previously been developed leads him to that state."

"But when a monk is attaining the cessation of perception & feeling, which things cease first: bodily fabrications, verbal fabrications, or mental fabrications?"

"When a monk is attaining the cessation of perception & feeling, friend Visakha, verbal fabrications cease first, then bodily fabrications, then mental fabrications."[1]

"Now, lady, how does emergence from the cessation of perception & feeling come about?"

"The thought does not occur to a monk as he is emerging from the cessation of perception & feeling that 'I am about to emerge from the cessation of perception & feeling' or that 'I am emerging from the cessation of perception & feeling' or that 'I have emerged from the cessation of perception & feeling.' Instead, the way his mind has previously been developed leads him to that state."

"But when a monk is emerging from the cessation of perception & feeling, which things arise first: bodily fabrications, verbal fabrications, or mental fabrications?"

"When a monk is emerging from the cessation of perception & feeling, friend Visakha, mental fabrications arise first, then bodily fabrications, then verbal fabrications."

"When a monk has emerged from the cessation of perception & feeling, lady, how many contacts make contact?"

"When a monk has emerged from the cessation of perception & feeling, friend Visakha, three contacts make contact: contact with emptiness, contact with the signless, & contact with the undirected."[2]

"When a monk has emerged from the cessation of perception & feeling, lady, to what does his mind lean, to what does it tend, to what does it incline?"

"When a monk has emerged from the cessation of perception & feeling, friend Visakha, his mind leans to seclusion, tends to seclusion, inclines to seclusion."[3]
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
feeling and perception are mental preparations (saṅkhārā) and nibbāna is the stilling of all preparations; does this help?
With the complete transcending of the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception, I entered & remained in the cessation of perception & feeling. And as I saw with discernment, the mental fermentations went to their total end.
http://www.buddha-vacana.org/sutta/angu ... 9-041.html
"When a monk is attaining the cessation of perception & feeling, which things cease first: bodily fabrications, verbal fabrications, or mental fabrications?"

"When a monk is attaining the cessation of perception & feeling, verbal fabrications cease first, then bodily fabrications, then mental fabrications."[1]

"Very good, venerable sir." And, delighting in and approving of Ven. Kamabhu's answer, Citta asked him a further question: "What is the difference between a monk who has died & passed away and a monk who has attained the cessation of perception & feeling?"

"In the case of a monk who has died & passed away, his bodily fabrication has ceased & subsided, verbal fabrication has ceased & subsided, mental fabrication has ceased & subsided, his life force is totally ended, his heat is dissipated, and his faculties are shut down. But in the case of a monk who has attained the cessation of perception & feeling, his bodily fabrication has ceased & subsided, verbal fabrication has ceased & subsided, mental fabrication has ceased & subsided, his life force is not ended, his heat is not dissipated, and his faculties are bright & clear. This is the difference between a monk who has died & passed away and a monk who has attained the cessation of perception & feeling."[2]
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
this is a very deep dhamma and i dont have it much mastered, i'm just trying to help

[User1249x]

I can see no other explaination than cessation of perception and feeling being the cessation of dukkha, the cessation of dukkha realizes Nibbana, 3rd Noble Truth.

I think that it is refered to as cessation of perception & feeling because of the context in which it is discussed.

Obviously i think that Doot is wrong in his assumption that Nibbana is not the Cessation of Perception & Feeling.

[Saengnapha]

It doesn't matter whether it's one of the earliest texts since by then the practices taught by the Buddha were likely already lost or mixed up with other practices.

You have no evidence for this & this is not the way to conduct a discussion. Discussing Buddhism means to discuss what is in the suttas.

Anyway, that sutta is the one where the Buddha attains Parinibbāna right ? Isn't Nirodha only mentioned once by Anuruddha ? Like I said the arūpa jhāna are mentioned countless times but Nirodha is only mentioned a couple of times, and since the arūpa jhāna serve no purpose other than to reach Nirodha... it just doesn't make sense, the arūpa jhāna and Nirodha should both be mentioned equally.

You continue to use the word Nirodha wrongly.

Note that the idea of progressive stages arūpa jhāna makes even less sense considering the fact that these are supposed to be one-pointed concentration states on abstract subjects : how does one transcend an arūpa jhāna while his/her whole mind is focused on it ? And how do you go from Infinite Consciousness to Nothingness ? It doesn't make any sense at all.

It obviously does not make sense to you. However, the suttas makes sense. Refer to MN 111. Also AN 9.34.

And how do you go from Infinite Consciousness to Nothingness ? It doesn't make any sense at all.

In Infinite Consciousness, the mind perceives "Infinite Consciousness". But as the mind calms further, the "perception" that perceives "Consciousness" ceases and the mind perceives "There is Nothing". What appears to occur here is a refinement of perceptions (rather than the disappearance of consciousness).

We're in the EARLY BUDDHISM category, not the classical Theravāda category, I don't care about your sutta. Theravāda is to original buddhism what mahāyana is to Theravāda. Your sutta aren't relevant, they're full of incoherences and inconsistencies, sometimes they don't even make sense. And I'm here to make theories based upon these very incoherences and incosistencies.

And still there is no logical link between Infinite Consciousness and Nothingness. Just because a text says they're linked doesn't make them linked... do you even know the Kalama sutta or whatever its name is ? "Don't believe blindly".

You will never understand what any of this means in your intellectual pursuit because you are just pursuing words and not engaged in direct experience. What will you hope to gain? More knowledge? It's not knowledge that makes any of this a reality for anyone. You cannot be an armchair philosopher and hope to approach this subject.

[Ruud]

We're in the EARLY BUDDHISM category, not the classical Theravāda category, I don't care about your sutta. Theravāda is to original buddhism what mahāyana is to Theravāda. Your sutta aren't relevant, they're full of incoherences and inconsistencies, sometimes they don't even make sense.

I am seriously curious on what you base your idea of Early Buddhism if you dismiss the suttas, the Theravada tradition and the Mahayana tradition. There is not much left to build an idea of early (or any other flavor of) Buddhism on, after you take those away. Especially the suttas.

And I’m here to make theories based upon these incoherences and incosistencies

Maybe look into the idea of papañca (mental proliferation)?

[retrofuturist]

Greetings Layt,

We're in the EARLY BUDDHISM category, not the classical Theravāda category, I don't care about your sutta.

Suttas are very relevant to the Early Buddhism section - arguably moreso than anything else. Please desist with your off-topic complaints.

Metta,
Paul.

[DooDoot]

1. Rapture and happiness don't mean anything, or rather they could mean way too many different things, so they're irelevant.

2. Calm depends on feelings, and equanimity isn't a feeling.

3. You don't enter legendary esoteric mental states simply through calm.

4. Still no link between Infinite Space and Nothingness, you're just saying that "this comes after that" without giving any sort of logical explanation.

5. There is no perception when you're sleeping, so according to your precious Theravāda sleep is Nirodha. Then go sleep and stop saying non-sense.

The Mahāyana ? Really ? These guys don't have anything to do with buddhism.

It seems like everything you post is wrong.

1. Rapture and happiness are the marks of the 1st and 2nd jhana. AN 4.123

2. The equanimity-faculty is to be seen as a feeling of neither pleasure nor pain. SN 48.38

3. The mind (citta) enters legendary esoteric mental states rather than a "you" or "self". (MN 1)

4. *Space is perceived as "spaciousness" & boundless consciousness is perceived as "boundless consciousness" until the faculty of perception itself starts to calm & its last perception is "There is nothing"; before it fades & collapses in the 8th jhana and ends in the unconsciousness of the 9th jhana. (MN 111)

5. Dukkha nirodha is awakening & not sleep (SN 56.11) but sanna-vedana-nirodha is like sleep (MN 43).

6. The Laytayana? Really ? Does this guys don't have anything to do with buddhism?

Vision arose, insight arose, discernment arose, knowledge arose, illumination arose within me with regard to things never heard before: 'This is the noble truth of the cessation (nirodha) of stress'... 'This noble truth of the cessation (nirodha) of stress is to be directly experienced'... 'This noble truth of the cessation (nirodha) of stress has been directly experienced.'

SN 56.11

Dukkha Nirodha is defined as follows:

And this, monks, is the noble truth of the cessation (nirodha) of stress: the remainderless fading & cessation, renunciation, relinquishment, release, & letting go of that very craving.

SN 56.11

Sanna-Vedana-Nirodha is described as follows:

In the case of a monk who has attained the cessation (nirodha) of perception & feeling, his bodily fabrications [breathings] have ceased & subsided, his verbal fabrications [thinking] ... his mental fabrications [perceptions & feelings] have ceased & subsided, his vitality is not exhausted, his heat has not subsided & his [five sense organ] faculties are exceptionally clear [pure].

MN 43

A person does not need to be a rocket-scientist to discern the difference.

[Layt]

We're in the EARLY BUDDHISM category, not the classical Theravāda category, I don't care about your sutta. Theravāda is to original buddhism what mahāyana is to Theravāda. Your sutta aren't relevant, they're full of incoherences and inconsistencies, sometimes they don't even make sense.

I am seriously curious on what you base your idea of Early Buddhism if you dismiss the suttas, the Theravada tradition and the Mahayana tradition. There is not much left to build an idea of early (or any other flavor of) Buddhism on, after you take those away. Especially the suttas.

And I’m here to make theories based upon these incoherences and incosistencies

Maybe look into the idea of papañca (mental proliferation)?

The thread is dedicated to original buddhism, not to the Theravāda or to any other early school.

Although the sutta might contain elements of original buddhism, they do not represent the original Dhamma, Theravāda isn't the Dhamma, it just pretends to be so, like the Mahāyana etc.

This is why I question whether or not Nirodha was part of the Dhamma, the inconsistencies (it's not mentioned as often as the formless) and the incoherences (some sutta say Nirodha is the end of the kammic imprints... they include breath, thoughts conception, recognition and feelings into "kammic imprints"... not only this doesn't make sense but it goes against the 5 khandha concept which defines kammic imprints, feelings and recognition as separate khandha) tends to prove that Nirodha was added to the doctrine as some kind of replacement for the brahmanical cessation-like attainment, which actually might very well be the "neither perception nor non-perception" attainment (the Buddha learnt it from another ascetic, probably of brahmanical background).

The bhikkhu who lived between the Buddha's death and the Theravāda tried desperately to compete with other sects like jainism, so they came up with concepts that would draw the maximum amount of people to them. This include the idea of "the 4 nobles ones" designed to make lay people think they can achieve something by supporting them, and this also very likely include Nirodha : a fake attainment designed to attract people who believed that Liberation could only be reached through the ending of every physical and mental process minus a bit of awareness (otherwise it would just be sleep).

The concepts of anattā and kamma also likely didn't originate from the Buddha himself. Anattā was designed to be like the Liberation-by-insight the other sects had come up with, "kamma" was to draw people of brahmanical beliefs of course. Notice that the 4 noble truths don't mention kamma as a factor of rebirth, they just mention craving. Those 4 noble truths probably come from the Buddha himself, not the 4 nobles truths themselves but the concept that craving creates suffering. What we call the 12 links weren't originally 12, and they unlikely involved the cessation of consciousness. I guess the 4 noble truths and the 12 links were originally the same thing.

Most of these theories don't come from me, they come from buddhologists, people who know the Theravāda and early buddhism better than all of us.

Anyway I believe that original buddhism was about purifying the mind from its unskillfull qualities (mostly craving, conceit and ill-will). I don't think that meditation had the same role and meaning as in the Theravāda, which places them as some kind legendary esoteric states (that no one ever reached). The overall doctrine wasn't complex, but some aspects of it might have been hard to understand for common people... unlike the Theravāda which possesses a complex doctrine, yet there isn't really anything hard to understand.

[dylanj]

Anyway it's just a theory, what do you think ?

I am not sure of final Nibbana.
But I am sure of pre Nibbanic experience. (Sotapanna etc)

you cannot attain nibbāna if you don't believe in it

please correct this wrong view

[DooDoot]

Most of these theories don't come from me, they come from buddhologists, people who know the Theravāda and early buddhism better than all of us.

Sounds like blind faith to me; like believing in Catholic priests.

[Layt]

Oh I forgot the most important... the 4th jhāna (which is never described despite being literally the most important thing in the Theravāda) was probably invented by elder bhikkhu in order to keep the younger ones under their control. They made nibbāna an abhiññā, thus putting it on the same level as supernatural powers that don't exist (levitation, divine eye etc)... so by the time the 4th jhāna was invented, the way to realize nibbāna had likely already been lost.

If nibbāna can not be realized through liberating-insight (which is bullshit), if it can't be realized through the 4th jhāna (which doesn't exist) and if it can't be realized through Nirodha (aka neither perception nor non-perception) then either nibbāna doesn't exist or none of the Theravāda practices lead to it.

[Ruud]

...

My point is that if you throw out the suttas, or at least cherrypick them as radically as you propose (even throwing out the understanding of the 4 Noble Truths, Dependent Origination, Nibbana and the levels of enlightenment), that you don’t end up with any form of Buddhism, not even early Buddhism. You just end up with Dhamma-inspired Layt-ism. From that point on discussing Nirodha or any other subject in relation to Buddhism becomes useless because there is no basis for the theories outside of your specific way of thinking.

Related to that, you paraphrase the Kalama-sutta as “Don’t believe blindly”, but while it indeed says “Don’t go by hearsay” and “Don’t go by a collection of scriptures” and “Don’t go by lineage of teaching”, it also says “Don’t go by logical reasoning” and “Don’t go by inferential reasoning” and “Don’t go by the acceptance of a view after pondering it”. It is the experience of what is unwholesome, blameworthy etc. that gets highlighted by the Buddha here.

[Layt]

Like I said, the ones who were the first to threw out of the window the 4 noble truths etc are the buddhologists, and they know your religion better than you do.

Theravaada isn't buddhism, it's just a religion invented by people who heard about the Buddha but never met him, hundred of years had gone since his death and by then his doctrine had already been deformed and mixed up with other doctrines.

[Sam Vara]

Like I said, the ones who were the first to threw out of the window the 4 noble truths etc are the buddhologists, and they know your religion better than you do.

Who are these "Buddhologists"? What is the status of their alleged views regarding the 4 Noble Truths? Do you mean that they have proven that the historical Buddha never formulated them, or that he did formulate them but was wrong about them?

[Layt]

Like I said, the ones who were the first to threw out of the window the 4 noble truths etc are the buddhologists, and they know your religion better than you do.

Who are these "Buddhologists"? What is the status of their alleged views regarding the 4 Noble Truths? Do you mean that they have proven that the historical Buddha never formulated them, or that he did formulate them but was wrong about them?

Do you seriously not know who Gombrich or Vetter are ? They, like other indologists, are specialized in buddhist studies, they know Paali and Sanskrit, they studied the Tipitaka and found many inconsistencies and incoherences, in both the doctrine of the Theravaada and in the way the sutta were made... though that's not all, they try to understand the thought process of the Buddha by analyzing the other schools of thought that existed during his lifetime.

Well of course it's hard to prove anything since the Paali canon is all we have, but some of their theories have more than 90% chance to be true, like the 12 nidana for exemple, the first four nidana are taken directly from the Vedic cosmogony, their meaning entirely depends on it, the whole thing is a parody... either invented by the Buddha himself or later, anyway the nidana weren't originally 12, some were added later by bhikkhu who didn't understand their satirical aspect.