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

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
User avatar
DAWN
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 5:22 pm

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

Post by DAWN »

Yes.
Sabbe dhamma anatta
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english
User avatar
Polar Bear
Posts: 1348
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 7:39 am

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

Post by Polar Bear »

Maybe we should stop metaphysically speculating about what nibbana is and just follow the path. Eventually we'll get to the point where the only thing left to do is let go completely and experience the unexcelled sublime state of peace, the stilling of all fabrications, the extinction of passion, aversion, delusion and the conceit I am. Sounds pretty nice to me. Of course, I have a long way to go. I'm not even a buddhist yet, but that's just because I'm procrastinating.

:anjali:
"I don't envision a single thing that, when developed & cultivated, leads to such great benefit as the mind. The mind, when developed & cultivated, leads to great benefit."

"I don't envision a single thing that, when undeveloped & uncultivated, brings about such suffering & stress as the mind. The mind, when undeveloped & uncultivated, brings about suffering & stress."
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

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

Post by tiltbillings »

polarbuddha101 wrote:Maybe we should stop metaphysically speculating about what nibbana is
Of course, practice is central. As for speculating about nibbana, little need for that.
>> 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
DAWN
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 5:22 pm

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

Post by DAWN »

tiltbillings wrote:
polarbuddha101 wrote:Maybe we should stop metaphysically speculating about what nibbana is
Of course, practice is central. As for speculating about nibbana, little need for that.
Thats why this cosmology have no matter.

I have never try to say that i see this Dhamma better. Dhamma is simple to understand, there is no merit, just right attention and right concentration.
Can you tell me what is your daily practice? I will tell the mine.

Friendly.
We are not concurents. :toast:

:anjali:
Sabbe dhamma anatta
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english
nibbuti
Posts: 155
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 11:36 pm
Location: Germany

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

Post by nibbuti »

tiltbillings wrote:
There are, Ananda, these two elements: the conditioned element and the unconditioned element. When he knows and sees these two elements, a monk can be called skilled

Element here is dhatu. Since you are the one using it, you should be the one to be able to explain its actual mraning. Please do.

As you wish.

Nibbana is called by the Buddha here the "unconditioned element (dhatu)".

An element, whether itself conditioned or not, is a natural 'thing' which can 'con-dition' (lat. together-speak, agree with, situate or come before) other things.

'Natural thing' can be understood as a potential for experience (rather than a created thing), including both suffering and non-suffering.

However, you said:
tiltbillings wrote:with your wanting nibbana to be some sort of ground, some sort of unconditioned conditioning thing.

Which implies nibbana is not an "unconditioned conditioning thing".

Which does not agree with the above Buddha-quote and explanation.


tiltbillings wrote:Please clarify your question.

Sure:

You said "The Buddha clearly did not say that nibbana is a condition for the destruction of greed, hatred, and delusion" and "that nibbana is a preexisting thing, which the Buddha did not teach".

What you said does not quite agree with what the Buddha says here:

There is, bhikkhus, a not-born, a not-brought-to-being, a not-made, a not-conditioned. If, bhikkhus, there were no not-born, not-brought-to-being, not-made, not-conditioned, no escape would be discerned from what is born, brought-to-being, made, conditioned. But since there is a not-born, a not-brought-to-being, a not-made, a not-conditioned, therefore an escape is discerned from what is born, brought-to-being, made, conditioned. - Ud 8.3

In case it is still not clear, it says:

"If there were no [nibbana], no escape would be discerned from [dukkha]. But since there is [nibbana], therefore an escape is discerned from [dukkha]

In summary, the Buddha explains nibbana as

1. a dhatu (natural thing, element)

2. preceding (preexisting) an escape from dukkha.

However, you said:

tilt billings wrote:"The Buddha clearly did not say that nibbana is a condition for the destruction of greed, hatred, and delusion ... that nibbana is a preexisting thing, which the Buddha did not teach

That is why I asked "Are you sure the Buddha said this not?".

It would be wise to not say the Buddha didn't teach what he taught.

Can you back up your statements by sutta quotes and wise contemplation?

Was that clear enough?

:meditate:
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

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

Post by tiltbillings »

nibbuti wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:
There are, Ananda, these two elements: the conditioned element and the unconditioned element. When he knows and sees these two elements, a monk can be called skilled

Element here is dhatu. Since you are the one using it, you should be the one to be able to explain its actual meaning. Please do.

As you wish.

Nibbana is called by the Buddha here the "unconditioned element (dhatu)".

An element, whether itself conditioned or not, is a natural 'thing' which can 'con-dition' (lat. together-speak, agree with, situate) other things.
So, nibbana is a natural thing existing someplace, somehow, and it can condition other things, but itself has no condition – which means there is nothing by which we can locate it and how can something that has no attributes relative to the conditioned condition that which requires attributes for being conditioned? That is a lot like of the idea of an absolute, unchanging god interacting with the relative and changing.

One interesting thing about dhatu is that it gets stuck behind all sort of interesting words such as dukkha, viññāna, neither of which have any existence outside of the person. Dhatu is an interesting word, which may not be serviced well by the English word element.
However, you said:
tiltbillings wrote:with your wanting nibbana to be some sort of ground, some sort of unconditioned conditioning thing.
Which implies nibbana is not an "unconditioned conditioning thing".

Which does not agree with the above Buddha-quote.
I am afraid your point here is unclear.

tiltbillings wrote:Please clarify your question.
Sure:

You said "The Buddha clearly did not say that nibbana is a condition for the destruction of greed, hatred, and delusion" and "that nibbana is a preexisting thing, which the Buddha did not teach".
What you said does not agree with what the Buddha says here:
There is, bhikkhus, a not-born, a not-brought-to-being, a not-made, a not-conditioned. If, bhikkhus, there were no not-born, not-brought-to-being, not-made, not-conditioned, no escape would be discerned from what is born, brought-to-being, made, conditioned. But since there is a not-born, a not-brought-to-being, a not-made, a not-conditioned, therefore an escape is discerned from what is born, brought-to-being, made, conditioned. - Ud 8.3
In case it is still not clear, it says:

"If there were no [nibbana], no escape would be discerned from [dukkha]. But since there is [nibbana], therefore an escape is discerned from [dukkha]

In summary, the Buddha explains nibbana as

1. a dhatu (natural thing, element)

2. preceding (preexisting) an escape from dukkha.
Well, that may be one way to interpret that passage, but if it is so, then the Buddha is, in fact, advocating an existing, unchanging entity, thing, which is a definition for atta/atman. On this I'll go with Ven Nanananda: http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f= ... 25#p216936" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
However, you said:
tilt billings wrote:"The Buddha clearly did not say that nibbana is a condition for the destruction of greed, hatred, and delusion ... that nibbana is a preexisting thing, which the Buddha did not teach
That is why I asked "Are you sure the Buddha said this not?". It would be wise to not say the Buddha didn't teach what he taught.

But were you talking from direct experience or from rashly perceiving something as 'true'?

Can you back up your statements by sutta quotes?

Was that clear enough?
Was it clear enough. No. Can I back what I have said with sutta quotes? Sure. Am I talking from direct experience? Interesting question, but given that you seem to think that is important, you first.
>> 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
DAWN
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 5:22 pm

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

Post by DAWN »

I'am sorry dear tiltbillings, i'am not sure that my reply was seen, or perharps forgot. :roll:
tiltbillings wrote:
polarbuddha101 wrote:Maybe we should stop metaphysically speculating about what nibbana is
Of course, practice is central. As for speculating about nibbana, little need for that.
Thats why this cosmology have no matter.

I have never try to say that i see this Dhamma better. Dhamma is simple to understand, there is no merit, just right attention and right concentration.
Can you tell me what is your daily practice? I will tell the mine.

Friendly.
We are not concurents. :toast:

:anjali:
Sabbe dhamma anatta
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

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

Post by tiltbillings »

DAWN wrote:I'am sorry dear tiltbillings, i'am not sure that my reply was seen, or perharps forgot. :roll:
tiltbillings wrote:
polarbuddha101 wrote:Maybe we should stop metaphysically speculating about what nibbana is
Of course, practice is central. As for speculating about nibbana, little need for that.
Thats why this cosmology have no matter.

I have never try to say that i see this Dhamma better. Dhamma is simple to understand, there is no merit, just right attention and right concentration.
Can you tell me what is your daily practice? I will tell the mine.

Friendly.
We are not concurents. :toast:

:anjali:
Two things. Thank you for your kind note, but I am not going to talk about my practice "publicly."
>> 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
DAWN
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 5:22 pm

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

Post by DAWN »

tiltbillings wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:Of course, practice is central. As for speculating about nibbana, little need for that.
Two things. Thank you for your kind note, but I am not going to talk about my practice "publicly."
It would be great if it would be possible, because it's interesting to know if practice is central in your buddhist life.
I have a good intention.

It is possible by personal message?

Frendly. :anjali:
Sabbe dhamma anatta
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english
User avatar
DAWN
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 5:22 pm

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

Post by DAWN »

I would like to ask pardon to you titlbillings. Shame on me. :spy:
I have a mistake in my experiance, by confonding with satipatthana - the foundation of mindfulness.

It seems realy like foundation, stable, calm and free from body, feelings, mind, and mental events... Thats why this similies arise in my mind.

satipaṭṭhāna:
Foundation of mindfulness; frame of reference — body, feelings, mind, and mental events, viewed in and of themselves as they occur.

:embarassed: :toilet:
Sabbe dhamma anatta
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english
nibbuti
Posts: 155
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 11:36 pm
Location: Germany

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

Post by nibbuti »

tiltbillings wrote:So, nibbana is a natural thing existing someplace, somehow, and it can condition other things, but itself has no condition – which means there is nothing by which we can locate it and how can something that has no attributes relative to the conditioned condition that which requires attributes for being conditioned? That is a lot like of the idea of an absolute, unchanging god interacting with the relative and changing.
tiltbillings wrote:Well, that may be one way to interpret that passage, but if it is so, then the Buddha is, in fact, advocating an existing, unchanging entity, thing, which is a definition for atta/atman.
Hi Tilt

It is not "one way to interpret that passage".

I've just quoted the Buddha replacing Nibbana-synonyms with 'Nibbana' .

You, however, seem to be suggesting that the Buddha taught Nibbana is Atta.
But since there is a not-born, a not-brought-to-being, a not-made, a not-conditioned, therefore an escape is discerned from what is born, brought-to-being, made, conditioned. - Ud 8.3
___
tiltbillings wrote:If there where at this time no awakened individuals, where is nibbana?
tiltbillings wrote:but I wonder if for the person who becomes an arahant if there is not a transformation
tiltbillings wrote:So, after the arahant dies, where does the nibbana go?
For your consideration:
Just as in the great ocean neither a decrease nor an increase will appear though all the streams of the world flow into it and rain falls into it from the sky; even so, even if many monks attain final Nibbana in the Nibbana element that is without residue left, there is no decrease or increase in the Nibbana element that is without residue left. This is the fifth wonderful and marvellous quality in this Dhamma and Discipline…. - A 8.19
tiltbillings wrote:Am I talking from direct experience? Interesting question...
Indeed.

:anjali:
User avatar
DAWN
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 5:22 pm

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

Post by DAWN »

In DN 16 Mahaparinibbana sutta, Buddha said also this :
Anupadisesaya nibbana-dhatuya parinibbayati : 'enters the Nibbana-element without the groups (of attachement) remaining' M. Walshe
Sabbe dhamma anatta
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english
User avatar
Alobha
Posts: 565
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2011 8:27 pm
Location: Germany

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

Post by Alobha »

DAWN wrote:Nibbana is the unconditioned dhamma?
Yes. Nibbana is unconditioned.
User avatar
DAWN
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 5:22 pm

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

Post by DAWN »

Alobha wrote:
DAWN wrote:Nibbana is the unconditioned dhamma?
Yes. Nibbana is unconditioned.
:anjali:

Is somethink what is unconditioned take a place of condition to the rest? What is your opinion?
Sabbe dhamma anatta
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

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

Post by tiltbillings »

nibbuti wrote:
You, however, seem to be suggesting that the Buddha taught Nibbana is Atta.
Obviously you are not reading carefully what I have written. I am suggesting that your "understanding" of what the Buddha taught about nibbana points to an atman/atta.

And interestingly, you list a number of question I directly asked which you have refused to directly answer.

As for your quotation of Udana 80, see:
ALot wrote:
DAWN wrote: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" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
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.



For your consideration:
Just as in the great ocean neither a decrease nor an increase will appear though all the streams of the world flow into it and rain falls into it from the sky; even so, even if many monks attain final Nibbana in the Nibbana element that is without residue left, there is no decrease or increase in the Nibbana element that is without residue left. This is the fifth wonderful and marvellous quality in this Dhamma and Discipline…. - A 8.19
Since you used it, please define "element" -- dhatu. Also, keep in mind that you are the one who talks about dhatu as being a conditioning, existing "thing" separate from any individual who has attained it.

Basically, you are advocating an idea of nibbana that exists even if there are no ariya. Where is it? and how does an unconditioned, unchanging thing conditioned something that changes and is conditioned?
tiltbillings wrote:Am I talking from direct experience? Interesting question...
Indeed.
And since you brought this question up, I see that you are refusing to address it.

If you expect me to answer question, then you need to answer the questions put to you. You are ignoring most of what I am saying here.
>> 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
Post Reply