Unconditioned

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
Post Reply
Dinsdale
Posts: 5866
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Unconditioned

Post by Dinsdale » Thu Jul 14, 2016 1:37 pm

Given that the unconditioned is an epithet for Nibbana, what are the practical implications of AN 3.47? No arising is seen of what, exactly?

"Bhikkhus, there are these three characteristics that define the conditioned. What three? An arising is seen, a vanishing is seen, and its alteration while it persists is seen. These are the three characteristics that define the conditioned.

Bhikkhus, there are these three characteristics that define the unconditioned. What three? No arising is seen, no vanishing is seen, and no alteration while it persists is seen. These are the three characteristics that define the unconditioned.”

https://suttacentral.net/en/an3.47
Buddha save me from new-agers!

chownah
Posts: 7416
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Unconditioned

Post by chownah » Thu Jul 14, 2016 2:01 pm

No arising is seen of what, exactly?
Nibbanana.
chownah

User avatar
katavedi
Posts: 234
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2014 11:42 pm

Re: Unconditioned

Post by katavedi » Thu Jul 14, 2016 2:13 pm

chownah wrote:Nibbanana.
Is this some sort of rare and wonderful fruit? (pun intended)
“But, Gotamī, when you know of certain things: ‘These things lead to dispassion, not to passion; to detachment, not to attachment; to diminution, not to accumulation; to having few wishes, not to having many wishes; to contentment, not to discontent; to seclusion, not to socializing; to the arousing of energy, not to indolence; to simple living, not to luxurious living’ – of such things you can be certain: ‘This is the Dhamma; this is the Discipline; this is the Master’s Teaching.’”

User avatar
katavedi
Posts: 234
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2014 11:42 pm

Re: Unconditioned

Post by katavedi » Thu Jul 14, 2016 2:45 pm

Hello Spiny,
Spiny Norman wrote:Given that the unconditioned is an epithet for Nibbana, what are the practical implications of AN 3.47? No arising is seen of what, exactly?
Good topic that you raised.

I've found it more useful to translate asankhata as "unconstructed", meaning that the mind is no longer constructing objects (and, as a result, a subject) out of experience. Thus there is no arising of "things", either "out there" (as objects that define a subject) or "in here" (as a subject that needs objects for its existence).

This is the case with the meditative experience of nibbana, the still point, in which all the constructive activities of the mind have ceased. But I think this sutta could also be referring to the everyday mind of the arahant, who is no longer constructing a subject to whom experience is happening. And with no subject, there can no longer be objects -- just as with no objects, there can be no subject. The two need each other to exist, as the sheaves of reeds simile attests (SN 12.67). It's not that the arahant can't use or recognize what we conventionally call "objects", but s/he is not "thingifying" them in a way that creates an "experiencer".

So, to me, this sutta says that when there is asankhata, there is no arising of "things", either subject or objects, presumably because one has seen that it's the constructive activities of the mind (the sankharas) that create the "things" (particularly the illusion of self).

Kind wishes,
katavedi
“But, Gotamī, when you know of certain things: ‘These things lead to dispassion, not to passion; to detachment, not to attachment; to diminution, not to accumulation; to having few wishes, not to having many wishes; to contentment, not to discontent; to seclusion, not to socializing; to the arousing of energy, not to indolence; to simple living, not to luxurious living’ – of such things you can be certain: ‘This is the Dhamma; this is the Discipline; this is the Master’s Teaching.’”

davidbrainerd
Posts: 1011
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Unconditioned

Post by davidbrainerd » Thu Jul 14, 2016 6:15 pm

If Nibbana is merely a "meditative experience" then it is something arisen and conditioned in the mind. I'm finding it impossible to avoid the conclusion that by the unconditoned Buddha means the uncreated essence that is what we truly are, which is why parinibbana is described as unbinding. If you have an object bound in cloth (a sword maybe) and you ubind it then what it truly is becomes apparent whereas before it could have been thought the cloth was part of the object. If you are unbound from the aggreates what are you? They're conditioned but are you also conditioned? How could the conditioned "go to" the unconditioned? It seems ultimately the point is you are already the unconditioned, just wrapped up in the conditioned in such a way that you've begun to identify as the wrapping rather than what's underneath the wrapping. After all the whole notion that things and reality are created by your mind is extremely presumptuous if you are thinking of a conditioned rather than an unconditioned mind creating reality. Its like saying "everything is created by my physical brain, including my physical brain itself"...does not work.

User avatar
Nicolas
Posts: 790
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2014 8:59 pm
Location: Somerville, MA, USA

Re: Unconditioned

Post by Nicolas » Thu Jul 14, 2016 6:29 pm

davidbrainerd wrote:[...]
Mūlapariyāya Sutta (MN 1) wrote: [An untaught ordinary person] perceives Nibbāna as Nibbāna. Having perceived Nibbāna as Nibbāna, he conceives himself as Nibbāna, he conceives himself in Nibbāna, he conceives himself apart from Nibbāna, he conceives Nibbāna to be ‘mine,’ he delights in Nibbāna. Why is that? Because he has not fully understood it, I say.
[...]
[A bhikkhu who is in higher training] directly knows Nibbāna as Nibbāna. Having directly known Nibbāna as Nibbāna, he should not conceive himself as Nibbāna, he should not conceive himself in Nibbāna, he should not conceive himself apart from Nibbāna, he should not conceive Nibbāna to be ‘mine,’ he should not delight in Nibbāna. Why is that? Because he must fully understand it, I say.
[...]
[A bhikkhu who is an arahant with taints destroyed], he too directly knows Nibbāna as Nibbāna. Having directly known Nibbāna as Nibbāna, he does not conceive himself as Nibbāna, he does not conceive himself in Nibbāna, he does not conceive himself apart from Nibbāna, he does not conceive Nibbāna to be ‘mine,’ he does not delight in Nibbāna. Why is that? Because he has fully understood it, I say.

User avatar
The Thinker
Posts: 805
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2015 6:12 pm
Location: UK

Re: Unconditioned

Post by The Thinker » Thu Jul 14, 2016 6:39 pm

katavedi wrote:Hello Spiny,
Spiny Norman wrote:Given that the unconditioned is an epithet for Nibbana, what are the practical implications of AN 3.47? No arising is seen of what, exactly?
Good topic that you raised.

I've found it more useful to translate asankhata as "unconstructed", meaning that the mind is no longer constructing objects (and, as a result, a subject) out of experience. Thus there is no arising of "things", either "out there" (as objects that define a subject) or "in here" (as a subject that needs objects for its existence).

This is the case with the meditative experience of nibbana, the still point, in which all the constructive activities of the mind have ceased. But I think this sutta could also be referring to the everyday mind of the arahant, who is no longer constructing a subject to whom experience is happening. And with no subject, there can no longer be objects -- just as with no objects, there can be no subject. The two need each other to exist, as the sheaves of reeds simile attests (SN 12.67). It's not that the arahant can't use or recognize what we conventionally call "objects", but s/he is not "thingifying" them in a way that creates an "experiencer".

So, to me, this sutta says that when there is asankhata, there is no arising of "things", either subject or objects, presumably because one has seen that it's the constructive activities of the mind (the sankharas) that create the "things" (particularly the illusion of self).

Kind wishes,
katavedi
But all things change, why should this meditative experience be any different?

and if so is the unconditioned a movement?
"Watch your heart, observe. Be the observer, be the knower, not the condition" Ajahn Sumedho volume5 - The Wheel Of Truth

davidbrainerd
Posts: 1011
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Unconditioned

Post by davidbrainerd » Thu Jul 14, 2016 6:47 pm

Nicolas wrote:
Mūlapariyāya Sutta (MN 1) wrote: [An untaught ordinary person] perceives Nibbāna as Nibbāna. Having perceived Nibbāna as Nibbāna, he conceives himself as Nibbāna, he conceives himself in Nibbāna, he conceives himself apart from Nibbāna, he conceives Nibbāna to be ‘mine,’ he delights in Nibbāna. Why is that? Because he has not fully understood it, I say.
He has obviously not fully understood it if he thinks he both is and is not nibbana.

If he "conceives himself as Nibbāna" and also "conceives himself apart from Nibbāna" then his mind is obviously given to extreme inconsistency.

User avatar
Nicolas
Posts: 790
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2014 8:59 pm
Location: Somerville, MA, USA

Re: Unconditioned

Post by Nicolas » Thu Jul 14, 2016 6:58 pm

davidbrainerd wrote:He has obviously not fully understood it if he thinks he both is and is not nibbana.

If he "conceives himself as Nibbāna" and also "conceives himself apart from Nibbāna" then his mind is obviously given to extreme inconsistency.
That's not the point. "I am Nibbāna", "I am in Nibbāna", "I am apart from Nibbāna", "Nibbāna is mine" are all incorrect. Sabbe dhamma anatta.

davidbrainerd
Posts: 1011
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Unconditioned

Post by davidbrainerd » Thu Jul 14, 2016 7:45 pm

Nicolas wrote:
davidbrainerd wrote:He has obviously not fully understood it if he thinks he both is and is not nibbana.

If he "conceives himself as Nibbāna" and also "conceives himself apart from Nibbāna" then his mind is obviously given to extreme inconsistency.
That's not the point. "I am Nibbāna", "I am in Nibbāna", "I am apart from Nibbāna", "Nibbāna is mine" are all incorrect. Sabbe dhamma anatta.
When I see a sutta that takes every option off the table (you cannot say you are nibbana, nor you are in nibbana, nor you are apart from nibbana meaning not nibbana and not in nibbana, so you cannot say anything at all), especially when so many other suttas are herding you to one of these positions, then I wonder if such an out of place and essentially meaningless and incoherent sutta did not arise by an abbott wanting to just shut all his monks up on the issue by asserting "Buddha said you cannot say anything at all on this subject, so fall in line in saying nothing at all."

davidbrainerd
Posts: 1011
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Unconditioned

Post by davidbrainerd » Thu Jul 14, 2016 7:49 pm

There is a similar issue with the question of if the Tagatha continues to exist after parinibbana or not. A sutta is made to take all options off the tablr and just shut everyone up, which I think ultimately damages Buddhism. If we cannot say snything about nibbana, might as well give up. So I cannot fathom how these kind of "just shut up" suttas could be authentic.

User avatar
Nicolas
Posts: 790
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2014 8:59 pm
Location: Somerville, MA, USA

Re: Unconditioned

Post by Nicolas » Thu Jul 14, 2016 7:57 pm

davidbrainerd wrote:[...]
This is still not the point. There is no "you" in Nibbana. There is no identification. Anatta.
davidbrainerd wrote:the uncreated essence that is what we truly are [...] what are you? [...] are you also conditioned? [...] you are already the unconditioned [...] you've begun to identify as the wrapping rather than what's underneath the wrapping.
There is too much "you" in there. "You" are not the unconditioned. Sabbe dhamma anatta. What's "underneath the wrapping" is not to be identified with.

davidbrainerd
Posts: 1011
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Unconditioned

Post by davidbrainerd » Thu Jul 14, 2016 8:04 pm

Nicolas wrote: Sabbe dhamma anatta.
Is Nibbana ever called a dhamma in the suttas?

User avatar
Nicolas
Posts: 790
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2014 8:59 pm
Location: Somerville, MA, USA

Re: Unconditioned

Post by Nicolas » Thu Jul 14, 2016 8:20 pm

Indirectly: Sabbe saṅkhārā aniccā. Sabbe saṅkhārā dukkhā. Sabbe dhammā anattā.

Regardless of the definition of "dhamma", based off of what I quoted from MN 1, one should not conceive of Nibbana as "mine" or "what I am".

Apologies to all for veering somewhat off-topic.

User avatar
Nicolas
Posts: 790
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2014 8:59 pm
Location: Somerville, MA, USA

Re: Unconditioned

Post by Nicolas » Thu Jul 14, 2016 8:28 pm

Itivuttaka 90 wrote: Yāvatā, bhikkhave, dhammā saṅkhatā vā asaṅkhatā vā, virāgo tesaṃ aggamakkhāyati, yadidaṃ madanimmadano pipāsavinayo ālaya­samug­ghāto vaṭṭupacchedo taṇhakkhayo virāgo nirodho nibbānaṃ.

Whatever states there are, whether conditioned or unconditioned, of these detachment is reckoned foremost, that is, the subduing of vanity, the elimination of thirst, the removal of reliance, the termination of the round (of rebirths), the destruction of craving, detachment, cessation, Nibbāna. (John D. Ireland)

To whatever extent there are phenomena conditioned or unconditioned, dispassion is declared the foremost among them, that is, the crushing of pride, the removal of thirst, the uprooting of attachment, the termination of the round, the destruction of craving, dispassion, cessation, nibbāna. (Bhikkhu Bodhi)

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: budo, lostitude and 82 guests