I was looking at this Wiki article, and would be interested in your thoughts:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moksha
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moksha#Buddhism
Is Nibbana a type of Moksha, or something different?
-
- Posts: 10262
- Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
- Location: Andromeda looks nice
Is Nibbana a type of Moksha, or something different?
Buddha save me from new-agers!
Re: Is Nibbana a type of Moksha, or something different?
The term moksha means "release, emancipation, liberation", and so I guess the Pali term that comes closest would be vimutti. The difficulty with all three terms is that they are said to be ineffable and the language describing them tends to be apophatic or figurative, so there is little that we can do in order to determine whether they are synonymous.
Re: Is Nibbana a type of Moksha, or something different?
I wonder if the pali equivalent is mokkha like in "Patimokkha"
-
- Posts: 1011
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 3:12 am
Re: Is Nibbana a type of Moksha, or something different?
Just from the Dhammapada you'd have no idea of a no-soul concept in Buddhism. Sabbe sankhra anicca. Sabbe sankhara dukkha. Sabbe sankhara (or dhamma) anatta. With verse 279 being the only thing even contortable in that direction, yet it contextually clearly just means no compounded thing is the self, its clear Buddhism did not teach there is no soul till later. Buddhism is clearly an offshoot of Jainism. And clearly in Buddha's time it was not that divergent metaphysically, but only in ascetic practices.Spiny Norman wrote:I was looking at this Wiki article, and would be interested in your thoughts:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moksha
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moksha#Buddhism
- cappuccino
- Posts: 12975
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
- Contact:
Re: Is Nibbana a type of Moksha, or something different?
With Moksha there is a higher Self.
So relatively it's "more pure" than mere self.
Nirvana is selfless.
Although… not soulless.
So relatively it's "more pure" than mere self.
Nirvana is selfless.
Although… not soulless.
-
- Posts: 1011
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 3:12 am
Re: Is Nibbana a type of Moksha, or something different?
Just like your food has no vitamins yet does have vitamins....cappuccino wrote:With Moksha there is a higher Self.
So relatively it's "more pure" than mere self.
Nirvana is selfless.
Although… not soulless.
- Polar Bear
- Posts: 1348
- Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 7:39 am
Re: Is Nibbana a type of Moksha, or something different?
Vimokkha is the pali equivalent of the sanskrit term (vi)moksha:
Vimokkha
Vimokkha (& Vimokha) [fr. vi+muc, cp. mokkha1] deliverance, release, emancipation, dissociation from the things of the world, Arahantship D ii.70, 111); iii.34, 35, 230, 288; M i.196 (samaya˚ & asamaya˚); S i.159 (cetaso v.); ii.53, 123; iii.121; iv.33; A ii.87; iv.316; v.11; Vin v.164 (cittassa); Sn 1071 (which Nd2 588 expls as "agga" etc., thus strangely taking it in meaning of mokkha2, perhaps as edifying etym.); Nd2 466 (in expln of Bhagavā); Ps i.22; ii.35 (as 68!), 243; Pug 11 sq.; Vbh 342; Dhs 248; Nett 90, 100, 119, 126; Vism 13, 668 sq.; Miln 159; PvA 98; Sdhp 34, 264. <-> The three vimokkhas are: suññato v., animitto v., appaṇihito v. Ps ii.35; Vism 658. The eight vimokkhas or stages of emancipation, are: the condition of rūpī, arūpa -- saññī, recognition of subha, realization of ākāsânañc'āyatana, of viññāṇ'ânañc'āyatana, ākiñcaññ'āyatana, neva -- saññā -- n'âsaññ'āyatana, saññāvedayita -- nirodha D iii.262 (cp. Dial. iii.242), A i.40; iv.306; Vbh 342; expld in detail at Ps ii.38 -- 40. [cp. BSk. aṣṭau vimokṣāḥ, e. g. AvŚ ii.69, 153.] -- In sequence jhāna vimokkha samādhi samāpatti (magga phala) at Vin i.97, 104; iii.91; iv.25; A iii.417, 419; v.34, 38; Vbh 342. -- See also jhāna.
http://dsalsrv02.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/p ... :1824.pali
"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."
"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."
- cappuccino
- Posts: 12975
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
- Contact:
Re: Is Nibbana a type of Moksha, or something different?
find your self, if you can.davidbrainerd wrote:Just like your food has no vitamins yet does have vitamins....
Re: Is Nibbana a type of Moksha, or something different?
David:davidbrainerd wrote:Just from the Dhammapada you'd have no idea of a no-soul concept in Buddhism. Sabbe sankhra anicca. Sabbe sankhara dukkha. Sabbe sankhara (or dhamma) anatta. With verse 279 being the only thing even contortable in that direction, yet it contextually clearly just means no compounded thing is the self, its clear Buddhism did not teach there is no soul till later. Buddhism is clearly an offshoot of Jainism. And clearly in Buddha's time it was not that divergent metaphysically, but only in ascetic practices.Spiny Norman wrote:I was looking at this Wiki article, and would be interested in your thoughts:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moksha
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moksha#Buddhism
Honest question, what do you find lacking in samkhya?
"People often get too quick to say 'there's no self. There's no self...no self...no self.' There is self, there is focal point, its not yours. That's what not self is."
Ninoslav Ñāṇamoli
Senses and the Thought-1, 42:53
"Those who create constructs about the Buddha,
Who is beyond construction and without exhaustion,
Are thereby damaged by their constructs;
They fail to see the Thus-Gone.
That which is the nature of the Thus-Gone
Is also the nature of this world.
There is no nature of the Thus-Gone.
There is no nature of the world."
Nagarjuna
MMK XXII.15-16
Ninoslav Ñāṇamoli
Senses and the Thought-1, 42:53
"Those who create constructs about the Buddha,
Who is beyond construction and without exhaustion,
Are thereby damaged by their constructs;
They fail to see the Thus-Gone.
That which is the nature of the Thus-Gone
Is also the nature of this world.
There is no nature of the Thus-Gone.
There is no nature of the world."
Nagarjuna
MMK XXII.15-16
Re: Is Nibbana a type of Moksha, or something different?
Cappuccino: This is very weak argument against Self, if that's how you're intending it. The Self cannot appear in the world anymore so than the eye can appear in its field of vision.cappuccino wrote:find your self, if you can.davidbrainerd wrote:Just like your food has no vitamins yet does have vitamins....
"People often get too quick to say 'there's no self. There's no self...no self...no self.' There is self, there is focal point, its not yours. That's what not self is."
Ninoslav Ñāṇamoli
Senses and the Thought-1, 42:53
"Those who create constructs about the Buddha,
Who is beyond construction and without exhaustion,
Are thereby damaged by their constructs;
They fail to see the Thus-Gone.
That which is the nature of the Thus-Gone
Is also the nature of this world.
There is no nature of the Thus-Gone.
There is no nature of the world."
Nagarjuna
MMK XXII.15-16
Ninoslav Ñāṇamoli
Senses and the Thought-1, 42:53
"Those who create constructs about the Buddha,
Who is beyond construction and without exhaustion,
Are thereby damaged by their constructs;
They fail to see the Thus-Gone.
That which is the nature of the Thus-Gone
Is also the nature of this world.
There is no nature of the Thus-Gone.
There is no nature of the world."
Nagarjuna
MMK XXII.15-16
Re: Is Nibbana a type of Moksha, or something different?
Sure I don't see why we can't call Nibbana a form of moksha, but this is just semantic, right? I get the feeling you were you asking something more specific? Like what's the difference between Moksha and Nibbana?Spiny Norman wrote:I was looking at this Wiki article, and would be interested in your thoughts:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moksha
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moksha#Buddhism
"People often get too quick to say 'there's no self. There's no self...no self...no self.' There is self, there is focal point, its not yours. That's what not self is."
Ninoslav Ñāṇamoli
Senses and the Thought-1, 42:53
"Those who create constructs about the Buddha,
Who is beyond construction and without exhaustion,
Are thereby damaged by their constructs;
They fail to see the Thus-Gone.
That which is the nature of the Thus-Gone
Is also the nature of this world.
There is no nature of the Thus-Gone.
There is no nature of the world."
Nagarjuna
MMK XXII.15-16
Ninoslav Ñāṇamoli
Senses and the Thought-1, 42:53
"Those who create constructs about the Buddha,
Who is beyond construction and without exhaustion,
Are thereby damaged by their constructs;
They fail to see the Thus-Gone.
That which is the nature of the Thus-Gone
Is also the nature of this world.
There is no nature of the Thus-Gone.
There is no nature of the world."
Nagarjuna
MMK XXII.15-16
- cappuccino
- Posts: 12975
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
- Contact:
Re: Is Nibbana a type of Moksha, or something different?
A strong argument against self is made by Buddha, of course you actually have to accept the teaching.
I don't think david is accepting the teaching, therefore, any argument is beside the point.
I don't think david is accepting the teaching, therefore, any argument is beside the point.
Last edited by cappuccino on Fri Sep 22, 2017 1:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Is Nibbana a type of Moksha, or something different?
Of coursecappuccino wrote:A strong argument against self is made by Buddha, of course you actually have to accept the teaching.
From what I can tell he is accepting the teaching, he simply doesn't accept how most of us understand it.I don't think david is accepting the teaching, therefore, any argument is beside the point.
"People often get too quick to say 'there's no self. There's no self...no self...no self.' There is self, there is focal point, its not yours. That's what not self is."
Ninoslav Ñāṇamoli
Senses and the Thought-1, 42:53
"Those who create constructs about the Buddha,
Who is beyond construction and without exhaustion,
Are thereby damaged by their constructs;
They fail to see the Thus-Gone.
That which is the nature of the Thus-Gone
Is also the nature of this world.
There is no nature of the Thus-Gone.
There is no nature of the world."
Nagarjuna
MMK XXII.15-16
Ninoslav Ñāṇamoli
Senses and the Thought-1, 42:53
"Those who create constructs about the Buddha,
Who is beyond construction and without exhaustion,
Are thereby damaged by their constructs;
They fail to see the Thus-Gone.
That which is the nature of the Thus-Gone
Is also the nature of this world.
There is no nature of the Thus-Gone.
There is no nature of the world."
Nagarjuna
MMK XXII.15-16
- cappuccino
- Posts: 12975
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
- Contact:
Re: Is Nibbana a type of Moksha, or something different?
A strong argument against self is made by Buddha.
Re: Is Nibbana a type of Moksha, or something different?
This is great. We've got the nibbana is this or that or something else thread and I'm sure that it is possible that we could have a similar moksha is this or that or something else thread......and now in this thread we have the collision of these too....SWEET.....
chownah
chownah