Thank you. Which realm was Gotama reborn in during his final birth? Sensual realm, material realm or immaterial realm?
In a number of suttas the five senses are cited, such as in DN14, DN21, and DN23.
Iti44 is pointing to the lack of attachment and identification with the five senses even as they remain conduits of pleasure and pain.
Again, I don’t see how the Five Indriyas of faith and effort, etc. apply as “something left over” that experience the agreeable and disagreeable, which seems to easily apply to the senses.
Anyway, that’s my understanding.
I didn’t say that nor do I think it. The comment you are replying to just pointed out that the account you present and those who are arguing against it are very similar in structure. 
Hello Venerable, thank you for your contributions to this forum. Your posts help a lot with understanding the suttas.
I agree that these reflections refer to the cessation of existence that comes through the ending of craving. Some passages that mention reflections of the type :
the cessation of existence is extinguishment
this is peaceful, this is sublime i.e stilling of all conditions …
also mention a state of immersion that comes along with such reflections, yet seems to be different from the form and formless immersions. This leaves perhaps a hole for readers to fill in with a variety of interpretations corresponding to what they take the goal to be.
For example in AN 10.7 and AN 10.6, this immersion is related to perceiving the above reflections
Could it be, reverend Sāriputta, that a mendicant might gain a state of immersion like this? They wouldn’t perceive earth in earth, water in water, fire in fire, or air in air. And they wouldn’t perceive the dimension of infinite space in the dimension of infinite space…
In AN 11.7 as well, this is said by both the Buddha and Sāriputta.
In AN 11.8, it is said that one gains a state of absorption by focussing on the reflection
“Could it be, sir, that a mendicant might gain a state of immersion like this. They wouldn’t focus on the eye or sights, ear or sounds, nose or smells, tongue or tastes, or body or touches. They wouldn’t focus on earth in earth, water in water, fire in fire, or air in air. And they wouldn’t focus on the dimension of infinite space in the dimension of infinite space, the dimension of infinite consciousness in the dimension of infinite consciousness, the dimension of nothingness in the dimension of nothingness, or the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception in the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception. They wouldn’t focus on this world in this world, or the other world in the other world. And they wouldn’t focus on what is seen, heard, thought, known, attained, sought, or explored by the mind. Yet they would focus?”
“It could be, Ānanda.”
“But how could this be?”
“Ānanda, it’s when a mendicant focuses thus: ‘This is peaceful; this is sublime—that is, the stilling of all activities, the letting go of all attachments, the ending of craving, fading away, cessation, extinguishment.’
AN 3.32 refers to gaining a state of immersion this time referring to the breakthrough to Arahantship as well
“Ānanda, it’s when a mendicant thinks: ‘This is peaceful; this is sublime—that is, the stilling of all activities, the letting go of all attachments, the ending of craving, fading away, cessation, extinguishment.’
That’s how, Ānanda, a mendicant might gain a state of immersion such that there’s no ego, possessiveness, or underlying tendency to conceit for this conscious body; and no ego, possessiveness, or underlying tendency to conceit for all external stimuli; and that they’d live having achieved the freedom of heart and freedom by wisdom where ego, possessiveness, and underlying tendency to conceit are no more.
This formulation of etaṁ santaṁ, etaṁ paṅītaṁ is also used to refer to states of absorption in MN 102, but in the context of the jhānas in that case
‘This is peaceful, this is sublime, that is, entering and remaining in the rapture of seclusion.’
In the Jhānasutta AN 9.36, it is said that a person attains a jhāna, and after their contemplation of this experience reaches a sufficient depth (in terms of the three characteristics for example), their mind turns away from these things that carry the three characteristics. Instead it turns towards the extinguishment :
They turn their mind away from those things, and apply it to freedom from death: ‘This is peaceful; this is sublime—that is, the stilling of all activities, the letting go of all attachments, the ending of craving, fading away, cessation, extinguishment.’
Regarding this it is then said
Abiding in that they attain the ending of defilements.
Here we encounter an abiding in these reflections on extinguishment but it is not any of the standard abidings in jhāna since it comes after reflecting on the jhānas as suffering, dart, not-self etc, but instead an abiding that gives rise to Arahantship. So this abiding (also referring to immersion?) is also associated with the breakthrough to highest stage of awakening. This is likened to an archer who first practice their craft by shooting at straw man (hindrances) and then eventually shatters large objects with it (defilements). How should we understand the nature of this immersion?
In my own reading so far, I have provisionally interpreted this immersion that comes with reflecting on the peace of extinguishment for the Noble Ones to refer to the commentarial idea of Fruition. This fruition absorption is also said to be possible only for Noble Ones. The Visuddhimagga on Pg 731 (in Ven Nyanamoli’s translation) says
(ii) Who attains it? (iii) Who do not attain it? No ordinary men attain it. Why? Because it is beyond their reach. But all Noble Ones attain it. Why? Because it is within their reach.
Moreover it is associated with peace and happiness and has to be entered, cultivated, emerged from etc like other absorption attainments
(iv) Why do they attain it? For the purpose of abiding in bliss here and now. For just as a king experiences royal bliss and a deity experiences divine bliss, so too the Noble Ones think, “We shall experience the noble supramundane bliss,” and after deciding on the duration, they attain the attainment of fruition whenever they choose.
and requires focus on the topic of extinguishment in seclusion
“Although they are resultant states, nevertheless the states of fruition attainment occur in the noble person only when he chooses since they do not arise without the preliminary work and do so only when they are given predominance”
(v) How does its attainment come about?
(v) In the first place its attainment comes about for two reasons: with not bringing to mind any object other than Nibbāna, and with bringing Nibbāna to mind, according as it is said: “Friend, there are two conditions for the attainment of the signless mind-deliverance; they are the non-bringing to mind of all signs, and the bringing to mind of the signless element”
Here, my own understanding is that the commentarial idea of Nibbāna refers to the absence of any conditions (which the Noble disciple is able to recognize due to their previous development of the path) since it is the cessation of them. Then the commentarial literature uses this strange language (from the pov of the suttas) of “consciousness taking Nibbāna as its object” maybe because it wants to distinguish this absorption from the final cessation of consciousness in the manner of the dependent origination sequence and its inverse. Perhaps, this is parallel to how the suttas are playfully using perception that is not percipient of forms, formless yet percipient since it is percipient of the cessation of forms and formless. So the commentary broadens the definition of Nibbāna to include this state of immersion produced by the Noble One’s recollection, along with the cessation of defilement and existence.
Since the occurrence of this absorption is an empirical claim by the commentary (since it says that the attainment can be entered for a fixed amount of time set by prior volition, cultivated, emerged from etc) and not just a theoretical device, I considered it a satisfactory idea to see things in this way. But it is mostly speculation on my part to provisionally harmonise the two kinds of literature until I can read more and understand it better. I am not really an expert on the commentaries or the suttas. What are your thoughts on this correspondence? Does this fruition idea of the commentary make sense here? Or maybe it fits somewhere else in the suttas better? Or perhaps, the commentary is going off towards some other tangential direction with this fruition idea?
Best 
2 Likes
The following sure sound like they are talking about the same thing and that is a completely stable experiencing of the senses without perceiving a self that clings. In other word, the end of greed, hatred, and delusion.
1 Like
Hi all,
Ānandajoti has a similar translation: “the pollutant of craving for continued existence”. Animals also want to continue to exist, although probably on a more “subconscious” level than humans. But if you want to discuss the meaning of bhava, this (click) is a better place.
As well as Thanissaro and Ireland.
I agree with Sabbamitta. And the six sense may be left out because unlike with the other senses the enlightened ones don’t feel pain through it anymore. Either way, this seems irrelevant because the discourse says the cessation of existence happens “after this life”, being opposed to the cessation of the defilements which “pertains to the present life”. And you can’t directly perceive “after this life” right now, even if you’re enlightened. That was the point I’m making.
I didn’t say that. I called it a “direct realization” and “knowledge”. ‘Cognitive’ doesn’t just mean ‘intellectual’. So unless you think the Buddha’s knowledge that “there won’t be a next existence” is an intellectual conceiving, I don’t really understand this objection.
Noble ones can have a direct encounter with a temporary cessation of suffering, but that’s not what this perception is about. The cessation of suffering includes the cessation of perception. But Sariputta was still percipient.
2 Likes
I do not think so, because this:
This has never been what i said. The unconditioned does not get reborn in any way. It is, was and will be always beyond birth and death and nay bhava etc. Also meaning, in endless lifes we have failed to see this.
1 Like
Hello,
Given the context of the Iti44 sutta and how the 5 mental factors are some of the most crucial aspects of the entire path:
A mendicant develops the faculty of faith, which relies on seclusion, fading away, and cessation, and ripens as letting go. … A mendicant develops the faculty of energy … mindfulness … immersion … wisdom, which relies on seclusion, fading away, and cessation, and ripens as letting go. … A mendicant develops the power of faith … energy … mindfulness … immersion … wisdom, which relies on seclusion, fading away, and cessation, and ripens as letting go. … A mendicant develops the awakening factor of mindfulness … investigation of principles … energy … rapture … tranquility … immersion … equanimity, which relies on seclusion, fading away, and cessation, and ripens as letting go.
These 5 mental faculties would naturally have to function freely, without any hindrances, as the sutta says.
Why the 5 senses on the other hand (which have little, to nothing, to do with the path) would function “unobstructed” or “unhindered” as in is “avighāta” makes no sense.
Avighāta often refers to a state of mental or meditative absorption where the mind is free from hindrances or disturbances.
The 5 mental faculties are essential regarding the entire path that leads to the unconditioned and fully understanding the unconditioned state.
Then again this entire sutta iti44, mentions such a vastly deep topic which very few would truly understand - So I don’t claim to fully understand all that is being said in it. 
But why does an arahant feel pleasure via the 5 senses?
Back to AN 10.7, in which plane of existence is this reflection taking place?
I believe the Buddha found the very subtle, the constant, stable, the very hard to see. This uprootes all instincts, all cravings, even the most subtle ones. For one who knows, as it were, there is no ground anymore for fear, feel lost, loniliness, feeling unsafe, unprotected. One has found home. Buddha sought home, like you know, and he found it. But not in a mere cessation. That is, i feel, cynical idea of home and a cynical idea of the end of suffering.
Where do you refer to? Do you refer to some state that only in retrospective can be said to exist but is never felt, perceived nor directly known? It that the encounter with the cessation of suffering? Is that direct knowledge of the cessation of suffering?
I think the crux of this sutta probaly lies in this formula:
"Just as, when a fire of twigs is burning, one flame arises and another flame ceases, so one perception arose and another perception ceased in me: ‘
He does not say, that a perception arises and the same perception ceases or that a flame arises and the same flame ceases, which is our regular focus.
What does he describe here?
Like his concentration was on more then one perception at the same time? And his field of perception was like seeing a fire in which one flames arises and another ceased. Like an overview at once without a special focus on one perception arising and ceasing?
Reflecting upon something does not seem the point here. But more like being in a special state that sees one perceptions arising and another ceasing.
Or maybe it refers to a situation in which the arising and ceasing of something are experienced as seperated moments or perceptions?
Thanks, I forgot to consider the commentaries.
The commentary to AN10.7 calls Sariputta’s perception of “the cessation of existence is extinguishment” a ‘reviewing’ (or ‘reflection’, paccavekkhaṇā) that is accompanied by mind/thought (citta), so seems to be in general agreement with what I was saying. This aligns with the Visuddhimagga saying “bringing Nibbāna to mind”.
‘Fruition attainment’ is largely a commentarial concept. There are similar terms in the suttas but there the reference is a bit more vague. In the suttas it seems arahantship (or stream entry/once-returning/non-returning) itself is the fruition attainment, not a specific moment or insight.
Regardless, in my view the primary fruit of enlightenment stages is exactly the knowledge that existence (hence suffering) will end, whether after this life, for enlightened ones, or after a few more lives, for stream enterers. This realization is what is being reviewed by Sāriputta.
So as I read the commentaries, keeping in mind that they use different terminology than the suttas, to me the two are in alignment.
I added a reference in the opening post.
The cessation of perception and feeling is an example. But that state itself is not direct knowledge, because knowledge is a cognitive faculty that doesn’t exist in that state, nor after the enlightened one’s death. A few suttas also indicate this directly.
I don’t think the metaphor of the fire in AN10.7 tells us anything more than that the perception Sāriputta had was different from the other perceptions he mentions. It’s easy to infer too much from vague metaphors, because by their nature metaphors can be read in many ways.
1 Like
I see this being said in the sutta:
First of all the sutta describes a state of immersion and makes clear it is no arupa jhana and there is not the perception of this world in this world nor another world. These are first of all the conditions that describe this immersion, this state. It characterises this immersion.
Then the sutta’s says:
"But at that time (in this special state of immersion, green) what did Reverend Sāriputta perceive?
He percieved at that moment: " One perception arose in me and another perception ceased: (and he knew and saw that moment , Green)‘The cessation of existence is Nibbana, the end of suffering. The cessation of existence is Nibbana, the end of suffering (green0.’"
This is all very clear.
So how can we explain that Sariputta did not perceive this world in this world at that moment, but still there were perceptions. One perception arose and another ceased.
What is this of kind of immersion? No arupja jhana, not perceiving this world in this world, also not perceiving another world?
Does it describe an immersion in which perceptions are not constructed to what we normally experience as the world? Mere a coming and going of perception?
Anyway, there is no indication that what Sariputta perceived and sees happened afterwards, reviewing his experience or something like that. It clealry describes what he perceived at that moment in that state of immersion.
Not? Still not?
The defilements are reborn, not the unconditioned in that formulation. I accept that this formulation does not represent you.
Of course. He did not have this perception in the past; he was cultivating it in the present. But it was based on his earlier insights, on the understanding what nibbāna is.
Either way, if it is an arisen perception, as you acknowledge, then it clearly can’t be nibbāna itself either. Because otherwise nibbāna would be dependently arisen.
No Sunyo, If it is not perceived, known in any way it is also nonsense to talk about this state as ultimate happiness like the sutta’s describe this state. That is Irrational.
If it is not known…one can also NOT KNOW if perception and feeling have really ceased.
The on
Why did the Buddha call this cessation of perception and feeling ultimate happiness? You believe, like @Jasudho…because nothing is felt nor perceived…but that way one can also call narcosis ultimate happiness or any black out situation when there is no sensing going on.
It is not likely. It is much more likely that the cessation of perception and feeling is also only the cessation of perception and feeling but no cessation of mind, like also Maha Boowa teaches. It is no absence but a pure awareness reveals itself. People who fall away in jhana are sleepy.
1 Like
If I understand you correctly, what you are trying to communicate here is that “cessation is bliss” can only be known conceptually as an inference. That in Venerable’s formulation, where perception and experience truly end there leaves no room for directly knowing anything at all.
The only room that is left is a conceptual inference that “cessation is bliss.” And since conceptions are diseases it can’t be an accurate account of nibbana. Is that what you are saying @Green ?
[quote=“Sunyo, post:30, topic:32557”]
Of course. He did not have this perception in the past; he was cultivating it in the present.
No, there is no clue at all that this sutta is about cultivating
I rely on Bodhi. He translates …“One perception arose and another perception ceased in me: ‘The cessation of existence is nibbāna; the cessation of existence is nibbāna.’
What is this cessation of existence?
That is fact explained in the first part of the sutta. One goes beyond all arupa jhana and there is not even a perception of this world in this world nor another world in another world.
This refers to cessation of existence in this very life.
So this sutta is about how Sariputta in this immersion went beyond the arupja jhana, beyond the world, beyond another word…in other words, he went beyond existence.
Had a direct experience of the peaceful and sublime character of this cessation, of Nibbana, of detachment.
In going beyond the world, and while perceiving that, Sariputta knew…the cessation of existence i have now reached, and i perceive…that is…indeed the Nibbana Buddha teaches, the end of suffering.
1 Like
What i say is: The Dhamma leads to direct knowledge is one of the most important fundaments of the Dhamma, i feel.
“There is a Middle Way for the abandoning of greed and hate, giving vision, giving knowledge, which leads to peace, to direct knowledge, to enlightenment, to Nibbana” (MN3, and many)
In principle, we can see/verify all for ourselves. We can directly know it ourselves.
"“Here, Ānanda, a bhikkhu is percipient thus: ‘This is peaceful, this is sublime, …(what is This, addition by me…) that is: the stilling of all activities, the relinquishing of all acquisitions, the destruction of craving, dispassion, cessation, nibbāna.’ (AN10.6)
So, i read here…dispassion is really perceived as peaceful, sublime, the same with detachment, cessation etc.
This is not some reflection or conceiving happening but it says that detachment is really peaceful and sublime. Stilling is really peaceful and sublime. Cessation is really peaceful and sublime. It is really perceived and known that way.
The same with the cessation of perception and feeling. If the text speak about it as ulitmate happiness, that can be really validated, it can be known as, indeed, ultimate happiness.
Now i a going in my foxhole again and see what comes my way 
1 Like
Namo Buddhaya!
Consider this
Suppose one hears about the meditative attainment of ‘perception of nothingness’.
Consecutively he becomes resolved on that attainment, he imagines & contemplates how it’d feel to be in such concentration of awareness as to perceive ‘There is nothing’.
Eventually at one time, when there is an opening the man attains a concentration of awareness based on the formless base of nothingness.
He is at that time not percipient of bodily senses, nor his contemplations, nor is he imagining & reflecting on that attainment, nor is he percipient thus ‘space is boundless’ nor like this ‘consciousness is boundless’, rather he is at that time percipient thus ‘There is nothing’.
If you ask him what were you percipience of at that time, he should say 'At that time i was percipient thus ‘There is nothing’.
The op text has the same linguistic structure.
Therefore the statement
At that time i was percipient thus ‘Cessation of existence is extinguishment’
Ought to be treated like one would the statement 'At that time i was percipient thus ‘There is nothing’.
It’d be a mistake to assert that the statement "At that time i was percipient thus ‘There is nothing’’ is a reference to one’s contemplations, imaginings & reflection regarding that attainment.
Rather it is a reference to a meditative attainment of concentration samadhi based on the ‘dimension of nothingness’.
Sariputta in turn ia talking about directly knowing that which is not experienced through the allness of the all as in becoming absorbed in dependence on the cessation principle, of which nobody has heard of much
When this was said, Ven. Sandha said to the Blessed One, "But in what way, lord, is the excellent thoroughbred of a man absorbed when he is absorbed dependent neither on earth, liquid, heat, wind, the sphere of the infinitude of space, the sphere of the infinitude of consciousness, the sphere of nothingness, the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception, this world, the next world, nor on whatever is seen, heard, sensed, cognized, attained, sought after, or pondered by the intellect — and yet he is absorbed, so that to this excellent thoroughbred of a man, absorbed in this way, the gods, together with Indra, the Brahmas, & Pajapati, pay homage even from afar:
‘Homage to you, O thoroughbred man.
Homage to you, O superlative man —
you of whom we don’t know even what it is
dependent on which
you’re absorbed.’"
It’s the noble attainment, transcending all feeling states, it is a seeing with wisdom which destroys taints in as far as there are any, and it remains a foremost pleasant abiding for the arahant.
Not all ariya have this attainment. Faith & Dhamma-Followers do not have this attainment but are guaranteed to attain the fruition of sotapatti (verified confidence) based on this. Everybody else has it, the one attained to view, the one freed by faith, the bodily witness, the one released by wisdom, and the one released in both ways, all have it at least once.
For some It begets the question is Sariputta still extraordinarily percipient?
The question doesn’t apply. He will never come back to tell about it. How do i know? Because there is no basis to talk about Sariputta going anywhere or coming back from as we can’t pin the word Sariputta down as something other than that a word.
In as far as sariputta is not without life force we talked about sariputta being percepient ordinarily or otherwise but after final extinguishment there is no ground because all that heap of referable name & form has passed, ceased, it was, is not and won’t be.
The terms was, is, will be, do not apply to the unmade element based on which sariputta attained samadhi such that he was percipient thus ‘cessation of existence is extinguishment’. It is still something that can come into play but the unmade is not sariputta and the unmade doesn’t change because sariputta attained such samadhi.
It is noteworthy that feeling-states are never the same, one can’t feel what another person feels, and you can’t relive exact same feeling, even if it is a meditative attainment. It is a new experience generated everytime as it is replicated.
The cessation attainments are different. It is literally the same not-generated element coming into play here & there, before & after, for one & for another, it is the exact same being percipient thus 'cessation of existence is extinguishment’in a way opposed to how there can’t be two comings into play of the exact same perception ‘red’ or ‘there is nothing’.
If today you enter & emerge from a cessation attainment and tomorrow you do it again, it’d be the exact same ualloyed, unsurmountable, pleasure attained twice and the final extinguishment will entail a coming into play of this pleasure with no sequel arising of name & form.
This is also paradoxical as is normal for what concerns cessation attainments.
2 Likes
It is practically axiomatic in Indian philosophy that “nothing comes from nothing,” and I do believe this is pretty much the case in Western philosophy as well. I have yet to see anything in Buddhist philosophy to suggest it somehow differs from this most common sense position. So there is no such thing as a “dimension” of nothingness.
Commentary on TU from Ādi Śaṅkarācārya
1 Like