SuttaCentral
“Mendicants, there are these four noble truths. What four? The noble truths of suffering, the origin of suffering, the cessation of suffering, and the practice that leads to the cessation of suffering.
And what is the noble truth of suffering? You should say: ‘The five grasping aggregates’. That is: form, feeling, perception, choices, and consciousness. This is called the noble truth of suffering.
Form, feeling, perception, choices and consciousness are suffering.
You didn’t answer the question but please note:
You asked “where’s the burden in this?” Anything experienced through five aggregates is suffering. Nibbana is extinguishment of form, feeling, perception, choices and consciousness. One might call that peaceful, but in reality, even the word peace is a conventional by-product of the five-aggregates world we live in.
Hi @Dogen
Welcome to the D&D forum! We hope you enjoy the various resources, FAQs, and previous threads. You can use the search function for topics and keywords you are interested in. Forum guidelines are here: Forum Guidelines. May some of these resources be of assistance along the path.
If you have any questions or need further clarification regarding anything, feel free to contact the moderators by including @moderators in your post or a PM.
Regards,
trusolo (on behalf of the moderators)
The jhānā are themselves conditioned, no? Equating the experience of any jhāna with the unconditioned seems a fallacy of logic.
So if perceptions cease, how does the Arahant navigate life?
But that immersion mentioned in AN 10.6 & AN 10.7 is the unconditioned (nibbāna), peaceful, sublime, the truth and full of light - I don’t see the logic in that one could gain such a state only with a physical body - but when the body dies, one all of sudden can’t (???)
And what is the element of extinguishment with something left over? It’s when a mendicant is a perfected one, with defilements ended, who has completed the spiritual journey, done what had to be done, laid down the burden, achieved their own true goal, utterly ended the fetters of rebirth, and is rightly freed through enlightenment. Their five sense faculties still remain. So long as their senses have not gone they continue to experience the agreeable and disagreeable, to feel pleasure and pain. The ending of greed, hate, and delusion in them is called the element of extinguishment with something left over. iti 44
5 senses….where is the 6th? 
Imagine a flame, fueled by a propane tank, which is connected to “the main source”. An arahant’s tank is disconnected from the source (Nibbana), but there’s still some fuel left in his tank. They still experience the world through grasping aggregates without “grasping” them as “me” or “mine”. When the tank depletes, there’s no more gas left for the fire, and with defilements overcome, there’s no more rebirth, and thus the end of all five aggregates once and for all (Parinibbana).
It’s thanks to the mendicant’s honest efforts in getting rid of defilements that the taint of perception is gone after death.
The problem in your approach is attributing a value to perception that Buddha clearly doesn’t. You think it’s bad that we can’t perceive, in fact, Buddha repeatedly mentions perception as a taint that should be destroyed for the purposes of ending suffering.
Whether you believe that Perception (of even Nibbana or otherwise) is good or not is for you to decide, but Buddha’s teaching is very clear that Perception is Suffering; and that Noble Path is to understand the taint of perception, origins of perception, and to destroy the perception.
“Perception should be known. The cause of perception should be known. The diversity in perception should be known. The result of perception should be known. The cessation of perception should be known. The path of practice for the cessation of perception should be known."
“Now when a disciple of the noble ones discerns perception in this way, the cause of perception in this way, the diversity of perception in this way, the result of perception in this way, the cessation of perception in this way, and the path of practice leading to the cessation of perception in this way, then he discerns this penetrative holy life as the cessation of perception. AN6.63
“Bad, unskillful qualities, mendicants, arise with perception, not without perception. By giving up that perception, those bad, unskillful qualities do not occur.” AN2.84
They understand: ‘There is this, there is what is worse than this, there is what is better than this, and there is an escape beyond the scope of perception.’ AN3.66
“Mendicants, there are these five grasping aggregates. What five? The grasping aggregates of form, feeling, perception, choices, and consciousness. These are the five grasping aggregates.
To give up these five grasping aggregates you should develop the four kinds of mindfulness meditation.” AN9.66
And later you said:
5 senses….where is the 6th?
In Pāli versions of the text, Iti 44 uses Pañcindriyāni here, that is, five spiritual faculties of Faith (Saddha), Energy (Viriya), Mindfulness (Sati), Stillness (Samadhi) and Wisdom (Pañña). Not the Six Sense Base Ajjhattikāni Āyatanāni.
Ajjhattikāyatanasutta SN56.14 explains six sense base as Ajjhattikāyatani.
SN48.79 explains Pañcindriyāni as five spiritual faculties.
yes, nibbana is coolness. There is an activity and that activity ceases, is coooled. This is the true Cease taught by the Buddha.
it says what it says. The problem is in the understanding of Cease. What is the Cease taught by the Buddha?
The Buddha never taught about a Cease like the vanishing, destruction or annihilation of something. Neither the destruction of the being or the -self . He taught the destruction of clinging:
“There is, brahman, a manner of speaking, rightly speaking in line with which, one could say of me, ‘Gotama the contemplative is a teacher of annihilation.’ For I do teach annihilation: I teach the annihilation of passion, aversion, delusion, and of many types of evil, unskillful actions. That, brahman, is the manner of speaking, rightly speaking in line with which, one could say of me, ‘Gotama the contemplative is a teacher of annihilation.’
When we read inside the Suttas that “there is a Cease” we shouldn’t understand the destruction of anything, except clinging.
The people who talk about a Cease and then they imagine that something will be destroyed at the Parinibbana, there are not “cessationists” but they are annihilationist. They misrepresent the Buddha teaching. This is pretty clear inside the Suttas:
“Exactly so, friends. As I understand the Dhamma taught by the Blessed One, a bhikkhu whose taints are destroyed is annihilated and perishes with the breakup of the body and does not exist after death.”
“Friend Yamaka, do not speak thus. Do not misrepresent the Blessed One. It is not good to misrepresent the Blessed One. The Blessed One would not speak thus: ‘A bhikkhu whose taints are destroyed is annihilated and perishes with the breakup of the body and does not exist after death.’”
SN. 22.85
IMHO I understand there are 3 problems of understanding in those annihilationist views:
Although the three are rooted in the first one: they don’t understand the meaning of Cease inside the Suttas.
the skeptical doubt can be shorted in the doubt about the Buddha Enlightenment. They doubt the Buddha eradicated dukkha completely - the 3 types of dukkha - as he said.
They wrongly believe the Buddha eradicated dukkha completely only after death. And the cause is the same; they don’t realize the true meaning of "Cease " in the teachings.
that’s also consequence of not realizing the true meaning the Cease inside the teaching.
The Cease according the Buddha teaching is the cease of clinging. The true Cease is no the non-existence of something but a different point to be discovered, in where these notions of “exists” and “no exists” both collapses, although without the destruction of ReAlity neither of the knowledge of that point.
Sure you knows the Bahiya and other Suttas in where the Buddha insist in this point in practical terms. That very point of the end of clinging is a different point. No thing is destroyed in nibbana in life neither in parinibanna. Because are the same nature. However, they imagine it is not the same issue because again they don’t realize the true meaning of the “Cease” inside the teachings.
That point of the cease of clinging when contemplating the Reality is not here, there, neither between of our mind-images about “it will exist” or “it will not exist”. This is expressed here in other terms:
One who is dependent has wavering. One who is independent has no wavering. There being no wavering, there is calm. There being calm, there is no yearning. There being no yearning, there is no coming or going. There being no coming or going, there is no passing away or arising. There being no passing away or arising, there is neither a here nor a there nor a between-the-two. This, just this, is the end of stress.
Ud. 8.4
instead be free of such images, one should realize the presence of that clinging to put an end. That’s the point: the very point the cease of clinging.
Inside the Suttas there is no any explanation about the parinibbana. In fact, we only find explanations in the added commentary production. Although these are not enough and then neither very reliable.
Inside the Suttas what we find is nibbana and parinibbana sometimes used in very similar terms. In example:
“The five aggregates are indeed burdens,
and the person is the bearer of the burden.
Picking up the burden is suffering in the world,
and putting the burden down is happiness.When the heavy burden is put down
without picking up another,
and having plucked out craving, root and all,
you’re hungerless, extinguished.”
the previous is a Sujato tr. That word “extinguished” is translated like “fully extinguished” by Thanissaro. And like “fully quenched” by B.Bodhi.
The three translators agree about the “extinction” character". But then, Why it shows that somebody can be “extinguished” while still alive?
in Pali, the phrase contains parinibbutā:
khīṇāsavā jutimanto te loke parinibbutā ti.
and we can read the SC related section about that word:
nibbuta
- adjective
1- ceased to burn, gone out; become cool, cooled; ceased
2- free from care or passion; serene, calm; happy; esp
3- free from passion, in whom the fires of passion (the fuel for rebirth) have gone out
4- gone out (like a lamp or fire), ceased, dead (without the possibility of rebirth)
we can read how nibbuta it is applied to “cool”, “cease” or “dead”. And obviously, the parinibbutā means “more than nibbana”; it is parinibbana.
Parinibbana is also applied to somebody while he is alive. Obviously because are the same thing. Therefore, we can start to review our beliefs about the substantial differences between nibbana and parinibbana, and live and death related to it.
Now, about what really can be the nibbana realized after death, we have 3 possibilities:
- First that view of the annhilationists, which is wrong because they don’t understand the meaning of Cease. And we can check how it contradict also the previous verses. So no excessive time to waste because they don’t understand the meaning of Cease and their ideas don’t fit with the Suttas.
- Second is the explanation of the added comments and textual stuff in the tradition. In short, it don’t explain clearly the parinibbana nature. Here also one can find quite poor explanations, in where some monks repeats an orthodox argument about the parinibbana is not an annhilationism, because the annihilationism don’t believe in rebirth. Such explanations are useless to understand nibbana after death, it doesn’t clarify the point.
However, in this second possibility we can find better explanations, in where the aggregates will be destroyed after death and then “no more nama-rupa” will arise, although it is said there is no annihilation of the nibbana nature.
Here we could think in the inherent freedom of nibbana sustained by itself. And It sounds quite well. However, if one thinks two times to stress the logics of that explanation, also some problems can arise. Because the nibbana nature of freedom is made of non-clinging: there is non-clinging to what could become and could be born although it doesn’t become and doesn’t born. And that’s the anatta nature of nibbana.
And logically a question could appear: How the nibbana freedom could be conceivable “sustained by itself”, without what could become and could be born?.
-Third, there is another possibility which it seems not so many people considers. We know the Reality is a mechanics of arising without any stop. The becoming of the atta reality and -self attachment is a constant production sustained by clinging, and in that mechanics will arise 3 different acquisition of a -self. From these 3 acquisitions of a -self, all the conceivable beings are born and exist.
Here one should remember that these acquisitions of -self doesn’t have any pause. That’s very important in the issue of death. Because there is always something growing (becoming), and death is not any stop for that
In this third possibility, the support is not in what we can find in the orthodoxy but in what is missing. Specially in the famous problem with the so-called “intermediate state” or antaraparinibbayi issue.
This state after-death was clearly mentioned by the Buddha in several places, although the tradition rejected to include it without giving the necessary solutions and explanations. This situation has been mentioned by many people, including the complaints of V.B.Bodhi,who explain this issue in the footnotes 1535->1538 inside his Anguttara Nikaya translation.
The same happens with V.Thanissaro who more clearly claims the existence of that antaraparinibbayi state in some of his writtings. V.Sujato also wrote some things in reference to the intriguing Suttas in where the beings are mentioned “sustained by clinging” until the next rebirth.
I would add also this passage:
§ 20. "There are these four nutriments for the establishing of beings who have taken birth or for the support of those in search of a place to be born. Which four? Physical food, gross or refined; contact as the second, consciousness the third, and intellectual intention the fourth. These are the four nutriments for the establishing of beings or for the support of those in search of a place to be born.
— SN. 12.64
That state after-death or antaraparinibbayi seems to be related with the episodes of many people who are dead and leave their bodies for a while, they experience different things and later they come back.
These are clearly experiences with a second-acquisition of -self or “mind-made body”, according the name in the Buddhist sources. These experiences can be different in the appearences because the different charges of subjectivity in that ambit, although are fundamentally authentic in its significance because the feeling and meaning is what rules that ambit.
In short, we can read that Sutta about how for the arhant, ‘With the break-up of the body, after the termination of life, all that is sensed, not being relished, will grow cold right here.’” And logically arise the possibility to understand the realization of nibbana after death with that second acquisition of -self . In fact, there are Suttas in where this nibbana just after death is mentioned.
According that, after death the five senses are leaved as the Suttas shows, and the clinging to -self will sustain a consciousness by means a mind-made body in a second acquisition of -self. In the case of the arhant we can understand the “it will grow cold right here” exactly as happens with nibbana in life.
For the rest of people of course the clinging and attachment to what would be experienced also would be the food and nutriment for the second acquisition of -self. And these experiences will build the wish or the search to exist again, and then the kamma for a new rebirth and a new acquisition of -self will definitely start.
Well, the issue about this third possibility to understand the parinibbana, is in the understanding of the constant production of Reality with a constant -self acquisition of whatever type. If a cease and nibbana arise at whatever point, it cannot mean the annihilation of the implied atta Reality. Exactly as happens with nibbana when we are alive.
Therefore, this would be a different frame to think in parinibbana: while the -self acquisition never stop, neither the atta grasped reality. And therefore the arising of the Cease and nibbana with whatever acquisition of -self couldn’t be a “blank ambit” but the pure freedom of anatta among what could become but it doesn’t become.
Of these two only valid possibilities of nibbana after death, at least I accept better the second one. Why?. IMHO the logics of nibbana and its no-annhilation request the non-destruction of the Wheel for the non-decay of its anatta nature, with whatever of the 3 acquisition of -self
This relation appears to be fully evident in many Suttas, in example:
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
the non-conditioned is the escape of the conditioned. And in a reverse way, if we think in an annihilation of the conditioned then there wouldn’t be escape of the conditioned. Therefore, a nibbana without decay requests that the situation of no-annihilation cannot decay.
Therefore, at least to me the best frame to understand nibbana is the Third possibility: nibbana freedom and happiness arising from whatever of the 3 acquisitions of -self, and without annihilation of nothing at whatever point of the incessant production of Reality
IMHO the explanations of parinibbana with the destruction of the aggregates are fully wrong in the case of annhilationists, while only partially wrong in that orthodox position arising from added explanation in where we cannot find enough explanations.
It is clear the Buddha used nibbana and parinibbana words in similar terms as we have read. And it cannot be in a different way because we read how the arhant realizes that ‘With the break-up of the body, after the termination of life, all that is sensed, not being relished, will grow cold right here.’”,
At least In my understanding it sounds quite difficult imagine an special ambit for nibbana “outside” the Wheel. For sure it cannot be the nihilist error of a nothingness, although neither some special and separate ambit of nibbana with difficulties to justify the non-clinging of nibbana.
There is a logical necessity of non-clinging to what could become so the nibbana freedom of non-clinging can exist.
Anyway, nobody can help really in this issue. No the tradition neither any master. Because no arhants available. Each person should search a door useful for live an after-death. I understand that door is non-clinging, the anatta of Reality without any stop in live and after death. Although maybe there is another one.
I believe you have good intuitions for this Path. I write all this hoping it can contains some inputs helping to discard any possible fear regarding annihilation. No annihilation, that’s sure.
Hope it helps 
Namo Buddhaya!
The OPs treatise is incomplete.
The buddhist annihilationist understands that phenomena are not self.
Their problem is in that they are locked into a way of thinking which asserts that the signs arising from name&form really exist and they can’t help thinking about everything in this way.
Whoever says that the signs /
arising from name-and-form do truly exist,
know that this person /
is on the road of death.Perceiving in name-and-form /
emptiness and absence of self-nature
this is called to respect the Buddhas /
for ever free from the realms of existence.” - SA 217
“‘Everything exists’ is the senior form of cosmology, brahman.”
“Then, Master Gotama, does everything not exist?”
“‘Everything does not exist’ is the second form of cosmology, brahman.”
“Then is everything a Oneness?”
“‘Everything is a Oneness’ is the third form of cosmology, brahman.”
“Then is everything a Manyness?”
"‘Everything is a Manyness’ is the fourth form of cosmology, brahman. Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathagata teaches the Dhamma via the middle: From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications.
Lokayatika Sutta: The Cosmologist
"‘Everything exists’: That is one extreme. ‘Everything doesn’t exist’: That is a second extreme. Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathagata teaches the Dhamma via the middle: From ignorance as a requisite
Kaccayanagotta Sutta: To Kaccayana Gotta (on Right View)
an untaught ordinary person who has no regard for noble ones and is unskilled and undisciplined in their Dhamma, who has no regard for true men and is unskilled and undisciplined in their Dhamma, abides with a mind obsessed and enslaved by identity view, and he does not understand as it actually is the escape from the arisen identity view; and when that identity view has become habitual and is uneradicated in him, it is a lower fetter. SuttaCentral
Therefore, by default people are locked in thinking that things either truly exist or not, and they conceive of death of a being based on this.
The annihilationist conceives of an annihilation of what truly exists.
Then if he learns that the annihilated is ‘not self’, it makes no difference to how they think about the end, still nothing after death for them.
It is analogous to eternalist’s cenception of parinibbana being unaffected by whether he thinks that which ceases is self or not, still something after death for them.
The two conceive of the end in wrong ways and delight in their own conceptions which remain unaffected by learning about anatta.
I am preparing a complete treatise on this topic.
The term indriya gets applied to many other things besides the five spiritual faculties (see the list below, from the Abhidhamma’s Vibhaṅga).
The Itivuttaka Commentary says that the five faculties referred to in Iti44 are “those commencing with the eye” (cakkh’ādīni pañcindriyāni).
This seems to be correct, since the five faculties commencing with saddhā are never described in the suttas as “that by which one experiences pleasure and pain”.
Bāvīsatindriyāni
The twenty-two faculties are:Cakkhundriyaṃ, sotindriyaṃ, ghānindriyaṃ, jivhindriyaṃ, kāyindriyaṃ, manindriyaṃ.
Faculty of eye, faculty of ear, faculty of nose, faculty of tongue, faculty of body, faculty of mind.Itthindriyaṃ, purisindriyaṃ.
Faculty of femininity, faculty of masculinity.Jīvitindriyaṃ.
Faculty of vital principle.Sukhindriyaṃ, dukkhindriyaṃ, somanassindriyaṃ, domanassindriyaṃ, upekkhindriyaṃ.
Faculty of pleasure (physical), faculty of pain (physical), faculty of mental pleasure, faculty of mental pain, faculty of indifference.Saddhindriyaṃ, vīriyindriyaṃ, satindriyaṃ, samādhindriyaṃ, paññindriyaṃ.
Faculty of confidence, faculty of energy, faculty of mindfulness, faculty of concentration, faculty of wisdom.Anaññātaññassāmītindriyaṃ, aññindriyaṃ, aññātāvindriyaṃ.
Faculty of “I am knowing the unknown”, faculty of knowing, faculty of one who has known fully.
No, Nibbana refers to the extinguishment of the fires of lobha, dosa and moha.
And sanna does not refer to the ability to perceive but to that mental aspect of the mind that is able to distinguish the specific characteristics of a sense object. For example it is able to distinguish red and blue or oak and maple wood. It can label such unique characteristic, ‘red’ , oak’ and next time when one sees a tree one recognises and remembers, this is an oak. That is sanna.
Sanna also sees signs like nicca, sukha, beauty, atta etc.
But sanna is not perceiving or the ability to perceive but it refers to a certain way the mind perceived things. Sanna nirodha does not mean the end of the mind but of that distinguishing function of the mind. Knowing is also always an aspect or quality of the mind. It can be an engaged kind of knowing, a knowing that has drifted towards something sensed. That is called vinnana. But also then the mind knows. Only this specific knowing of vinnana is always a knowing of something specific that is sensed via one the senses.
When mind or knowing does not engage that way and does not drift towards the sense domains then this is different.
But always only mind knows. When knowing connects with the senses that is vinnana.
So, nor the cessation of sanna, nor vedana, nor vinnana even implies the cessation of knowing.
It only implies the cessation of a particular kind of knowing. Engaged with senses.
For anyone interested in this issue, I fully recommend this paper from Piya Tan.
I have found this paper today and is really useful. It contains a good summary from the sources, and it shows how the nibbana and parinibbana words had the same meaning in the Suttas, both were the same thing:
Inside the sources, the real meaning of parinibbana was applied to somebody “without any clinging”. “Parinibbana” was applied to alive arhants as I wrote before. I’m happy to find this paper with many more examples from the sources, and also a good explanation about what happened with these terms.
"1.3.1.2 In the early Buddhist texts, the terms nibbāna and parinibbāna, as a rule, refer to the same
thing, that is, the full awakening of an arhat. However, there is an important grammatical difference.
Parinibbuta (literally, “who has nirvana-ed”; “who has attained niravana”) is the past participle of parinibbāna, which also means “full nirvana,” that is, the awakening of the Buddha or an arhat."
it sounds fully logical to me, because lesser ariyas also experienced nibbana althouth logically the later consequences and persistence of clinging were not the same of the arhant.
The use of “Parinibbana” exclusively associated with death started to be popularized due to its appearance in the famous episode of the physical death of the Buddha (“The Buddha’s Parinibbana”)
Nibbana and Parinibbana are the same nature and independent from our images of live and death. There are important implications for those who believe the parinibbana is a different or higher cease, like a different nibbana happening after death. Because it should force to reconsider the meaning of the “Cease” inside the Suttas.
The true Cease taught by the Buddha has higher transcendental consequences. The arising and end of the being, the live and death, the end of aggregates, the “full extinction”… all this inhabits at the very moment of the Cease of clinging, with total independence of live and death. That’s the event in where all notions of “existence” and “no existence”, live or death, all that collapses and is leaved. The Buddha was no more a human being as Himself said, and it was not a metaphor.
The discovery of the Buddha was much more radical in existential terms of what our cultural and materialist mind-programming initially can suspect. One should choose the red pill to consider the discovery of the Buddha in all its reach.
This is relevant
Ea16.2
There are these two elements of Nibbāna . What it the two? Nibbāna element with residue and Nibbāna element without residue.What is called Nibbāna element with residue? Here, a monk, [by] destroying five lower fetters, he approached final Nibbāna [in Suddhavasa realm], not returning to this world. This is called Nibbāna element with residue.
What is called Nibbāna element without residue? Here, a monk destroyed taints (asava) and attained the unstained, is liberated in the mind (cetovimutti) and liberated by wisdom (paññāvimutti). He personally realized and penetrated for himself: ‘Birth and death has been destroyed, holy life has been established, there is no more experience of becoming.’ Thus he understands as it really is. This is called Nibbāna element without residue. These are two elements of Nibbāna, which should be sought with [exerting] effort, until [achieving] Nibbāna without residue. Thus, monks, you should train
Thread about it Two Elements of Nibbāna in EA 16.2
Also this
- Rising from the first jhana, he entered the second jhana. Rising from the second jhana, he entered the third jhana. Rising from the third jhana, he entered the fourth jhana. And, rising from the fourth jhana, the Blessed One immediately passed away.
The World’s Echo
- And when the Blessed One had passed away, simultaneously with his Parinibbana there came a tremendous earthquake, dreadful and astounding, and the thunders rolled across the heavens.
Maha-parinibbana Sutta: Last Days of the Buddha
As i understand, the final extinguishment, as a final removal of delusion, is one thing, and the final extinguishment of the aggregates is another thing.
I assume that the EA is correct, in that a partial removal of delusion is nibbana with residue and a complete removal of delusion is nibbana without residue, whereas the term parinibbana i use as the khandaparinibbana, but one could say parinibbana of delusion too.
Nibbana, as a removal of taints, depends on turning the mind away from the khandas and towards the deathless element, towards a direct experience of khandanirodha, the stilling of all sankhara.
First comes khandanirodha, by attaining this some of the taints are removed. If he is steady in that, all taints are removed. He can still enter into & abide in the same principial khandanirodha attainment after the complete removal of delusion, for as long as life-force lasts, up until the khandaparinibbāna.
I think the proper usage is that parinibbāna of defilements is when arahant is alive and attained to arahanthood. Parinibbāna of the 5 aggregates is only at the death of arahant.
Regardless, it’s just semantic labeling, we should understand the meaning of what is commonly referred to. So that mere changing the labels doesn’t affect any conclusions.
For common usage, we just normally say nibbāna for when arahant is still alive and parinibbāna for the death of arahant and asking what’s left if anything after that.
My position as with orthodox Theravada and many sutta central monks is that only body, corpse is left, no mind. No 6 sense bases, contacts, nothing can be said of it left, closest language we can use is nothing left. No 7th sense, no pure mind, not even just Nibbāna itself as a positive ontological thing.
I think this shows you how even this total cessation can be rejoiced in by some people. As you, @Dhabba keeps on asking how this conception of parinibbāna can be rejoiced in. I think other than the “self” quoted there, the rejoicing is also a problem. Any delight itself is fuel for further existence.
There’s 3 types of annihilationism from what I can see from these discussions.
Annihilation means no rebirth, the materalist atheist position. Definition of annihilation valid. Buddhism rejects annihilation of this type as we have rebirth as part of the core doctrines.
Annihilation means annihilation of self. Definition of annihilation valid. Buddhism also rejects that this applies to Parinibbāna as there’s no self in the first place to be annihilated. So anything else that gets annihilated, is ok: defilements, 5 aggregates, 6 sense bases, all suffering. We just call it cessation, but if the meaning is clear, without causing confusion, annihilation can be used too, but since annihilation means annihilation of self, we just say cessation of all is not annihilation as there’s no self to be annihilated.
Annihilation means nothing after death. This definition of annihilation is not valid for people who holds the same position as me. It is for those who holds this definition of annihilation that they must reject the position of nothing after Parinibbāna and construe anything else, be it Nibbāna itself, consciousness unestablished, dhammakāya, or something more subtle.
So perhaps the key is to focus on debunking that annihilation definition no. 3 via the suttas and show that it’s not what the Buddha meant when he used this term.
To be fair, annihilation 1 implies annihilation 3 as nothing after death, and annihilation 2 is just different from annihilation 3 in the sense of the self concept. So it is very close, subtle difference which could mean the difference of true attainment of stream entry or not.
“All doesn’t exist” doesn’t apply only when we can see arising. When dependent cessation does it’s job and all conditioned things ceases without arising again, the condition of “all doesn’t exist” to not apply is gone.
According to the texts, khandārinibbana is the end of the world.
When you say only body remains and not the mind. This is certainly not an end of the world you are describing.
This word ‘body’ of which you speak, can not be pinned down as true & real, it is a convention used in as far as the aggregates are present.
So when you say ‘there remains a body’ you are essentially saying ‘there khandas are present’.
And so you have to take note of this because if in describing khandāparinibbana you say that the body remains.
You are essentially describing khandā after khandāparinibbāna, you are not describing the khandaparinibbana.
In other words, you are describing a world after the end of the world in asserting that the end of the world occured in the world wherein the body remains.
I think it pretty obvious that arahants like the Buddha didn’t had their bodies magically vanished when they die. So that’s the corpse left part. As to their own internal senses, without any 6 senses, there’s nothing that can be said.