SuttaCentral
No feeling, perception, volitional formations, and consciousness.
No experience, no knowledge, no mental objects that can be sensed by the mind because of no mind to sense it. No 6 sense consciousness, as they are all part of consciousness and thus part of mind.
Classical Theravada doesn’t say Nibbana is nothingness Bhante. They say it’s a truly existing thing. Ven. Dhammapala also adds that it’s filled with light. Saying that nibbana is cessation is explicitly denied in the Visuddhimagga. The Sarvastivadins also said said nibbana was a true existent. It’s just beyond comprehension for these traditions. It was the Sautrantika who argued that nibbana is complete nothingness, that final Nibbana is a “true death”.
But that is also under narcosis, in deep dreamless sleep, unconscious. But then we do not say that this is person without mind, or mind has ceased at that moment. So what does the cessation of mind really mean?
Well, it should be deeper than that then.
Anyway,
Really?
I asked in the classical Theravada forum,
They affirm the same view.
I asked the teachers here at Na Uyana, a known very classical Theravada monastery, they affirm the same view. Many times, in different ways. I asked about nibbāna being existent in Abhidhamma, they say it’s not a something, don’t misunderstand.
Could it be that there are different groups in classical Theravada with different views on this?
Seems the Classical Theravadins need to better read their classical texts. As I say, the Visuddhimagga denies that Nibbana is simply cessation. Its something, filled with light according to commentary.
But how? Again, what does it really mean that mind has ceased in sannavedayitanirodha? What has ceased now?
The sutta’s are really not vague about Nibbana, i feel. Nibbana is positively described as the Peak of Peace, Peace of Heart, or as sublime state of supreme peace. Extinguishment of defilements with love and wisdom, results naturally in peace of heart.
Nibbana is an open and sensitive warm living heart at ease, also meeting death, sickness, conflicts, decay, etc. This peace of heart is what the Buddha lost meeting the sick, the corpse, the old man. It was what the Buddha sought and what he found (MN26)
This peace is called everlasting in the sutta’s and Nibbana an imperishable state.
Must one reify peace, turn it into something? Ach…i think we can all admit that we have no peace of heart, or at best some conditional peace, based upon this and that, but very vulnerable. Our peace of heart, if its there, it can disappear any moment when our situation changes. Such unstable peace, like also jhana, cannot be the goal of Dhamma.
The peace of Nibbana can also not result from some forced attitude, proces of conceiving, or use of skills such as vipassana, i believe. I have seen some belief this, i do not. If an arahant still has to apply vipassana to have peace of heart, and is still liable to loose peace of heart when he/she does not, i feel that cannot be true.
Nibbana cannot be owned
To the extent there is nothing; there has always been nothing.
To the extent there is something; there has always been something;
To the extent there is nothing; there is nothing right now.
To the extent there is something; there is something right now.
To the extent there is nothing; there will always be nothing.
To the extent there is something; there will always be something.
There is no nothingness nor is there somethingness.
There is no lack of nothingness nor any lack of somethingness.
Neither nothing nor something apply to any past moment.
Neither nothing nor something apply to this present moment.
Neither nothing nor something apply to any future moment.
All past moments are full of nothingness and full of somethingness.
The present moment is full of nothingness and full of somethingness.
All future moments are full of nothingness and full of somethingness.
Babble… babble… babble… 
there is not such continuity without more things to say. The cessation of perception and feeling is described like a situation similar to a dead corpse, although with the vital signs still working:
“In the case of a monk who has died & passed away, his bodily fabrication has ceased & subsided, verbal fabrication has ceased & subsided, mental fabrication has ceased & subsided, his life force is totally ended, his heat is dissipated, and his faculties are shut down. But in the case of a monk who has attained the cessation of perception & feeling, his bodily fabrication has ceased & subsided, verbal fabrication has ceased & subsided, mental fabrication has ceased & subsided, his life force is not ended, his heat is not dissipated, and his faculties are bright & clear. This is the difference between a monk who has died & passed away and a monk who has attained the cessation of perception & feeling.”
- SN.41.6
please, continue reading that Sutta to know what happens after the decay of that state:
“When a monk is emerging from the cessation of perception & feeling, mental fabrications arise first, then bodily fabrications, then verbal fabrications.”
“When a monk has emerged from the cessation of perception & feeling, three contacts make contact: contact with emptiness, contact with the signless, & contact with the undirected.”
it says the mental, bodily and verbal fabrications will arise again. However, instead that activity can give rise to the common proliferation and clinging to -self, the detachment trend acquired in the cessation of perception & feeling makes possible a situation in where nibbana become the only logical destiny.
That is, that state is still a -self delusion ambit also impermanent and with decay. Although due to its refinement regarding the absence of clinging, it makes possible that after its decay the subsequent arising of fabrications becomes quickly realized like anatta, and then nibbana is just there.
This is another ambit of delusion of -self although in its more refined possibility. However, we check how the fabrications arise again. It means that this state is not part of some progressive annihilation of Reality until a nothingness. When the fabrications arise again, then anatta is realized and nibbana arise. Because without anatta there is no nibbana. And logically, it should exit atta (fabrications) in order to realize anatta.
If that previous acquired trend of -self detachment in that state wouldn’t exist, the arising of fabrications would cause attachment to the -self again in all the extent. Although these are quickly realized as anatta and nibbana without the annihilation of that Reality-fabrications.
Therefore, that state is not part of a progressive annihilation of Reality but this is a progressive annihilation of clinging. The fabrications arise again after the end of that state, and this arising is even necessary or nibbana wouldn’t be possible.
this contradicts the Suttas as soon we remember that there is arhanthood by wisdom, by touching with the body, and by both ways. And in the arhanthood through wisdom, the abiding in the state of cessation of perception & feeling is not present, while the goal is fulfilled anyway.
In fact, the commented obsession to avoid a luminosity in nibbana (DN.11) it shows an atta substantiation of nibbana: because it should be a nothingness instead a luminosity. While the Buddha teaching is about freedom from clinging. This cannot be covered with bizarre Scholar arguments like upanishadic influences and such things,
That obsession to avoid a luminosity it lacks of sense because it could be present or not. In the case of a contemplation of consciousness as consciousness, the viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ can be manifest like a luminosity being its nibbana aspect. While in the case of contemplation of sense consciousness, the viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ can be be manifest like the anatta of dhammas being its nibbana aspect.
In both cases the viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ will be present like the true nature of the nibbana freedom without clinging/sustenance.
There is no nibbana like a nothingness place to go in where the Reality is annihilated. If the nibbana freedom exist without a decay, this is because there is also a Wheel without decay. The Reality cannot be annihilated because nibbana is freedom of clinging, without a beginning or an end. And it means the annihilation of Reality into a nothingness is not possible. Is this not obvious?
Namo Buddhaya!
Does this not fit?
The Blessed One said: "There is the case, monks, where an uninstructed run-of-the-mill person — who has no regard for noble ones, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma; who has no regard for men of integrity, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma — perceives earth as earth. Perceiving earth as earth, he conceives [things] about earth, he conceives [things] in earth, he conceives [things] coming out of earth, he conceives earth as ‘mine,’ he delights in earth. Why is that? Because he has not comprehended it, I tell you.
"He perceives water as water… fire as fire… wind as wind[1] … beings as beings… gods as gods…Pajapati as Pajapati…Brahma as Brahma… the luminous gods as luminous gods… the gods of refulgent glory as gods of refulgent glory… the gods of abundant fruit as the gods of abundant fruit… the Conqueror as the Conqueror[2] … the dimension of the infinitude of space as the dimension of the infinitude of space… the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness as the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness… the dimension of nothingness as the dimension of nothingness… the dimension of neither-perception-nor-non-perception as the dimension of neither-perception-nor-non-perception[3] … the seen as the seen… the heard as the heard… the sensed as the sensed… the cognized as the cognized[4] … singleness as singleness… multiplicity as multiplicity[5] … the All as the All[6] …
"He perceives Unbinding as Unbinding.[7] Perceiving Unbinding as Unbinding, he conceives things about Unbinding, he conceives things in Unbinding, he conceives things coming out of Unbinding, he conceives Unbinding as ‘mine,’ he delights in Unbinding. Why is that? Because he has not comprehended it, I tell you.
The Trainee
"A monk who is a trainee — yearning for the unexcelled relief from bondage, his aspirations as yet unfulfilled — directly knows earth as earth. Directly knowing earth as earth, let him not conceive things about earth, let him not conceive things in earth, let him not conceive things coming out of earth, let him not conceive earth as ‘mine,’ let him not delight in earth. Why is that? So that he may comprehend it, I tell you.
"He directly knows water as water… fire as fire… wind as wind… beings as beings… gods as gods… Pajapati as Pajapati… Brahma as Brahma… the luminous gods as luminous gods… the gods of refulgent glory as gods of refulgent glory… the gods of abundant fruit as the gods of abundant fruit… the Conqueror as the Conqueror… the dimension of the infinitude of space as the dimension of the infinitude of space… the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness as the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness… the dimension of nothingness as the dimension of nothingness… the dimension of neither-perception-nor-non-perception as the dimension of neither-perception-nor-non-perception… the seen as the seen… the heard as the heard… the sensed as the sensed… the cognized as the cognized… singleness as singleness… multiplicity as multiplicity… the All as the All…
"He directly knows Unbinding as Unbinding. Directly knowing Unbinding as Unbinding, let him not conceive things about Unbinding, let him not conceive things in Unbinding, let him not conceive things coming out of Unbinding, let him not conceive Unbinding as ‘mine,’ let him not delight in Unbinding. Why is that? So that he may comprehend it, I tell you. Mulapariyaya Sutta: The Root Sequence
Or this?
- "So teaching, so proclaiming, O monks, I > have been baselessly, vainly, falsely and wrongly accused by some ascetics and brahmans: ‘A nihilist[38] is the ascetic Gotama; He teaches the annihilation, the destruction, the non-being of an existing individual.’[39]
"As I am not as I do not teach, so have I been baselessly, vainly, falsely and wrongly accused by some ascetics and brahmans thus: ‘A nihilist is the ascetic Gotama; He teaches the annihilation, the destruction, the non-being of an existing individual.’
"What I teach now as before, O monks, is suffering and the cessation of suffering. Alagaddupama Sutta: The Snake Simile
Or this?
- Doctrines of Nibbāna Here and Now (Diṭṭhadhammanibbānavādā): Views 58–62
“There are, bhikkhus, some recluses and brahmins who maintain a doctrine of Nibbāna here and now and who, on five grounds, proclaim Nibbāna here and now for an existent being. And owing to what, with reference to what, do these honourable recluses and brahmins proclaim their views?
“Herein, bhikkhus, a certain recluse or a brahmin asserts the following doctrine or view: ‘When this self, good sir, furnished and supplied with the five strands of sense pleasures, revels in them—at this point the self attains supreme Nibbāna here and now.’ In this way some proclaim supreme Nibbāna here and now for an existent being.
“To him another says: ‘There is, good sir, such a self as you assert. That I do not deny. But it is not at that point that the self attains supreme Nibbāna here and now. What is the reason? Because, good sir, sense pleasures are impermanent, suffering, subject to change, and through their change and transformation there arise sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and despair. But when the self, quite secluded from sense pleasures, secluded from unwholesome states, enters and abides in the first jhāna, which is accompanied by initial and sustained thought and contains the rapture and happiness born of seclusion—at this point, good sir, the self attains supreme Nibbāna here and now.’ In this way others proclaim supreme Nibbāna here and now for an existent being.
“To him another says: ‘There is, good sir, such a self as you assert. That I do not deny. But it is not at that point that the self attains supreme Nibbāna here and now. What is the reason? Because that jhāna contains initial and sustained thought; therefore it is declared to be gross. But when, with the subsiding of initial and sustained thought, the self enters and abides in the second jhāna, which is accompanied by internal confidence and unification of mind, is free from initial and sustained thought, and contains the rapture and happiness born of concentration—at this point, good sir, the self attains supreme Nibbāna here and now.’ In this way others proclaim supreme Nibbāna here and now for an existent being.
“To him another says: ‘There is, good sir, such a self as you assert. That I do not deny. But it is not at that point that the self attains supreme Nibbāna here and now. What is the reason? It is declared to be gross because of the mental exhilaration connected with rapture that exists there. But when, with the fading away of rapture, one abides in equanimity, mindful and clearly comprehending, and still experiencing happiness with the body, enters and abides in the third jhāna, so that the ariyans announce: “He abides happily, in equanimity and mindfulness”—at this point, good sir, the self attains supreme Nibbāna here and now.’ In this way some proclaim supreme Nibbāna here and now for an existent being.
“To him another says: ‘There is, good sir, such a self as you assert. That I do not deny. But it is not at that point that the self attains supreme Nibbāna here and now. What is the reason? It is declared to be gross because a mental concern, ‘Happiness,’ exists there. But when, with the abandoning of pleasure and pain, and with the disappearance of previous joy and grief, one enters and abides in the fourth jhāna, which is without pleasure and pain and contains purification of mindfulness through equanimity—at this point, good sir, the self attains supreme Nibbāna here and now.’ In this way some proclaim supreme Nibbāna here and now for an existent being.
“This, bhikkhus, the Tathāgata understands … and it is concerning these that those who would rightly praise the Tathāgata in accordance with reality would speak.
“It is on these five grounds, bhikkhus, that these recluses and brahmins who maintain a doctrine of Nibbāna here and now proclaim supreme Nibbāna here and now for an existent being. Whatever recluses or brahmins proclaim supreme Nibbāna here and now for an existent being, all of them do so on these five grounds or on a certain one of them. Outside of these there is none.
“This, bhikkhus, the Tathāgata understands … and it is concerning these that those who would rightly praise the Tathāgata in accordance with reality would speak.
“It is on these forty-four grounds, bhikkhus, that those recluses and brahmins who are speculators about the future and hold settled views about the future assert various conceptual theorems referring to the future. Whatever recluses or brahmins, bhikkhus, are speculators about the future, hold settled views about the future, and assert various conceptual theorems referring to the future, all of them do so on these forty-four grounds or on a certain one of them. Outside of these there is none.
“This, bhikkhus, the Tathāgata understands … and it is concerning these that those who would rightly praise the Tathāgata in accordance with reality would speak.
“It is on these sixty-two grounds, bhikkhus, that those recluses and brahmins who are speculators about the past, speculators about the future, and speculators about the past and the future together, who hold settled views about the past and the future, assert various conceptual theorems referring to the past and the future SuttaCentral
Or this
“He may not regard form as self … … or self as in consciousness, but he holds such a view as this: ‘That which is the self is the world; having passed away, that I shall be—permanent, stable, eternal, not subject to change.’ That eternalist view is a formation….
“He may not regard form as self … or hold such an eternalist view, but he holds such a view as this: ‘I might not be, and it might not be for me; I will not be, and it will not be for me.’ That annihilationist view is a formation….
“He may not regard form as self … or hold such an annihilationist view, but he is perplexed, doubtful, indecisive in regard to the true Dhamma. Sn22.81
There are many more texts that discuss wrong views pertaining to parinibbana, like whether tathagata exists after parinibbana or not.
However there can certainly exist verifiably wrong theories about what a back hole is and you do not need a description of “the inside” to explain that it’s not a place you can go into like a supermarket.
And it is important to understand how to think about these things and how not to think these things to conceive of it correctly.
Nibbana as it is explained is very important to not misapprehend, if one conceives of it wrongly then one would not be motivated & incentivized properly. He could never incline the mind to the unconstructed by giving it frequent attention because he would in doing so be giving attention to something else as the real thing is not in his range.
I think you are mixing up nibbāna with remainder and nibbāna without remainder, as it is common for those who argue of something left after parinibbāna to do.
When arahants is still alive, the cessation attainment is temporary. When there’s no more body, dead, there’s no condition at all for anything to arise again.
Given that cessation of perception and feeling is already a great nothing with only the possibility of arising left, can parinibbāna be a more something compared to this? Makes no sense, makes more sense to say that even the possibility of arising is gone for parinibbāna.
You also might have a bit of reification of parinibbāna as something.
Yes, for wisdom liberated arahants, there’s no need to attain for cessation samadhi, but it doesn’t invalidate the reasoning above.
Do you agree that in the arising of nibbana there is a Cease of Consciousness?
If you agree, then:
From the cessation of consciousness comes the cessation of name-&-form. From the cessation of name-&-form comes the cessation of the six sense media. From the cessation of the six sense media comes the cessation of contact. From the cessation of contact comes the cessation of feeling. From the cessation of feeling comes the cessation of craving. From the cessation of craving comes the cessation of clinging/ sustenance. From the cessation of clinging/sustenance comes the cessation of becoming. From the cessation of becoming comes the cessation of birth. From the cessation of birth, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair all cease. Such is the cessation of this entire mass of stress & suffering."
SN.12.011
from here there are only two options: that understanding of the word “Cease” is not right, or you mean the nibbana was not real for the arhant.
And in the second case it means a fundamental contradiction with the Buddha teaching
I believe you are thinking in materialist terms instead in the transcendental terms of the Buddha teaching. Read:
- “Are you a human being?”
- “No, brahman, I am not a human being.”
[…]
"Brahman, the fermentations by which — if they were not abandoned — I would be a deva: Those are abandoned by me, their root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising. The fermentations by which — if they were not abandoned — I would be a gandhabba… a yakkha… a human being: Those are abandoned by me, their root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising.
- An.4.36
the human being arise because these fermentations, moment after moment. I believe that if one continues to think in the worldly materialist deluded terms, the Buddha teaching cannot be rightly understood.
We know that we have an experience of the Reality in these terms, although precisely the purposes of the Buddha teaching is to leave these terms.
I also tend to see it that way. Ofcourse there is Paticca Samuppada in this very life. This also means that grasping an existence also happens in this very life. But i think i see that other buddhist here feel that this introduces an esoteric element that they do not like.
Do you also believe that human bhava is not something fixed at birth but the Buddha, while alive, had allready transcended human bhava or even any bhava? And this is what bhava-nirodha really means?
Now one can at will enter different bhava’s.
i also believe that while in jhana mind has in fact entered or realised another bhava. One really experiences what it is to be like to have a certain deva bhava. How do you see this?
There is not really something like a human mind. How do you see this?
I believe that this possibility of re-arising sankhara’s (when leaving sannavedayitanirodha) shows mind is not gone in that state, because mind is the forerunner of arising sankhara’s (dhp1)
Do sankhara’s arise without mind?
at least I understand this is not an esoteric thing because the explanations are really open. This is just a frame to understand the arising of existence and the Reality according Dhamma.
Commonly we accept the worldly frames despite we don’t have personal experience of many things from that frame. Just we accept things from our childhood to be in agreement with what the society repeats.
I agree about there is no “human mind”. There is mind, and in the human beings it works with shared aspects.
There are also the 4 nutriments to explain the sustenance of all beings as they are. Gross food is just one, while others types are related with mind aspects. It can have relation with the second acquisition of a -self belonging to many beings. From a human being, the mind have the possibility to work under a second-acquisition of a -self and then to interact with those beings. This is what we find inside the Suttas in the interactions with devas, gods, and so on
At least I understand in this way.
In Buddha and arhants there is no clinging to the human condition and therefore in Dhamma terms they are no more human beings neither they belongs to any other realm of existence.
When someone attains to arahanthood, there’s still consciousness arising and ceasing as normal as before.
Only permanent cessation of consciousness is when an arahant dies.
I think to use arising for nibbāna is a bit problematic for nibbāna is the unchanged, unarisen etc. I just take it as attaining of arahanthood.
If you mix up the nibbāna with remainder (arahant alive) with nibbāna without remainder (arahant passed away), then we would just be talking past each other.
are you aware about the residue are the 5 senses, and it doesn’t include Consciousness?
This was said by the Lord…
"Bhikkhus, there are these two Nibbana-elements. What are the two? The Nibbana-element with residue left and the Nibbana-element with no residue left.
"What, bhikkhus, is the Nibbana-element with residue left? Here a bhikkhu is an arahant, one whose taints are destroyed, the holy life fulfilled, who has done what had to be done, laid down the burden, attained the goal, destroyed the fetters of being, completely released through final knowledge. However, his five sense faculties remain unimpaired, by which he still experiences what is agreeable and disagreeable and feels pleasure and pain. It is the extinction of attachment, hate, and delusion in him that is called the Nibbana-element with residue left.
"Now what, bhikkhus, is the Nibbana-element with no residue left? Here a bhikkhu is an arahant… completely released through final knowledge. For him, here in this very life, all that is experienced, not being delighted in, will be extinguished. That, bhikkhus, is called the Nibbana-element with no residue left.
“These, bhikkhus, are the two Nibbana-elements.”
Itivuttaka § 44
note the whole panorame is this:
The six internal sense-media should be known. The six external sense-media should be known. The six classes of consciousness should be known. The six classes of contact should be known. The eighteen explorations for the intellect should be known. The thirty-six states to which beings are attached should be known.
MN.137
if you says the Cease of Consciousness only is possible after death, then you are locating: one internal sense-media, one external sense-media, one class of consciousness, and their related explorations for the intellect, all these in the residue.
In that way it would be impossible the contemplation of consciousness as consciousness, like the Suttas shows:
he lives contemplating consciousness in consciousness
MN.10
but then all the 4 ariya stages would be invalidated because nibbana arise in all them according the Suttas. Therefore the eradication of defilements would be impossible and then how could we explain the arhanthood at death.
Again, note in the previous Sutta the “remainder” are the 5 senses. The arhant can expereince the remainder like remainder before his death.
Why there is necessity of death to realize complete nibbana if this was already the previous situation experienced by the arhant?
Imagine you have the keys of your home and you live with anguish of losing your keys, and then you cord the keys to your pocket. However, one day you realize that these keys doesn’t belongs to you. And you want to throw them away, although you should wait to arrive to a shop to buy a pair of scissors.
Do you think the Cease of the sense of property of the keys will be not realized until arriving to the shop?
We disagree on how to interpret that sutta then. It makes no sense to posit consciousness ceased all the time and still arahants can enter Jhānas and cessation of perception and feeling where consciousness ceases.
For stream winners etc, they see nibbāna, but not yet tasted Nibbāna. This is the well simile in one of the suttas I think quoted earlier here. Arahants tastes Nibbāna, as ratana sutta shows, freely enjoying it. This I take it to mean the happiness of non-greed, hatred and delusion.
After the death of arahant, then even the possibility of physical suffering is no more.
Your analogy needs mapping to make things super clear.
Stream winner discarded self view, arahants eradicated conceit. 5 aggregates ceases at parinibbāna.
the goal according Buddha is the complete eradication of dukkha instead some further annihilation of the aggregates, disintegration of matter, or whatever image of annihilation of mind, body or Reality.
And the end of dukkha happened with the realization that the keys don’t belong to us.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Buddhism/s/oxFmxAy8JT
See the picture on how suffering ends in 2 parts. Mental suffering ends at arahanthood, physical suffering and the rest of the suffering I discussed just a few posts ago, with parinibbāna, the aggregates themselves are impermanent and thus dissatisfactory. Not just clinging aggregates. It’s aggregates themselves. Anything which changes.
I think MN28 explains that a condition for sense vinnana to arise is engagement. Without engagement one still hears sounds, smell smells, sees images, etc. but the mind does not get stuck on it. It does not catch the eye, ear, nose etc. And the sutta seem to say that this being caught by the eye, ear, nose etc. that is typical for vinnana. If visuals do not catch the eye, if sounds do not catch the ear etc there is still perception but is there vinnana? Vinnana, i think, also refers to a more or less frozen sensing, being fettered, being bonded to something particular. Being caught. Often it is much more then merely seeing, hearing etc.
I have seen this once being explained with a real life example. If you go by train you see endless things. But they come and go and the eye is not caught. But suddenly a nice house catches your eye . The mind gets engaged via greed. You find it beautiful and you want to own it. You starts daydreaming about how to get it etc. It becomes your world at that moment. Till the moment it all collapses again. To maybe arise again some time later etc.
This being caught by something, this eye catching moment, is a very different situation then before when visual just come and go. Not hooked. No vinnana?
MN28 seems to say that that being caught and getting engaged that is typical for vinnana. So that is also why vinnana is suffering because it represent a frozeness. Mind has become rigid, trapped, small-minded, obsessed, caught.
Even when we do not accept that vinnana’s only arise with engagement as condition, even then, i feel, we must with more care talk about vinnana. We cannot treat it as some bare consciousness. Vinnana is more like a mindset often, its colour dependend on how the mind engages with an sense object.
In this context, vinnana is distinguished from kamma-vinnana. Sutta’s almost always deal with kamma vinnana. For an arahant kamma vinnana do not arise anymore. That particular engagement of being hooked, eye caught, ear caught etc. does not happen.
So, it is also not really like this that for an arahant consciousness just arises as before.
