Consciousness and Nibbana

[Sunyo]

@Nikolas

Hello Bhante Sunyo. I have come across such arguments on russian-language forums: If the Buddha cannot feel, perceive directly the cessation of grasping aggregates, then this cessation is a theoretical assumption and he does not really know what is happening “out there”. And he can judge only by indirect signs, such as Dependent Origination and so on. Thus it turns out that the enlightened one does not know about the state that will come after death. How can the paradox be resolved: “awareness of the absence of consciousness”?

Hi. It’s not a theoretical assumption because it is based on insight into the nature of existence. All noble ones know that “what arises will cease”, which means they know consciousness must cease one day. For fully enlightened ones, they know that consciousness will cease after this life because there is no craving to propel consciousness anymore. That’s not theoretical, though, because that is a direct knowledge.

@Jasudho

Not always easy, as words like “then” or “no longer” or “becomes” in english are indeterminate as to timing: consciousness then becomes unestablished could point to the following moment, to the next lifetime, or to parinibbana. My understanding from what you’ve shared is that such references as unestablished, ananta, without footing, etc. all refer to after the death of an arahant.

Hi. In Pali time references can also be somewhat indeterminate. But then sometimes it is translated in a very definite way that no longer shows that in English.

The “ananta” consciousness “without footing” I think has nothing to do with nibbana, by the way.

@Jasudho

So - when nibbana is described in terms of being peace, the island, free of the defilements, safety, etc. this refers to an arahant’s consciousness of these qualities while the aggregates are still present. Correct?

Not necessarily, because the final nibbana is also all those things: peace, free of defilements, etc. Which nibbana is referred to is context dependent.

However, and this is the important thing, the nibbana of enlightenment is not yet freedom from suffering. The end of suffering only happens at final nibbana. That should be obvious, because, for example, even the Buddha still got sick and in pain. For some reason that doesn’t seem to be a popular idea, and then you get such ideas as “equating samsara with nirvana” which to me makes no sense. Also not throwing stones, as I practiced in a Zen tradition for years myself too. ]

Thanks for the great questions and may you all get much wisdom from the Buddha’s teachings.