Different types of "Nibbāna"

[NgXinZhao]

AN11.7:

“Here, Ānanda, a bhikkhu is percipient thus: ‘This is peaceful, this is sublime, that is, the stilling of all activities, the relinquishing of all acquisitions, the destruction of craving, dispassion, cessation, nibbāna.’ It is in this way, Ānanda, that a bhikkhu could obtain such a state of concentration that he would not be percipient of earth in relation to earth; of water in relation to water; of fire in relation to fire; of air in relation to air; of the base of the infinity of space in relation to the base of the infinity of space; of the base of the infinity of consciousness in relation to the base of the infinity of consciousness; of the base of nothingness in relation to the base of nothingness; of the base of neither-perception-nor-non-perception in relation to the base of neither-perception-nor-non-perception; of this world in relation to this world; of the other world in relation to the other world; of anything seen, heard, sensed, cognized, reached, sought after, and examined by the mind, but he would still be percipient.”

For short to refer to this state, I just call it as perceiving Nibbana.

There’s also another sutta where the Buddha seems to imply that there’s another state which is the highest happiness.

MN59

"Should anyone say: ‘That is the utmost pleasure and joy that beings experience,’ I would not concede that to him. Why is that? Because there is another kind of pleasure loftier and more sublime than that pleasure. And what is that other kind of pleasure? Here, Ānanda, by completely surmounting the base of neither-perception-nor-non-perception, a bhikkhu enters upon and abides in the cessation of perception and feeling. This is that other kind of pleasure loftier and more sublime than the previous pleasure.

To refer to this second state, I will say nirodha samapatti (attainment of cessation) for short. According to commentarial tradition, this state is only accessible to non-returners and arahants who has attained all the formless attainments. There’s no such limit according to EBT, thus there’s some who view that this state is nothing much special.

Now, according to SN22.19

"Bhikkhus, form is suffering. The cause and condition for the arising of form is also suffering. As form has originated from what is suffering, how could it be happiness?

"Feeling is suffering … . Perception is suffering … . Volitional formations are suffering … . Consciousness is suffering. The cause and condition for the arising of consciousness is also suffering. As consciousness has originated from what is suffering, how could it be happiness?

Note that the 5 aggregates themselves are to be known as suffering, not just the clinging aggregates.

So given that there’s still perception and form (not dead) in perceiving nibbana, and there’s still form (not dead) in nirodha samapatti, but both of them should basically not perceive the body anyway, so form existing still as in not dead, cancel out for them. Given that perceiving nibbana has an additional aggregate of perception, it has at least that level of suffering associated with it as compared to nirodha samapatti.

Thus, I would rank nirodha samapatti as higher happiness compared to even perceiving nibbana.

There are another 2 types of nibbana to be discussed. Nibbana with remainder and nibbana without remainder. iti44

And what is the Unbinding property with fuel remaining? There is the case where a monk is an arahant whose fermentations have ended, who has reached fulfillment, finished the task, laid down the burden, attained the true goal, ended the fetter of becoming, and is released through right gnosis. His five sense faculties still remain and, owing to their being intact, he is cognizant of the agreeable and the disagreeable, and is sensitive to pleasure and pain. His ending of passion, aversion, and delusion is termed the Unbinding property with fuel remaining.

And what is the Unbinding property with no fuel remaining? There is the case where a monk is an arahant whose fermentations have ended, who has reached fulfillment, finished the task, laid down the burden, attained the true goal, ended the fetter of becoming, and is released through right gnosis. For him, all that is sensed, being unrelished, will grow cold right here. This is termed the Unbinding property with no fuel remaining.".

As they are both used to refer to arahant, I map the first one to be when the arahant is still alive, and the most obvious result would be no greed, hatred, delusion, and no unpleasant mental feelings (TH248) thag16.1

707"There isn’t any mental suffering
For one without expectations, village chief.
All fears are left behind
By one whose fetters are ended.

Natthi cetasikaṁ dukkhaṁ, anapekkhassa gāmaṇi; Atikkantā bhayā sabbe ,khīṇasaṁyojanassa ve

.
The second one without remainder basically refers to parinibbana (death) of arahant, where the 5 aggregates, 6 sense bases ceases without remainder and no more rebirth. Ok, a corpse is left, but it doesn’t count as the arahant.

Compare nibbana without remainder to nirodha samapatti, both has no more mind, but the nirodha samapatti still has a living body. mn43

“Friend, in the case of one who is dead, who has completed his time, his bodily formations have ceased and subsided, his verbal formations have ceased and subsided, his mental formations have ceased and subsided, his vitality is exhausted, his heat has been dissipated, and his faculties are fully broken up. In the case of a bhikkhu who has entered upon the cessation of perception and feeling, his bodily formations have ceased and subsided, his verbal formations have ceased and subsided, his mental formations have ceased and subsided, but his vitality is not exhausted, his heat has not been dissipated, and his faculties become exceptionally clear. This is the difference between one who is dead, who has completed his time, and a bhikkhu who has entered upon the cessation of perception and feeling.”

According to commentarial sources, the meditator typically do not stay longer than 7 days in nirodha samapatti and has to come out to go for alms to eat for the body to continue surviving. SuttaCentral
The vinaya teacher in Na Uyana told me that the origin story of why monks cannot store food is because of an arahant who wishes to get out of nirodha samapatti, eat the stored food and then go in again for another 7 days. So the very fact of having to come out and eat can be seen as a form of suffering associated with still having a living body. Thus nibbana without remainder is a superior happiness to nirodha samapatti.

Comparing nibbana with remainder (normal daily life of arahant) vs arahant in perceiving nibbana mode. It’s likely that arahant perceiving nibbana mode is happier due to having less things to perceive, less dukkha.

Thus, ranking the different types of nibbana according to their happiness, from the least to most happy:

1. Nibbana with remainder
2. Perceiving nibbana
3. Nirodha samapatti
4. Nibbana without remainder.

Of these, experience of 1 and 2 are possible, 3 and 4 are without mind. And 3 is not going to be attained by all arahants (for those who don’t attain the formless attainments).

How to gel this with the generic statement of nibbana is the highest bliss (Dhammapada verse)?

I believe that the suffering of nibbana with remainder comes from the remainder (5 aggregates), which is not nibbana itself. So that explains 1 and 2, as 2 still has the perception as the remainder. For 3, it’s not actually nibbana, but it’s the closest we can see to the nibbana without remainder. 3 is not nibbana as it’s a temporary state. So the true nibbana is actually the nibbana without remainder.

[am7]

@NgXinZhao

Note that the 5 aggregates themselves are to be known as suffering, not just the clinging aggregates.

So you’re differentiating between the 5 aggregates and 5 clinging aggregates like Sn22.48, right?

Mendicants, I will teach you the five aggregates and the five grasping aggregates.

But then how should we understand Sn22.85 which states, it seems to state the opposite:

And when you’re not attracted to and don’t grasp these five grasping aggregates, they lead to your lasting welfare and happiness.

[Adutiya]

I don’t want to derail the conversation away from the subject of nibbana but I do want to comment on what was said above.

@am7

But then how should we understand Sn22.85 which states, it seems to state the opposite:

And when you’re not attracted to and don’t grasp these five grasping aggregates, they lead to your lasting welfare and happiness.

Bhante Sujato’s notes in SN 22.48 say:

The text illustrates the noun “grasping” (upādāna ) with the future passive participle “graspable” (upādāniya ). I render it “fuels grasping” to capture the secondary sense of “fuel” for the fire (SN 12.52:1.2). This is the aspect of the aggregates that stimulate or provoke desire and attachment. The “grasping” itself is the desire and lust for the aggregates (SN 22.121). But desire only functions as part of a system involving all the aggregates, hence the aggregates are neither identical to nor separate from the grasping (SN 22.82:4.3). Elsewhere we find the past participle “grasped” (upādinna ) as that which has been “appropriated” or “taken up” at birth (MN 28:6.4).

Bhante Sujato answers in detail here the question of five aggregates vs. the five grasping aggregates. They’re not contradictory, but rather different perspectives.

[AdrianMagno]

@Adutiya

I don’t want to derail the conversation away from the subject of nibbana but I do want to comment on what was said above.

Indeed, it seems this is not complete though, we need to mention what the Buddha said in his first discourse SN56.11

And I like bhante Sujato’s framing of the five khandhas, where he holds out his hand and lists them one by one assigning each to a finger, and then coming to vinnana, he says “conciousness is the thumb” and he closes his hand into a fist, and says “and that’s why they’re called the panc (‘punch’) + upadanakkhandha, because they punch you and it hurts!”

When it comes to nibbana though, we just need to remember one thing, one verse.

nibbanam paramam sukham.

Nibbana is the greatest bliss.

[Adutiya]

Thanks for this, Adrian!

@AdrianMagno

And I like bhante Sujato’s framing of the five khandhas, where he holds out his hand and lists them one by one assigning each to a finger, and then coming to vinnana, he says “conciousness is the thumb” and he closes his hand into a fist, and says “and that’s why they’re called the panc (‘punch’) + upadanakkhandha, because they punch you and it hurts!”

If anyone’s interested, Bhante Sujato’s very inspiring talk on the “Punch” is here.

[Sunyo]

@NgXinZhao

Given that perceiving nibbana has an additional aggregate of perception

Hi Venerable,

I think the following interpretation fits better with the suttas overall:

The word ‘perception’ has a range of meanings. It can mean a direct experience but also a reflection. For example, the perception of death (maranasañña) is not a direct experience of death but a reflection on its inevitability. Likewise, the “perception” of nibbana can be a reflection on the cessation of existence (AN10.7). Existence only ceases when the enlightened being passes away. Then all perception ceases, which is why this reflective perception transcends even neither-perception-nor-nonperception.

I can’t believe it’s already been more than 2 years ago, but I wrote some draft essays on these matters. I have expanded them quite a bit since, based on feedback I got. So these arguments are not complete, but you’ll get the idea:

A paradoxical perception in the Pāli discourses?

In AN10.7 Venerable Sāriputta says he was meditating in such a way he wasn’t even perceiving the state of neither-awareness-nor-nonawareness (or ‘neither-perception-nor-nonperception’), yet at the same time he was still aware. This is paradoxical, because beyond this state of meditation there is only the cessation of all awareness, so how could Sāriputta still be aware? The answer lies in his subject of meditation. The perception he was cultivating was, “the cessation of existence is extinguishm…

The cessation of perception and feelings: a temporary nibbāna?

Hi all! In response to some questions and discussions, I have been writing something on the Kaccayanagotta Sutta and related texts. Over time, I will share some sections here for feedback and discussion. Let me know what you think. In AN9.34 Venerable Sāriputta tells Venerable Udayī that extinguishment (nibbāna), when nothing is experienced (or ‘felt’), is pleasant (sukha). Because enlightened beings still have experiences, this refers not the extinguishment of the mind’s defile…

[Dhabba]

Venerable,

@Sunyo

The word ‘perception’ has a range of meanings. It can mean a direct experience but also a reflection. For example, the perception of death (maranasañña) is not a direct experience of death but a reflection on its inevitability. Likewise, the “perception” of nibbana can be a reflection on the cessation of existence (AN10.7).

But regardless if it is a perception or a reflection on the cessation of becoming, exactly where is this reflection in AN 10.7 even taking place?

I didn’t perceive earth in earth, water in water, fire in fire, or air in air. And I didn’t perceive 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. And I didn’t perceive this world in this world, or the other world in the other world. And yet I still perceived.”

The sutta AN 10.7 in question effectively excludes all the elements:

• “I didn’t perceive earth in earth, water in water, fire in fire, or air in air.”
  = kama loka & rupa loka

• “And I didn’t perceive 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.” = The formless realms, arupa loka:

• And on top of that:
  “And I didn’t perceive this world in this world, or the other world in the other world.”

Yet there is still perception.

There is no possibility of actual direct knowledge regarding what you call a “transcendental reflective perception of nibbāna” unless one already has a preconcieved notion what the cessation of becoming even implies in the first place (while the sutta clearly says there is still perception).

@Sunyo

Existence only ceases when the enlightened being passes away. Then all perception ceases, which is why this reflective perception transcends even neither-perception-nor-nonperception.

• But more importantly even if there is only a reflection on the cessation of existence, in which plane of existence in AN 10.7 is this “transcendental reflective perception of nibbāna” actually taking place?

[NgXinZhao]

@Sunyo

Likewise, the “perception” of nibbana can be a reflection on the cessation of existence (AN10.7).

My teacher also said the same. It’s not seeing Nibbāna, but seeing the meaning of it.

Direct seeing Nibbāna is for the well simile where even non returns see but do not touch with the body the water in the well.

[Jasudho]

Hi Dhabba,

@Dhabba

in which plane of existence in AN 10.7 is this “transcendental reflective perception of nibbāna” actually taking place?

In this context, which plane of existence doesn’t matter because whatever it is, it’s conditional.

I see it as a play on words. When one knows via pañña that the aggregates and senses (the All as in SN 35.23) will cease after final nibbāna, one “perceives” what is beyond or what transcends neither-perception-nor-nonperception: Cessation.

Of what?
The aggregates and senses, therefore experiences of any sort, hence of all dukkha.

[Dhabba]

Greetings

@Jasudho

In this context, which plane of existence doesn’t matter because whatever it is, it’s conditional.

Exactly how is a state of immersion that transcends all planes of existence where one perecieves and understands,: ‘Birth is ended, the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no further coming to any state of being.’” conditional?

It matters a great deal and if you claim even such a transcendental immersion is “conditional” then please explain the following:

What two things should be directly known?
Katame dve dhammā abhiññeyyā?

Two elements:

Dve dhātuyo—

the conditioned element and the unconditioned element.

saṅkhatā ca dhātu asaṅkhatā ca dhātu.

• DN 34

“But sir, could there be another way in which a mendicant is qualified to be called ‘skilled in the elements’?”

“Siyā pana, bhante, aññopi pariyāyo, yathā ‘dhātukusalo bhikkhū’ti alaṁvacanāyā”ti?

“There could, Ānanda.

“Siyā, ānanda.

There are these two elements:

Dve imā, ānanda, dhātuyo—

the conditioned element and the unconditioned element.

saṅkhatādhātu, asaṅkhatādhātu.

When a mendicant knows and sees these two elements,

Imā kho, ānanda, dve dhātuyo yato jānāti passati—

they’re qualified to be called ‘skilled in the elements’.”

ettāvatāpi kho, ānanda, ‘dhātukusalo bhikkhū’ti alaṁvacanāyā”ti.

• MN 115

@Jasudho

When one knows via pañña that the aggregates and senses (the All as in SN 35.23 will cease after final nibbāna, one “perceives” what is beyond or what transcends neither-perception-nor-nonperception: Cessation.

Of what?

The aggregates and senses, therefore experiences of any sort, hence of all dukkha.

Also regarding the All as in [SN 35.23] that you mentioned:

Mendicants, suppose someone was to say: ‘I’ll deny this all and describe another all.’ They’d have no grounds for that claim, they’d be stumped by questions, and, in addition, they’d get frustrated. Why is that? Because they’re out of their element.”

The very same principle can be applied to the unconditioned element, one can’t explain it in terms of conditionality, hence this immersion being said to be atakkāvacara, meaning it is beyond the scope of logic, reasoning, and intellectual speculation.

The immersion itself, defined as the cessation of suffering and the unconditioned element, cannot be understood or attained through thought alone.

That is one of the reasons I reject that one can somehow only reflect over this very real meditative immersion, when in reality all this reflecting regarding conditionality/unconditionality is in itself taking place in conditionality unless one transcends the conditional element.

The scope of proliferation extends as far as the scope of the six fields of contact. The scope of the six fields of contact extends as far as the scope of proliferation. When the six fields of contact fade away and cease with nothing left over, proliferation stops and is stilled.”

Another reason is that that not even arahants themselves are fully aware of having had ended the defilements 24/7:

“In the same way, when a mendicant is perfected, the knowledge and vision that their defilements are ended is not constantly and continually present to them, while walking, standing, sleeping, and waking.

Rather, they are aware of it only when they checked it.”

• MN 76

Dispassion is said to be the the best of all things whether conditioned or unconditioned.

Here’s two identical suttas regarding the planes of existence and the aggregates:

Planes of existence:

In the same way, take a certain fine thoroughbred person who has gone to the forest, the root of a tree, or an empty hut. Their heart is not overcome and mired in sensual desire, and they truly understand the escape from sensual desire that has arisen.

Their heart is not overcome by ill will … dullness and drowsiness … restlessness and remorse … doubt …

They don’t meditate dependent on earth, water, fire, and air.

They don’t meditate dependent on the dimension of infinite space, infinite consciousness, nothingness, or neither perception nor non-perception. They don’t meditate dependent on this world or the other world. They don’t meditate dependent on what is seen, heard, thought, known, attained, sought, or explored by the mind.

Yet they do meditate.

When a fine thoroughbred meditates like this, the gods together with Indra, the Divinity, and the Progenitor worship them from afar:

‘Homage to you, O thoroughbred!

Homage to you, supreme among men!

We don’t understand

the basis of your absorption.

AN 11.9

Seeing this, a learned noble disciple grows disillusioned with form, feeling, perception, choices, and consciousness. Being disillusioned, desire fades away. When desire fades away they’re freed. When they’re freed, they know they’re freed.

They understand: ‘Rebirth is ended, the spiritual journey has been completed, what had to be done has been done, there is nothing further for this place.’

This is called a mendicant who neither gets rid of nor accumulates, but remains after getting rid. They neither give up nor grasp, but remain after giving up. They neither unmesh nor enmesh, but remain after unmeshing. They neither dissipate nor get clouded, but remain after dissipating.

And what things do they neither get rid of nor accumulate, but remain after getting rid of them? They neither get rid of nor accumulate form, but remain after getting rid of it. They neither get rid of nor accumulate feeling … perception … choices … consciousness, but remain after getting rid of it.

And what things do they neither give up nor grasp, but remain after giving them up? They neither give up nor grasp form, but remain after giving it up. They neither give up nor grasp feeling … perception … choices … consciousness, but remain after giving it up.

And what things do they neither discard nor amass, but remain after discarding them? They neither unmesh nor enmesh form, but remain after unmeshing it. They neither unmesh nor enmesh feeling … perception … choices … consciousness, but remain after unmeshing it.

And what things do they neither dissipate nor get clouded by, but remain after dissipating them? They neither dissipate nor get clouded by form, but remain after dissipating it. They neither dissipate nor get clouded by feeling … perception … choices … consciousness, but remain after dissipating it.

When a mendicant’s mind is freed like this, the gods together with Indra, the Divinity, and the Progenitor worship them from afar:

‘Homage to you, O thoroughbred!

Homage to you, supreme among men!

We don’t understand

the basis of your absorption.’”

• SN 22.79

So if such advanced beings have no way of understanding the basis of this absorbtion that goes beyond conditionality I don’t see how one could only reflect over such an immersion and come to the right conclusion regarding the two elements, the aggregates and senses.

[Jasudho]

I’d offer that it’s a matter of different interpretations and understanding:

@Dhabba

Exactly how is a state of immersion that transcends all planes of existence where one perecieves and understands,: ‘Birth is ended,

It’s not that the immersion transcends all planes of existence, but rather that what is being perceived and contemplated is.

The Buddha said only nibbana is unconditional, never that any jhana or samāpatti is.

@Dhabba

The immersion itself, defined as the cessation of suffering and the unconditioned element, cannot be understood or attained through thought alone.

Not thought; realization.

It appears you are taking certain non-nibbanic states as unconditional.
This is where I think we disagree.

All best

[Dhabba]

@Jasudho

It’s not that the immersion transcends all planes of existence, but rather that what is being perceived and contemplated is.*

What is being perceived is also the following:

”And I didn’t perceive this world in this world, or the other world in the other world.”

• So of course this immersion transcends all the planes of existence.

@Jasudho

The Buddha said only nibbana is unconditional, never that any jhana or samāpatti is.

• This immersion is very much a meditative state and nothing but a meditative state:

They don’t meditate dependent on earth, water, fire, and air.

They don’t meditate dependent on the dimension of infinite space, infinite consciousness, nothingness, or neither perception nor non-perception.

They don’t meditate dependent on this world or the other world. They don’t meditate dependent on what is seen, heard, thought, known, attained, sought, or explored by the mind.

Yet they do meditate. <———

AN 11.9

@Jasudho

It appears you are taking certain non-nibbanic states as unconditional.

This is where I think we disagree.

Sorry but I have no clue how you even came to such an conclusion,
which specific non-nibbanic states would that be and why?

Please clearify what you mean and why.

I’m actually showing in my post that there has to be a distinction made between the conditioned and unconditioned elements.

Only then is one skilled in the elements.

One can’t explain nibbãna in terms of conditionality, hence nibbãna being said to be atakkāvacara, meaning it is beyond the scope of logic, reasoning, and intellectual speculation.

Exactly how am I taking certain non-nibbanic states as unconditional when I’m pointing out the exact opposite, that nibbãna (the unconditioned element) is beyond the scope of logic, reasoning, and intellectual speculation?

Kindly explain what you mean when you say that it appears I’m taking certain non-nibbanic states as unconditional…I’m honestly a bit confused…

@Jasudho

It’s not that the immersion transcends all planes of existence, but rather that what is being perceived and contemplated is.

And what exactly is being perceived then?

“Ānanda, it’s when a mendicant perceives:

‘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.’

Nibbãna.

That’s how 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, 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. And they wouldn’t perceive this world in this world, or the other world in the other world.

And yet they would still perceive.”

• Transcendental immersion beyond all the planes of existence.

About Extinguishment - Ud 8.1

“There is, mendicants, that dimension where there is no earth, no water, no fire, no wind; no dimension of infinite space, no dimension of infinite consciousness, no dimension of nothingness, no dimension of neither perception nor non-perception; no this world, no other world, no moon or sun.

There, mendicants, I say there is no coming or going or remaining or passing away or reappearing. It is not established, does not proceed, and has no support. Just this is the end of suffering.”

“Atthi, bhikkhave, tadāyatanaṁ”

āyatana:
sphere
domain
dimension
base
realm

Probably different interpretations and understanding of āyatana too?

[Jasudho]

@Dhabba

Sorry but I have no clue how you even came to such an conclusion,
which specific non-nibbanic states would that be and why?

Any state/experience that is not nibbana while alive (cessation of defilements) or final nibbana, must be conditional.
And conditions persist even during niibbana while alive as the senses and khandhas.

In this way we are not in agreement about

@Dhabba

Transcendental immersion beyond all the planes of existence.

While in immersion a person is clearly still in the human realm and is perceiving, so it’s clearly not final nibbana.
Although, what’s being seen/perceived we agree is beyond words and logic.

@Dhabba

”And I didn’t perceive this world in this world, or the other world in the other world.”

A number of interpretations are possible, but this points imo to the ending of papañca, knowing this world and any other are empty of inherent self or “thingness.”

@Dhabba

@Jasudho

It appears you are taking certain non-nibbanic states as unconditional.

This is where I think we disagree.

Sorry but I have no clue how you even came to such an conclusion,

From this:

@Dhabba

So of course this immersion transcends all the planes of existence.

“Transcending all planes of existence” indicates, to me, what’s unconditional.

When one is thirsty, one can come to know that water will relieve the thirst, even before one actually drinks the water.
In a similar way, through pañña one knows that the cessation of greed, anger, and ignorance is liberation while alive and that cessation of the khandhas and senses after final nibbana will be the full cessation of all dukkha. Even before one dies.

So before awakening, all meditation/ immersion states are still conditional. Even as nibbana is beyond words and logic.

But maybe we’re talking past each other.

[yeshe.tenley]

What kind did the Teacher achieve under the Bodhi tree when he became the Buddha? You’re saying that he didn’t achieve the true kind? That he arose without achieving the highest happiness? That his lion’s roar was not supreme or was premature? That he still had more to achieve?

I find all of the above unacceptable conclusions with the framing of this thread. It misses the mark and the rhetorical questions above show it. To believe the framing of nibbana presented here you have to believe the Buddha was mistaken when he got up from the Bodhi tree. That he still hadn’t achieved his highest aim. That several Arhats who passed away in his lifetime actually achieved the highest aim before him. These are unacceptable consequences of this threads framing of nibbana.

[Jasudho]

Hi Yeshe,

I’m not clear what you mean.
Speaking for myself, there’s nothing I see in my posts that would indicate the Buddha did not realize nibbana-while-alive or final nibbana after the final death.

My responses to Dhabba were more about claims of immersions beyond “all planes of existence.”

But perhaps my posts were unclear.

[NgXinZhao]

@Dhabba

Exactly how is a state of immersion that transcends all planes of existence where one perecieves and understands,: ‘Birth is ended, the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no further coming to any state of being.’” conditional?

Attaining nibbāna, perceiving nibbāna, reflecting on Nibbāna, etc are themselves not nibbāna.

Nibbāna has no beginning, no end, because it is permanent, whereas the act of attaining/perceiving etc nibbāna has a beginning and end, it depends on the noble 8fold path.

The act of seeing an apple is itself not an apple. I hope that’s clear.

[Khemarato.bhikkhu]

Is happiness and feeling happiness two different things? Are you suggesting that Nibbāna is a physical object?

[Dogen]

@Jasudho

Hi Yeshe,

I’m not clear what you mean.

I’ll try to translate @yeshe.tenley’s points based on our acquintement so far, so Yeshe, feel free to correct me if I’m missing anything!

@Jasudho

Speaking for myself, there’s nothing I see in my posts that would indicate the Buddha did not realize nibbana-while-alive or final nibbana after the final death.

I believe it’s the concept of treating “Death-after-Nirvana” as somehow more special an event than “Nirvana during lifetime” that would seem problematic. For example:

@yeshe.tenley

That several Arhats who passed away in his lifetime actually achieved the highest aim before him.

Here’s the math, assuming there is a special parinirvana after death:

Year 0 - Buddha achieves nirvana
Year 1 - An arahat passes away, achieving parinirvana
Year 2 - Buddha achieves parinirvana

This would mean that the arahat has achieved the highest bliss before the Buddha, since Buddha also has to wait for his death for the highest bliss.

Ergo, there is some sense is positing:

@yeshe.tenley

I find all of the above unacceptable conclusions with the framing of this thread. It misses the mark and the rhetorical questions above show it. To believe the framing of nibbana presented here you have to believe the Buddha was mistaken when he got up from the Bodhi tree.

Since framing Nirvana-after-death as an event more special than nirvana-during-lifetime could imply that an arahat would have made away with impurities and delusions long before Buddha did.

Now, obviously there are many suttas framing death-after-nirvana as a special event. And it could also be argued that some other expositions actually clash with this idea. Hence, the provenance and the internal logic of these suttas must be scrutinized. On that much, I agree with Yeshe - but I’ll keep my agnosticism and open mind to the possibility of not knowing which is which just now.

---

Now, on a separate note:

@NgXinZhao

Nibbāna has no beginning, no end, because it is permanent

Bhante; if I burn down a forest, would you say the extinguishment of the forest fire has no beginning, no end, and is permanent?

To this topic, I would only interject what Bhante Sunyo has made me consider that perhaps Nirvana should not be taken as a place / state / as such; rather, it should be treated as an event.

In most of these discussions (even with life/death paradigms), treating Nirvana as an event, like explosion, like dousing, helps me make more sense of the sutta expositions.

With metta;

[Jasudho]

Hi Dogen,

Thanks for sharing.

Regarding:

@Dogen

I believe it’s the concept of treating “Death-after-Nirvana” as somehow more special an event than “Nirvana during lifetime” that would seem problematic.

Not more special. Just the full and final cessation of all dukkha.
While alive, the khandhas and senses remain and are active so: still some dukkha, (dukkha-dukkhatā).

@Dogen

Since framing Nirvana-after-death as an event more special than nirvana-during-lifetime could imply that an arahat would have made away with impurities and delusions long before Buddha did.

Again, not an event that’s more special per se. Just the final cessation of all dukkha.
And yes, I’d offer that this occurred for Sāriputta before the Buddha. Not because it’s more special or elevated, but because the selfless processes conventionally called “Sāriputta” ceased before the selfless dependently conditional processes labeled the Buddha.

In terms of “impurities” and “delusions” the cessation of all these took place first by the Buddha. So special in that way!
That’s what I’m calling nibbāna while alive as in SN43.12,

“And what is the unconditioned?
The ending of greed, hate, and delusion.”

Clearly, the Buddha was free of the defilements before anyone else. And of course this was when he was still alive.

And yet all that time there never was an inherent arahant or Buddha who attained nibbāna while alive or who vanished after death. So again, ultimately, no special events for anyone.
Just the cessation of dukkha, (with residue while alive, as in Iti44).

All best

[Dogen]

Thanks for notes and kindness, Jasudho.

@Jasudho

Again, not an event that’s more special per se. Just the final cessation of all dukkha.

Well that sounds pretty special!

Again, since these conversations get pretty long winded, I’m just going to offer a view for why this idea might be challenged:

@Jasudho

And yet all that time there never was an inherent arahant or Buddha who attained nibbāna while alive or who vanished after death. So again, ultimately, no special events for anyone.
Just the cessation of dukkha

If all that happens during parinirvana is cessation of dukkha, it means the khandas we conventionally refer to as the Buddha was in fact, just dukkha. In which case, Buddha dying would be less of a dukkha for people, since fading away of the dukkha is sukha - which would be an inconvenient and problematic idea.

Or, if one can live with perfect understanding even while alive before death-as-parinirvana, why do we need the final parinirvana?

Finally, if there’s delusion, there’s dukkha. Conversely, if we speak about dukkha, there must be delusion. This is one way to read in line with Yeshe commenting about the idea of parinirvana leading to the conclusion that Buddha would have to be deluded if death is a requirement for total absence of dukkha.

It also strangely posits life itself as Mara, and absence of life as freedom from Mara. It is kinda weird to consider Mara (Death)'s never ending embrace to be considered the final victory over Mara.

Etc, etc. Feel free to respond for others’ benefit but I’ll likely abstain from yet-another-nibbana thread!