yes please read my sentence ‘If the aim of Buddhism is extinguishment’. It’s simply that it’s hard to write in English without using reflexive pronouns
Greetings Irene,
I’m sorry I can’t provide the references, but I have heard teachings where this topic was asked… The answer was along the lines of
" existence, in all it’s facets, is a natural process. As such, liberation from delusion and seeing things the way they are, leads to cessation of suffering. The body also follows natural processes of birth ageing and death. In the case where all clinging is extinguished and liberation attained - one is still subject to natural processes and remains physically alive until natural processes determine it is time for death. Thereby, upon death of the body, there is nothing left to provide fuel for a new flame… Nibbana without remainder has been attained"
Perhaps someone with better knowledge of Suttas can elaborate or provide references.
Metta
4 Likes
thank you for your answer. Ok I understand your point; still we see the influence of the mind on the body even for us unenlightened ones: for example there are stories of old, ill people living on till a given date (like their anniversary or a special date) and then dying, or living on till they have completed a task and then dying, or on the other hand you hear of old couples in which one person dies and the other one dies very soon afterwards because they no longer have any desire to live.
So even for ordinary people the will to live affects the body.
So when I see a monk who says he’s enlightened and will never be reborn, and then I see him living on till he’s 98 years old, I am a bit confused.
A lot of very insightful comments have already been written about this and I will only try to reinforce them with what I understand. Abandoning craving and becoming extinguished are two different things. In fact, when you you say “you are supposed to become extinguished” it is what you suppose which is contrary to teaching as found in the discourses. All I can say is that it is a wrong supposition.
In MN.43 for example, it says that the five faculties eye, ear, nose, tongue, and body depend on ayu translated as vitality or life. Elsewhere ayu is discussed as formation sankhara. The Buddha could have lived on for sometime longer but he let go of the will to live or abandoned ayu sankhara at will. This means that it is possible for an enlightened person to give up life if he chooses to do so. In the case of the Buddha, he had to finish the task at hand which is teaching his discovery to all other living beings out of compassion for them. This is exactly what he did and gave up life when it deemed right.
I think the story that the Buddha could have lived for several eons kalpas is an exageration.
With Metta
3 Likes
If one can move beyond a desire/clinging for clarity, then doubt and confusion also fade 
This level of detail is really getting too bogged down in the unknowables and endless speculation. I think this is especially easy to confuse when using words that can mean multiple things . For me the essence lies in the part of awakening that concerns seeing things as they truly are - freedom from all conditioning - absolute understanding of non-self > even more that there is actually no self… but that the acts needed for living are viewed free of conditioning … so there is neither desire to live nor absence of desire to live… no interference.
But really this is 3 levels too detailed to spend much time on - it becomes just beliefs and opinions. 
4 Likes
This is a quote from a Buddhist scripture that is later than what is generally studied on this forum.
“Bhikkhus, there are these two Nibbāna-elements. What are the two? The Nibbāna-element with residue left and the Nibbāna-element with no residue left.
“What, bhikkhus, is the Nibbāna-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 Nibbāna-element with residue left.
“Now what, bhikkhus, is the Nibbāna-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 Nibbāna-element with no residue left.
“These, bhikkhus, are the two Nibbāna-elements.”
The text is then ended with a section in verse:
These two Nibbāna-elements were made known
By the Seeing One, stable and unattached:
One is the element seen here and now
With residue, but with the cord of being destroyed;
The other, having no residue for the future,
Is that wherein all modes of being utterly cease.Having understood the unconditioned state,
Released in mind with the cord of being destroyed,
They have attained to the Dhamma-essence.
Delighting in the destruction (of craving),
Those stable ones have abandoned all being.
(Iti 44, Nibbānadhātusutta)
All in all, in the text, the Buddha speaks of two nibbānadhātuyo, or “nirvāṇa-elements”. A discussion about exactly what dhātu, or “element”, is in this context would probably be very interesting.
Terminological finesse aside, it seems nirvāṇa can occur with or without the “residu[al]”.
5 Likes
Hi Irene. It seems like you may be concerned with something I’ve struggled with since first attending retreats and studying suttas: that is, what is nibbana as taught by the Buddha? Is it simply annihilation, which is somewhat synonymous with extinguishment? Or something else? The view of annihilationism seems to be clearly condemned by the Buddha in the suttas, and it seems most people agree with that. However, I’ve heard teachers and others agree with that condemnation on one hand, then later say things that seem to express the view of annihilationism, which was confusing.
Anyway, two things that have been helpful to me recently that might be helpful to you:
-
the Buddha taught that nibbana and the path of the holy life is subtle. If the truth is an arahant is simply extinguished at death, that would not be subtle and sounds a lot like annihilation. Fortunately, the Buddha had more to say on the subject, which is well-summarized by Bikkhu Bodhi.
-
Bikkhu Bodhi’s paper on nibbana: https://www.dhammatalks.net/Books16/Bhikkhu_Bodhi-Nibbana.pdf
One of the parts of the paper I really appreciate is how Bikkhu Bodhi points out that the Buddha described nibbana in both positive and negative terms – not just the end of suffering or extinguishment. For example, in some suttas the Buddha describes nibbana as the supreme happiness, perfect bliss, peace, serenity, liberation, freedom, and/or freedom of heart. The turtle fish story in the paper is also illustrative.
That said, I’m not an arahant, and it seems only an arahant could really accurately describe what nibbana is or isn’t, and even then we would be bound by the limits of words and circumstances like the turtle and fish faced. The turtle in the story had been to dry land and tried futilely to explain to the fish what dry land is like.
For me, what’s important is that assiduously studying all of the early suttas and trying to practice what Buddha taught has completely changed my life for the better over the years. So, I’m developing trust that nibbana is more than a worthy goal. Hope this helps.
with metta,
8 Likes
I think the Buddha wanted to find a way out of his pain and a way to be happy. He thought he found it. He spent the rest of his life teaching other people how to find it. That’s why he stayed alive - not because his “kammic residue” had to be exhausted.
He was followed by an increasingly patriarchal, self-interested, and dogma-armed religious establishment that did what religious establishments tend to do: prey on people’s fears and superstitions. It scared them with nightmares of hells and endless eternal rounds of torment, enticed then with hopes of devata lives in fantastically long-lasting pleasure palaces, the proper means of navigation among which was … surprise! … giving stuff to their sedentary and indolent religious leaders.
4 Likes
That’s certainly what seems to have happened in religions such as Christianity with which I am familiar from my own culture - just think of the ‘indulgences’ of the Catholic Church.
I think you raise an interesting question which certainly deserves consideration, and I think it’s a good sign of open mindedness that such comments/debates can be made on this website
1 Like
I didn’t really read Iti44 as a “and that’s why the Buddha stayed alive”. I read it more as “there are two nibbāna-elements”, one seems to correspond to someone seemingly living, one to someone seemingly dead.
Then again, they say that the difference between a Buddha and a rock is that a Buddha has metabolism, so who am I to say!
2 Likes
Hi irene, and all,
The Pali Canan does not convey entirely the authentic teachings of the Buddha. Only some Pali collections are closer to the early Buddhism. This is based on the current findings by Yinshun regarding the compilation of the Pali nikayas/agamas and their Chinese counterparts:
-
SN/SA was the foundation of the four nikayas/agamas in the formation of early Buddhist texts.
Yinshun suggestes that SN/SA (ie. the synthesis of the first three angas: Sutra/Sutta, Geya/Geyya, and Vyakarana/Veyyakarana) came into existence first, and that subsequent expansion of it yielded the other nikayas/agamas in the sequence MN/MA, DN/DA, AN/EA. -
SN/SA had its origin in the first council.
-
MN/MA, DN/DA, and AN/EA orginated at the second council. (Sutta-nipata, Udana and Dhammapada compiled in the Khuddaka-nikaya rather than being made part of the four basic nikayas/agamas).
-
The extant SN/SA (and also other nikayas/agamas) are definitely sectarian texts. One can seek an understanding of early Buddhist teachings by studying them comparatively.
Yinshun’s research on the formation of early Buddhist texts is written in Chinese: 原始佛教聖典之集成 [The Formation of Early Buddhist Texts] (1971) (See Choong Mun-keat, The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism, pp. 2-11).
Kind regards,
Thomas
6 Likes
Hi brooks,
one view that I come across is that whereas annihilationists think there’s a self which gets annihilated, in buddhism one says that there was never a self in the first place, so in parinibbana there is extinguishment but there was not a self to extinguish anyway.
Be as it may I remember, if I am not mistaken, reading an Introduction to the suttas by Maurice Walshe in which he wrote that indeed it would be very strange if nibbana was just no more existence, since in buddhism you make that the ideal and practice that a lot to attain it, whereas if you are a materialist and atheist you just take that as a given without having to do any practice for it 
(and usualy you don’t consider that a good or desirable thing).
I would say it is because there is a difference between physical fuel and mental fuel. The Body has it’s own causes and conditions for it’s sustenance and if it is given physical fuel nourishment in the form of food it will continue it’s corporeal existence. The mind too continues it’s existence, it is only the delusion that ceases and therefore the ability to suffer because all of the 5 hindrances have been forever seen and abandoned and therefore there is no further arising of dukkha in the mind of an arahant. The body however, will continue until it becomes sick and dies as it is not solely created by the mind. The mind influences the body but it is not it’s sole creator. The body is created by the 4 constituent elements and therefore as long as those elements are given to the body, it will carry on until it is worn out, diseased and passes away through physical dissolution back into those 4 basic elements once again.
1 Like
Hi Irene. Good discussion! That seems to be a common view you quoted and a difficult one to discuss. I think that is because the Buddha does teach anatta (non-self) in the suttas, especially to monastics. A whole book could be written on this topic, and there probably are such books already.
It seems the teachings of anatta have to do a lot with the five aggregates - form, feelings, perceptions, volitional formations, and consciousness - not being permanent and thus they are not a permanent enduring self.
However, the Buddha does talk about the unconditioned and the deathless element, and perhaps impersonal awareness, which are not the same as the five aggregates. These words seem to be pointing to that which is both not nothing and not something, but beyond finite language and understanding. They also don’t seem to be a self, as we understand self. That’s why I mentioned the Buddha’s discussion of his teachings and path being subtle and profound. Sounds like it takes direct experience to fully understand nibbana.
The good news is, as the Buddha taught, his teachings are good in the beginning, middle and end. So, his gradual training approach can bring us immediate benefit that grows over time. The difficulty seems to be the Buddha is no longer here to teach us directly, and there are so many different interpretations about what he taught.
Also, it can be challenging to find suttas that are relevant to our situation. Fortunately, sutta central is going a long way to make the Buddha’s teachings more accessible. Seems like there is and will continue to be an awesome unfolding of the dharma in the years to come:-)
Metta,
7 Likes
Whether the Lotus Sutra can be read alongside the Pali suttas depends on whether one takes an inclusivist or exclusivist reading of the Lotus Sutra:
For some later commentators, the sutra is seen as illustrating the relationship between the One Vehicle and the various, sometimes contradictory teachings found in Buddhist tradition.
The different teachings each have their own validity as skillful means; they are indispensable in leading toward the Buddha’s insight, but they are not the whole of it in and of themselves. Since enlightenment is beyond words and concepts, any doctrinal statement is going to be relative and incomplete, and that is why the One Vehicle is never formulated in words.
According to this reading, the sutra is really not about anything. It is a direct presentation of how the Buddha’s teachings actually work, an enactment of Buddhism as a pedagogical system.
This kind of reading is inclusive, in that any doctrine or practice can be seen as a “skillful means” leading toward enlightenment. Other readings, however, tend to be exclusive, in that they identify the One Vehicle with a specific teaching, which is then held to supersede all others.
The Final Word: An Interview with Jacqueline Stone
Daisaku Ikeda has an exclusivist interpretation of the Lotus Sutra as the only valid teaching of the Buddha, superseding all other teachings and practices. East Asian Buddhism more generally, however, has seen the Lotus Sutra’s One Vehicle as embracing many teachings and practices, various forms of skillful means leading to enlightenment.
1 Like
Just now I tried to read the Lotus Sutra for the first time and…I couldn’t. It felt too much like reading an epic script for a Hollywood show.
Thus have I heard. Once the Buddha was staying in the city of Rājagṛha, on
the mountain called Gṛdhrakūṭa, together with a great assembly of twelve
thousand monks, all of whom were arhats whose corruption was at an end,
who were free from the confusion of desire, who had achieved their own
goals, shattered the bonds of existence, and attained complete mental discipline. Their names were Ājñātakauṇḍinya, Mahākāśyapa, Uruvilvakāśyapa,
Gayākāśyapa, Nadīkāśyapa, Śāriputra, Mahāmaudgalyāyana, Mahākātyāyana, Aniruddha, Kapphiṇa, Gavāṃpati, Revata, Pilindavatsa, Bakkula,
Mahākauṣṭhila, Nanda, Sundarananda, Pūrṇamaitrāyaṇīputra, Subhūti,
Ānanda, and Rāhula. All of them were great arhats, known to the assembly.
There were in addition two thousand others, both those who had more to
learn and those who did not. The nun Mahāprajāpatī was there, together with
her six thousand attendants; and also the nun Yaśodharā, Rāhula’s mother,
together with her attendants.
There were also eighty thousand bodhisattva mahāsattvas, all of whom
were irreversible from highest, complete enlightenment (anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi). … (LotusSutra)
So I put it down and read MN121:
There is only this that is not emptiness, namely, the oneness dependent on the mendicant Saṅgha. In the same way, a mendicant—ignoring the perception of the village and the perception of people—focuses on the oneness dependent on the perception of wilderness. Their mind becomes eager, confident, settled, and decided in that perception of wilderness. …
And peace returned.
7 Likes
I second your sentiments. I’ve been really open to read an understand from that yana , and for instance still like very much the readings of Hakuin. But when I arrived at such literature, I only was interested to understand, what mind is that which composes such insane images of history .
I met such style of language, thinking and putting things together from some casual reading of the gnostic apocryphes around the abrahamic/mosaic transmissions but also there I could not grasp or realize any familiarity with that style of sayings.
It’s really a topic to learn to understand, to detect some handle for the grasping of the underlying mental process and for the dealing with it. (at least, we are all humans and have human minds, don’t we?)
4 Likes
To be exact & precise ,
nidana ,
sacca ,
ahara ,
khandas ,
salayatana ,
dhatu &
bodhapakkhiyā dhammā .
I might add indriya (faculties), anicca, dukkha, anatta, and ariya attangika magga.
That seems like an unfair double standard, considering how often the same kind of grandiose language is used in the Pali suttas.
What I’d recommend doing, as I’d do with any Buddhist scripture, is read it as uncritically as possible from beginning to end, so one can then assess its overall message before expressing an opinion on it.
If you had taken the time to read through the Lotus Sutra, you’d find the same teaching within its pages.
Please keep in mind that the Lotus Sutra might be the most influential Buddhist scripture in East Asian history. I believe it deserves some measure of respect, whether it’s one’s cup of tea or not.