SuttaCentral
With respect, would you be willing to offer citations from the Pāli Canon?
By “infinite consciousness” the assumption is that you’re pointing to a “timeless awareness” or a “deathless consciousness.”
If so, can you find teachings in support of this in the suttas?
Such concepts are present in a number of Mahayana sutras – perhaps you’re relying on them for your position?
I am getting you interested. Thats good. Countless info in here. But its not from Mahayana. Search Higher Conciousness in suttacentral.
from avijja to bhava , there is not mentioned with craving , clinging n existence as conditions , that directly link to dukkha (of psychological sorrow) , not just craving alone causes dukkha instead it point dukkha to something as a whole starting from avijja as a condition . Dukkha as a end result after birth link . So the dukkha are referring to the whole conditioning of the dependent origination in which the entire mass of suffering manifest .
Sn12.1
“And what is dependent origination? Ignorance is a condition for choices. Choices are a condition for consciousness. Consciousness is a condition for name and form. Name and form are conditions for the six sense fields. The six sense fields are conditions for contact. Contact is a condition for feeling. Feeling is a condition for craving. Craving is a condition for grasping. Grasping is a condition for continued existence. Continued existence is a condition for rebirth. Rebirth is a condition for old age and death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, sadness, and distress to come to be. That is how this entire mass of suffering originates. This is called dependent origination.
With respect, what I’m interested in is what suttas you can cite to support your claims about “infinite consciousness.”
If you mean the 2nd arupa attainment, that could be considered a kind of “infinite consciousness”, sometimes described as adhicitta, or “higher mind.” But this is clearly referring to a conditional state.
If by “infinite consciousness” you’re claiming a “deathless, timeless, consciousness” perhaps you’d be willing to say so —and then cite from the suttas rather than refer to discussions about suttas.
Best wishes 
I start with this one.
Your not going to have nirvana on earth without a a higher conciousness. Its the most happy state. Peaceful etc. By then you should be able do more than before. Its actually old tradition already to believe this end in India. This ending was shared in common like saying deathless.
Instead of asking where the four great elements, cease without remainder, you should have asked:
‘Where do earth, water, fire and air no footing find?
Where are long and short, small and great, fair and foul -
Where are “name-and-form” brought to an end?’“And the answer is:
Consciousness that is signless, limitless, all-illuminating,
Then water, earth, fire, & wind find no footing,
Then long & short, small & large, pleasant & unpleasant -
Then “name-&-form” are all brought to an end.With the cessation of viññāṇa [divided-knowing]
all this is brought to an end.’”Thus spoke the Exalted One. And Kevaṭṭa, the young householder, pleased at heart, rejoiced at the spoken word.
Here ends the Kevaṭṭa Suttanta.
Thanks for sharing.
You’re quoting from DN 11.
Here is the translation on SC:
Buddha - "This is how the question should be asked:
“Where do water and earth, fire and air find no footing; where do long and short, fine and coarse, beautiful and ugly; where do name and form cease with nothing left over?”
And the answer to that is:
“Consciousness that’s invisible, infinite, ‘*Viññāṇaṁ anidassanaṁ,* entirely given up: that’s where water and earth, fire and air find no footing.
And that’s where long and short, fine and coarse, beautiful and ugly—that’s where name and form cease with nothing left over.
With the cessation of consciousness, that’s where they cease.”’”
That is what the Buddha said. "
Note, there is nothing here about a timeless, deathless, consciousness. Rather, the cessation of consciousness is taught.
You may also be interested in:
and
May you be happy and well. 
Let’s look at the second noble truths in SN56.11.
Now this, bhikkhus, is the noble truth of the origin of suffering: it is this craving which leads to renewed existence, accompanied by delight and lust, seeking delight here and there; that is, craving for sensual pleasures, craving for existence, craving for extermination.
This means that we crave for the existence of something that will bring us delight and lust or sensual pleasures, and we crave for the non-existence of something that does not do so.
Now let’s look at the first noble truth:
Now this, bhikkhus, is the noble truth of suffering: birth is suffering, aging is suffering, illness is suffering, death is suffering; union with what is displeasing is suffering; separation from what is pleasing is suffering; not to get what one wants is suffering; in brief, the five aggregates subject to clinging are suffering.
We can see that aging, illness, death, union with what is displeasing, separation from what is pleasing, not to get what one wants definitely do not bring delight and lust or sensual pleasure to us; therefore, we crave for the non-existence of them. Since we do not want them, but we must get them, we will be displeased. Grief, lamentation, sorrow will arise in our mind. This negative state of mind is what we call dukkha.
Now look at birth. What’s wrong with it? We can see that with birth, we will be subjected to all of those above. If we are born, we will get aging, illness, death, union with what is displeasing, separation from what is pleasing, etc. Therefore, if we have craving which leads to renewed existence, accompanied by delight and lust, seeking delight here and there, then we will be reborn, and we will get all of those above. However, since we will not like them but must get them, we will be displeased. Grief, lamentation, sorrow will arise in our mind and that is dukkha.
Dukkha is anicca. So, dukkha is not mine, I am not dukkha, dukkha is not my self.
Its not that my friend. Its litterly where there is obviosly conciousness without the bondage etc. No Arahant is without conciousness. Its just a transformed to awakened conciousness. Its not a big deal. Its just the last conciousness before death of an arahant. Common sense
The Uddesavibha"nga Sutta explains the nature of consciousness and the general cognitive attitude of an arahant:[41]
The consciousness of an arahant is not scattered and diffused in the external world (bahiddhaa vi~n~naa.na.m avikkhitta.m avisa.ta.m) ; this becomes possible because he does not indulge in the enjoyment of sense objects.
His consciousness is not established within (ajjhatta.m asa.n.thi.ta.m): this is possible because he does not become attached to the enjoyment of the jhaanas.
He remains unagitated without grasping (anupaadaaya na paritassati): this means that he does not identify himself with any of the five aggregates or personality factors
Agree with that.
That’s why I inquired whether you were speaking of a “timeless, deathless” consciousness which some believe to “exist” after parinibbāna.
Your last post clarified what you meant.
All best
Well see the paradox. Its because Samsara will always exist. So is Nirvana. Without nirvana there is no samsara. And without samsara there is no nirvana. Buddha had some ralitives of his ancestors bloodline which probably didnt become Arahant. Their blood is still in us. Influencing Conciousness
It seems samsara is nirvana; nirvana is samsara.
You have to take this that conditionality into account. Namely:
When this is, that is.
From the arising of this comes the arising of that.
When this isn’t, that isn’t.
From the cessation of this comes the cessation of that.
In this quartet, there are things that arise due to composition and things that arise due to consequence.
Composition:
when this is, that is; when this isn’t, that isn’t.
Something that arises due to composition is a simultaneous kind of arising. E.g.
If you paint a solid red circle on a blank piece of paper, the shape appears simultaneously with the colour red. Without the colour red, there would be no circle. But because there is the colour red, one can perceive the circle. I.e.
when red is, the circle is
when red isn’t, the circle isn’t
The suffering of birth, aging, pain etc. is a result of this simultaneous arising due to composition. I.e.
When birth and craving is, suffering is.
when birth and craving isn’t, suffering isn’t
When ageing and craving is, suffering is.
When ageing and craving isn’t, suffering isn’t
When pain and craving is, suffering is.
When pain and craving isn’t, suffering isn’t
Because craving is assumed to be present in all cases, you can use the shorthand of birth is suffering, ageing is suffering, pain is suffering etc.
Consequence:
From the arising of this comes the arising of that; From the cessation of this comes the cessation of that.
Something that arises due to consequence is a sequential kind of arising. E.g.
If you fertilise a chicken egg, a chick will be born. I.e.
from the arising of a fertilised chicken egg comes the arising of a chick
The suffering of lamentation is a result of this sequential arising due to consequence. I.e.
from the arising of craving comes the arising of lamentation
from the arising of craving comes the arising of suffering
Given that craving is the singular point of origin for both lamentation and suffering, one can then say:
when lamentation is, suffering is
when suffering is, lamentation is
when lamentation isn’t, suffering isn’t
when suffering isn’t, lamentation isn’t
Because both appear and disappear with each other, you can use a shorthand to say lamentation is suffering.
Note that whether phenomena arises simultaneously or sequentially, craving plays an integral role. Once craving is uprooted, suffering ceases:
In the case of simultaneous kinds of arising: when pain and craving is, suffering is. Due to the requirement for both pain AND craving to be present, simply removing craving is enough to cause suffering to cease.
In the case of sequential kinds of arising: from the arising of craving comes the arising of lamentation. Due to the requirement of craving to be present for lamentation to ensue, simply removing craving is enough to cause lamentation to not ensue. Because craving is what also causes suffering to ensue, simply removing craving is enough to cause suffering to not ensue. In such a circumstance, neither lamentation nor suffering arise.
Dukkha sacca refers to the whole mass of suffering of the five aggregates which is the outcome of ignorance . Cessation is about cessation of dukkhakhandas . Maybe It has no impact on healthy arahant which has a limited lifespan say of 50 or 70 years left . But say if an arahant that have lifespan of 100 millions years living in this world , what would he do ? This immense scale in time would be a kind of dukkha .
The khandas in SN 22.95 are seen as void (without reality, rittaka), insubstantial (tucchaka), and lacking essence (asaaraka).
Funnily here is a coincidence of what is about “unreal” found in :
The Vajracchedika-prajna-paramita Sutra
金剛般若波羅密經
Subhuti, what do you think?
須菩提！於意雲何？
“Can the Tathagata be seen by means of His bodily form?”
可以身相見如來不？
“No, World Honoured One, the Tathagata cannot be seen by means of His bodily form.
不也，世尊！不可以身相得見如來。
“Why?
何以故？
“Because when the Tathagata speaks of bodily form, it is not (real) form.”
如來所說身相，即非身相。
The Buddha said to Subhuti:
佛告須菩提：
“Everything with form is unreal;
凡所有相，皆是虛妄。
The khandas in SN/SA suttas are also seen as emptiness/empty, e.g. (p. 54):
Pages 52-4 from The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism Choong Mun-keat 2000-3.pdf (226.0 KB)
My friend to those that didnt read Upanishads and Indian texts you wont understand Buddha point.
There is waking state, dream state, deep sleep state
Form is usually meaning waking state.
Formless is usually meaning dream state
Im not sure of deep sleep state.
Those are the 3 world ancient used.
Suttas I think use a different language for them.
Although one place Buddha talks of gross body etc. He is probably talking of these 3 states.
The jhanas itself. Im doubting when writing if formless attainment are supposed be mastered while awake.
Being an Arahant. I think in all 3 states you supposed to be mastered that they are present in all. When Buddha talks about seeing the world as a dream. Isnt he maybe saying seeing as in reality formless?
In SN35.85 (= SA 232) the Buddha teaches the world is empty (suñño loko).
The world is said to be empty, because of being empty of self or of anything belonging to self (suññam attena vā attaniyena vā).
The world refers to the sense spheres, which are empty of self or of anything belonging to self.