Here are a couple examples to consider
First an example of how & why one could say that one ought not reify a cessation.
“I was sick before and now I am healthy.”
When thought about as ‘before I had a thing, the thing ended, and now I am without the thing.’
People say, here ‘cessation’ of disease is not a thing because it doesn’t add something to the equation, it merely removes what was.
The logic is like this
- a is me
- b is sickness
- a+b s me with the sickness
- a+b-b is the removal of sickness
Thus in the end it is just me and the cessation cancels out the sickness and is not a thing.
This would describing me as i change while persisting.
This describes a change in the constructed as it persists.
If one was to think of a world changing, where having been with the aggregates which could be grasped with wrong view as being personal for one who attained cessation, the world would become without those aggregates. Then one would think like this.
There are instances where one would think like this, for example
The Realized One’s body remains, but his attachment to rebirth has been cut off. As long as his body remains he will be seen by gods and humans. But when his body breaks up, after life has ended, gods and humans will see him no more.
Here the conception & perception of other beings can be described as a world and it would change as it persists. Having been with the perception of Tathagata it would become without.
Now keep in mind that this still describes just a change in the constructed as it persists, which is thr perception & conception of a world by the gods and humans.
This is one way to think about it.
Another way to think about the same example “I was sick before and now I am healthy.”
Here one thinks not: ‘before I had a thing, the thing ended, and now I am without the thing.’
Rather one thinks: ‘I was sick before and now I am healthy.’
Here one thinks only of the two elements, the being sick and the being healthy.
In other words here one describes only the state of being sick & it’s cessation
Logic is like this
if a then not b
if b then not a
a is being sick
b is being healthy
One understands that if there was no discernment of being healthy then cessation of being sick would not be discerned.
Therefore here the discernment of being healthy is a cessation of being sick.
There are many texts where one should think in this way
But sir, could there be another way in which a mendicant is qualified to be called ‘skilled in the elements’?”
“There could, Ānanda. There are these two elements: the constructed element and the unconstructed element. When a mendicant knows and sees these two elements, they’re qualified to be called ‘skilled in the elements’.” - MN 115
Both formerly & now, it is only dukkha that I describe, and the cessation of dukkha."
There is, monks, an unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated. If there were not that unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated, there would not be the case that escape from the born — become — made — fabricated would be discerned. But precisely because there is an unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated, escape from the born — become — made — fabricated is discerned. - Udana 8.3
It is crucial to keep in mind that when we are talking about a cessation of the constructed occuring in dependence on the unconstructed, a world ceases in reference to a cessation of conception & perception of the world.
Therefore this cessation occurs only for one who attains it. For on who attains it, the world ends, there is no future or an after parinibbana,for them all modes of being cease.
One can say ‘the world still exists for other beings and for them there is an ‘after’, after the parinibbana of another, but one must keep in mind that this is essentially a different world. And it is only in the context of speaking about this world’s changing as it persists, that one can talk about the parinibbana as a change in the constructed, not reifying the cessation, just as one would talk about seeing a fire being extinguished.
When talking about the parinibbana, or the cessation of perception & feeling, from the frame of reference of one who attains it,then one must reify the unmade as the cessation which is a truth & reality alternative to the conception & perception of the world. Because when talking about that cessation one is not talking about a change in the constructed as it persists, rather one talks about a cessation of the constructed in dependence on the unconstructed.
When one attains the cessation of the constructed in dependence on the unconstructed, one does not go into the unconstructed, does not come out of the constructed, the constructed doesn’t become the unconstructed, the unconstructed doesn’t do anything, the unconstructed doesn’t change.
Whoever attains the cessation of the constructed all do so in dependence on exactly one and the same unchanging truth & reality.
One should realize the importance of this.
In talking about the extinguishment of something constructed in dependence on something constructed one would never speak of extinguishing multiple fires with the exact same water. When talking about the extinguishment of something constructed in dependence on something constructed such as a perceived cessation of a fire being extinguished, one would not say that the fire that ceased yesterday, ceased in dependence on the same thing that a fire that would cease in the future would be ceasing in dependence upon.
Therefore the extinguishment of the constructed in dependence on the unconstructed is entirely extraordinary. Because it does occur in dependence on a single truth & reality which doesn’t change as it persists.