Is it accurate to say that Nibbana is just a state of mind (citta), or is there more to it?
There are Udana verses which seem to describe Nibbana as a different sphere (ayatana), and I’m not sure what that means.
1 Like
Yes…
I think these are states of mind. All the 8 states of mind(4 paths and 4 fruits). Well using ‘state’ word for mind would be contradicting it. Saying this would be misleading for those who just trust words.
Being aware of the above fact I also believe that we can say that it is a state of mind characterized by non-greed, non-ill will(non-hate), non-delusion.
1 Like
@Alaray You are correct BUT when you talk about ending of greed, hate and delusion, you are NOT ONLY talk about parinibbāna. There are others below:
- Parinibbāna (nibbāna without remainder)
- Kilesa-parinibbāna (nibbāna with remainder)
- The mind at arahant level
Now, let’s look at the property of unconditioned:
- Parinibbāna (nibbāna without remainder): not-self, permanent, unconditioned
- Kilesa-parinibbāna (nibbāna with remainder): not-self, permanent, unconditioned
- The mind at arahant level: not-self, impermanent and still with very very little of suffering if got clung to. This is conditioned.
So, in the suttas, the Buddha was most likely referring to the Kilesa-parinibbāna (nibbāna with remainder), not the Parinibbāna. The reason is: Kilesa-parinibbāna can be experienced by the mind which is free of greed, hate and delusion; and the Buddha was instructing the monks how to train the mind to be free of greed, hate and delusion.
On the other hand, Parinibbāna is a very delicate topic and can easily lead to all kind of wild speculation theories as I already said in another thread here.
Finally, as I said in previous reply: None of 2 types of nibbāna is consciousness or mind or citta or self. And obviously, those 2 types of nibbāna are NOT states of mind because states of mind are conditioned while nibbāna is unconditioned.
Hope that I managed to clear your confusion, Alaray 
4 Likes
so you think nibbana is an experience ?
so without mind in parinibbana how could you experience nibbana ?
but arahant have ceased greed,hate and delusion so why do you differentiate kilesa parinibanna and the mind of arahat ?
Just want to add, there is no kilesa-nibbana. Buddha never used this term ever. You might want to distinguish between these 2 types of Nibbana (ITI 44):
- Saupādisesā ca nibbānadhātu, = Nibbana with leftover
- Anupādisesā ca nibbānadhātu. = Nibbana without leftover.
Kilesa is impurity. There is no impurity (kilesa) in Nibbana.
It is difficult to understand Nibbana for one who has not done with the path.
The easy way to understand is as Described AN 11.7,
This is peaceful; this is sublime—that is, the balancing of all process activities, the letting go of all attachments, the ending of craving, fading away, cessation, cooling.’
‘etaṁ santaṁ etaṁ paṇītaṁ, yadidaṁ sabbasaṅkhārasamatho sabbūpadhipaṭinissaggo taṇhākkhayo virāgo nirodho nibbānan’ti.
Hence Nibbana element is cooling. No desire, no new sankharas, etc.
The question is:
Have you cooled your body actitivites (sila) hence you can cool the mind (samadhi), hence the arising of wisdom(panna)/vimutti?
2 Likes
I think it depends how you interpret “unconditioned”. Does it refer to the mind being unconditioned by craving, aversion and delusion, or does it refer to Nibbana being an independent phenomenon, not subject to conditions?
And if Nibbana is unconditioned, does that make it an objective reality, something one “connects” with?
1 Like
With respect, the suttas do not mention "Kilesa-parinibbāna ". Rather, the terms used are sa-upādisesa nibbānadhatu and anupādisesa nibbānadhatu for nibbāna with residue and nibbāna without residue, (parinibbāna).
upādisesa means “some remaining fuel”. In this context, pointing to the presence of the khandas while an arahant is still alive. Though they’re present, there is no clinging, self-view ,or self-making, ahamkāra.
By definition, no kilesas can be present with respect to nibbāna.
2 Likes
@Joe.C and @Jasudho Thank you for your remarks. You guys are correct that the suttas do not mention “Kilesa-parinibbāna”. Instead, according to Iti 44 Nibbānadhātusutta, the terms are sa-upādisesa nibbānadhatu and anupādisesa nibbānadhatu for nibbāna with residue and nibbāna without residue, (parinibbāna)
The term “Kilesa-parinibbāna” is defined in this Dictionary of Buddhism by Damien Keown as below:
The condition or state of being awakened in this life (as was the Buddha) through the destruction of the impurities (āśrava) and defilements (kleśa). Also known in Pāli sources as the extinction of the defilements (kilesa-parinibbāna). In such a person the five aggregates (skandha) that constitute individuality remain, and he is still exposed to the possibility of suffering and the effect of previous karma. Only at death when final nirvāṇa (parinirvāṇa) is attained is suffering completely at an end.
I repeat here that you guys are correct 
. Just that I did not invent that term “Kilesa-parinibbāna” by myself. I still acknowledge that it was still my ignorance for not showing the source of this term.
Anyway, it still does not affect the logic of my original post above.
1 Like
@Alaray No, Kilesa-parinibbāna can be experienced by the mind which is free of greed, hate and delusion but it is not an experience.
The question regarding “experience parinibbāna” is equivalent to the one asking about experiencing inside the blackhole. This issue has been discussed in another thread before.
Because the mind at the arahant level is still impermanent, conditioned while kilesa-parinibbāna is permanent, unconditioned. The mind at the arahant level can experience kilesa-parinibbāna. But they are not the same. So, we have to differentiate them.
1 Like
@Martin In my understanding, it refers to Nibbana being an independent reality, not subject to conditions
Nibbana is a reality. It is clearly announced in the 3rd Noble Truth.
There is nobody that enters or “connects” with it. For an arahant, “Self” or “Being” are just conventional usage of language.
1 Like
could color and sight be experienced by the mind which is free from defilements ?
isn’t sight/color an experience ?
ven sariputta said that nibbana is bliss, without an experience he couldn’t say that, it’s like without experiencing that chili is hot you couldn’t say chili is hot unless you are lying and I don’t think someone like ven sariputta can lie
now even nothing is still something
there’s the knower, the things they know (nothing) and the process of knowing(knowledge)
now I don’t think nibbana know itself because knife can’t cut itself so it must be something external like consciousness without surface or something like that that experience nothing otherwise you couldn’t say that nothing exists because without the knower and the known, knowledge wouldn’t arise
So do you view Nibbana as an objective reality which is always there, waiting to be discovered?
1 Like
Something useful to read
Basically we’re talking about Buddha-nature. We have to be really careful when establishing the idea of this Buddha-nature, otherwise it might end up becoming something like atman or a truly existing soul and so on. That’s why we talk about it as a quality that is the absence of the dirt. I’m telling you to be careful because the Mahayana shastras talk about the qualities of this ‘result of freedom’: the ten powers, the four fearlessnesses, the 32 major marks, the 80 minor marks, and so on. If you’re not careful, then you might start to think more theistically again. But all these are qualities of the absence of dirt
(Page 3)
[Q] What makes us different from Hindus, given that Hindus say everything is from Shiva?
[A] This is their job! (Rinpoche turns to Tulku Jigme Khyentse Rinpoche and Tulku Pema Wangyal Rinpoche). I’m kind of a Hindu myself! What do you want to know? The difference between Buddha-nature and atman or Ishvara?
[A] (Tulku Jigme Khyentse Rinpoche) I don’t have an answer to that, but I was just wondering if Rinpoche already answered this when he was explaining the slight difference in the way we are using the vocabulary of permanence, clean, self and bliss.
[A] (Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche) I didn’t even realise that!
(347-349)
I don’t know if this applies to all Buddhist schools, but the general rule or tradition in schools of Buddhist philosophy is that students study Madhyamika first, because it really helps to deconstruct all kinds of concepts. Madhyamika is followed by vinaya, metaphysics and all that. And gyü lama, the Uttaratantra, is taught at a later stage, often as the last text in the Buddhist curriculum, and many masters of the past say that the Uttaratantra is like a bridge between the sutras and tantra.
(Page 9)
BUDDHA-NATURE
MAHAYANA-UTTARATANTRA-SHASTRA
By Arya Maitreya
With Commentary by
DZONGSAR JAMYANG KHYENTSE RINPOCHE
Given at the Centre d’Études de Chanteloube
Dordogne, France
2003-2004
Edited by Alex Trisoglio
© 2007 by Siddhartha’s Intent
1 Like
So is there anything in the EBT corresponding to Buddha-nature? It appears to be a later development.
Also there seem to be different ideas about what Buddha-nature is. Some describe it as the potential for enlightenment, others describe it as some kind of essence, almost like an Atman.
1 Like
How is that different from the dimension of nothingness?
1 Like
it’s even more subtle
Yes. The mind which is free from defilements still experiences color and sight (from light). However, such a mind does not cling to anything (light, color/sight or even mind, etc.) in the world.
I would rather say: Light interacts with the eyes to form eye-consciousness. From there, the mind experiences light as sight and color. Light is not an experience.
Here, again, you still don’t get out of the confusion yet. You need to differentiate between kilesa-parinibbāna and parinibbāna. In that sutta, Ven. Sariputta was referring to kilesa-parinibbāna. Of course, as an arahant, Ven. Sariputta experienced kilesa-parinibbāna. This is what I said from the beginning of this thread.
The “knower” is just a conventional usage of language, same situation with “self” or “being”. As I said, the mind at arahant level experiences kilesa-parinibbāna. I did NOT say: There is a knower who experiences kilesa-parinibbāna.
Nibbāna is not mind or citta or consciousness or self or states of mind. It does not make any sense to say nibbāna “knows”. Nibbāna is not “something” and it’s not “external” and it’s not “internal”. Such concept does not applies here.
There is no such kind of dependent origination as taught by the Buddha. Knowledge does not arise that way.
Also, as I said in this thread, Nibbāna is a reality as confirmed by the 3rd Noble Truth.
1 Like
Please note: Here is a discussion forum and I am not at arahant level. I present my understanding for discussion. I back it up with suttas, logical and experience. I am ready to let go of my view if it is shown to me beyond doubt that it leads to suffering.
To my understanding: Nibbāna is a reality as firmly announced in the 3rd Noble Truth. It’s permanent, meaning it’s always there.
For the phrase “waiting to be discovered”, it is somewhat confusing. Nibbāna does not wait for anything or for anyone. Instead of “to be discovered”, I would rather say: It’s a guarantee that the mind at arahant level, free from defilements will surely experience Nibbāna.
You can check the following Mūlapariyāyasutta MN1
They directly know extinguishment as extinguishment.
nibbānaṁ nibbānato abhijānāti;
But they don’t identify with extinguishment, they don’t identify regarding extinguishment, they don’t identify as extinguishment, they don’t identify that ‘extinguishment is mine’, they don’t take pleasure in extinguishment.
nibbānaṁ nibbānato abhiññāya nibbānaṁ na maññati, nibbānasmiṁ na maññati, nibbānato na maññati, nibbānaṁ meti na maññati, nibbānaṁ nābhinandati.
Why is that?
Taṁ kissa hetu?
Because they have completely understood it, I say.
‘Pariññātaṁ tassā’ti vadāmi.
1 Like
If Nibbana is a permanent and objective reality, then presumably the Arahant has managed to connect with it in some sense. How do you see that happening?
As I said above in this thread, I am not at arahant level. I present my understanding for discussion. I back it up with suttas, logical and experience. I am ready to let go of my view if it is shown to me beyond doubt that it leads to suffering.
“Arahant” or “self” or “being” or “knower”, all those are just conventional usage of language. Instead, we should talk about “the mind at arahant level which is free from defilements”. And that kind of mind experiences the kilesa-nibbāna.
For the mind who is not yet at arahant level, it’s impossible to understand that kind of experience. We only know the path to experience kilesa-nibbāna as taught by the Buddha. We don’t know exactly that experience yet. We can experience that kind of experience (kilesa-nibbāna) here and now in this lifetime by training the mind to get rid of defilements.
Just take an example: Suppose you never been to the top of Mount Everest. There is no way you can understand the experience of standing on the top of Mount Everest. You can hear from the people who has been there but it’s not the same experience. The only way to experience that is to go there by yourselves through correct instruction steps. As long as the instructions are good and you follow them correctly, it’s guarantee that you will get that experience.
1 Like