Is Nibbana a different reality, or just a different state of mind?

[Martin]

@Sujith

Moksha in Adwaita is gaining union with Brahman, who is posited as the intelligent creator of the world. This is incompatible with the Buddha’s Teaching, which advises one to put aside the question of creation of the cosmos.

Sure, I realise that Buddhism doesn’t “have” Atman and Brahman, I was thinking about it from an experiential view, assuming that Nibbana is a transcendent reality of some kind ( see the OP ). The similarity would be in the experience of accessing a transcendent reality, though using different terminology and with different assumptions.

[Martin]

@Mat

The Buddha’s Dhamma doesn’t label anything, but merely describes the container (aggregates, elements, sense doors).

As I see it there are just different explanations for “spiritual” experiences. The explanation provided by Buddhism certainly looks more sophisticated than some of the others, but it is an explanation none-the-less.
Buddhism doesn’t just describe the container, it also describes the goal ( Nibbana ), though in a rather ambiguous way ( hence the OP ).

[Sujith]

@Martin

The similarity would be in the experience of accessing a transcendent reality, though using different terminology and with different assumptions.

It’s not just about words and terminology, the fundamental tenets and views are vastly different and they would affect and influence whatever one experiences…

But, regarding the OP, maybe this sutta is relevant.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/iti/iti.2.028-049.than.html#iti-044

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 & the disagreeable, and is sensitive to pleasure & pain. His ending of passion, aversion, & 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.

[Sujith]

One more question.

What about paticca-samuppada ? Would knowledge of that also be attained in an instant ?

[seniya]

Nibbana is a cessation of dukkha (Third Noble Truth), like the Buddha said in his first disourse Dhammacakkapavattana Sutta.

[anon29387788]

Hi all

At @samseva’s request, I’ve moved the discussion about whether Jhana = Samma Samadhi to this new thread.

[Mat]

@Martin

it also describes the goal ( Nibbana ),

Yes but mostly in the absence of things such as the absence of those containers! Without understanding why the aggregates etc are suffering it is impossible to see why Nibbana is desirable, that is why God and heaven itself isn’t desirable (and even more, cannot exist) once the aggregates are clearly seen. People generally like things existing and the idea of something that doesn’t correspond to any known thing in the universe is rather mind-boggling, but that was the only solution that could be directly experienced and verifiable. The dhamma is directly visible and it can be known without waiting for the next life, for realization. When this realization was experienced, no imagination was projected on to that realization saying it is this and that (except when they did that when the monks wrote the Mahayana). I suspect Advaita was a similar ‘invention’.

with metta

[samseva]

I’d say that that nibbāna is simply the absolute absense of the suffering due to the complete uprooting of all the Taints/Fetters (saṃyojana/āsava), and that metaphorically, it problobly reassembles having been on fire, from head to toe, for lifetimes, only for the fire to be put out by large buckets of fresh water.

[freedom]

It is nibbana when one does not decrease even if one does nothing. It is nibbana when one is freed from all conditioned phenomena. It is nibbana when one is freed from oneself. It is nibbana when nothing can relate to oneself (even with one’s own state of mind). Therefore, it is not a place, it is not a thing, it is not a state of one’s mind. It is nibbana when “I, me, my, mine” forever does not exist. When “I, me, my, mine” does not exist, how can “I” increase or decrease? Where can “I” go? What can bring suffering or happiness to “me”? When we cannot find “I” in nibbana, how can we fill nibbana up when “I” attain nibbana? Of course, it is not an annihilation!

[Mat]

@Sujith

What about paticca-samuppada ? Would knowledge of that also be attained in an instant ?

Attainment, and realization of nibbana happens in an instant. But the lead up to it takes longer. The EBT simile is one of the sea bottom sloping but then suddenly deepening. Knowledge of the DO, of the dependently arisen nature of phenomena, inclines the mind towards nibbana. It shows the lack of inherent existence, showing the dance of phenomena to be an illusion, allowing the mind to let go at the deeper and deeper levels. With repulsion, dispassion and cessation the sea deepens steadily until a bottomless sea trench hits.

with metta

[SarathW1]

@Martin

Buddhism doesn’t just describe the container, it also describes the goal ( Nibbana ), though in a rather ambiguous way ( hence the OP ).

I think this is an attempt to non-objectifying the Nibbana.
Because Nibbana is not an objective reality.

[SarathW1]

@samseva

I’d say that that nibbāna is simply the absolute absense of the suffering

But Buddha had back pain.

[samseva]

Mental suffering, not physical suffering/pain.

That’s the other dart (SN 36.6).

[Mat]

@Sujith

What about paticca-samuppada ? Would knowledge of that also be attained in an instant ?

Just came across this sutta- had to share it here. This shows clearly that the stream entrant understands causality (translated here as condition) -if not the entire DO.

“When, bhikkhus, a noble disciple thus understands the condition (paccayam pajanati); thus understands the origin of the condition (pac­ca­ya­sa­muda­yaṃ pajānāti); thus understands the cessation of the condition (pac­ca­ya­nirodhaṃ pajānāti); thus understands the way leading to the cessation of the condition (pac­ca­ya­nirodha­gā­miniṃ paṭipadaṃ pajānāti), he is then called a noble disciple who is accomplished in view (diṭṭhisampanno), accomplished in vision (dassa­na­sam­panno), who has arrived at this true Dhamma (āgato imaṃ saddhammaṃ), who sees this true Dhamma (saddhammaṃ), who possesses a trainee’s knowledge (­sekkhena ñāṇena), a trainee’s true knowledge (sekkhena ñāṇena), who has entered the stream of the Dhamma (dhammasotaṃ samāpanno), a noble one with penetrative wisdom (ariyo nib­bedhi­kapañño), one who stands squarely before the door to the Deathless (amatadvāraṃ āhacca tiṭṭhati).” SN12.27

with metta

[Martin]

@Sujith

It’s not just about words and terminology, the fundamental tenets and views are vastly different and they would affect and influence whatever one experiences…

Perhaps, though I then wonder about confirmation bias, ie we find what we expect to find, given a particular set of assumptions and views. And of course different approaches to practice will lead in different directions.

[Martin]

@SarathW1

Because Nibbana is not an objective reality.

Could you provide some sutta references to support that position? I don’t think it’s clear.

[Martin]

@anon29387788

At @samseva’s request, I’ve moved the discussion about whether Jhana = Samma Samadhi to this new thread.

Thanks.

[SarathW1]

@Martin

Could you provide some sutta references

See MN 18. As Sn 4.14 points out, the root of the classifications and perceptions of objectification is the thought, “I am the thinker.” This thought forms the motivation for the questions that Ven. Maha Kotthita is presenting here: the sense of “I am the thinker” can either fear or desire annihilation in the course of Unbinding. Both concerns get in the way of the abandoning of clinging, which is essential for the attainment of Unbinding, which is why the questions should not be asked. >

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.174.than.html

[Martin]

@SarathW1

Could you provide some sutta references

See MN 18. As Sn 4.14 points out, the root of the classifications and perceptions of objectification is the thought, “I am the thinker.” This thought forms the motivation for the questions that Ven. Maha Kotthita is presenting here: the sense of “I am the thinker” can either fear or desire annihilation in the course of Unbinding. Both concerns get in the way of the abandoning of clinging, which is essential for the attainment of Unbinding, which is why the questions should not be asked. >

Kotthita Sutta: To Kotthita

Thanks, but this is really about an approach to pratice, and I don’t see how it supports your position of Nibbana not being an objective reality.

The Udana passage I posted in the OP ( Ud 8.3 ) seems more on point, though I do think it’s ambiguous.

There is also Ud 8.1, which describes Nibbana ( again rather ambiguously ) in terms of a dimension or sphere:

“There is that dimension, monks, where there is neither earth, nor water, nor fire, nor wind; neither dimension of the infinitude of space, nor dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, nor dimension of nothingness, nor dimension of neither perception nor non-perception; neither this world, nor the next world, nor sun, nor moon. And there, I say, there is neither coming, nor going, nor staying; neither passing away nor arising: unestablished,[1] unevolving, without support [mental object].[2] This, just this, is the end of stress.”
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.8.01.than.html

[SarathW1]

@Martin

There is that dimension, monks, where there is neither earth, nor water, nor fire, nor wind; neither dimension of the infinitude of space, nor dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, nor dimension of nothingness, nor dimension of neither perception nor non-perception

He is referring to the cessation of perception and feeling.