Is nibbana similar to annihilation?

Nibbana ~ the ending of sufferings, ie : greeds hatreds delusions . The stopping of the cycle of the 5 aggregates.

Annihilation ~ to destroy (something ) completely.

Is there any different between both end result ?!

1 Like

(A brahmin in Verañjā once said:)
“Good Gotama teaches annihilation.”

(To which the Buddha replied:)
“There is a way one could rightly say about me that the ascetic Gotama teaches annihilation.
For I speak of the annihilation of sensual desire, ill-will, and confusion;
I speak of the annihilation of various sorts of bad, unwholesome qualities.
But that’s not what you meant.”

Source: The origin of the monastic law, Theravāda Collection on Monastic Law



According to Buddhist teaching even though nihilist belive annihilation after death they will be re-born due to their ignorance.
There is no re-birth when you attain Nibbana.

What I meant is " the end result " !

The 5 aggregates stops completely !

my definitions:

Annihilation - to destroy something completely, that you value.

Nibbana , is to destroy something completely, that is of no value (on an ultimate/bigger picture level) and much suffering. It is consensual, personal and of much benefit in this life to be free from suffering.

with metta

Value or not depending on individual .
Annihilation is just the ending of certain thing. No continuation of it .

If so, in the bigger picture ,
we are nothing worth while . But , we value it very much, especially our life !

When nibbana is attained , ultimately certain thing is finished totally . No more continuation .

I find it hard for Buddhist to accept the ending of five aggregates is equally similar to the idea of annihilation !

1 Like

MN.72 explains in no uncertain terms what Nibbana is.

“And suppose someone were to ask you, ‘This fire that has gone out in front of you, in which direction from here has it gone? East? West? North? Or south?’ Thus asked, how would you reply?”

“That doesn’t apply, Master Gotama. Any fire burning dependent on a sustenance of grass and timber, being unnourished—from having consumed that sustenance and not being offered any other—is classified simply as ‘out’.”

With Metta

1 Like

Hi friend,

I am just trying to say that the end goal of dhamma practice will arrive at dissolution of the 5 aggregates with no future becoming !
Hence , the Precious Life we held now has come to an end permanently !

Thank you .

1 Like

Nothing precious about Samsara.

1 Like

Including your very life ?! If someone kills you , no need to weeps !

“But if they take your life with a sharp knife…?”

“If they take my life with a sharp knife, I will think, ‘There are disciples of the Blessed One who — horrified, humiliated, and disgusted by the body and by life — have sought for an assassin, but here I have met my assassin without searching for him.’ That is what I will think, O Blessed One. That is what I will think, O One Well-gone.”

1 Like

Forgive me for my poor English , could you explain it in plain ?

For a person who realise Nibbana, life is not precious.

1 Like

I see, but , for me I still think we are not compatible to the ariya !
May be you are , I don’t know !
By the way , everything in samsara is worthless including the Precious Dhamma according to your understanding !

Thanks .

Dhamma is the raft.
You discard when you cross the flood.

No I am not an Arahant.
I am trying to answer you question in OP.

So, this is in accordance to the view of those says that buddhism in a way is nihilism !

This is exactly the contradiction of the relative and ultimate truth !

At one hand , we are not supposed to kill , life is precious !
On the other hand , life is worthless ! You may discard your life at any time you wishes after attaining nibbana .


I tend to agree with Bhikkhu Bodhi, that Nirvana is an existing reality, rather than simply personal annihilation:


Some suttas have already been quoted. Here’s another nice one

AN 2.118: “Bhikkhus, these two desires are hard to abandon. What two? The desire for gain and the desire for life."

Edit: I see a fundamental communication problem in EBT Buddhism. I think there is the legitimate question of the practitioner “What do I get practicing your way? Because all these other paths are clear in what they promise”.
And Buddhism says “Your very desire to get something out of the practice is misleading. There is something ultimately beautiful to realize, but it’s not what can be described or has anything to do with what you desire.”

As (more-or-less) truthful as it is, it’s not a direct answer to the practitioner’s question, nor does it sound very satisfying. If anything, it’s mysterious. And why should Buddhism’s mysteriousness be superior to some other mysteriousness, say of Daoism?


Please read this article by Bhikkhu Bodhi, which quotes the early Buddhist texts:

Bhikkhu Bodhi explains these things as clearly and directly as possible.