Is the saññāvedayitanirodha a cognitive state?

[Green]

@NgXinZhao

Now that’s just misrepresenting a whole tradition. No self is a hall-mark of Buddhism, whichever school rejects it, rejects the dhamma.

I am not talking about no self. I am talking about the position/the idea there are really individual streams of vinnana sota’s that have existed endlessly and a first moment for their existence cannot be found. I do not believe that Buddha teaches this as the ultimate truth about ourselves. At best how we perceive ourselves in an delusional and identified way. Identified with vinnana’s.
Ultimately this have never been real.

@NgXinZhao

Very good, if I didn’t remember wrongly, you didn’t believe in rebirth not too long ago. Congrats.

Probably you refer to me saying that i see those rebirth ideas in the sutta’s and theravada as gross and oversimpliflied. In my opinion it is all clearly magical thinking. I do not reject the possibility or rebirth but these primitive ideas about it.

@NgXinZhao

It’s your own notion of the unconditioned. We have different interpretations of it. Don’t ask the world what it cannot give you. Reality is what it is.

I am most true to the sutta’s, i feel The sutta speak about asankhata as the uninclined, Nibbana, the amazing, the stable, constant, not-desintgrating, state of grace, Truth…, and never ever as nothing at all, nor ever as mere a concept. It really points to something.

I am always true to the sutta’s. But, my perspective is: some people just cannot accept anything stable, constant, not-desintegrating as part of Buddha-Dhamma…I see this as a problem, wrong view, wrong tendency, wrong choice. I give reasons, arguments, always based upon the sutta’s, but i cannot really help to overcome peoples resistance, aversion, towards no-change.

Any reference to no-change meets enormous resistance. But i feel it is not honest, not sincere, that the sutta’s do not teach the stable, the constant, the not-desintegrating, the very hard to see etc.
They do beyond any doubt.

Oke, we can differ in opinions but not about what is fact. How can i be a heretic, a threat, when i only respect the sutta’s teaching an element or aspect of no-change?

@NgXinZhao

You can choose not to reply so as not to trigger further reply that makes strange things happen to your poor heart. May you be well and happy.

To be honest, it really touches my heart how much resistance, bordering to aversion, this talking about an element of no-change meets. If you see all this from a distance…what is really happening? Why does it meet so much resistence? Why? It is not that the Buddha did not taught asankhata, that what is not desintegrating and is stable. So why does this meet so much resistance?

Shall we continue this discussion here?
The Aspect of No-Change - Discussion - Discuss & Discover (suttacentral.net)