Nibanna as the cessation of existence

[dhammapala]

If parinibanna is taken as the total extinction of the 5 skandhas - then what prevents rearising?

[Jasudho]

@dhammapala

what prevents rearising?

The Buddha says the cessation of ignorance and craving prevents rearising/rebirth.
These are the fuels for the perpetuation of saṁsāra.

SN56.11:
Now this is the noble truth of the cessation of suffering.
Idaṁ kho pana, bhikkhave, dukkhanirodhaṁ ariyasaccaṁ—
It’s the fading away and cessation of that very same craving no residue left behind; giving it away, letting it go, releasing it, and not clinging to it. These are all terms for Nibbāna.
yo tassāyeva taṇhāya asesavirāganirodho cāgo paṭinissaggo mutti anālayo.

In the prior NT, the Buddha states:
Now this is the noble truth of the origin of suffering.

It’s the craving that leads to future lives, mixed up with relishing and greed, taking pleasure there wherever it alights.

[Commentary by Ven. Sujato - This definition clarifies two common misunderstandings. First, not all desire causes suffering, for some kinds of desire lead out of suffering (SN 51.15:4.1). Second, rebirth is not a tangential part of the Buddha’s teachings, uncritically inherited from cultural suppositions; it is baked into the fundamental meaning of the four noble truths. | The idiom tatratatra (literally “there, there”) is not selective (“here and there”) but distributive (“each and every place”, “everywhere”). By taking pleasure in sense experience, the mind binds itself to the need for continued stimulation in future lives. The distancing sense “there” is important, for craving does not merely satisfy itself with what it currently experiences, but must always seek out renewed gratification. For an Upaniṣadic precursor, see the note to the same idiom at [MN2:8.8(SuttaCentral). yāyaṁ taṇhā ponobbhavikā nandirāgasahagatā tatratatrābhinandinī, seyyathidaṁ— craving for sensual pleasures, craving to continue existence, and craving for nonexistence. Craving for sensual pleasures in this life or the next, binding oneself to a form that can experience such pleasures. In Buddhism, this includes not only the human realm, but all of the heavenly realms too, so far as the Brahmā realm. When a person has good kamma, they are reborn in a realm where they enjoy such pleasures, if not, in a lower realm. | Craving to continue existence (bhavataṇhā) refers to any desire, whether conscious or not, to continue existence after death. When it solidifies as a view it is called eternalism, and motivates religious and spiritual practices aiming at “eternal life”. As such, it especially applies to rebirth in the Brahmā realms. However, it is still present even in those who do not ascribe to such a view; craving is more primal than view (see SN 12.2:6.3 and notes). | Craving for nonexistence is the longing to destroy the self, in contrast with the Buddhist perspective that the self is a false construct. When it crystallizes as a view it is called annihilationism. kāmataṇhā, bhavataṇhā, vibhavataṇhā.

In general terms, the extinguishment of craving and ignorance lead to the cessation of a unique combination of processes or life-stream that interacted as “you.” When the fuel runs out, that stream ceases like “that flame went out.”
“That flame” does not re-arise any more than the particular flame of a birthday candle re-arises after being blown out.

[dhammapala]

@Jasudho

The Buddha says the cessation of ignorance and craving prevents rearising/rebirth.
These are the fuels for the perpetuation of saṁsāra.

Does cessation of ignorance and craving = cessation of conscious experience of any kind?

Or, is it that which was subject to ignorance and craving, now illumined with wisdom, no longer re-arises, is not entangled in ceaseless ‘becoming’ but has ‘become’?

My point of difficulty is parinibanna taken as a total cessation of conscious experience of any kind.

“'I am the owner of my actions (kamma), heir to my actions, born of my actions, related through my actions, and have my actions as my arbitrator. Whatever I do, for good or for evil, to that will I fall heir…”

If parinibanna is taken as a total cessation of conscious experience of any kind, then that which decides to take ownership of ones kamma, is extinguished entirely. If that is extinguished entirely, meaning no conscious ownership of kamma, then what is preventing the conditions leading to the re-arising of the one which came to own their kamma, from arising again?

There would be nothing holding back or suppressing the 5 skandhas from arising again. With the owner of kamma, the one who is heir to their kamma gone, the wisdom garnered in that life gone, what holds back the process from arising again?

Abandoning craving for existence and non-existence: what is left? The interpretations of nibanna I have been looking into recently all seem to be pointing to the abandonment of language as a means to fully gauge experience.

The Arahants being described as what they do as compared to what they are.

All descriptors of the Arahant and Tathagata seem to be pointing to immeasurability.

[Jasudho]

@dhammapala

Does cessation of ignorance and craving = cessation of conscious experience of any kind?

Arahants are still conscious and all the aggregates and senses remain functional while there’s life.
One understanding of parinibbāna is that when the senses and aggregates fully cease, consciousness and all dukkha do too.
Others state that after the final death, there is still “something” beyond time and space that’s blissful or peaceful.

@dhammapala

If parinibanna is taken as a total cessation of conscious experience of any kind, then that which decides to take ownership of ones kamma, is extinguished entirely. If that is extinguished entirely, meaning no conscious ownership of kamma, then what is preventing the conditions leading to the re-arising of the one which came to own their kamma, from arising again?

As in the previous post, those kammic conditions cease and go out, just as a flame goes out. Can conditions combine to re-create the same flame?

But when conditions end after the final death for awakened ones, it doesn’t mean all conditions end.
After all, we’re still experiencing the conditional. so to speak.
Also see AN10.95.

@dhammapala

All descriptors of the Arahant and Tathagata seem to be pointing to immeasurability.

I’d offer not so much in an ontological or metaphysical sense. More as: when there’s no self-view, no grasping, or new kamma being created, there’s nothing specific to measure.
In fact, regarding “self” and “Tathagatas” there’s never been an essential or core essence to either, ever.
Only conditions, dukkha, arises and ceases.

[dhammapala]

@Jasudho

One understanding of parinibbāna is that when the senses and aggregates fully cease, consciousness and all dukkha do too.
Others state that after the final death, there is still “something” beyond time and space that’s blissful or peaceful.

This is where the erring is coming from. I have seen the threads regarding consciousness that is without surface, viññāna anidassanaṁ. I have also seen the argument that just because something is unchanging does not mean that it is eternal, as being eternal is being subject to time, and this matter transcends time all together.

I think the only way to get to the bottom of this matter is to find out directly. At this stage in my development, words do not seem to be doing the trick, and I am going round and round.

If one abadons abstraction momentarily, where is form, feeling, perception, abstraction and consciousness? The tendency to describe them as the 5 skandkas disappears, but what each term points to remains.

@Jasudho

As in the previous post, those kammic conditions cease and go out, just as a flame goes out. Can conditions combine to re-create the same flame?

But when conditions end after the final death for awakened ones, it doesn’t mean all conditions end.
After all, we’re still in the conditional. so to speak.
Also see AN10.95.

This is the other analogy that I have been wrestling with. The candle goes out and the fuel for the flame extinguishes. But what led to the candle arising in the first place? Let’s suppose we have a portrait of a burning candle. First we take the flame away, then we take the candle away, and now we are left with a blank canvas. But: how did the candle get on the canvas in the first place?

The flame will not be the same flame that was blown out, but any flame or candle arising would be the same in quality.

Your final paragraph is the one that throws the spanner in the works. The tetralemma in AN10.95 points back to the skillful negation of language as a description for the status of an awakened one. The descriptors of awakening in that Sutta are more palatable and are something that I can work with.

@Jasudho

More as: when there’s no self-view, no grasping, or new kamma being created, there’s nothing specific to measure.
In fact, regarding “self” and “Tathagatas” there’s never been an essential or core essence to either, ever.
Only conditions, dukkha, arises and ceases.

This statement is interesting. When examined, I cannot say it is born of clinging or pertains to a view, but points to a freedom from the thicket of views and the stress that comes from clinging to views.

[Jasudho]

@dhammapala

If one abadons abstraction momentarily, where is form, feeling, perception, abstraction and consciousness? The tendency to describe them as the 5 skandkas disappears, but what each term points to remains.

The Buddha said dukkha is real.
SN12.17:
“Well, is there no such thing as suffering?”

“It’s not that there’s no such thing as suffering. Suffering is real.”

“Then does the worthy Gotama not know or see suffering?”

“It’s not that I don’t know or see suffering. I do know suffering, I do see suffering.”

There are direct experiences of conditions, which can be cagtogarized as the senses and aggregates.
Since they are conditional and impermanent, they are dukkha.

SN22.85: “What’s impermanent is suffering. Yad aniccaṁ taṁ dukkhaṁ;”

When conditions end, dukkha ends.

@dhammapala

But what led to the candle arising in the first place?

The Buddha didn’t become involved in such metaphysical speculations.
SN15.3:
" “Mendicants, this transmigration has no known beginning. No first point is found of sentient beings roaming and transmigrating, shrouded by ignorance and fettered by craving. "

There’s no need to somehow know how “it all started.” What’s important is practicing the Path to end all conditions/experiences.

The tetralemma is about not answering questions that subtly assume a core or essence or self.

The ineffable goal of the Upasīva Sutta

Hi Discoursers! The following is a continuation of a series of draft essays connected to the Kaccānagotta Sutta. Previous essays which are relevant: the “world” in the Kaccānagotta Sutta “existence” and “nonexistence” in the Kaccānagotta Sutta only suffering and its cessation, indeed I’d be happy to receive any criticism in order to improve potential future versions of this essay. And I’d be even happier if you all have some fruitful Dhamma discussions below. Introduction W…

I’m not too interested to debate final nibbāna.
I just offered some reflections and citations regarding the particular questions you asked about the arising and ceasing of conditions, i.e. dukkha.

All Best