Where in the suttas is it presented indirectly then? I suspect you’re referring to meditative attainments rather than to Nibbana, but it would be useful to clarify this.
MN 122?
Thank you, Venerable! 
If it was good enough for KR Norman, it’s certainly more than good enough pour moi." 
I know how the Buddha often offered teachings to people steeped in the Brahmanical traditions, but the information and details you’ve provided are clarifying and very helpful.
And thanks for the link on pada, I’ll look forward to reading that.
With Metta and kataññu
2 Likes
Sorry. I guess that word already got snatched up. What about calling it something like “non-manifestative consciousness” or “consciousness without feature”? I am sure someone could translate that into Pali for us.
Vinnanam anidassanam? I don’t think there is a consensus on what that is.
That’s ok. There doesn’t seem to be consensus on what nibbana is either.
1 Like
You may find this essay by Ven. Sunyo helpful and informative:
3 Likes
If, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu’s mind has become dispassionate towards the form element, it is liberated from the taints by nonclinging. If his mind has become dispassionate towards the feeling element … towards the perception element … towards the volitional formations element … towards the consciousness element, it is liberated from the taints by nonclinging.
“By being liberated, it is steady; by being steady, it is content; by being content, he is not agitated. Being unagitated, he personally attains Nibbāna. He understands: ‘Destroyed is birth, the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more for this state of being.’ (SN22.45)
When the body is in pain, a run-of-the-mill person thinks “I am in pain”, when unpleasant feeling arises, he thinks “I feel horrible”, he becomes discontent, he is agitated, he is suffering.
When the body is in pain, an educated disciple of the noble ones does not think “I am in pain”, when unpleasant feeling arises, he does not think “I feel horrible,” since he is freed from them, he is steady and content. By being content, he is not agitated. Being unagitated, he personally attains Nibbāna.
When the body is in good shape, a run-of-the-mill person thinks “I am in a good shape”, when pleasant feeling arises, he thinks “I feel so good”, he clings to that body, that feeling. When that body is no longer in a good shape or that good feeling ceased and unpleasant feeling arises, he becomes discontent, he is agitated, he is suffering.
When the body is in good shape, an educated disciple of the noble ones does not think “I am in a good shape”, when pleasant feeling arises, he does not think “I feel so good.” When that body is no longer in a good shape or that good feeling ceased and unpleasant feeling arises, he does not have any trouble. Since he is freed from them, he is steady and content. By being content, he is not agitated. Being unagitated, he personally attains Nibbāna.
Form is there, feeling, perception, volitional formations, consciousness are there, but one attained Nibbāna and one is not. The educated disciple of the noble ones attained Nibbāna but “his” form, feeling, perception, volitional formations, consciousness are not disappeared to the thin air. What disappeared to the thin air is that “I, my.” When the body is in pain, he understands “the body is in pain.” The body is there, but the “my body” cannot be found except just for communication purpose. When unpleasant feeling arises, he understands “there is unpleasant feeling.” The feeling is there, but there is no “I who feel.” He does not interest in that form element, he does not interest in that feeling element…He does not cling to them. Since he does not cling to them, there is no reference to “I, my”.
So where is that “I, my”? It is in Nibbāna. Where is Nibbāna? It is where there is no “I, my” can be found, where “I, my” is completely destroyed with no future arising. What is Nibbāna? It is the absence of “I, my”.
Without “I, my”, what condition can cause suffering to “I”? Without “I, my”, will I die? will I get old or sick? So, what gets old, sick and die? For an educated disciple of the noble ones, it is simply that body, that feeling, that perception,…
Do form, feeling, perception, volitional formations, consciousness require “I, my”? Without “I, my”, will they disappear in the thin air?
When there is no “I, my” can be applied to a person, there is no ownership can be applied to that person. Without any ownership, he cannot be identified. Mr. A is no longer applied since he no longer owns that name. You can call him Mr. A or Mr. B or anything else, he has no trouble with that. He is what he is. He no longer identifies with any name. He can use any recognizable name just for communication purpose, but without identification since he is nameless.
Since he is nameless and cannot be identified, is it proper to ask if Mr. A exists or not exists? How can we identify or locate a person who has no name and cannot be identified as Mr. A? Therefore, the question is indeterminable. However, this does not mean that he does not exist. It means that he is unfathomable.
When the purified mind-base is completely released from the body, earth, water, air, fire no longer has any footing to it since it has no form. It is no longer limited by the body, so it is boundless. Because it is purified energy, it is luminous all around. Since it is energy, it is indestructible, but it is not permanent. It can change from this state to another state. From resting to active and so on. It has no beginning and end. When the purified mind base does not receive any object, there is no mind-consciousness, no name-and-form. It is in its resting state. It could be what we called vinnanam anidassanam. It is free from suffering in this resting state. However, it is not Nibbāna. It is what it is. If it no longer identifies with “I, my” then it attained Nibbāna. If it still identifies with “I, my” then it is not free from suffering.
For a run-of-the-mill person, the “I, my” is tied to form, feeling, perception, volitional formations, consciousness. They are his refuge. He clings to them and identifies himself with them. If not cling to the five aggregates, he will cling to something that he does not know what it is or if it exists. He cannot let go of that clinging. He cannot function without clinging to something.
2 Likes
Nibbana is also regarded as ‘the cessation of dhamma’(‘dhammaana.m nirodha.m’), according to SA 352-354 = SN 12.13-14, SN 12.71-81. See p. 180, note 129:
Page 180 from The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism Choong Mun-keat 2000.pdf (82.0 KB)
To attaining Nibbana (or liberation) is described in SN/SA suttas in terms of the five stages (p. 53):
Pages 52-3 from The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism Choong Mun-keat 2000.pdf (155.1 KB)
Thanks so much for posting that sutta. I was looking for it for the past couple days but couldn’t remember where it was. It’s beautiful and very relevant to the topic at hand.
1 Like
Hello Green,
To repeat, the Buddha said the “no-born” is “the escape from that”, “the cessation of all painful things”. So “no-born” is a negation of the born, unlike in brahmanism where “unborn” refers to the presence of a Self.
But I agree with you bickering over exact translations isn’t the most important thing. It’s our delusions that matter.
But just as important a question is why is one would be attracted to the idea of everlasting existence.
2 Likes
You mean Nibbana as cessation of DO?
Yes, it refers mainly to the cessation of dukkha based on this formula: “this is not existing, that does not come to exist (imasmim asati ida.m no hoti); from the ceasing of this, that ceases (imassa nirodhaa ida.m nirujjhati).”
Reading this thread, iti49 comes to mind:
"Mendicants, some gods and humans get stuck, some overreach, while those with vision see.
And how do some get stuck? Because of love, delight, and enjoyment of existence, when the Dhamma is being taught for the cessation of existence, the minds of some gods and humans are not eager, confident, settled, and decided. That is how some get stuck.
Some, becoming horrified, repelled, and disgusted with existence, delight in ending existence: ‘When this self is annihilated and destroyed when the body breaks up, and doesn’t exist after death: that is peaceful, that is sublime, that is reality.’ That is how some overreach.
And how do those with vision see? It’s when a mendicant sees what has come to be as having come to be. Seeing this, they are practicing for disillusionment, dispassion, and cessation regarding what has come to be. That is how those with vision see.”
3 Likes
Hallo venerable @Sunyo
I see it like this that the Buddha does not denie a Reality that Is, that is not born, not arising and ceasing and is unsupported (Udana 8.1).
He refers to this in his teachings to those teachings teachings that are deep and connected to emptiness. In Patisambhidamagga Nibbana, the stilling of all formations, is also refered to as ‘supreme emptiness’. I know this is not reckoned to be EBT but it is Pali Canon.
But also this emptiness is no entity, no, ego, no self, no atman or atta or soul
Yes, that is also important.
Realising emptiness is, i believe, not at all the same as realising an everlasting personal existence. It is in no way connected to a desire to exist personal eternally. It is not aiming at everlasting personal existence but aiming at truth, aiming at reality, at what is, at what is not seen arising and ceasing,i feel, aiming at the truth of oneself. Respecting that truth.
1 Like
Sorry about the delay in responding.
The sutta SuttaCentral you’re quoting goes on to say that the ignorance of Yamaka was due to his view of an arahant being/having a self that is annhilated and destroyed after death – a typical example of the the Annihilistic view the Buddha refuted.
As we can see, the sutta continues with Sariputta questioning Yamaka about whether a "Realized One "(Sujato), can be identified with any of the khandas or located anywhere in the present. Yamaka comes to understand this can’t be done and begins to see the Dhamma more clearly.
So, out of context, the sentence about death can appear to refute the death of an arahant, but when there is no one and nothing to delineate as an arahant in the first place then…
3 Likes
There is also this fragment in that sutta:
"And when you’re not attracted to and don’t grasp these five grasping aggregates, they lead to your lasting welfare and happiness.”
Even when there is no self in the khandha’s, or wherever, i feel it is quit cynical to talk about utter extinguishment at death with nothing remaining, as a lasting happiness and welfare.
May Parinibbana not only be the cessation of an unwanted process in which feelings and perceptions arise and suffering is experienced to certain degrees, but may it indeed be, in some realistic way or the other, be a lasting happiness and welfare. I believe it is.
I do not refer to a surviving eternal soul, a surviving eternal self, but i hope that in some realistic way there is welfare after death for the arahant and realised ones.
How did the Buddha observe the existence of nibbana when you lost your body in the 5th jhana? I’ve read somewhere that beings in arupa can’t hear the dhammic teachings because they don’t have ears. Does this also mean that they’re blind as well? And how could the Buddha discern the existence of nibbana when he lost his consciousness in the 7th jhana, the plane of complete nothingness?
Factoid: the Nikayas mention 4 jhanas. After that, they’re called formless attainments, arūpa samāpatti(tā).
Beyond that, the teachings in the Nikayas never mention the formless attainments as being necessary for liberation/nibbāna. So we can choose to free ourselves from speculation as to how the Buddha could have discerned nibbāna in these conditional states.
And nibbāna is realized not by discerning a “something” – rather an awakened one, knowing the utter cessation of all greed, anger, and ignorance, directly realizes liberation.
“For this is the ultimate noble wisdom, namely,
Esā hi, bhikkhu, paramā ariyā paññā yadidaṁ—
the knowledge of the ending of suffering. sabbadukkhakkhaye ñāṇaṁ.”
2 Likes
what is the difference between “lasting happiness” and “endless happiness”?