SuttaCentral
I’m sorry, I don’t understand your point.
The Buddha.
Yes. I would think that’s obvious since we’re not arahants. But so what? What difference does it make? We can clearly see that be Buddha taught this to be the case. So if we have faith in the Buddha, we can have a degree of confidence that it’s true even if we don’t know for ourselves. It’s not unusual to regard things in this way. Most of us don’t know for ourselves that the earth is round, yet we can be reasonably sure that it is.
My impression is that we start from wrong view and come to wrong conclusions… if… we believe that Buddha teaches that we are a being consisting of 5 instable, ever changing, khandha’s. This is a wrong start, i believe.
No, he teaches that the perception that we are a being, arises from grapsing and identifying with khandha’s, grapsing at arising bodily feelings, arising volition, arising sense-impressions, arising emotions, views, thoughts, longing etc. This grasping and identifying with arising formations creates the perception that we are something different from the supreme peace of Nibbana, a wholeness and completeness, an ultimate emptiness, in the sense that it cannot be identified as this and that.
Some people frame it like this interpretation means there is sakkaya ditthi or are involvement in a doctrine of self.
I do not believe this. It is just based on the experience, the taste, the wisdom that this peace is not seen arising and ceasing like formation. It is not a formation. While this peaceful nature stays the same, you stay the same, right? That is not an idea or theory of self. That is how things are, i believe.
If we would be only 5 fleeting khandha’s we can never ever arrive at peace. It would be useless to make an island of ourselves of try to find a solution for suffering. But if there is a basis for peace, it is not useless. The basis for peace is the present asankhata dhatu, the Buddha teaches, the Nibbana element, the element of supreme peace we can taste and experience here and now. The unfabricated.
That what is not seen arising and ceasing.
I believe one is not involved in a doctrine of self when one tastes that this peace is like your real self in a not conceived manner. It is almost like a ground. It is not that one actively conceives this peace as me, as mine, as myself. That would be attachment, grapsing, identifying. It is not like that.
That would be a mistake.
So, i believe that the Enlightend one has found a happiness, a supreme unburdened peace which is no vedana or object of the senses, a wholeness and compleness that is real.
Can this supreme peace which is not a sankhata end? How?
The idea that parinibbana is an utter extinguishment, vanishing like a particle entering Earths atmosphere (thanks to @stu) with nothing remaining, is, i believe, based upon the wrong idea that we are a being consisting of 5 aggregates which will all cease at death. In this view there is no room for a deeper understanding, an understanding of a supreme peace one can taste, see, discover, realise here and now. The taste of Nibbana.
While the Buddha uses all his creativity, wisdom, compassion to let us know we are not the 5 aggregates, and guides us in a direction we get estblised in peace, and taste this more and more, people apparantly cannot drop this view and start to see cessation of existence/khandha’s as non-existence in stead of supreme peace and happiness.
I still believe that if one aims with Dhamma at vanishing like a particle entering Earths atmosphere without nothing remaining, this is vibhava tanha. One aims at becoming non-existent after death, enjoys in that, and sees that as supreme peace. But what supreme peace can there be when there is nothing anymore? Must we really believe that this is the socalled supreme peace the Buddha sought? Vanishing forever with nothing remaining not even peace. I is all so cynical.
That is my not so modest opinion.
Yes, great point. I think proponents of this ‘just the 5 aggregates’ theory need to flesh it out a bit more. A few more questions:
If there are just the 5 aggregates:
-how is it that the 5 aggregates give rise to Buddhas? to the dhamma?
-how does the arahant, with the aggregates scattered and abandoned, who no longer experiences arising and passing, dwells with unrestricted awareness and then somehow that awareness vanishes because the body dies? so the awareness of the arahant depends on the form aggregate that lies scattered and abandoned?
-how does the Buddha (composed of just the five aggregates -which are now scattered and abandoned) know and see that the ending of these aggregates is the greatest happiness? is the Buddha just speculating?
-how can one know and abandon things that are impermanent without employing some sort of awareness that is not impermanent?
MN26: “Having gong forth, bhikkhus, in search of what is wholesome, seeking the supreme state of sublime peace, I went to Alara Kalama.…”
Buddha was seeking the supreme state of sublime peace, which he called Nibbana…
I believe he found it, realised it, embodies it, is it.
I believe, in the end there is no difference between Tathagata and this unconditioned peace which is also called ultimate emptiness.
I find it too cynical and poor to believe that this supreme state of sublime peace would be the same as going out like a flame, an utter extinguishment, vanishing without nothing remaining.
If all we are is 5 khandha’s and they cease totallty at death, well, it has no use at all to call this a state of supreme peace
Unfortunately the suttas don’t explain what happens when a Buddha dies.
Thank you. I like the above. I personally am not inclined towards translations such as ‘unbinding’ and ‘extinguishment’. Instead, I prefer ‘peace’ because peace is unambiguously a dhātu (element). I personally think the words ‘nirodha’ (‘cessation’) and ‘Nibbana’ are not synonymous. 
I have never read anything (such as in the PTS Pali English Dictionary) that asserts the common Indian meaning “to blow out” need be taken literally. As already said, I prefer ‘peace’ or, possibly more etymologically, ‘coolness’.
It’s when a mendicant is a perfected one, with defilements ended, who has completed the spiritual journey, done what had to be done, laid down the burden, achieved their own true goal, utterly ended the fetters of rebirth, and is rightly freed through enlightenment. For them, everything that’s felt, being no longer relished, will become cool right here (tassa idheva, bhikkhave, sabbavedayitāni anabhinanditāni sīti bhavissanti). This is called the element of Nibbana with nothing left over. Ayaṁ vuccati, bhikkhave, anupādisesā nibbānadhātu.
Iti 44
sīta
adjective
- cool; cold. (neuter) coolness; cold
Coolness would fit with the Fire Sermon, SN 35.28.
I think Nibbana coincides with the cessation (nirodha) of DO.
The teacher Maha Boowa says something about PS:
"When avijjã is extinguished, conditioned phenomena—which give rise to dukkha—are also extinguished. They have disappeared from the knowing nature of the citta. Conditioned phenomena, such as thoughts, which are an integral part of the khandhas, continue to function in their own sphere but they no longer cause dukkha. Uncorrupted by kilesas, they simply give form and direction to mental activity. Consciousness arises in the mind, purely and simply without producing suffering. Viññãna paccaya nãmarrupa, nãmarupa paccaya sãîayatanam, sãlayatanam paccaya phasso: All sense media and the sense contact that they condition are just naturally occurring phenomena that exist according to their own intrinsic characteristics. They have no negative effect whatsoever on the citta that has successfully completed its task to the point of evamme tassa kevalassa dukkhakkhandhassa nirodho hoti. This is the total cessation of the entire mass of dukkha.
When avijjã and all the kilesas are extinguished, they are extinguished inside the citta. The extinction of avijjã means the destruction of the cycle of repeated birth and death. Both must be extinguished within the citta, for the avijjã-citta is the essence of the world of rebirth, the essence of birth, ageing, sickness and death. Sensual craving, with avijjã acting as the prime mover, is the root cause of birth, ageing, sickness and death—and it exists only within the citta.
When avijjã finally disintegrates, being severed from the citta forever, total cessation is achieved. The citta is then free, vast and supremely empty, without limits, without bounds—totally expansive. Nothing encloses or obstructs it. All contradictions have been eliminated. When the citta knows, it knows only the truth; when it sees, it sees only the truth. This is true emptiness" (arahattamagga/phala, page 62/63)
k but… why!? 
Why do we think what we think? There can hardly be a solution to this topic through us reiterating our own beliefs at each other.
Most of us don’t know the answer for ourselves. So we rely on what different teachers say. All I can do is repeat my understanding of what my favorite teachers say. All you can do is repeat what your favorite teachers say. It’s not very interesting.
With topics like this, things can get heated because it cuts so close to sakkaya ditthi. On both sides!!! Whichever answer resonates with you, there is room for sakkaya ditthi to mess everything up. In fact, it almost certainly does regardless of what you believe because it’s such a powerful distortion. Even if the answer you side with is correct, your understanding of it will be distorted.
So why do we pick the teachers/explanations that we do? And how do we know we’ve picked well? What is it about a certain explanation or teacher that should help us decide?
One of the things that comes up for me is how the suttas say that what the ariyas see as suffering, the commonfolk see as happiness. And vice versa. So just because something (like extinguishment) goes against what we intuitively call happiness, doesn’t mean much. So that’s something about an explanation that pushes me in one direction instead of another.
But it’s not the only reason. Just because the commonfolk see something as suffering, doesn’t always mean it isn’t. Most people would say that sickness is suffering, and the Buddha agreed.
Much of it has to do with faith in certain teachers. Where that faith comes from is a complex myriad of reasoning, intuition, habits etc. From this life, but probably also previous ones. So when Ajahn Brahmali says at the end of his paper:
The idea that final Nibbāna is nothing apart from the cessation of the khandhas
might seem bleak. If it seems bleak, it is only due to the false sense of having
a permanent self, or more precisely, because of the view of personal identity,
sakkāya-diṭṭhi.
The sense that one has a permanent core — a distortion of perception that is unavoidable for all puthujjanas — makes cessation appear like annihilation and the successful practice of the path like a form of suicide. If cessation
seems undesirable, it is only due to this distorted outlook.
It is completely satisfying to me because I have great faith in Ajahn Brahm, and Ajahn Brahmali is heavily conditioned by him. I can see how others would be unconvinced, and there is nothing I can do or say about it. I disagree with all of the criticisms of Ajahn’s viewpoint in this thread. But there is nothing I can say about it because people who rely on fundamentally different assumptions will never find common ground. And I’m far from having a reputation that would justify trust in something I say just because I said it. I’m just a username to you, as most of you are to me.
The point of all this being, we could all benefit from examining why we believe what we believe.
Well, that was the point and the thread.
Speaking for myself, I used “incline” as an indicator of just that – inclining towards one side of the topic that was raised. Who is utterly clear about this?
The issue was raised because discussion of the Dhamma can help to clarify points that can be rather subtle – as noted in several posts, there continues to be debate amongst well-respected teachers and practitioners about whether nibbāna is a transcendent “reality” or utter cessation/extinguishment. The hope was for some deep reflections and input on this.
The thread seemed to deviate from this particular point at times, though everyone is. of course, welcome to offer input.
So while one can get too involved or attached to beliefs and opinions, there’s a balance where one can humbly admit “This is how it appears to be, at this stage of practice” while maintaining an interest in further clarity, (since none of us are arahants).
On we go… 
Also Ajahn @Brahmali, i saw, insist that we must seek evidence in the texts, or we must rely on texts.
Well, i see these texts:
“There is, mendicants, that dimension where there is no earth, no water, no fire, no wind; no dimension of infinite space, no dimension of infinite consciousness, no dimension of nothingness, no dimension of neither perception nor non-perception; no this world, no other world, no moon or sun.
There, mendicants, I say there is no coming or going or remaining or passing away or reappearing.
It is not established, does not proceed, and has no support. Just this is the end of suffering.” (Udana 8.1)
Or,
“There is, mendicants, an unborn, unproduced, unmade, and unconditioned. If there were no unborn, unproduced, unmade, and unconditioned, then you would find no escape here from the born, produced, made, and conditioned. But since there is an unborn, unproduced, unmade, and unconditioned, an escape is found from the born, produced, made, and conditioned.” (Udana8.3)
Or
“What’s born, produced, and arisen,
made, conditioned, not lasting,
wrapped in old age and death,
frail, a nest of disease,
generated by food and the conduit to rebirth:
that’s not fit to delight in.
The escape from that is peaceful,
beyond the scope of logic, everlasting,
unborn and unarisen,
the sorrowless, stainless state,
the cessation of all painful things,
the stilling of conditions, bliss.” (iti 43)
Or,
What two things should be directly known?
Two elements:
the conditioned element and the unconditioned element.
(DN34)
Or,
“Mendicants, conditioned phenomena have these three characteristics.
What three?
Arising is evident, vanishing is evident, and change while persisting is evident.
These are the three characteristics of conditioned phenomena.”
“Unconditioned phenomena have these three characteristics.
What three?
No arising is evident, no vanishing is evident, and no change while persisting is evident.
These are the three characteristics of unconditioned phenomena.”
(AN.3.47)
Or,
*“But sir, could there be another way in which a mendicant is qualified to be called ‘skilled in the elements’?” *
“There could, Ānanda.
There are these two elements:
the conditioned element and the unconditioned element.
When a mendicant knows and sees these two elements,
they’re qualified to be called ‘skilled in the elements’.” (MN115)
If one just takes a look at those texts…really…how else can one interpret this as: there is the uncondioned, unborn, a stainless state, eternal…there is the asankhata element which is not seen arising and ceasing…and this can, and not only can, but MUST be known according to the texts.
The real question one must ask oneself, i believe is: Do I know that element that does not arise and cease, the unconditioned element, the unborn…do i see that, do i know that, and ofcourse not as idea, not as vision, not as concept, but just like one sees and knows that what arises…right?
Do i know this asankhata element, do i see it, or do i know only things that arise and cease?
In that last case, ones knowledge cannot be complete and one certaintly cannot be called *skilled in the elements, right? (MN115)
Is not the whole point of Buddha’s search that he saw how instable everything conditioned is, unreliable, unsafe, no protection? Did he not realise that this can never be a base for the supreme sublime peace he sought? Did he not understand at any moment that there is a dimension, a peace which is not supported by anything. In Udana 8.1 he describes this. In Udana 8.3. he describes that if this would not exist, there is no escape.
What do you mean by Dhama and Dhatu?
What role does Dhamma play when the consciousness of an arahant (4 mental khandhas) has completely faded and ceased?
What difference does this dhamma make if the experiential consciousness ceases? cessation of consciousness = cessation of the world
Hi,
The terms “dhamma” and “dhatu” are defined in Ven. Bodhi’s essay, (see OP for the link). IMHO, it’s definitely worth reading both articles by Ven. Brahmali and Ven. Bodhi.
In this case, we’re not talking about the Dhamma as a form of practice, as the arahant has no further need to cultivate the Path.
Also, the khandhas are still present and active during the physical life of an arahant – though, of course, there is no attachment or clinging to them or to any thing. This is called nibbāna with residue, sa-upadisesa nibbānadhatu.
After the death of an arahant, the khandhas fully cease and since there is no craving, there is no rebirth or arising of anything conditional, including the khandhas – called nibbāna without residue, anupadisesa nibbānadhatu.
It’s important to know which of these we’re referring to in these discussions.
The article by Ajhan Brahmali (the link is also listed above), is very detailed and sides with final nibbāna, after the passing of an arahant, as not being a kind of transcendental “reality”, while Ven. Bodhi does.
Hence, the OP to explore this together.
The AN3.74 passage is interesting. But if Nibbana is the unconditioned element, what does it mean to say say Nibbana doesn’t arise, given that is an attainment?
But what do YOU think about meaning of that term?
I have said about this dhamma - nibbana
“Dhamma” in particular is a broad term with many meanings. The reason I cited Ven. Bodhi was because I was referring to the points he made using these terms in his article.
At the same time, in the contexts he used these terms, that’s how I understand them as well.
If Nibbana would really be our creation, the end-product of a longtime proces of re-conditioning, constructed, a fabricated end result of our effort, it would be surely not unconditioned, not stable, not unsupported, and certainly, in no way, the end of suffering. It would be subject to arising and ceasing too, like anything conditioned and constructed. It would never ever be the supreme sublime peace Buddha sought. How can anything fabricated and ceasing really be peaceful, safe, refuge?
For me it is very clear that the Buddha understood that no fabricated, conditioned thing, being, state, reality can ever fulfill what he sought, supreme sublime peace. Supreme peace can only be found in that what does not arise and cease and is an unsupported reality.
So, i believe it a mistaken understanding that Nibbana is something we can construct by our effort, or is fabricated by us or is a result of re-conditioning. It cannot be like a house we make. Like a joyful state we can develop. Because whatever is constructed will cease.
Buddha called this all the ignorant search. Looking for happiness, refuge, protection in what arises and ceases. For me it is very clear Buddha did not search for something like that. Therefor Nibbana is not a construction and made by us.
What is our role? I believe the only thing we can do as practioners is removing the defiling and disturbing influences which hinder us to see, know and taste Nibbana here and now. This is the nature of purification. While we purify we get to see and taste Nibbana. It becomes real for us but not as something we now have created. It was always there. That we start to realise.
All is supported by causes and conditions but Nibbana is not. The unsupported peace of Nibbana can only be obstructed to see, obstructed to taste but cannot be absent. We can be ignorant about its presence but it can not be absent. The more we invest in passion, in defilements, the more the cool, whole, and peaceful and empty reality of Nibbana stays hidden for us. But i believe it cannot be absent.
This discussion is i believe not about being involved in a view of self or being involved in sakkaya ditthi, and because of that seeing cessation as fearful. No it is about admitting that the Buddha teaches the asankhata element which must be known. Unsupported reality (udana 8.1). Something that is beyond and not of the nature of dependend arising, and exactly this is taught as the end of suffering.
This is what the Buddha understood as the supreme sublime peace.
When you do not see the conditioned and unconditioned as me and mine, you and that unsupported reality are one and the same. There is no difference between you and that empty peace. You cannot be found, seen, detected, described, you are not here nor there. I believe the Buddha refers to this as Tathagata.
I do not see what would be wrong about this. Maybe someone can tell me
When our understanding is not deeper than that there are only five khandha’s, not deeper than only seeing arising and ceasing, i believe, it is logic that one will present that the ultimate goal of Dhamma is like…vanishing at death like a particle entering earths atmosphere. This is the result of only seeing arising and ceasing.
I believe, people who see vanishing as a negative goal, as a pessimistic worldview, as a very strange solution of suffering, are right. People who enjoy in vanishing, and see vanishing as the end of suffering, have no eye for that what is not seen arising and ceasing. They totally ignore this, i believe.
Yes, they do not accept it asa something that can and must be known, while the text say that.
I must admit i am involved in this in a way i am really worried about all this. Worried that people see vanishing at death without anything remaining as a supreme sublime peace, or as the deathless, or as the unborn, or even as supreme happiness.
To be honest, i feel sad about this understanding of Dhamma, and tears come in my eyes. For me it is sure that if one does not see the unconditioned as a reality one can know and see, than Dhamma is also not a Path to the Uncondioned but to Non-existence.
““Mendicants, I will teach you the unconditioned and the path that leads to the unconditioned”
SN43.12)
sorry for the length
@Green
Imagine a place where a fire has been burning since time immemorial. in this place there are no matches, no flint, no solar lens, if the fire goes out, there will be nothing to light it again. you take a bucket of water and start pouring on the fire. the fire goes out. only coals remain, which smoke and dry the fuel. you have not extinguished the fire, but only subdued it. But you keep pouring water, and now the coals go out, and the fuel gets so wet that it can no longer ignite again. “cold” is coming. Water is the good qualities of the mind and insight in the aggregate. Spilling water is a conditioned process of extinguishing the defilements of the mind. and the ensuing coolness is that which is released or manifested when the defilements of the mind have met with the extinguishing good qualities. when water and fire are mutually neutralized, the reality of coolness is revealed, the state of cessation due to the cessation of the cause. this is not a normal termination. this cessation is distinguished by the fact that it comes definitively due to the eradication of all causes. What keeps you cool? what can bring back the fire, that same fire, that same flame? Are there any forces that would support termination? no, they don’t exist. that is, this coolness or peace is unconditioned. If the redemption process is conditioned, then the coolness itself is unconditioned. The Buddha always compared nibbana to extinguishing a fire. if the fire goes out, it does not mean that the fire goes into some potential state. the same metaphor of fire (the metaphor of suffering - after all, fire burns, fire fluctuates and worries) is used for consciousness and at the same time for mind defilements. If we accept that consciousness goes into non-manifestation, as Thanissaro teaches, then it would be fair to say that anger, meanness, envy, resentment, revenge also go into non-manifestation, because they are the same fire that dies out in nibbana! In fact, this is exactly what the final destruction, the absolute ceasefire (through the destruction of the cause). First, the fires of thirst, malice and delusion go out, then the fire of consciousness, generated by karma and supported by the body, goes out and is not recreated by karma again, because the fires of malice and thirst are destroyed. Nibbana is a gradual fading away, or rather a state of cessation of the fires.
Well, some just delight in the idea of vanishing. They practice hard to vanish as body and mind without anything remaining. I do not think i can do anything about this. I become sad thinking about where they in delight. Like Buddha delighted in vanishing? Is cessation of khandha’s really alike vanishing.
I believe that people who want to vanish as body and mind show that they are very identified with body and mind. I think they have only knowledge of what arises and ceases. That is not enough the texts say. I think they also have no taste or knowledge of a happiness or peace that is not part of khandha’s.
In my opinion, the Enligtend Ones have. They know that cessation of the khandha’s at death is not like vanishing, because an Enlightend one has already in this live seen this is not true. It is more like seeing home, being home. The Buddha sought a home for himself on his quest, a refuge, and that he found in an unsupported emptiness, Nibbana, the deathless. The Tathagata does not vanish but the person we once called Gautama Buddha does.