[quote=âDeeele, post:2, topic:5719, full:trueâ]
[quote=âLucasOliveira, post:1, topic:5719â]
Nibbana, by Thanissaro Bhikkhu
The second level of unbinding, symbolized by a fire so totally out that its embers have grown cold, is what the arahant experiences after this life. All input from the senses cools away and he/she is totally freed from even the subtlest stresses and limitations of existence in space and time.
[/quote]How can this be âexperiencedâ after this life?[/quote]It sounds like Ven Thanissaro may have been reading the literature of the âotherâ Buddhism:
The Tathagatas are not eternally extinguished in Nirvana like the heat of an iron ball that is quickly extinguished when cast into water. Moreover, it is thus: just as the heat of an iron ball is extinguished when thrown into water, the Tathagata is likewise; when the immeasurable mental afflictions have been extinguished, it is similar to when an iron ball is cast into water - although the heat is extinguished, the substance / nature of the iron remains. In that way, when the Tathagata has completely extinguished the fire of the mental afflictions that have been accumulated over countless aeons, the nature of the diamond Tathagata permanently endures - not transforming and not diminishing.
Buddha-nature is svabhÄva in MahÄyÄna Buddhism, which allows them to make statements like the ones made by Ven Thanissaro without controversy.
I am also wondering where Ven Thanissaro finds this discourse in the PÄli (or another Dharma language I suppose) explicitly, as that would be very interesting indeed, since anyone (myself frequently included) can find implications of the sort that Ven Thanissaro has also found, but explicit statements concerning this are lacking in the literature dealt with on this forum, afaik.
This is the linchpin for me:[quote=Ven Thanissaro]The Buddha insists that this level is indescribable, even in terms of existence or nonexistence, because words work only for things that have limits.[/quote]I know (or rather, think I know) what Buddhavacana Ven Thanissaro is talking about here. I think he is talking about the questions of Vacchagotta and related discourses. But if that is the case, then the Buddha doesnât actually [quote=Ven Thanissaro]The Buddha insists that this level is indescribable[/quote]He simply doesnât answer.
It would have been very easy, and much much more direct and helpful, if the Buddha had simply said: âThere is a form of quasi-existence that is nothing like any sort of conceptualized existence that exists after parinirvana, but it is utterly impossible to conceive of this state correctly without clinging, you must achieve it for yourself.â
The Buddha would have said it better, if he had said it and if it were necessarily true.
The thing about this teaching, similar to the notion of âThe Buddha taught an inconceivable true self.â is that it isnât actually that complicated a teaching, one just needs to be epistemologically humbled as to the limits of oneâs knowledge, so why didnât the Buddha simply teach it explicitly if it were the case that that was the truth behind the teaching?
@LucasOliveira, is this particular text of Ven Thanissaroâs, concerning NibbÄna, related to his The Mind Like Fire Unbound?