post must be at least 20 characters
1 Like
A lot of people do. You may have some secret memories you are yet to dig up yourself. Perhaps even from this life, or from a past. I have had a glimpse of my own, but my practice is generally based on Faith that coincides with my works in Buddhadhamma.
1 Like
Consider a bunch of monkey’s all with their hands in a trap. Their fingers curled around something firm and hard in their grasp. The monkeys argue and quarrel with each other debating about the precise taste of the delicious morsel in their hands. Some claim it tastes of chocolate. Some claim it tastes of delicious fruitiness. It smells amazing whatever it tastes like. All agree that whatever it tastes like it must be absolutely scrumptious and delectable. They argue and fight about the nature of the hidden gift in their hands if only they could get their hands out of the trap! They yearn to devour that amazing morsel and settle once and for all the debate about what nibbana/freedom tastes like.
My best attempt 
Oke, space also does not really refer to a thing but at least it refers to something.
When the sutta’s say about asankhata…that it has not the characteristics to arise, cease and change…
and you do not believe that refers to a thing, were does it refer to?
Maybe an attempt?
I can define it as being disturbed by talking about it.
Silence explains it better than words.
1 Like
There’s one way to do so. Let go of the morsel. Then one can take one’s hand away and be freed.
By this shouldn’t your answer to the unconditioned be samsara itself? Since nibbāna is the only unconditioned.
Of course, there’s a contradiction as samsara is conditioned. I leave it to you to resolve this contradiction as it is your view.
1 Like
What?? And give up the delicious morsel of Nibbana??!! I kidd, I kidd 
I’m aware of the seeming contradiction. That is one reason the verse is so seemingly heretical and famous! 
However, this thread is about something different and I don’t want to distract, but suffice it to say I think the seeming contradiction is not an actual contradiction and the intended meaning is deep and of value. I was hesitant to post it here as I know most will see it as just contradiction and probably confusing, but @Green asked so urgently for my lowly little opinion
They say Samsara is the same as Nibbana because of the belief of it’s eventual Cessation. It is the hope of many people. It’s a long held view, expressed in many Dhammas. Is there a being out there who will never achieve Nibbana (unless they are already there, such as the Buddha, not needing to enter it again)? This is not the word.
Huh? Chapter and verse please. This is an EBT forum.
I guess all I can give you is the one about the handful of leaves.
Not sufficient. You can’t make up a thing and say it exists because the Buddha didnt talk about it. That’s silly.
I don’t make things up like that, and neither does the Buddha. I’m a firm believer in Right Speech.
Bienvenido 
.
And it has more to do with the whole world of the Forest of the Spiritual World outside of mere Cessation, that I respect the Buddha taught in the EBT’s. Do you think eventually you won’t encounter it?
I think I lost the meaning of the conversation. Or more likely, this is one of those meaningless conversations we’ve been admonished not to waste time on.
The idea of self is created by feelings arising from thinking. The feeling of I originated in infancy and continually gets imbued in the memory. Hence, it is an inseparable feel of life. Just like the mirage we see is an imaginary visual thought created by eye-brain networks, the self is a delusional thought created by our sensory inputs, memory, and brain networks. The feeling of I does not go away from our thinking system but lingers in the background or the subconscious depths of our brain throughout life.
Thinking happens through the trillions of neural networks that we have developed since infancy. These networks will keep running till death if our brain is healthy. There is no brain cell network or combination of brain networks that takes the central role in thinking, representing a commander’s responsibility. Basically, we have a commander-less living system developed from infancy that gets firmer, undergoes improvement, and gets updated as we gain knowledge and experience in life. As most functional systems we see around the world are commander-centered operations, it is hard for us to comprehend the functioning of a commander-less system.
The “feeling of I” only exists when we are awake as well as when we are dreaming. In both of these situations, thinking continually occurs in the brain. In awake situations, signals from the five senses and our memory are the data sources that lead to the generation of new thoughts and feelings.
When we are unconscious or in deep (non-REM) sleep, the situation is vastly different. Our thinking processes are fully shut off, and we do not generate any thoughts in the brain to create feelings of I, self, or soul, or of a thinker. You may question what happens to the soul, self, or I, in these two cases. If there is no formation of thoughts there are no feelings to create a self, soul, or I. Hence, simple logic proves that the feeling of “I” comes into existence only when the brain is in thinking mode. Waking up from these two situations at each time is really a new mental birth (similar to re-booting a computer) with the luxury of having access to your past data and ready-made thinking programs to continue your life. But where does all the religious reasoning behind the afterlife of an unconscious person or a person who is in deep sleep, in whom we just established that a soul clearly does not exist, if that person dies under any of the two situations, unconscious or in deep non-REM sleep? This is a great question to ponder!
Not so. Arahants do not have conceit of “I am”. At all.
This is the commonly asked question: how can rebirth happen without a soul? I recommend you read these: Dependent Origination - Ajahn Brahm
What is it that is reborn?
If the person is not an arahant, they will get reborn. The underlying tendency to conceit doesn’t need manifestation to be still binding people to samsara. How can a simple worm or the smallest insect think in terms of self? Nonetheless, they have the fetters of conceit, ignorance, self view there.
It is still a bit shocking for me that the one teacher, considered expert, venerated, respected, teaches that mere cessation is not even possible…and other teachers, also considered experts, venerated, respected, teach that mere cessation is the ulitmate goal of Dhamma.
How can it be that this can go on for so long? Is there really not some authority that can make an end to all this? For Dhamma sake. For Buddha sake. For the sake of united Sangha. For our welbeings sake.
Oke, that there are some minor disagreements oke…but this is really serious, right? This is not some minor disagreement. This is about the fundamentals. I feel this is about schism in the Sangha.
From my side’s perspective, which I got it clear after reading Burgs is that the experience of Dhammakāya is the awakened experience. It is like what Buddha said to Bahiya, in the seen, there’s only the seen, etc. Thus the non-dual people are very keen on using this sutta. However, it’s close, but by itself is not enough. Although Bahiya got it well to be able to break through. One has to see Nibbāna as the cessation of all conditioned things.
Since they are so close, and the experience of Dhammakāya has no sense of self in there (self-making is stopped), it’s a temporary relief from suffering caused by conceit, it’s understandable that many might regard that as the end. Except for those who have gone beyond even that. Some people have no good kamma to receive direct teachings or conversations or encounters with people who can personally reveal their attainments and then categorically say that Dhammakāya/ non-dual experience etc, all these are not yet the ultimate. Hearing the words of enlightened ones is a condition for stream-entry, this is one crucial pitfall that enlightened ones can really prevent people from falling in, or bring them out if they have fallen in.
Thus, these people think they are enlightened and teach the wrong view they have learnt. As the suttas can match a lot to their experiences as well.
Only monastics can do this, and it’s very technical. Practically, people with different views either stay in the monasteries which share their views or they don’t talk about this particular topic with the monastics they live with. Or they get taught and brainwashed to the majority or teacher’s view in that monastery.
What about an arahant who sees, hears, thinks etc? Conditioned things are not ceased.
But you assume that those teachers that teach mere cessation are the enlightend ones. That is a personal choice.
Yes, monastics here teach a mere cessation and others monastics teach this is not even possible.
I feel the Sangha has a problem. And also all lay people. Who to trust?
I do not understand why monastics take no action on this. This is not a healthy situation.
Monastics even seem to reject the teachings of teachers of their own tradition. How can one not see this as a problem and schism in Sangha?
As the classical theravada describes it well, the moments of seeing nibbana are the supramundane mind, lokuttara citta. At other moments, the arahants would have the normal thought processes, but without roots of greed, hatred and delusion and functional, so no new kamma is generated.
As An10.7 shows seeing nibbāna is a samadhi state. samādhipaṭilābho
The supramundane mind which sees nibbāna is described as pure dhammakāya by burgs, it is seen by theravada as part of the consciousness aggregate, and is subject to impermanence, since that citta is not present all the time in arahant. That is impermanent is dukkha. Thus even that sublime citta is dukkha in terms of the arahant eventually have to get out and find food to eat.
Let’s say the arahant have not practised the formless realms, and cannot go into cessation of perception and feeling. Then perhaps the highest and best meditation state she can do is to get into the fruition absorption, which is this lokuttara citta for arahant fruition. Eventually, she has to come out of it and eat. (commentary says max 7 days) If anything, it’s unsatisfactory because of that. The same applies to the cessation of perception and feeling.
I think cessation of perception and feeling is superior happiness compared to fruition absorption because there’s no feeling in the former. Feeling is an aggregate and is also seen as inherently dukkha by the arahant.
Parinibbāna is like cessation of perception and feeling, except it’s not impermanent. What is not impermanent is not subject to unsatisfactoriness. And the physical body died in parinibbāna.
Many eternalists like to attach to this fruition absorption of arahant as the same thing after the death of arahant. And here I have shown that there are 2 “things” that are better than it. Given that nibbāna is the highest happiness, the ultimate nibbāna cannot be less than parinibbāna.
extinguishment, the ultimate happiness.
Nibbānaṁ paramaṁ sukhaṁ. SuttaCentral
You should truly see any kind of consciousness at all—past, future, or present; internal or external; coarse or fine; inferior or superior; far or near: all consciousness—with right understanding: ‘This is not mine, I am not this, this is not my self.’
What would your suggestion be? Sit down together and discuss like here on the forum, but maybe an internal monks forum for ease of sutta citation? Have a 7th Theravada Buddhist council to discuss this and the othordox theravada slam basically all other EBT which differs from orthodox interpretation of the nature of parinibbāna as false? And the EBT folks who doesn’t want to submit make their own counter council later?
Schism is when there’s one group of at least 5 monastics separating out of the majority, leaving a minimum of 4 monastics in the original lineup, and both groups hold separate vinaya kamma in the same sima at the same time, on purpose. To avoid such happenings, nowadays sima halls are generally made super small, and people who have different views or cannot mix with the local community just move on to the next monastery. My vinaya teacher said, basically no schism happened after Buddha’s passing away because we all know the dangers and how to avoid it technically.
I am lay, probably stubborn, but i choice to develop my own understanding based upon learning, study, relfecting and meditation. I have had guidance and lessons but not at this moment. I hope i will in the future.
I do not believe in how orthodox theravada portrayes all this. I believe there is not really something like a supramundane mind and ordinairy mind. Mind is mind.
Mind can be defiled and its understanding distorted. Then things are not seen as they really are and that leads to suffering. And mind can be cleansed, undefiled, seeing things as they really are. I believe the Buddha teaches that in this seeing things as they really are, there lies the Path to end suffering and the slavery, the ruling blind will in our lifes. Karma is just blind will. It is blind and it also blinds. Passion is blind will. I feel it is not really difficult to understand we are not this blind will. But blind will can rule us very easily.
I feel it is like the sutta’s in Iti teach:
Knowing the escape from sensuality,
& the overcoming of forms
—ardent
always—
touching the stilling
of all fabrications:
he is a monk
who’s seen rightly.
From that he is there released.
A master of direct knowing,
at peace,
he is a sage
gone beyond bonds. (iti72, Thanissaro)
I believe, an arahant is always touching the stilling of all formations, even when there are formations arising and ceasing. This does not excluce eachother. This all has become one mind. The stillness and noise, the non-movement and the movement, the inactivity and activity , the screen and the projected, emptiness and formations, the sankhata and asankhata. There is no splitting up, no grasping, no division, unity. This is the right samadhi as fruit, i believe.
Being obsessed with coming and going we always failed to see the escape, this element of not coming and going. The Path to Asankhata which is the Buddha-Dhamma (SN43)
I believe, in Dhamma the cessation of conditions (sankhata) refers to the cessation of those formations or conditions that give rise to distortion, rebirth, suffering but does not refer to the end of nature law ‘if this then that…’ in this very life.
And Asankhata is not a vinnana. Vinnana’s cannot arise with a basic awareness as condition. First info must be received, detected by the mind, before it is processed and sense vinnana’s arise.
Is there not some teacher that really is seen as superior person regardless of any tradition?
Thanks for the info. I feel that when things become so technical the spirit is lost. The spirit of schism is just that people develop very different understanding of Dhamma and all claim that as true Dhamma.
Even about the fundamentals they do not agree. This is happening. That this is not seen as a problem, is weird.