Regarding Nirodha Samāpatti/Saññāvedayitanirodha


I think you’ll agree if we hold well-wishes for people in our heart and let go of desire for them to change their views, we can be equanimous and sane. :slightly_smiling_face:


I should get that engraved on a poster, indeed. :smiley:


I have never seen a person having the view that a sense vinnana still remains in nirodha or in parinibbana. Ofcourse sense vinnana’s cease. Is sense vinnana the same as mind? If in deep sleep or under narcosis there is no perception and feeling is the mind now ceased? One cannot equate vinnana with mind. Vinnana in practice just simply refers to perceptions. If one becomes aware of a certain sound, the perception of a sound has arisen. That is in practice the arising of a moment of ear-vinnana.
This awareness and perception cannot be seperated. Such perceptions cease in nirodha.

The citta, for example that Maha Boowa describes is very different then vinnana. It is a singularity. It does not arise with a sense object as condition like a vinnana.

again you are not willing to consider what i write.

The signless, desireless, uninclined, empty does not describe an arahant but the nature of mind. When all adventitious defilements are removed, the nature of mind just shows to be desireless etc.
Like water show clear when adventitious defilements are removed. The nature of mind cannot change. It can only be revealed when adventitious defilements are removed. It reveals to be uninclined, stilled, empty, desireless etc.

Arahant is only a name given to a mind that is freed from defilement and all khandha’s, without clinging, due to wisdom. An arahant knows mind as unburdened of nature. dispassionate, cooled.
And he/she also knows IT HAS NEVER BEEN OTHERWISE
Only other people do not experience this. This truth about mind is hidden for them due to their defilements.

so it is.

Fact is: the sutta’s are very consistent in describing a reality beyond the senses, beyond this world and the other world, that what will never be an object of a sense vinnana. Asankhata, the supramundane Path. That what is already free and pure. But you do not understand this. It has nothing to do with a permanent vinnana.

You must really apply this upon yourself because while you know that asankhata is really described as the stable, the constant, the not-desintegrating, that what has no characteristics to arise , cease and change, you are still resistent, only resistent. You do not want this. You keep arguing about this.
You make a translation issue of it. All resistance.

For me it is really amazing to see how buddhist resist all that transcends this and the others world, samsara, the senses etc. There is so much resistance.

No. As even the study above revealed, there are (unusual) EEG waves present even during nirodha samāpatti. But no consciousness.

True. He is apparently on the “eternalist” side of consciousness while others are not.
See @Dogen’s post above regarding what’s not clearly and repeatedly taught in the suttas.

This is a disparaging opinion, not a point of discussion or debate.
BTW, in my last post I said that I understood your views to be different, which acknowledges what you write.
We just don’t agree.

Cite them. Cite teachings that are not vague and which are direct, as in SN56.11.

The Upanishads clearly teach about everlasting, pure, consciousness. It’s not a difficult point to state.
Where are such direct teachings in the suttas?

In MN38, for example, the monk Sāti tells the Buddha that it’s an unchanging consciousness that transmigrates and lasts from lifetime to lifetime and the Buddha directly admonishes him and clarifies the teachings with DO.
At no point in this sutta does the Buddha state there is an unchanging ever-present mind or consciousness. Would have been easy to do and quite appropriate to the situation and context.
But nothing of the sort is taught.
Quite the contrary.

‘Self’-harm prevention lady: “Have you ever wanted to go to sleep and never wake up?”

You: “Do you mean Parinibbana?”

If by “you” above you mean me, I’ll say that I don’t agree with your example.


Because as the Buddha said it is only dukkha arising and dukkha ceasing. See SN12.15.
So cessation at parinibbana is simply the cessation of dukkha and nothing else. Is that so bad?

This is different than

which is based on elements of attachment, aversion, and ignorance.
In which case, there will be rebirth…and on it goes.

Cessation via awakening has nothing to do with self-harm.


Theoretically it’s quite easy to imagine. No experience, no sense of time. So sit, get out, check clock, oh so much time has passed. And unlike other meditation absorptions, where one might feel like a few seconds passed when outside hours passed, this one has no subjective time in it at all. The process of shutting down to nirodha is known as well as the process of rebooting, but it feels like after shut down immediately reboot by this subjectively it is known that there’s nothing in-between, unlike other kinds of absorption.

You keep pushing people into an eternalist camp Jasudho. People who only validate asankhata. What has asankhata to do with eternalism? Asankhata refers to what has no characteristics to arise, cease and change. It is stable, constant, not desintegrating.

The citta in the teachings of Maha Boowa is not some eternal vinnana or consciousness. I have shared this with you many times but you keep pushing him and others into an eternalist camp. I request, please stop with this. Please, take yourself some time to think about asankhata and how this is really used in the sutta’s.

Buddha-Dhamma is about being shocked with the reality of suffering and being acutely aware about how unreliabe conditioned existence is. Where is the protection? Where is the safety?
I believe many awaken to this truth of unreliabe existence. All can change every moment. From healthy to sick. From all going well to misery. From succes to failure etc. Our heart can stop any moment. In fact, often only intoxication can make us forget all this misery for some moments. It is almost as if existence functions upon intoxication. Conditioned existence is unstable. Buddha described that what is unstable is unreliabe. Enough to become dispassionate he says. That is right. Who likes unreliable?

For me this is a kind of basic vision. Seeing what is unreliable. Seeing that it is not conducive for ones welbeing to keep seeking protection and refuge in what is unreliable. One begins to see this as a kind of panic mode. Mind in samsara is in a panic mode. If a notion of lack of control arises, panic is often the reaction. An ignoble search starts. Seeking grip in what is perishing will never work.

Still Buddha does not teach hopelessness of our situation because there really is the stable, the constant, the not-desintegrating, asankhata, Nibbana. That is his teachings. But this cannot be arrived at via grasping and clinging. Our usual panic mode must end. We must see this very clear. The stable can only be arrived at when clinging tendencies (anusaya) weaken and stop. The protection we seek, and which is really a legitimate heartwish, does not come from grasping but lies in the end of it.
This stream is opposite of what are we used to in the world.

Buddha sought the stable, that what is reliable. He found it. He realised that the world seeks in a wrong way for safety, protection, namely, via grasping, clinging, attachment. But this way real protection cannot be found. Because all what one builds up desintegrates. Asankhata, Nibbana is arrived at when all those building up tendencies are gone.

Asankhata is not something that can be said to be eternal, or being some-thing, or being nothing, or as existent etc. All such makes no sense. One must also not even try to conceive it. But our knowledge of it must sink in while grasping and clinging weakens and disappears. Then we becomes skilled in the element of arising, ceasing and changing and in the element of stability, no change.(MN115)

An everlasting consciousness. I am not gonna comment on this. This is a typical strawman. But maybe you must try to understand what asankhata means in the teachings of the Buddha and not rely on comments but see for yourself in the texts how asankhata is used and described. Buddha teaches the Path to Asankhata, to the Truth, to Purity, the stable, constant, not-desintegrating.

I have seen that some believe that resisting a mere cessation is something personal. A personal issue. But i feel this is going on with people who resist asankhata. For me it has become very clear that they all have some antipathy towards mystics, esoterie. I see that as what they all share. That is where they join. That is where they find eachother. But you cannot find me there.

This is also what makes all these discussion so fruitless, i feel. Because it is never really about EBT. In the end it is always about something personal, some sympathie, antipathy, some underlying sentiment. That lies always at the root of all decisions one makes. Without adressing this, i feel, all these debates remain fruitless. But i do not want to adress it. But i know this is what is really going on.
We never have any discussion about EBT but in the end it is always about our own sentiments.
And to adress this is not nice and appropriate here. But it is how i experience all this.

It’s wrong view, we just point out it’s wrong view. To ask us to stop is like saying please don’t say right view.

Anything which is positive ontologically and not impermanent can be taken as self and fits in with eternalism. That’s your notion of nibbāna. That’s not our notion of it, we deny the positive ontological part.


Indeed, it comes down to sentiments. You do not have to talk long with somebody to see where the resistances lie. Generally speaking, many people resist what cannot be grasped by intellect. Here is quit a resistance towards anything that has some flavour of mysticism, esoterie. We can be open and honest about it right? This resistance underlies almost all debates and decisions people make. But i can also see that people here find eachother in this shared antipathie. But it makes it hard to discuss things.

First, develop right understanding of the teachings of maha boowa. It is useless to comment on it from wrong understanding. If people really believe he teaches a permanent vinnana, sorry that is misunderstanding.

Nibbana refers to what has no characteristic to arise, cease and change. It is asankhata. How can all cease? Asankhata per definition does not cease.

Asankhata cannot be expressed as eternal and to see it as a self makes no sense at all. Where does Buddha teach that the concept of atta is the same as asankhata?

To denie the ontological part is sentiment. Because Buddha teaches:

“There is, monks, an unborn, unbecome, unmade, unconditioned. If, monks there were not that unborn, unbecome, unmade, unconditioned, you could not know an escape here from the born, become, made, and conditioned. But because there is an unborn, unbecome, unmade, unconditioned, therefore you do know an escape from the born, become, made, and conditioned.”

This is the key of Dhamma,that there is real escape from what is inconstant, unstable, desintegrating and unreliable. if one does not believe there is, then one goes against the teachings.

Yes, I know, one can juggle with Pali, succes. If one oversees the Dhamma, one knows that Buddha sought asankhata, what is reliable, not desintegrating. He was not on a mission to erase himself from existence. But oke, sentiments rule among us and we will never be able to move one when we do not let go the sentiments.

I am commenting on your understanding. However you misrepresent or accurately represent other teachers, that’s on you.

The all (conditioned things) cease, that’s parinibbāna. You understand our stance, you know we don’t say nibbāna ceases. We just deny an ontologically positive thing.

This just means that there’s an end to rebirth. That it’s possible for all conditioned things to cease without remainder.

You also know by now that we deem that there’s an escape, but you just refuse to acknowledge that since there’s no soul, there’s no one who literally gone from saṁsāra to nibbāna. But the dismantling of all which we call a self is that crossing over, is that escape. The escape is, no one who escapes. Doesn’t deny an escape.


It remains heartbreaking for me to see that people delight in becoming non-existent and vanish after a last death.

I also stop about this. It is to troublesome for me that people have really developed such strange ideas about holiness and the holy life. As if this is about vanishing from existence without anything remaining. There is nothing in me that can accept it as holy.

Sorry. I also do not see this as my problem. I know it is a problem when people see vanishing from existence without anything remaining as the holy spirit and life. I will never accept this.
The holy life is not about a wish to finally cease.

I do not know why i know that, i know it. I do not doubt this for 1 second. The wish to vanish for ever has nothing to do with holiness and a holy life. It is troublesome for me that people do not understand this.

You use asankhata like a noun, as a “something.”
You write has asankhata. But cessation cannot be has or had.
You write stable, constant, not disintegrating. But cessation is none of these because there is nothing and no characteristics to be stable or constant.
So, in this sense, your view is on the side of “eternalism.” See DN1.

It’s understood that you’re not talking about something solid. But claiming that “asankhata” or anything persists after the final cessation of all the senses and aggregates at parinibbāna is a form of eternalism.
If that’s your view, why deny it and accuse others of “pushing” something?

Honestly, I’m not interested in re-hashing this topic which has been discussed extensively on D&D.
Rather, the OP was about a meditator stating that in nirodha samāpatti, after he returned to a waking state, that it was utter cessation, nothing there at all. Same is indicated in the suttas.
And unusual changes in his EEG correlated with his claims of this state.
That’s all.

1 Like

Indeed it isn’t. Because it were, you would see that citta is always referred to as impermanent in the suttas, but then you say “Oh it’s a specific citta, not this citta” which has no basis in EBT whatsoever.

This is the part where it gets muddy waters. If we are not going to use words for what they are used for, there’s no point in discussion. It’s not about keeping an open mind.

For example, it’s easy to trace in EBTs that 1. All six sense fields cease, 2. All aggregates cease, 3. Afterwards it’s beyond language.

When you assign something the suttas clearly explain to cease with nibbāna (citta) to have a pure form that survives beyond nibbāna, it’s just anachronistic, confusing. Nibbāna is not a pure citta. At best, it’s indescribable, beyond what it isn’t.

If you want to employ creative language to talk with your friends to help you on your path, go ahead. But such poetic assumptions are not the point of these forums, which is quite academic investigations. In EBTs, there’s no difference between “monkey citta” and “pure citta”. Citta is citta and it’s impermanent. Feel free to make such a difference in your own practice, but don’t argue that that’s what the suttas say.

You see, “knowing”, “seeing”, “loving” all rely on movement, on difference, on fluidity. You and I agree that nibbāna is non-movement. In stability, there’s no passage of time. When there’s no time to speak of, concepts that depend on time vanishes. There’s no knowing without time, there’s no seeing without time, there’s no loving without time. These imply a verb which betrays non-movement, non-arising, non-ceasing, unborn, unmade nature of asankhata.

So, that’s why it’s a mistake to assign concepts that depend on a passage of time, to a state where there is no time.

At best, it’s peaceful (implying a stability and non-change, which implies absense of mental fabrications, heartful sentiments and all) and thus beyond language.

Beyond language is a good thing.


Agree. This wish relies on self-view and is vibhavatanha.

When all conditions are known as fundamentally dukkha, the cessation of all that is liberation from all dukkha.
This is clearly not related to self-view, attachments, greed, anger, ignorance.
Rather it is their cessation during life that is nibbāna with residue and at the final death the complete cessation of the aggregates and senses is the final cessation of all dukkha.
Nothing else need remain or to be spoken about, as the Buddha clearly stated the cessation of dukkha is the purpose of the practice.

1 Like

probably just it happens that he is checking what he imagined about that state instead what the Dhamma explains because it remains unknown to him.

.his faculties are bright & clear. This is the difference between a monk who has died & passed away and a monk who has attained the cessation of perception & feeling.
SN 41.6


His faculties are bright and clear, I’d say, refers to the fact that the senses and the aggregates have not dissolved in the way they do at the final death.
So they remain with all their potential in this state, although they have temporarily ceased.

Because the “vital life force“, as in MN43, is still present in this state the senses remain with the potential to continue to be active. Clearly, even in the form jhanas, the five senses, for example, can disappear completely. How much more so in nirodha samāpatti.

1 Like

Well it has. The Buddha clearly speaks about the nature of mind, for example as luminous, cool, as empty, as signless, desireless or dispassionate, as uninclined, undirected, untraceble, without boundaries. All such can be found. Read the sutta’s. You must do the job yourself he.

he does not cling to anything in this world. When he does not cling, he is not agitated. When he is not agitated, he personally attains Nibbana…MN140


Bhikkhus, when ignorance is abandoned and true knowledge has arisen in a bhikkhu, then with the fading away of ignorance and the arising of true knowledge he no longer clings to sensual pleasures, no longer clings to views, no longer clings to rules and observances, no longer clings to a doctrine of self. When he does not cling, he is not agitated. When he is not agitated, he personally attains Nibbana. He understands: 'Birth is destroyed, the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more coming to any state of being.'” (MN11)

This all points to mind. Mind without agitation, at ease, mind without clinging, no burden on this mind.
Nibbana is also described as the removal or destruction of lobha, dosa and moha. This is also about mind ofcourse.

I like to think in terms of the nature of mind. For example, the mind can operate in a distorted and defiled way, like a motor with wrong fuel. But this does not mean that the nature of mind/the motor is distorted and defiled. There is nothing wrong with the motor. There is also never anything wrong with mind. Mind is not really something burdened, agitated, restless, stressed, on fire. But the defilements in that mind impose that impression upon it. It is merely because people do not know that the nature of mind is grace, peace, sublime, not burdened, that people seek refuge elsewhere. But the Buddha teaches all being that mind is not the problem but defilements. Those must be extiguished.

It is also not mind that distorts but defilements that arise in that mind. Mind itself is also cool, at ease, peaceful, cannot change, cannot be affected and whatever training has not effect at all on the nature of mind. One cannot improove the nature of mind but also not really infect mind.

If mind is free from the notion I am and all tanha, that is when you directly taste the peace or bliss of Nibbana. The coolness of Nibbana, the coolness of an undefiled mind.

You also know that all these acadamic studies are not really a measure for Dhamma expertise.

The sutta’s describe how an engaging and defiled mind functions. The more defiled and engaged, the more fire, burden, lack of coolness, the mind experiences. And the more it has the distorted perception that mind is coming and going and is a problem that must be solved.

This perception changes. It is like looking at formations. First formations are very coarse and one cannot even understand that they are not coarse. But at some moment in time formation arising in the mind change in nature. They are like feathers, like mere rimpelings. The weight they formerly had, and the power to overwhelm oneself is gone. This also shows that the weight is not really in the formations.

In a similar way, the perception of mnd becomes increasingly subtle. First one has a very coarse undersanding of the nature of mind. That becomes more and more subtle. But i do not think you practice like this.

In some buddhist traditions is it very normal to directly look at mind. I do not think you can relate to this. I think it is very normal that a not liberated mind and a liberated have different views on what mind is, like a frog in a dirty well also has no wider understanding of the world then its pool.
A defiled mind has in the same way no wider understanding of itself.

If you tell yourself that you see the mind ceasing, tell me what do you see ceasing?

This is all your inference.

Remember the raft - we build up the N8P to even let go of it. All mental process, aggregates, sense fields are abandoned.

There’s no separation of mind or thoughts. There is no thinker, there’s only thoughts. And then there’s the cessation of thoughts.

He doesn’t. If he did, you’d quote him.

“Mendicants, I do not see a single thing that’s as quick to change as the mind. So much so that it’s not easy to give a simile for how quickly the mind changes.

This mind, mendicants, is radiant. But it’s corrupted by passing corruptions.

This mind, mendicants, is radiant. And it is freed from passing corruptions.”

Mind is so unstable that Buddha fails to give a simile for how unstable it is. Doesn’t sound like a stable permanent reality that’s supposed to be what asankhata is.

Once freed, mind even lets go of itself, as part of aggregates and sense field, and ceases with nibbāna.

First you say Let’s stick to EBT. Once EBTs challenge your ideas, you scoff at academic work. That doesn’t sound like a consistent attitude.

Mind can’t see the mind ceasing. Mind ceases and you’re only aware of it retrospectively. When observation ends, there’s no observation of cessation of observation. Observation has ended.

“But when it comes to that which is called ‘mind’ and also ‘sentience’ and also ‘consciousness’, an unlearned ordinary person is unable to become disillusioned, dispassionate, or freed.”
“Yañca kho etaṁ, bhikkhave, vuccati cittaṁ itipi, mano itipi, viññāṇaṁ itipi, tatrāssutavā puthujjano nālaṁ nibbindituṁ nālaṁ virajjituṁ nālaṁ vimuccituṁ.”

SN12.61 advises us to become disillusioned, dispassionate and freed from mind. Consider that.

"But an unlearned ordinary person would be better off taking this body made up of the four primary elements to be their self, rather than the mind (citta).

Why is that?

This body made up of the four primary elements is seen to last for a year, or for two, three, four, five, ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, or a hundred years, or even longer.

But that which is called ‘mind’ and also ‘sentience’ and also ‘consciousness’ arises as one thing and ceases as another all day and all night."

Mind ceases. Not mental process, not monkey mind, not bright mind. Mind ceases.

Even an unlearned person would be better off thinking their body was their true self rather than their mind, because mind is that fickle and unreliable.

1 Like