SuttaCentral
That is all we need to agree. Unfortunately you seem to make distinction between nirodho and nibbana and I still don’t get you quoting Suttas, based on which you are inclined to make such distinction. And you will not find any such Suttas, since in Suttas nibbana and nirodho are synonymous which you can find in the phrase bhava nirodho nibbanam.
With metta
Let me clarify from the point of view of classical theravada, as OP also asked this there.
Nibbana as a paramattha dhamma is an arammana paccaya - object condition - for the lokuttara cittas.
supramundane consciousnesses are conditioned (lokuttara cittas) by nibbana, they are then a conditioned phenomenon.
they are impermanent. Arahants are not in supramundane consciousness all the time, and after death of arahant it doesn’t arise anymore.
What is impermanent is unsatisfactory.
We have to be careful with the usage of suffering as mental suffering would not be a suitable thing to imagine supramundane consciousness has, but unsatisfactoriness due to impermanence is.
Ven Sir, you may find this quote useful and interesting:
The power generated by the development of jhana/samadhi and vipassana to a sufficient level of proficiency produces magasamangi.
Magasamangi is not the same state as that of jhana or samadhi but shares with them the process of the mind merging into a unified state. When vipassana contemplation has investigated inner and outer cause-effect relationships and has clearly seen their nature so as to be free of all doubts and uncertainties in regards to them, the mind will gather all eight factors of the Path (in short, sila, samadhi and panna) together in the one place of Right View in a single thought moment. Subsequently, there will be a withdrawal into the realm of the sense, but experience in that realm will now be constantly accompanied by a clear knowing of the true nature of sense objects, and the mind will not be deluded by them in the same way as before. The Buddha taught that each Path consciousness (maggacitta) arises once and once only.
Only The World Ends, Luang Poo Tate
This is like saying when the sun is free of the clouds, it shines through. Again, being free of cloud and the sun shining are not the same thing.
I’ll rest here as I have no wish go back and forth.
Yes, you can rest here, but at best this quote seems to suggest that there is incoherence with my simile of sun with Suttas. If so I can gladly abandon such simile, no problem for me.
But how to resolve direct contradiction of Suttas, that nirodho and nibbana aren’t synonymous? I suspect that may not be difficult for you, unfortunately you will not provide any Suttas for that. So perhaps just take a rest is a good idea, for both of us. I take care that my ideas do not fall into contradiction with Suttas, if you find your ideas satisfactory despite such contradiction, that’s fine. Perhaps you are right. That I don’t know, I only know that nirodho and nibbana in Suttas are synonymous, and this knowledge isn’t inferred. It is there stated verbatim.
Death of arahat? And this is classical Theravada? But how arahat can die, if he wasn’t born? MN 140 must belong to pre-classical Theravada …
Maybe this helps: The purity of water is never really affected and gone even when there is sand in water, metals, salt, oil. Why? Because water and defilements never become one.They never really mix up and become one thing. Defilements may be present, but they never really become an intrinsic part of water. They are adventitious (AN1.51). Only for this reason they can also be removed. The natural result of this removal is pure water. That was always there in the first place because water and defilements never really become one.
The mind is the same. The mind and defilements never really mix up. They cannot become one.
When all adventitious defilements are removed this natural purity is not made, nor created, it was always there. It just becomes apparant again. See?
This is all no theory. Any purification relies in this fact that defilements and gold, defilements and water, defilements and mind never really become one and the same, and never really mix up.
Purification does not produce water, does not produce gold, does not produce mind. But more and more become apparant what pure water, pure gold, pure mind really is.
I am pretty sure you have debated this with someone before if not, create a new topic and mention me there, if you’re open to learning.
I don’t think anything I say would change your mind, given that you have debated this before. Yes, it’s the classical Theravada position.
But how do you explain that Buddha forsaw trouble for himself (tiresome) when he would start teaching? Does that not show a Buddha still thinks in lines of…if a do this, that will have this and that effect on me? I will become tired etc?
Definitely, you are right. As far as Suttas Teaching goes: namely that Tathagata actually and in truth is not to be found even now and here, it is impossible that I could change my mind about it. But I appreciate your compassionate offer to teach me about ideas which aren’t in Suttas. Since my Sutta teachers informed me that ignorance of the traditional Commentaries may be counted a positive advantage, as leaving less to be unlearned, definitely I am not open to learn anthing about classical Theravada. Of course there is always the element of risk, in trusting, but I’m afraid it cannot be avoided. So let it be. Dhamma discussion on higher level is simply impossible between two interlokutors who disagree which texts are authoritative.
Metta
Just so you know, I know many EBT people who are of the opinion that arahants die as well. As the sutta you quoted has it:
They understand: ‘When my body breaks up and my life has come to an end, everything that’s felt, since I no longer take pleasure in it, will become cool right here.’
This is not some metaphysical thing which requires a self for the arahant. What’s referred to is just 5 aggregates of arahants (conventional concept arahant) break up.
No doubt about it. I know venerable Brahmavamso has such opinion.
Situation 1: a jar contains salt and pure water
Situation 2 : I am removing the salt from the jar
Situation 3: the jar contains pure water, but no salt
Situation 3 is the result of situation 2; situation 2 caused situation 3. There is a cause-effect relationship.
If you would find gold in the ground, and you would collect all this, and bring this to a goldsmith who purifies this gold with a method. Can you not see how absurd it would be that this craftmans would claim that he has produced the gold?
Likewise, if the method of the Path removes defilements from the mind, the mind is not created nor produced. The mind without defilements now shows to be at ease, not burdened, free, easy to use and apply. But we fail to taste this nature of mind when defilements are still present. What we hold for mind is not at all what mind really is. If one hold defiled water for what water really is, one is deluded about the nature of water.
So:
It is really not only me, i am just a lay with conceit, but also teachers who teach that Nibbana is always present. We must not think about non-clinging, dispassion, peace as something that is absent but more like something that is covered up, because our minds tend to become defiled so easily.
So easily it becomes passionate, grapsing at something, clinging. That makes us more or less blind that this all arises conditionally and is not always present. But sometimes people also taste the peaceful unburdened nature of mind.
Now i stop this, because i only repeat using different words.
https://suttacentral.net/an4.140/en/sujato
“Mendicants, there are these four speakers. What four?
There’s a speaker who runs out of meaningful things to say, but not of ways of phrasing things.
There’s a speaker who runs out of ways of phrasing things, but not of meaningful things to say.
There’s a speaker who runs out of both meaningful things to say, and ways of phrasing things.
There’s a speaker who never runs out of meaningful things to say, or ways of phrasing things.
These are the four speakers. It is impossible, it cannot happen that someone accomplished in the four kinds of textual analysis will ever run out of meaningful things to say, or ways of phrasing things.”
My words: Thank you!
Thank you for your patience and pedagogy, but I don’t think your analogy works. In fact, the craftsman did cause the situation where the gold is without impurity; this situation is the causal result of the craftsman’s activity.
Moreover, even from the point of view of certain Buddhist philosophies this is obvious, for they would say that from moment to moment, gold is not the same (it keeps changing), so that gold dies and is born from moment to moment, and so the craftsman does cause a new pure gold.
Hi @DeadBuddha, what did you make of the non affirming negation I tried to relay; was it at all helpful?
Can you think of the necessary and sufficient set of causes and conditions with the result, “It is not the case that the current king of France’s name is John.”
Is it conditioned? If so by what?
Yes, defilements must really be skillfully removed. An analogy is given in AN3.101.
After defilements are removed gold shows like it really is. Gold that has no defilements shines, is not brittle, can be turned into jewelry etc. It has different characteristics then gold with defilements.
The same with mind. If the mind is cleansed its show what minds really is: at ease, peaceful, unburdened, dispassionate, wieldy, easy to apply, not governed anymore by inner habits, drifts, conditionings like greed, hate, conceit etc. This is just the nature of mind.
Buddha did not create this nature of mind and this nature of mind is also not created as a result of purification.
Buddhas and Arahants live in the world of Sammuti until they die. As a result, they have to observe the conventions of this world, such as language. While they may refer to an “I”, a “me” and a “you” they are not deluded in thinking that there is substance to these words. The use of these words is simply to attempt to convey meaning via language. Their use is not driven by conceit.
I do not agree. Nothing get lost due to Dhamma but unfreedom, fettering. One remains having the ability to conceive, to think, become emotional and relate to body and mind as me, mine, my self but not anymore in an unfree fettered way. Liberation is not about inabilities.
If a Buddha thinks about becoming tired when doing this and that, that is not some conventional use of me and mine, but he really also still knows that choices have consequences for him, for body and mind. That remains so.
It would also not be wise at all to think about body and mind as literally not me, mine, my self. I have said this many times and it is really true. It is sickness. If you look in the mirror and you really literally think…that is not me…you are not wise but sick. My mother does with Alzheimer. See is not able to understand that it is herself who she sees. See sees literally not my self and that is sickness. This is also not what Buddha meant, i believe.
The whole of Dhamma is about loosing fetters, and me and mine making does not have to function as a fetter. But my mother is fettered to…this is not me , this is not mine, this is not my self. And that is NOT wisdom.