There’s no arahant to refer to even conventionally after passing away. No mind, body becomes a corpse.
Withiut choice in the matter.
Not all arahants can go into cessation of perception and feeling, only those liberated both ways.
I think it can be unhelpful to use a term “Buddha” which is loaded with a notion of self/soul to most unenlightened mind to describe nibbāna or emptiness.
The purpose of life is to end rebirth, end suffering.
To get higher metta is like aiming for brahma realms. Arahants naturally have loving kindness due to eradication of hatred. There’s nothing to refer to after cessation (death of arahant), to even say attain a higher metta.
It’s quite easy to just be zapped out of existence by some Deva, generally consciousness will return though, I believe for the aim of Buddhahood. I think Nibbana provides a Cessation to all material strifes. But what about Spiritual Life? Why do the Suttas talk of the Holy Life beginning when Arhatship has been achieved? I don’t think dying for an Arhat is the answer, but quite what they’ve found in their life pursuit of Awakening is. Suffering is quite unnecessary though. All religions teach that.
Can you quote that? What I usually see is those who attained arahanthood said done what has to be done, the holy life is fulfilled, there’s nothing else to do for the sake of liberation.
Yes you are right. Looking back the general rule is “Holy Life has been lived when Arhatship has been achieved.” What you have said is correct. But I think there is some purpose to continue to live for the Arahant. Otherwise there would be no purpose to life at all, and all would cessate into nil now. It wouldn’t have to be earned if the Highest purpose was a deletion. Saved by Buddha… but then deleted! (lol, sorry, bad joke ). I think you understand Nibbana though, so I am not arguing. But I think there is purpose to life in deep, deep Love, and something possibly no one has experienced yet and won’t experience for a long time. But who knows.
Maybe you know: The EBT texts describe the fruit as detachment from 5 khandha’s, also a mind detached from vinnana. I wonder, how can one ever not be involved and engaged in rupa, vedana, sanna, sankhara, vinnana, if there is nothing else? Isn’t this a mission impossible?
Anyway, mind without limits is the real deal in EBT:
“Bāhuna, the Realized One has escaped from ten things, so that he lives detached, liberated, his mind free of limits. What ten? Form … feeling … perception … choices … consciousness … rebirth … old age … death … suffering … defilements … Suppose there was a blue water lily, or a pink or white lotus. Though it sprouted and grew in the water, it would rise up above the water and stand with no water clinging to it. In the same way, the Realized One has escaped from ten things, so that he lives detached, liberated, his mind free of limits.”
There are also sutta’s that refer to the nature of the Tathagata as deep, immeasurable, unfathomable. Makes no sense at all If ‘the tathagata’ is just a designation for 5 khandha’s.
Taken all together, all these texts…i believe the Buddha teaches that there is a real base for detachment. That is refered to as the asankhata element in our lifes. I believe an element of stilling, dispassion, emptiness, undirected, peaceful. This element is the stable and constant element in our lifes and provides a real ground and escape from the khandha’s.
The Buddha teaches the Path to this element (SN43) that is a stable and constant and not-desintegrating factor in our lifes.
I believe this element must not be reified but seen as the element of emptiness.
Nibbana is also called supreme Emptiness in Patisambhidhamagga. But peace is also a word to refer to emptiness, and also words like dispassion, the uninclined, signless, undirected.
It points to, i believe, a dimension in our lifes we cannot denie to be present. We can ignore it…oke…we can reject it…oke…but we cannot denie there is an element or aspect of peace, dispassion, stilling, non-movement, emptiness in our lifes.
I believe the Buddha found the escape there. In also fully understanding this truth of cessation, the stilling, dispassion, peace (MN26). From there he saw also PS perfectly.
We take this element of peace, stability, emptiness for granted and see almost nothing special in it.
But i believe that is part of our ignorance. The Buddha understood as Grace, as Amazing (SN43.14 and further), the Truth.
If this element would not be present, i feel, it also makes no sense to make an island of oneself.
We can make an island of ourselves because there is this stable element of emptiness.
To have a purpose is to be moved, is to create action. When there’s no ignorance, there’s no volitional formations.
Anyway, if arahants would have a purpose it is to teach while they are still alive and have the conditions to teach. They can also just be contented and sit in the forest and just be a field of merit to those who keep him alive.
That’s the meaning of being saved. Deleted. But people might just associate this with cybermen from Doctor Who and don’t like what it implies.
Avijja gives rise to karmically loaded volitional formations. In terms of abhidhamma, punnabhisankhara, apunnabhisankhara and anenjabhisanhara). These are special volitional formations. These end but not all volitional activity ends when avijja end. A Buddha is not will-less.
But can apply the will as wished.
One can also say…with cessation of avijja blind will ends, the drifts, the instinctive patterns, the reactivity, the floods, the fermentations that constant well up and dictate our thinking, speech and acts.
The purification of gold and water show/reveal the true characteristics/qualities of gold and water.
Before purification these were not apparant yet. While purifying they gradually become apparant.
But those qualities are not really created, produced but are just the characteristics of water and gold.
The same with mind. The purification of the mind shows/reveals the true characteristics/qualities of mind but does not create, produce or make them. They become apparant.
What are these? I believe: mind is by nature signless, undirected, empty, dispassionate, peaceful, unburdened, free, and i also believe…unborn, deathless, stable, not-desintegrating.
We do not really produce the natural peace of a undefiled mind, its freedom, its pliancy, its dispassionate quality etc. No what we can do is focus on removing defilements. That is all what we can do.
So, there is a part of effort, and we really need to develop the skills and wisdom to remove defilements, but at the same time we never make, create or produce dispassion, peace, Nibbana. Those are just natural qualities of mind.
So if we experience mind as limited, as stressed, as burdened, as anxious, restless…etc…this is solely because of defilements being present in the mind (or kamma vipaka). We do not experience here the nature of mind. What we experiences is the effect of defilement in the mind. The restlessness, the passions, the stress is not really a characteristic of mind.
Because we do not really realise this, we seek relief of that suffering elsewhere. We have no experience, or real understanding that mind is not the problem, but these fires that arise and tend to set the mind on fire are the problem.
So, the Path of the Buddha is to purify this mind so that we become in touch with the peaceful unburdened stilled, empty, pliant nature of mind…and Nibbana becomes real for us, and is personally attained.
This will probably also come down to an interpretation issue but i feel AN11.7 says so that one can be percepient and still be beyond all perceptions of jhana, the world, another world. Extinguishment can be perceived says this sutta. Which MN1 also says so.
The stilling of al formations is, apparantly, not like becoming unconsciousness, blacking out, the end of the ability to perceive,
I am pretty sure you know it by now, after talking with us for so long. But anyway, here’s again how I interpret this.
AN11.7 is referring to Nibbāna with remainder, where there’s still perception, which is part of the remainder (of the 5 aggregates) object is nibbāna.
In orthodox Theravada, it is called fruition attainment, whereby there’s lokuttara citta which is part of conditioned phenomena, which takes nibbāna as object.
There’s another attainment which is superior to that which is the cessation of perception and feeling, which is different from dead corpse by the fact that the body is alive, thus clearly indicating that without perception and feeling, there’s no consciousness and no mind. Unless you want to say corpse also has mind, which is possible in total idealism.
I think it’s superior because there’s no mind aggregates there and mind aggregates themselves are dukkha. Compared to even perceiving nibbāna, this is better because of no perception.
If what you think of AN11.7 is full nibbāna including nibbāna without remainder would be the same perceipient of nibbāna, then it contradicts the notion of nibbāna is the highest bliss. As cessation of perception and feeling is a higher bliss than that.
And even cessation of perception and feeling is impermanent, at most one can get into it for 7 days at a time, one has to get out to eat, so parinibbāna, being the ultimate cessation of mind and body, all 5 aggregates, has no this defect. It is better bliss than cessation of perception and feeling.
Following the notion of nibbāna is the highest bliss, we cannot go higher than parinibbāna, as there is nothing else that can be ceased, the all has ceased.
Thanks. I feel this does not match with: … And they wouldn’t perceive what is seen, heard, thought, known, attained, sought, or explored by the mind. And yet they would still perceive.”
You speak of Nibbana known by the mind. Although a lokattara citta, still mind that has Nibbana is object.
I tend to see it like this that this attainment refers to what Maha Boowa described. Here the citta knows itself. Mind is now absorbed into her own knowing nature. Or, in other words, there is only knowing, all pervading the universe.
This, i feel, are difficult things. Because now we are not investigating and relying anymore upon our direct experience and knowledge of things, but now we are starting to rely on some theory of mind. I doubt this is wise. Does this really contribute to seeings things as they really are? Or starts the theory dictating what we see?
All those theories of mind, -and within Buddhism there are many different theories-, are often presented as what people really know…this is being dishonest, not sincere and a serious offense, i feel.
That those people do not feel it this way is even more serious, i feel. It is immoral to claim true knowledge of things where there are only theories learned, and only a mind full of concepts, able to create some consistent Dhamma puzzle. One can be impressed by such scholarship, learning, i am not anymore. I am much more impressed by an act of friendliness, sincerity, goodness. That is Dhamma for me. All that knowledge only feeds pretention, conceit, ego. No person becomes more friendly. I have seen this so many times. There is such a huge difference between the growth of wisdom and growth of knowledge.
I feel, theory must not start dictating what we (want to) see, explore, investigate. This must be done free of theory. There is no person in the entire world that has seen bhavanga nor mind ceasing but what to do if people start to claim this as their true knowledge?
I feel we are lost, totally lost, when there is no sincerity, uprightness anymore and people start claimen knowledge that is not truly their knowledge, and others are impressed by that.
Why does there have to be “a point” to the capacity to know? Also, I think that you have missed the point completely when you ask the question
Nibbana is a singularity, so time and space DO NOT EXIST. This is why the pure Citta cannot be considered an eternalistic view.
If Nibbana is complete “cessation” or “extinguishment”, how can a Sotapanna “see” it if “it” is not yet produced? Or, how can it be an “object” if it is not yet produced or if it is “nothingness” or non-existent?
I think using the English term mind is causing all sorts of confusion.
This statement has some confusion too. It uses both Citta and mind, but they don’t always mean the same thing. Maha Boowa uses Citta in two ways. The defiled workings of the four Nama Khandha (the common understanding of the mind) is one use and the pure Citta, which is the source (or building material) of the Khandha (but not the same as the Khandha). So the Khandha are expressions of the Citta, but not the Citta. These expressions are extinguished through Nirodha but their source (the purified Citta) is not. It’s “knowingness” nature is unique and NOT the same as Vinnana. However, this knowingness does not “pervade the universe” because the universe no longer exists.
You may hold this view because you are yet to meet anyone who actually does know and you are yet to have the relevant experiences yourself. I think it may be more prudent to have an open mind.
This is seriously not true! There are many practitioners even in this day that know the qualities of the Bhavanga. I think you are confused about this. What you call “Bhavanga” and the pure Citta are NOT the same thing. Bhavanga is the impure Citta. It ceases at parinibbana. Until then, it arises and passes away, moment by moment.
It’s in the sutta that right view all the way to right samādhi leads to right knowledge and then right liberation. It’s the whole point of discussing dhamma, to get right view. You interpreted somethings differently from me, and thus when you practise and get what you think of as nibbāna, you would think of that as right knowledge to you, and thus right liberation, but to me, it’s wrong knowledge and wrong liberation due to wrong view.
The Pa auk tradition clearly teaches even how to see Bhavaṅga, how to see past and future lives. And one of the practitoner even shared with me that she can see a monk who has only one more future life, because when she trace the death consciousness of that next life, nothing further.
So even other people can see the total cessation of other people. All these theories and knowledge are not just for the sake of debate, fun etc, they really are personal experiences of advanced practitioners who can see and know things directly, as they really are due to deep, absorption samādhi.
Then why insists on anything called capacity to know?
Then why call it pure citta? As opposed to no citta?
So whilst watching the passing away of formations, try to advert your mind to their passing away without remainder. If you try to do it too soon you will be lost in concepts, but when you have a clear experience of their passing away, advert your mind to where they are passing away to. Feeling arises and passes away and is gone. Materiality arises and passes away and is gone. Perception is arising and passing and is gone. We eventually want to try to advert our mind to the passing away of formations and to their non-arising, their cessation.
And at this point you want to observe clearly that everything is coming to cessation, you are watching things arise and pass away, pass away, pass away and you should follow them as they pass away. Whilst watching formations passing away, watch them come to cessation. Gradually you start to be able to perceive the cessation of formations until there comes a moment when you let your mind go to the cessation state and that’s when your attention will come to rest in the non-arising and passing of formations. Now, formations may still be arising within you, but your mind now comes to rest upon their non-arising. So now you see for yourself; that which appears to be innately there, is innately not there. You are seeing the basic ground from which they arise, rather than their appearance.
So let’s leave it at that for now. You will not be able to stay in that space from which things are non-arising, if you are still attached to that which is arising. So along with your adverting the mind towards the non-arising of formations, there must be a willingness to relinquish your attachment to them. And that will be the determining factor as to whether or not you will be able to take the unconditioned state (Nibbāna/cessation), or whether you will continue to just fix your mind on arising and passing, or passing away, passing away.
It is a very, very subtle and delicate process, and what it actually equates to, is what I mentioned yesterday, about coming out of the jungle of saṁsāra. In the jungle you are all confused until someone shows you the way to the riverbank. And then you start to see this riverbank. And you also start to see that on the other side of the river, you start to realise there is something which is not the arising and passing of the jungle, of saṁsāra. And eventually there comes a point where our insight becomes strong enough that we can perceive what Nibbāna might be and where it might lie. As we perceive this, we understand that it is over there on the other side of the river, it is beyond that which I am entangled with, but I can’t yet go there.
So you understand this unconditioned state now, and your understanding of phenomena has become sharp enough that you see things arise and pass away without remainder and come to cessation (nirodha) and never reappear. But where are these conditioned states coming from? It must be somewhere they are arising from and are passing away to. What is that place of their non-arising? So your mind starts to now grasp what was just an inconceivable idea when we were in the jungle. But you are looking at it, from this side of the river, the jungle side, trying to decide whether you are going to cross the river. Whether you cross the river is determined by how much momentum you approach the riverbank with, and how completely you launch yourself…
And finally you jump. “Oh…not enough,” and end up landing in the river, which is bhavaṅga, and you have to come back to the riverbank. So, in this instance, we launched ourselves at the unconditioned state, or the non-arising or cessation of conditioned states (Nibbāna), but without enough impulse and we fall into bhavaṅga for a moment, and the next thing we know, the mind is taking conditioned objects again and it doesn’t take the unconditioned object. And why? Because at that point of launching, there was not enough willingness to relinquish.
That moment of Path Knowledge, which is the moment the mind first takes the Nibbāna object, in all the rounds of conditioned lives, is the moment of crossing over and landing on the other side of the riverbank. This has never been known to you. Only the jungle of saṁsāra has been known so far. But in that moment that you come to know the unconditioned state, the impression of knowing the unconditioned state registers in bhavaṅga, and Nibbāna is now known.
Depends on how you use impure, because arahants still do sleep and thus have bhavaṅga mind.
I think you are arguing against yourself with this article. I do thank you for the article. It is interesting.
Spot on!
Also, Bhavanga is not just sleep. Your article supports this. Or, are you saying that when you “jump from the riverbank” you fall asleep if there is no momentum?
Bhavanga is the Life Continuum, and it is also a state of its own. It is the home of Samadhi. If you really want to know about the Bhavanga, I suggest you read Luang Poo Tate’s books. Many of them contain detailed explanations of the Bhavanga. Many of these are available on sites like Achieve.org or Scribd.
Burgs knows the Dhammakāya and he is able to integrate it with the orthodox view and insist that dhammakāya is not nibbāna. It’s those who misidentify dhammakāya as nibbāna, especially nibbāna without remainder who thinks that there’s something after parinibbāna. Do read his whole book. Especially this: Dharmakaya, Parinibbana, Nibbana and Samsara — Advanced Vipassana
Agreed.
… Jhānas are not bhavaṅgas, Jhāna cittas are specialized, each jhāna has their own citta, and it’s the absence of bhavaṅga in Jhāna that Burgs say makes it that there’s no sense of self in there and it’s temporary cessation of suffering (caused by sense of self).
I am talking about people who are deeply involved in Abhidhamma systematics and present it as if this is what they really know or what Buddha taught.
I respect Dhamma expertise but i believe this is very different from scholarship and knowing the scriptures and knowing all in and outs of abhidhamma systematics.
I think it is very rare that such knowledge is really conducive to the goal of detachment, letting go of views, making an end to conceit etc.
What direct knowledge do they have of bhavanga? Can you show me what this looks like?
I also reject the idea that the Citta can really be impure. It cannot. Citta cannot change from one thing to the other. Impossible. So, I do not agree with the idea that the pure citta can even be absent.
). I think you understand Nibbana though, so I am not arguing. But I think there is purpose to life in deep, deep Love, and something possibly no one has experienced yet and won’t experience for a long time. But who knows.