What is wrong with a positivist interpretation of Nibbana?

[Jasudho]

@srkris

The word “ajātam” does not mean “freedom from rebirth” or “without birth”. In the phrase ajātam, abhūtam, akaṭam and asaṅkhatam are all adjectives referring to one and the same thing, not to 4 different freedoms-from-different-things, further the verb atthi is singular and cannot be referring to 4 different freedoms. So basically your reinterpretation does not make sense from a grammatical or semantic point of view.

Suggest you read the links I offered in the last post along with those by several Venerables who explicitly stated the position and translations about this sutta that offer different understandings from your interpretations.

Another is: What do you think about Ven Thanissaro’s view on Nibbāna?
And others can be found using the Search Function.

@srkris

So regarding your assertion that you were not stating your opinion, but was merely quoting the text - that is not true, you were quoting the translation, not the source text. The source text is translated in a certain way, and you think the translations say what the source says.

Actually, I was using the Pāli here. We just don’t agree on all the points. Fair enough.

@srkris

So you can see that by blindly relying on a wrong translation, you got your own conclusions wrong. The original doesnt say “any state of existence” it explicitly says “this state of existence”.

For some reason, you keep attributing thoughts to me that I don’t have. And again, I don’t appreciate the use of judgmental terms like “weird” and “blindly” in discussions here.
Meanwhile, the translation I used in my prior post regarding “all existence” was by Ven. Sujato. So yes, here I’m following the translation of this highly respected scholar-monk.
I understand, and have read, other translations.

@srkris

Viññāṇassa nirodhena natthi dukkhassa sambhavo.” (With the destrunction of the thinking-faculty, dukkha doesnt arise).

Your interpretation of Viññāṇassa …

@srkris

So everytime a person dies, their dukkha stops at death because they dont have a body or its khandas to feel the dukkha any more.

Consider reading DN15, where it’s explicitly stated that dukkha does not end for a non-arahant because there is craving and rebirth as the stream of consciousness and nāmarūpa combine to form a new being/dukkha.

Also, all the khandhas cannot end with the death of a non-arahant, as the consciousness aggregate remains – as in DN15, for example.
And since in MN43 perception, feeling, and consciousness are utterly interdependent and cannot be separated, these khandhas must also be present.

I respect your input but the use of judgmental words, as cited above, is something I’m not appreciating so I’m going to respectfully disengage.

Wishing you the best.