Would you take a Nibbana-pill?

Since I have no problems creating a thought-experiment pill: sure, the pill would take care of all the path factors. Would you take it?

Journey is more important than the destination!

1 Like

Count me in as your guinea pig then. :grinning:

Why would anyone deny themselves the end of suffering except out of delusion or ill-will?

2 Likes

I think you make a very important point @SarathW1. Would you kindly elaborate on that?

Now you got me!
:slight_smile:

I like to use this topic to develop right view. And I think that your responses are hinting at something important:

  • Is behind our (necessary) desire for nibbana a desire for annihilation? When I’m in pain, and I understand the dhamma saying ‘all existence is pain’, isn’t it consequential to say ‘Enough with this pain! Enough with this existence!’ But the Buddha refuses desire for annihilation, so how am I to think about ending ‘this whole mass/mess of dukkha’? How is the idea of a pill/dhamma not a desire for annihilation?

  • ‘The journey is more important than the destination’ This is actually how many people choose to practice. They feel that they don’t want to stress themselves out, that practicing for joy/jhana is contradictory. So they say ‘There is no right way of meditating, the journey/process counts’. Also, think about how kids at a certain age hate it when you lift them up or put them in the stroller. They want to do it on their own. Also relating the incident when U.G. Krishnamurti went to Ramana and asked him if he can give him enlightenment. And Ramana said ‘Yes, I can give it to you - but can you take it?’ - So, are we willing to take the enlightenment that is given to us by the Buddha (the pill in form of the dhamma)? Or is the ego in a strange way unable to take it?

For the first part, I would say that annihilation doesn’t work because it’s still a lust and desire for a particular experience (no more pain), or it comes from ill-will towards experience (to heck with this pain!).

In the suttas, the awakened being experiences revulsion (the opposite of desire) towards experience. As far as I can tell, that means not wanting anything to do with experience, but the annihilationist still cares about having it his/her way.

Having this revulsion, things fade away (viraga - like, there’s literally nothing to gain by doing anything with experience, which includes trying to make it go away, so the mind just turns away from it) and the mind is liberated.

Liberated, perhaps, from thinking there is anything you can do with this existence (including trying to end it) that doesn’t result in suffering.

I mean, with annihilation you still think you can get your happiness out of samsara: “I just have to end it, then I’ll be happy” but even this happiness does not really exist in samsara.

(Edit: “Joy at last, to know there is no happiness in the world”)

Anyway, a bit of topic maybe, sorry :slight_smile:

2 Likes

“Good Gotama teaches annihilation.”

“There is a way one could rightly say about me that the ascetic Gotama teaches annihilation. For I speak of the annihilation of sense desire, anger, and confusion; I speak of the annihilation of various sorts of bad, unwholesome qualities. But thatʼs not what you meant.”

(…)

“Good Gotama is an eradicator.”

“There is a way one could rightly say about me that I am an eradicator. For I teach for the sake of eradication of sense desire, anger, and confusion, for the eradication of various sorts bad, unwholesome qualities. But thatʼs not what you meant.”

— Bhikkhu Vibhanga (pi-tv-bu-vb-pj1)

1 Like

Great thought experiment… found the hedonists!

1 Like

"These are the four modes of being addicted and devoted to pleasure, Cunda, which conduce absolutely to unworldliness, to passionlessness, to cessation, to peace, to higher knowledge, to enlightenment, to Nibbāna.

What are the four?

Firstly, Cunda, when a brother, aloof from sensuous appetites, aloof from evil ideas, enters into and abides in the First Jhāna, wherein there is initiative and sustained thought which is born of solitude and is full of zest and ease.

Secondly, when suppressing initiative and sustained thought, he enters into and abides in the Second Jhāna, which is self-evoked, born of concentration, full of zest and ease, in that, set free from initial and sustained thought, the mind grows calm and sure, dwelling on high.

Thirdly, when a brother, no longer fired with zest, abides calmly contemplative, while mindful and self-possessed he feels in his body that ease where of Ariyans declare: ‘He that is calmly contemplative and aware, he dwelleth at ease,’ so does he enter into and abide in the Third Jhāna.

Fourthly, by putting aside ease and by putting aside malaise, by the passing away of the joy and the sorrow he used to feel, he enters into and abides in the Fourth Jhāna, rapture of utter purity of mindfulness and equanimity, wherein neither ease is felt nor any ill.

These four modes of being addicted and devoted tu pleasure, Cunda, conduce to utter unworldliness, to passionlessness, to cessation, to peace, to insight, to enlightenment, to Nibbāna.

If then it happen, Cunda, that wanderers teaching other doctrines should declare: ‘The Sākyan recluses live addicted and devoted to these four modes of pleasure, to them ye should answer: ‘Yea.’ :blush:

Rightly would they be speaking of you, nor would they be misrepresenting you by what is not fact, by what does not exist.
– DN29

1 Like

And how do you understand that

AN 4.23: the Tathāgata has realized the cessation of the world

AN 4.45: I proclaim (1) the world, (2) the origin of the world, (3) the cessation of the world, and (4) the way leading to the cessation of the world

Was the Buddha proclaiming the annihilation of the world - except the nibbana element?

[quote]
Sariputta in AN 4.173: “If one says: ‘With the remainderless fading away and cessation of the six bases for contact, there is something else,’ one proliferates that which is not to be proliferated” [/quote]

So we are practicing for the end of personal existence and there is an impersonal existence left, or no existence at all?

Well, this is clearly a quote from one of the “Noble Truth - Noble Task suttas” (I love them! :blush:). In this case, the word world is found where the word suffering would be found.

Mind as well that, unlike in the quote I originally posted, the Buddha is in these suttas you quoted not speaking about anihilation (uccheda) or removal/eradication (vinayāya) but indeed of cessation (nirodha).

Well, as per the Four Noble Truths and its respective Four Noble Tasks, we pursue the noble task of developping (bhavetaba) the path - or practice it if you prefer - for the sake of fulfilling the noble task of verifying by ourselves (sacchikata) the cessation of suffering (dukkhanirodha).

As per the quote originally posted by me, there is indeed a way to say that this will involve both annihilation (uccheda) and removal/eradication (vinayāya). This is for the Buddha spoke of the annihilation/removal/eradication of sense desire, anger, and confusion - various sorts of bad, unwholesome qualities.

With regards to the question on if a self or soul is anhilated or not once the noble task of verifying (sacchikata) the cessation of suffering (dukkhanirodha) is fulfilled, the Buddha in the suttas clearly avoided extremes of existence or nonexistence - as per his answer to the question whether the Tathagata would exist or not after death.

In order to understand his rationale for doing so I recommend reading the AN7.54, from which I quote:

“Because of the cessation of views (diṭṭhinirodhā), monk, uncertainty doesn’t arise in an instructed disciple of the noble ones over the undeclared issues.
The view-standpoint, ‘The Tathagata exists after death,’
the view-standpoint, ‘The Tathagata doesn’t exist after death,’
the view-standpoint, ‘The Tathagata both does and doesn’t exist after death,’
the view-standpoint, ‘The Tathagata neither does nor doesn’t exist after death’:
The uninstructed run-of-the-mill person doesn’t discern view,
doesn’t discern the origination of view,
doesn’t discern the cessation of view,
doesn’t discern the path of practice leading to the cessation of view,
and so for him that view grows.

He is not freed from birth, aging, & death; from sorrows, lamentations, pains, distresses, and despairs. He is not freed, I tell you, from suffering & stress.

But the instructed disciple of the noble ones discerns view, discerns the origination of view, discerns the cessation of view, discerns the path of practice leading to the cessation of view, and so for him that view ceases.

He is freed from birth, aging, & death; from sorrows, lamentations, pains, distresses, and despairs. He is freed, I tell you, from suffering & stress.

As well one of the “Tathagata exists or not after death-suttas” of the Avyākata Saṃyutta, from which I quote:

“Then, great king, do you have an accountant or calculator or mathematician who can count the water in the great ocean thus: ‘There are so many gallons of water,’ or ‘There are so many hundreds of gallons of water,’ or ‘There are so many thousands of gallons of water,’ or ‘There are so many hundreds of thousands of gallons of water’?”

“No, revered lady. For what reason? Because the great ocean is deep, immeasurable, hard to fathom.”

“So too, great king, that form by which one describing the Tathagata might describe him has been abandoned by the Tathagata, cut off at the root, made like a palm stump, obliterated so that it is no more subject to future arising.
The Tathagata, great king, is liberated from reckoning in terms of form; he is deep, immeasurable, hard to fathom like the great ocean.
‘The Tathagata exists after death’ does not apply;
‘the Tathagata does not exist after death’ does not apply;
‘the Tathagata both exists and does not exist after death’ does not apply;
‘the Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist after death’ does not apply.

“That feeling by which one describing the Tathagata might describe him …
That perception by which one describing the Tathagata might describe him …
Those volitional formations by which one describing the Tathagata might describe him …
That consciousness by which one describing the Tathagata might describe him has been abandoned by the Tathagata, cut off at the root, made like a palm stump, obliterated so that it is no more subject to future arising.
The Tathagata, great king, is liberated from reckoning in terms of consciousness; he is deep, immeasurable, hard to fathom like the great ocean

1 Like

I have seen we use this argument in many occasion to justify certain desires (Zeal)
However the Zeal meant here is not a result of delusion.
This desire is a gradual development of faith,lending ear, hearing Dhamma etc.
How this desire or craving is developed is discussed in the following Sutta.

https://suttacentral.net/en/mn95

1 Like

Yes, I would.