Are significant numbers drawn to Buddhism for the promise of immortality in Nibbana?

[rockyysdt]

We have learned that Nibbana is a state not a place.

 

Having said that, why do most turn to Buddhism?

 

Apart from core Buddhist teaching, the practices prescribed  could also apply to many  pursuits and philosophies, and is not exclusive to Buddhism.

 

Such things as Yoga, Health, Therapeutic self hypnosis, Praana, and, a host of other pursuits too numerous to mention.

 

I know that the Buddha taught Awakening.

The quenching of desire resulting in the cessation of suffering, as there is no longer any craving left to generate re birth.

 

My question is, are most drawn to Buddhism for the promise of eternal existence in the state of Nibbana?

 

If it's not, isn't re birth, with its bouts of suffering, better than cessation of re birth, which suggests annihilation?

[VincentRJ]

On 2/26/2025 at 5:56 PM, rockyysdt said:

We have learned that Nibbana is a state not a place.

 

Having said that, why do most turn to Buddhism?

 

Apart from core Buddhist teaching, the practices prescribed  could also apply to many  pursuits and philosophies, and is not exclusive to Buddhism.

 

Such things as Yoga, Health, Therapeutic self hypnosis, Praana, and, a host of other pursuits too numerous to mention.

 

I know that the Buddha taught Awakening.

The quenching of desire resulting in the cessation of suffering, as there is no longer any craving left to generate re birth.

 

My question is, are most drawn to Buddhism for the promise of eternal existence in the state of Nibbana?

 

If it's not, isn't re birth, with its bouts of suffering, better than cessation of re birth, which suggests annihilation?

 

Hi Rocky,
I don't know why most people turn to Buddhism, who haven't been brought up in a Buddhist culture. One would need to conduct a widespread, world-wide poll to find the answers.

 

However, I suspect that those in Western countries, who do not have a religious faith, and who are agnostics or aetheists, find that Buddhism, in relation to the basic teachings of Gautama, is a rational alternative to religious dogma, and many of those basic teachings accord more with the understanding of modern science, than other religions do.

 

A couple of examples are: "nothing is permanent, and everything is subject to cause and effect."

 

As I understand, the term Nirvana refers to the extinction of greed, ill will, attachment to things and the delusions in the mind, which are the cause of the various types of suffering that most of us experience to some degree. 
The concept of 'eternal existence in the state of Nibbana' seems contradictory to the basic Buddhist concept that there is no permanent soul or self.
 

[Brucenkhamen]

On 2/26/2025 at 8:56 PM, rockyysdt said:

My question is, are most drawn to Buddhism for the promise of eternal existence in the state of Nibbana?

 

 

The Buddha didn't promise eternal existence, some people seem to think he did but I think this is a fundamental misunderstanding of his teaching.  Some people are drawn to this idea but I think most others religions explicitly promise eternal life so maybe they'd be more comfortable with one of those.

 

Nibbana is the cessation of craving, including the craving to continue to exist as a future me.

[Rick45]

On 2/26/2025 at 2:56 PM, rockyysdt said:

My question is, are most drawn to Buddhism for the promise of eternal existence in the state of Nibbana?

 

5 hours ago, Brucenkhamen said:

Nibbana is the cessation of craving, including the craving to continue to exist as a future me.

Exactly this.

 

Eternal existence isn't the focus of Buddhism.  It's not like Christianity that way.  Buddhism teaches to live in the present moment and not desire anything more than you have at the present moment. 

[rockyysdt]

On 3/3/2025 at 4:07 PM, Rick45 said:

 

Exactly this.

 

Eternal existence isn't the focus of Buddhism.  It's not like Christianity that way.  Buddhism teaches to live in the present moment and not desire anything more than you have at the present moment. 

Hi Rick.

 

In order to achieve the state in which you "live in the present moment and not desire anything more than you have at the present moment", you must practice many hours over perhaps many years, including sitting meditation, daily mindfulness, and perhaps abstinence from many things which you might find currently pleasurable, to eventually come to the state (if you are fortunate) to realise it (awakening).

 

Whether desire is illusory or not, given that when you expire, isn't illusory pleasure (in moderation), better than the cold hard facts of impermanence? 

[rockyysdt]

On 3/3/2025 at 10:35 AM, Brucenkhamen said:

 

The Buddha didn't promise eternal existence, some people seem to think he did but I think this is a fundamental misunderstanding of his teaching.  Some people are drawn to this idea but I think most others religions explicitly promise eternal life so maybe they'd be more comfortable with one of those.

 

Nibbana is the cessation of craving, including the craving to continue to exist as a future me.

Hi Bruce.

 

What is wrong with craving to continue to exist?

[rockyysdt]

On 3/2/2025 at 1:26 AM, VincentRJ said:

 

Hi Rocky,
A couple of examples are: "nothing is permanent, and everything is subject to cause and effect."

The concept of 'eternal existence in the state of Nibbana' seems contradictory to the basic Buddhist concept that there is no permanent soul or self.
 

Hi Vince

It had been said that' "there is no permanent soul or self".

 

But what about' "that which was never born, can never die?".

[VincentRJ]

6 hours ago, rockyysdt said:

Hi Vince

It had been said that' "there is no permanent soul or self".

 

But what about' "that which was never born, can never die?".

 

Hi Rocky,
I did a Google search on the meaning of the Buddhist quote: "that which was never born, can never die".
Following is the answer, which was AI generated. 

 

"In Buddhism, the phrase "that which was never born can never die" refers to the concept of "anatta" (no-self), meaning that there is no permanent, unchanging soul or self that is born and dies; instead, our experience of life is a continuous flow of impermanent phenomena, so the "self" we perceive is simply a collection of constantly changing sensations and perceptions, which therefore cannot be said to have a true beginning or end."

[Brucenkhamen]

On 3/6/2025 at 8:14 PM, rockyysdt said:

Hi Bruce.

 

What is wrong with craving to continue to exist?

 

It causes suffering, and doesn't work because of impermanence.

[rockyysdt]

On 3/7/2025 at 1:17 AM, VincentRJ said:

 

Hi Rocky,

"In Buddhism, the phrase "that which was never born can never die" refers to the concept of "anatta" (no-self), meaning that there is no permanent, unchanging soul or self that is born and dies; instead, our experience of life is a continuous flow of impermanent phenomena,"

Focusing on the continuous flow of impermanent phenomena, I see an aspect which appears to be permanent.

 

What appears to be the permanent part of this continuous flow of impermanent phenomena?

 

Your continuous flow of impermanent phenomena, differs from my continuous flow of impermanent phenomena, which differs from Bruce's continuous flow of impermanent phenomena.

 

The key word is "what".  What being a pronoun, adverb, or dare I say, noun.

 

"What" appears to be permanent, unless of course Awakening occurs, in which case craving is quenched and re birth ceases (on a side note, is this akin to annihilation?)

 

Is "what" the real you (permanent)?

[rockyysdt]

5 hours ago, Brucenkhamen said:

 

It causes suffering, and doesn't work because of impermanence.

But given re-birth, doesn't this process guarantee continuation, subject to Awakening extinguishing it?

 

Quote: the Buddha attained the ability to recall a vast number of past lives along with numerous details about them.

 

Presumably these were his past lives, not your, nor mine, which is suggestive that in this procession there is something, something unique to each of us.

 

Which raises the question: Isn't Awakening akin to annihilation?

[Brucenkhamen]

17 hours ago, rockyysdt said:

But given re-birth, doesn't this process guarantee continuation, subject to Awakening extinguishing it?

 

Quote: the Buddha attained the ability to recall a vast number of past lives along with numerous details about them.

 

Presumably these were his past lives, not your, nor mine, which is suggestive that in this procession there is something, something unique to each of us.

 

Which raises the question: Isn't Awakening akin to annihilation?

 

There is something but it's not a permanent "thing", I would say what is described above is more like received wisdom passed down from generation to generation, probably it's kamma.

[jts-khorat]

On 2/26/2025 at 8:56 AM, rockyysdt said:

My question is, are most drawn to Buddhism for the promise of eternal existence in the state of Nibbana?

 

If it's not, isn't re birth, with its bouts of suffering, better than cessation of re birth, which suggests annihilation?

 

On 3/1/2025 at 3:26 PM, VincentRJ said:

The concept of 'eternal existence in the state of Nibbana' seems contradictory to the basic Buddhist concept that there is no permanent soul or self.

 

Buddhism is not like Buddhism.

 

The problem is, that many people only have the most superficial idea what Buddhism supposedly teaches. Also, in its 2500 years of history, there are literally a myriad of different philosophies and ideas -- very often conflicting -- that sprung from the Buddhavacana, especially if you move geographically away from where the Buddha lived.

 

You would be true if you would follow the diverse Mahayana philosophies, or even Tibetan Buddhism, where you reach some kind of paradise, where Bodhisattvas are eternal beings helping others.

 

At least in Thai and Burmese Theravada (itself derived from Sri Lanka and the theories of Buddhagosa's Visudhimagga from the 5th century), there are no "eternal existences", and there is no "place" or "state" called nirvana (which would be a Sanskrit word). There is nibbana (a Pali word), which describes the release from Samsara -- so it is exactly the opposite of an eternal existence: it is the release first from ego, then release from the illusion of such repeated existences altogether.

 

Unluckily, there is literally nothing that is easy to understand about it, it is quite a complex philosohpy. The most recent edition of the Pali Tipitaka is 40 books and 15,000 pages. You might have seen it when visiting Thai temples, it is the book cabinet full with books from top to bottom and the reason, why higher-ranking Thai monks since the reform in the 19th century need to study years in university to get enough experience to read and understand Pali.

 

Still, if you want to get an understanding, about Theravada there are a ton of good books explaining all that, but expect to read hundreds of pages until you get a good hang of it. The luck is, many of those books are free. Maybe start here: https://buddho.org/books/. I personally recommend Thanisaro Bikkhu for theory and material about meditation, Ajahn Chah for Dhamma talks from the Forest tradition.

 

Lots of the western temples of the Forets tradition have websites and free reading material, with lots of very good informaiton on meditation (the thing most foreigners are the most interested in): https://www.abhayagiri.org/books

 

For a translation of much of the Tipitaka, and lots of commentary: https://www.accesstoinsight.org/

 

In case you would want to discuss with Theravada specialists and those who think they are, I recommend the following forum: https://www.dhammawheel.com/.

[JoseThailand]

On 3/6/2025 at 2:14 PM, rockyysdt said:

What is wrong with craving to continue to exist?

 

Because it's futile and only leads to more suffering

[lamyai3]

On 2/26/2025 at 2:56 PM, rockyysdt said:

My question is, are most drawn to Buddhism for the promise of eternal existence in the state of Nibbana?

Unlikely in most cases, given that this is recognised as an extremely rare event and not something most people would expect in their current lifetime. Even the understanding of Nibbana, like the snuffing out of a flame is very hard to comprehend, it is not a personal achievement. 

 

Most would be drawn to Buddhism within their own culture by absorption and tradition, and in many respects the more mundane aspects of Buddhism function not dissimilarly to old fashioned Christianity with it's petitionary prayer, a wishing for better fortune. 

 

At deeper levels (and where outsiders might be brought into the fold), it is as others have mentioned suffering. If Nibbana is the ultimate exit ramp within Buddhism, perhaps the entry point lies in the Four Noble Truths. 

[fondue zoo]

Because existence "seems" to be without purpose, everything outside Earth's barn door is scary and humans die very easily/quickly, but, we have fantastic imaginations?

We have imagined countless divinities and immaterial concepts, some even decided that human mortality can be surpassed and a divine state achieved (not for everyone mind you, plebs are still required). And every now and again every century or two, someone comes along and says no that's not it, this is how you should interpret this and that.

 

_{I'm not dissing anyone's personal beliefs or path, I'm all for people seeking and attaining peace and happiness.}

[rockyysdt]

10 hours ago, JoseThailand said:

 

Because it's futile and only leads to more suffering

Why is it futile?

 

It's already been indicated that Awakening (which results in the quenching of craving and finally cessation of rebirth) is very difficult to attain.

Even the Buddha was amazed at the number of his re births "Quote: the Buddha attained the ability to recall a vast number of past lives along with numerous details about them."

 

It maybe futile in the end but if it buys you millions of re births, that is a lot of living, before cessation catches up with you.

 

And lets consider this more closely, yes, there is suffering, but there is also good times.

Cessation is nothing.

 

As the Led Zeppelin title "Good Times Bad Times" suggests, some days might be good, and others bad, but there is life.

Isn't that better than cessation?

[rockyysdt]

10 hours ago, lamyai3 said:

Unlikely in most cases, given that this is recognised as an extremely rare event and not something most people would expect in their current lifetime. Even the understanding of Nibbana, like the snuffing out of a flame is very hard to comprehend, it is not a personal achievement. 

 

Most would be drawn to Buddhism within their own culture by absorption and tradition, and in many respects the more mundane aspects of Buddhism function not dissimilarly to old fashioned Christianity with it's petitionary prayer, a wishing for better fortune. 

 

At deeper levels (and where outsiders might be brought into the fold), it is as others have mentioned suffering. If Nibbana is the ultimate exit ramp within Buddhism, perhaps the entry point lies in the Four Noble Truths. 

Hi Lamyai.

 

If they are drawn by reasons not dissimilar to Christianity then doesn't this support my question?

I have never met a Christian believer who doesn't expect an after life.

 

And, as you describe, the end of suffering appears to be the ultimate exit ramp within Buddhism.

But if the end of suffering, which results from the quenching of craving,which then  results in the in the cessation of rebirth, then who would sacrifice their life/lives for perhaps countless lifetimes with the ultimate reward of being extinguished?

[rockyysdt]

12 hours ago, jts-khorat said:

Also, in its 2500 years of history, there are literally a myriad of different philosophies and ideas -- very often conflicting -- that sprung from the Buddhavacana, especially if you move geographically away from where the Buddha lived.

 

You would be true if you would follow the diverse Mahayana philosophies, or even Tibetan Buddhism, where you reach some kind of paradise, where Bodhisattvas are eternal beings helping others.

 

At least in Thai and Burmese Theravada (itself derived from Sri Lanka and the theories of Buddhagosa's Visudhimagga from the 5th century), there are no "eternal existences", and there is no "place" or "state" called nirvana (which would be a Sanskrit word). There is nibbana (a Pali word), which describes the release from Samsara -- so it is exactly the opposite of an eternal existence: it is the release first from ego, then release from the illusion of such repeated existences altogether.

 

 

I do view it from a Thervada perspective.

 

Although the history goes back 2,500 years we do have recent works supporting many critical aspects of the teaching.

 

There are a number of Arahants who have documented their teachings and experience.

 

For this discussion I site Ajaan Maha Boowa.

Quote:  "So I turned my attention to investigate my own past lives. If the corpses were scattered along the length and breadth of Thailand, there would not be space left. Just this one individual. Imagine the time it took to be born and die that many times. It would be impossible to count all the births and deaths".

 

What do we make of his words, and that of several others?

Do you call them fakes, or did they experience a collective delusion?

 

If we accept these records and what we know about Theravada then:

 

1.  our experience of life is a continuous flow of impermanent phenomena.

2. The flow continues through our lifetime while there is craving.

3. As we were born, we are impermanent and will die.

4. But (if we accept the Arahants word), while craving remains the cycle of re birth will occur.

5. Ajaan Boowa indicates all of his past lives were unique to him and his rebirth lineage, not others.

6. Awakening results in the quenching of craving.

7. When craving is quenched re birth ceases.

 

What can you deduce from this?

 

a. One's past lives have a unique lineage associated with them.

b. Re Birth ceases when craving is quenched.

 

Quite clearly, according to Ajaan Boowa and others, there are countless past lives, and there is cessation of rebirth after Awakening.

 

If there is no longer suffering because there is no one reborn to suffer, then awakening appears to lead to annihilation.

Then aren't countless rebirths (virtual permanence) with good times and bad times and illusion, better than nothing?

 

Or is there something more to the state of Nibbana than simply quenching of craving?

 

 

 

 

[Cameroni]

On 2/26/2025 at 8:56 AM, rockyysdt said:

We have learned that Nibbana is a state not a place.

 

Having said that, why do most turn to Buddhism?

 

Apart from core Buddhist teaching, the practices prescribed  could also apply to many  pursuits and philosophies, and is not exclusive to Buddhism.

 

Such things as Yoga, Health, Therapeutic self hypnosis, Praana, and, a host of other pursuits too numerous to mention.

 

I know that the Buddha taught Awakening.

The quenching of desire resulting in the cessation of suffering, as there is no longer any craving left to generate re birth.

 

My question is, are most drawn to Buddhism for the promise of eternal existence in the state of Nibbana?

 

If it's not, isn't re birth, with its bouts of suffering, better than cessation of re birth, which suggests annihilation?

 

Well, no re-birth isn't better. With a Buddhist lense it would be endless suffering. Obviously a permanent state of bliss is preferable.

 

I don't think people are mostly attracted to Buddhism because of the state of Nirvana promising eternal existence. The attraction of Buddhism for many is the logical and pratical approach to ethics, life and morality. It's a bit preferable to some of the Judaeo/Christian nonsense if you find things like people walking on water  hard to swallow. Having said that in Buddhism too indigenous folklore has been added on top of Buddha's teaching, devils and the like.

 

It's true though Yoga and other pursuits can help you achieve similar states which meditation in Buddhism achieves, however, Buddhist teachings are still the best way to achieve the overall goals of Buddhism, clearly.

[rockyysdt]

22 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

 

Well, no re-birth isn't better. With a Buddhist lense it would be endless suffering. Obviously a permanent state of bliss is preferable.

 

I don't think people are mostly attracted to Buddhism because of the state of Nirvana promising eternal existence. The attraction of Buddhism for many is the logical and pratical approach to ethics, life and morality. It's a bit preferable to some of the Judaeo/Christian nonsense if you find things like people walking on water  hard to swallow. Having said that in Buddhism too indigenous folklore has been added on top of Buddha's teaching, devils and the like.

 

It's true though Yoga and other pursuits can help you achieve similar states which meditation in Buddhism achieves, however, Buddhist teachings are still the best way to achieve the overall goals of Buddhism, clearly.

Yes, but many are saying that Nibbana is not a permanent blissful state.

 

On the contrary, it is taught "that which was born is impermanent and therefore will die".

Also, if you were to follow the Buddhas teachings, and that of Arahants since, it's not simply meditation, but a process of letting go of attachment to Self. 

Self being impermanent.

Basically you detach yourself or abandon Self or Ego. 

If successful you Awaken to the reality that there is no self. 

This quenching of craving results in the cessation of rebirth.

Nothing there about bliss.

 

There are stages of meditation which result in blissful experiences, but the teaching is to observe them without attachment. 

Blissful feelings are impermanent and not the goal.

In fact attachment to bliss is an obstacle which will hinder your progress.

 

From where I see it there are two camps:

 

1. Those who believe that Awakening is simply a state in which you no longer have attachment and therefore craving is quenched.

    The conclusion appears to result in the cessation of rebirth.

    As nothing else was promised it appears to end in annihilation.

 

2. Others believe Awakening is again a state in which you no longer have attachment and therefore craving is quenched, but that this is a gateway to something beyond our comprehension.

 

Because I can't see why the Buddha would teach annihilation I favour the second option. 🙂

[Cameroni]

50 minutes ago, rockyysdt said:

Yes, but many are saying that Nibbana is not a permanent blissful state.

 

On the contrary, they are saying, "that which was born is impermanent and therefore must die.

Also, you were follow the Buddhas teachings, and that of Arahants since, it's not simply meditation, but a process of letting go of attachment to Self. Self being impermanent.

Basically you detach yourself or abandon Self or Ego. If successful you Awaken to the reality that there is no self. This quenching of craving results in cessation of rebirth.

 

Nothing there about bliss.

There are stages of meditation which result in blissful experiences, but the teaching is to observe them without attachment. Blissful feelings are impermanent and not the goal.

In fact attachment to bliss is an obstacle which will hinder your progress.

 

Yes, indeed, there is a lot of debate about what Nirvana really means.

 

Of course "letting go of attachment to self" is a core aspect of Nirvana, one only has to look at the meaning of the words, which can be translated as letting go of passions and cravings. This is indeed a core teaching of Buddhism and one of the hardest things in the world, to let go of your likes and dislikes. Speaking from personal experience I can assure you it is a sure path to bliss in this world. I experienced a state of bliss in my daily meditations after many years, an indescribable experience of happiness. I actually had to laugh out loud, it was so intense. This really had a profound impact on me, so I decided to go to a Japanese Zen monastery of the Soto school.

 

Suffice to say life in a Zen monastery is absolute torture to my own nature, and I could only endure the truly awful food for so long. Leaving after a week or so I went straight to a hotel to have a meal. The kitchen was closed alas, so they served me a roll with liver sausage. I ate that roll with liver sausage, and to this day that was the best tasting meal I ever had, total bliss. Precisely because I was eating these garbage vegetable meals in the Zen monastery. Letting go of your likes really is the path to incredible pleasure. Now a roll with liver sausage tastes nowhere near as good, because I eat normally, ie according to my likes. But when I ate letting go of my likes, as they do in the Zen monastery, whilst it was digusting, it did allow me to enjoy food on an almost surreal level. For a short time.

 

But I digress.

 

Bhikkhu Bodhi, a Theravada monk, translator and scholar, argues that various descriptions of nibbana from the early buddhist texts "convey a more concrete idea of the ultimate goal" which differs from mere cessation and "speak of Nibbana almost as if it were a transcendent state or dimension of being."[62] Bodhi notes that nibbana is sometimes described as a base (ayatana), an unborn and unconditioned state (pada), a reality (dhamma), and an "element" (dhatu).[63] This transcendent state is compared to the ocean, which is "deep, immeasurable, [and] hard to fathom.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_(Buddhism)

 

Also see:

 

"A similar view is also defended by Christian Lindtner, who argues that in pre-canonical Buddhism, nirvana is:

 

... a place one can actually go to. It is called nirvanadhatu, has no border-signs (animitta), is localized somewhere beyond the other six dhatus (beginning with earth and ending with vijñana) but is closest to akasa and vijñana. One cannot visualize it, it is anidarsana, but it provides one with firm ground under one’s feet, it is dhruva; once there one will not slip back, it is acyutapada. As opposed to this world, it is a pleasant place to be in, it is sukha, things work well.

 

According to Christian Lindtner, the original and early Buddhist concepts of nirvana were similar to those found in competing Śramaṇa (strivers/ascetics) traditions such as Jainism and the tradition of the Upanishads. It was not a purely psychological idea, but a concept described in terms of Indian cosmology and a related theory of consciousness.[76] All Indian religions, over time, states Lindtner evolved these ideas, internalizing the state but in different ways because early and later Vedanta continued with the metaphysical idea of Brahman and soul, but Buddhism did not.[77] In this view, the canonical Buddhist views on nirvana was a reaction against early (pre-canonical) Buddhism, along with the assumptions of Jainism and the Upanishadic thought on the idea of personal liberation.[78] As a result of this reaction, nirvana came to be seen as a state of mind, instead of a concrete place."

 

And also:

 

"Buddhaghosa also criticizes the view that nibbāna is a kind of non-existence or an absence (of the five aggregates).[113] He argues that nibbāna is "apprehendable [by some, namely, the nobles ones] by the [right] means, in other words, by the way that is appropriate to it, [the way of virtue, concentration, and understanding]."[113] Buddhaghosa also argues that if nibbana were a mere absence or a nothingness, it would follow that the Buddhist path would be meaningless."

 

And:

 

"A similarly apophatic position is also defended by Walpola Rahula, who states that the question of what nirvana is "can never be answered completely and satisfactorily in words, because human language is too poor to express the real nature of the Absolute Truth or Ultimate Reality which is Nirvana."

 

Quite clearly, if you are able to do this supremely hard thing and let go of your likes and dislikes, you will achieve bliss in this life. I have experienced it myself.

 

However, the metaphysical interpretations that came after, remember Nirvana predates Buddhism by a long shot, may promise a state of bliss or transcendence, but whether these are what the Buddha really meant is doubful. After all he steadfastly refused to discuss metahpysical concepts.

 

In so far as the letting go of cravings and passions, of likes and dislikes, the actual meaning of the words Nirvana, takes place in this world, it can lead to blissful experiences. However, speculation about states after death have to always remain that, speculation. There is a good reason why Buddha remained silent on this. So did Nietzsche, who famously wrote "we can't cut our own head off and see what remains".

[Cameroni]

The Sri Lankan philosopher David Kalupahana has taken a different position, he argues that the Buddha's "main philosophical insight" is the principle of causality (dependent origination) and that this "is operative in all spheres, including the highest state of spiritual development, namely, nirvana."[138] According to Kalupahana "later scholars attempted to distinguish two spheres, one in which causation prevailed and the other which is uncaused. This latter view was, no doubt, the result of a confusion in the meanings of the two terms, sankhata ('compounded') and paticcasamuppanna ('causally conditioned')."[138] Thus, even though nibbana is termed "asankhata" (un-compounded, not-put together) there is no statement in the early texts which say that nirvana is not dependently originated or is uncaused (the term would be appaticcasamuppana).[138] He thus argues that "nirvana is a state where there is 'natural or causal happening' (paticcasamuppada), but not 'organized,' or 'planned' conditioning (sankha-rana)", as well as "a state of perfect mental health (aroga), of perfect happiness (parama sukha), calmness or coolness (sitibhuta), and stability (aneñja), etc. attained in this life, or while one is alive."

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_(Buddhism)

 

 

[rockyysdt]

1 hour ago, Cameroni said:

 

Yes, indeed, there is a lot of debate about what Nirvana really means.

 

Thanks C.

 

I write to rekindle my path, but also to learn from others.

Thank you for your insights.

 

I tip my hat to you. Quite a journey you've experienced.

Your words help to make sense of my life and validate what has happened to me and what I do and hope to with the remainder of my impermanence..

 

I laughed wholeheartedly at your Zen experiences.

The Japanese know how to cut through to get to the heart, all be it with great suffering.

 

Regarding the stance some have that Awakening is the cessation of suffering due to the quenching of craving, I suspect this might have something to do with letting go of the Self.

You indicated, letting go was one of the hardest things to do in order to achieve that sublime state of being.

It might be possible that believing one will exist in eternal bliss might get in the way of letting go of the Self and thus impede your practice.  👍

 

[jts-khorat]

3 hours ago, rockyysdt said:

I do view it from a Thervada perspective.

 

...

 

For this discussion I site Ajaan Maha Boowa.

Quote:  "So I turned my attention to investigate my own past lives. If the corpses were scattered along the length and breadth of Thailand, there would not be space left. Just this one individual. Imagine the time it took to be born and die that many times. It would be impossible to count all the births and deaths".

 

Interesting that you quote Ajahn Maha Bua, who is the most divergent from orthodox Theravada with his ideas of an indestructible Citta.

 

See: https://discourse.suttacentral.net/t/whats-up-with-ajahn-chahs-the-knower/21870

 

Which goes to show, that even in the most "modern" philosophical trend in Theravada, there are severe differences. This idea of a Citta does still have nothing to do with some form of enduring consciousness.

 

It does not help, of course, that Theravada is mainly based on Buddhagosa's Visudhimagga treatise and later Sri Lankan Buddhism, itself removed from the Buddha by a 1000 years, adding a rudimentary Boddhisattva ideal, the idea of a Buddhist god-king and lots of ideas about various supernatural phenomena (including a first try to make Pali a "magic" language, which only later succeeded with the amazing mathematical rules to build a Sanskrit grammar --> see Thai amulets and Sak Yant tattoos).

 

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/perera/wheel100.html#sect-28

 

All the more confusion, if you then move on to still equate Nibbana to Nirvana, where both are exactly opposites in idea.

 

So, to answer your question: nobody will be drawn to Theravada for its eternal bliss, as this is not part of the belief; it is simply not on offer.

 

Many people from even more derived Budddhist Mahayana and Vajrayana philosophies just might, as this is their opposing, central tenet.

[rockyysdt]

15 minutes ago, jts-khorat said:

 

Interesting that you quote Ajahn Maha Bua, who is the most divergent from orthodox Theravada with his ideas of an indestructible Citta.

 

See: https://discourse.suttacentral.net/t/whats-up-with-ajahn-chahs-the-knower/21870

 

Which goes to show, that even in the most "modern" philosophical trend in Theravada, there are severe differences. This idea of a Citta does still have nothing to do with some form of enduring consciousness.

 

It does not help, of course, that Theravada is mainly based on Buddhagosa's Visudhimagga treatise and later Sri Lankan Buddhism, itself removed from the Buddha by a 1000 years, adding a rudimentary Boddhisattva ideal, the idea of a Buddhist god-king and lots of ideas about various supernatural phenomena (including a first try to make Pali a "magic" language, which only later succeeded with the amazing mathematical rules to build a Sanskrit grammar --> see Thai amulets and Sak Yant tattoos).

 

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/perera/wheel100.html#sect-28

 

All the more confusion, if you then move on to still equate Nibbana to Nirvana, where both are exactly opposites in idea.

 

So, to answer your question: nobody will be drawn to Theravada for its eternal bliss, as this is not part of the belief; it is simply not on offer.

 

Many people from even more derived Budddhist Mahayana and Vajrayana philosophies just might, as this is their opposing, central tenet.

Does that leave Buddhism as a nihilistic pursuit?

[jts-khorat]

12 minutes ago, rockyysdt said:

Does that leave Buddhism as a nihilistic pursuit?

 

No, of course not. Theravada is based on the laws of Kamma (not: Karma!), so it is not rejecting morals as meaningless.

 

On the contrary, only with the right application and development of morals (Sila) is it possible to be sensitized enough to perceive reality as it is and therefore achieve removal from the wheel of Samsara.

[rockyysdt]

3 minutes ago, jts-khorat said:

 

No, of course not. Theravada is based on the laws of Kamma (not: Karma!), so it is not rejecting morals as meaningless.

 

On the contrary, only with the right application and development of morals (Sila) is it possible to be removed from the wheel of Samsara.

Thanks JT.

 

Removal from the wheel of Samsara is agreed.

 

But what about what happens after the quenching of Craving?

 

It is this part of the process that I referred to as being nihilistic.

 

[jts-khorat]

Also, maybe helpful for your imemdiate question, read up on the concept of Anatta.

 

https://www.britannica.com/topic/anatta

 

Also, there are two Suttas which might interest you, namely:

 

Nibbana Sutta: https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.8.01.than.html

 

Quote

There is that dimension, monks, where there is neither earth, nor water, nor fire, nor wind;

neither dimension of the infinitude of space, nor dimension of the infinitude of consciousness,

nor dimension of nothingness, nor dimension of neither perception nor non-perception;

neither this world, nor the next world, nor sun, nor moon.

 

And there, I say, there is neither coming, nor going, nor staying;

neither passing away nor arising: unestablished,

unevolving, without support [mental object].

 

This, just this, is the end of stress.

 

Vajira Sutta https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn05/sn05.010.bodh.html

 

Quote

Why now do you assume 'a being'?

Mara, have you grasped a view?

This is a heap of sheer constructions:

Here no being is found.

 

Just as, with an assemblage of parts,

The word 'chariot' is used,

So, when the aggregates are present,

There's the convention 'a being.'

 

It's only suffering that comes to be,

Suffering that stands and falls away.

Nothing but suffering comes to be,

Nothing but suffering ceases.

 

[jts-khorat]

11 minutes ago, rockyysdt said:

Thanks JT.

 

Removal from the wheel of Samsara is agreed.

 

But what about what happens after the quenching of Craving?

 

It is this part of the process that I referred to as being nihilistic.

 

 

Out of the absence of craving follows the absence of Dukkha in a wholly natural, for lack of a better word "automatic" process.

 

This is actually the central tenet of the Buddhavacana, see the Four Noble Truths.

 

Quote

• Dukkha: the Truth of suffering
• Samudaya: the Truth of the origin of suffering
• Nirodha: the Truth of the cessation of suffering
• Magga: the Truth of the Path to the cessation of suffering