YOU CANNOT POST. OUR WEB HOSTING COMPANY DECIDED TO MOVE THE SERVER TO ANOTHER LOCATION. IN THE MEANTIME, YOU CAN VIEW THIS VERSION WHICH DOES NOT ALLOW POSTING AND WILL NOT SAVE ANYTHING YOU DO ONCE THE OTHER SERVER GOES ONLINE.

Observer citta and nibbana - Dhamma Wheel

Observer citta and nibbana

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
Modus.Ponens
Posts: 2637
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:38 am
Location: Gallifrey

Observer citta and nibbana

Postby Modus.Ponens » Thu Apr 05, 2012 9:19 pm

Hello

I've noticed that in all buddhist traditions there is a type of consciousness called "the observer" (in a non spectacular way) or the "buddha nature" (in a more spectacular way) or "rigpa", or the "citta that never dies", etc. In theravada, though, there is a distinction between this citta and nibbana, while other buddhist traditions seem to identify the two things.

So I have two questions:

1- Do you agree that other traditions don't make a distinction between buddha nature and nirvana? If they distinguish, please explain the distinction made.

2- What is the specific name and description given to this citta in the Theravada literature?

Be well :)
He turns his mind away from those phenomena, and having done so, inclines his mind to the property of deathlessness: 'This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.'
(Jhana Sutta - Thanissaro Bhikkhu translation)

User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: Observer citta and nibbana

Postby ground » Fri Apr 06, 2012 1:44 am


User avatar
DarwidHalim
Posts: 537
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2011 11:49 am
Location: Neither Samsara nor Nirvana

Re: Observer citta and nibbana

Postby DarwidHalim » Fri Apr 06, 2012 3:13 am

Hi modus,

You get a wrong impression and understanding with this one.

None of Buddhist schools accept 'the observer'.

Buddha nature is not the observer.
Rigpa is not the observer.

Citta that never dies is A disaster misunderstanding as well.

Regarding Buddha nature, buddhahood is not something you can create like creating a car. If you can fully realize there is no self in everything, you realize your buddhahood right now. Not after you die, but right now, this second.

Everything doesn't have self. There is no such thing as today I have self, then after following Buddha way I find this I and I destroy it. It is not like that. In this case, you can find the real Self and then you destroy that self. It is not like that.


Now, we think there is self. But if you search whether you are usin theravada method or Mahayana method or Vajrayana method, it is right now you find the answer that this self or I is unfindable. So, actually there is already no self since last year, last last year, yesterday, today, and even in the future. This no self is always no self. This is called Buddha nature, the no self. Because everyone without exception always doesn't have self or I, since beginningless time everyone is actually already have this Buddha nature.

If you can eliminate your belief regarding this I and 100% directly perceive no I or no self, your Buddha nature just shinning. You are Buddha straight away. But, if you cannot eliminate this no self, your Buddha nature is covered with your imagination of I, which you believe is there.

Buddha nature is unfindable, it is just a pointer referring to this state that right now you are already in the state of no I. But you don't believe it, you think there is I.

Rigpa and Buddha nature are same. Just different fancy name.

Only people who cannot accept there is nothing in spite these various appearances are there, they create citta or mind as the observer. But if you are critical, and you check it yourself, you won't find it.

There is a school based on this citta who assert citta is the main actor. But this school has been criticized almost 2000 years ago.

If we talk citta or mind only on the relative level AS IF you can find it, that is fine. But, if that citta or mind give you the impression that mind and citta is real and findable, then it is a big big mistake.
I am not here nor there.
I am not right nor wrong.
I do not exist neither non-exist.
I am not I nor non-I.
I am not in samsara nor nirvana.
To All Buddhas, I bow down for the teaching of emptiness. Thank You!

User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: Observer citta and nibbana

Postby ground » Fri Apr 06, 2012 3:26 am


User avatar
Modus.Ponens
Posts: 2637
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:38 am
Location: Gallifrey

Re: Observer citta and nibbana

Postby Modus.Ponens » Fri Apr 06, 2012 3:55 am

Darwid,

I know that mahayana schools don't consider buddhanature to be a self (except for nirichen, but I don't even consider nirichen buddhist). That's not what I'm asking. What I'm asking is if the experience of this type of consciousness has been confused with nibbana in mahayana traditions (but not only).
He turns his mind away from those phenomena, and having done so, inclines his mind to the property of deathlessness: 'This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.'
(Jhana Sutta - Thanissaro Bhikkhu translation)

User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: Observer citta and nibbana

Postby ground » Fri Apr 06, 2012 4:07 am


User avatar
DarwidHalim
Posts: 537
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2011 11:49 am
Location: Neither Samsara nor Nirvana

Re: Observer citta and nibbana

Postby DarwidHalim » Fri Apr 06, 2012 4:32 am

The issue here is not Mahayana, or Theravada or Vajrayana.

If there is observer, that is not three of them.

If people think there is, they have misunderstand it.

For this point, three of them are having same stand.

If only one people think that one, you cannot assume the whole school is like that. Even nichriren doesn't have observer. It is clearly mentioned in lotus Sutta.

Please don't mix just because a small group of people think like that, the whole school think like that.
I am not here nor there.
I am not right nor wrong.
I do not exist neither non-exist.
I am not I nor non-I.
I am not in samsara nor nirvana.
To All Buddhas, I bow down for the teaching of emptiness. Thank You!

Nyana
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: Observer citta and nibbana

Postby Nyana » Fri Apr 06, 2012 9:26 am


xabir
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 8:59 am

Re: Observer citta and nibbana

Postby xabir » Mon Apr 09, 2012 1:50 pm

1) It is simply the luminosity of mind, falsely reified into a self/observer. In actuality there is no observer and no self. Those who realized this usually have to go through a few further realizations to break through the self-view. See http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/ ... ience.html

2) No, not all of Mahayana Buddhists mistakens Buddha-nature as an observer. Buddha-nature is often understood to be the union of luminosity and emptiness, without self or observer. Even the luminous mind, and the luminosity of all experience, is understood (by many) to be without self, observer, or agency. There are many Mahayana Buddhists who also realize anatta. But Mahayana Buddhists generally don't aspire for merely an arahant's cessation, but full Buddhahood. Buddha-nature can also be understood as the potential to achieve Buddha-hood.

santa100
Posts: 2673
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: Observer citta and nibbana

Postby santa100 » Mon Apr 09, 2012 2:24 pm

Modus.Ponens wrote:
"1- Do you agree that other traditions don't make a distinction between buddha nature and nirvana? If they distinguish, please explain the distinction made"

Buddhanature is the potential energy that if being recognized AND put into practice, will result in the fruit of Nibbana. Recognizing this potential is an important first step but this alone won't result in Nibbana, why? if Nibbana is defined as the total and final liberation from greed, aversion, and delusion, then without "putting into practice", greed, aversion, and delusion are still there, the potential energy would just remains as potential energy, it will not be converted into kinetic anergy or thermal energy, etc..


Return to “General Theravāda discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 19 guests

Google Saffron, Theravada Search Engine