Nirvana - Unborn or Created

No holds barred discussion on the Buddhadharma. Argue about rebirth, karma, commentarial interpretations etc. Be nice to each other.

Re: Advaitin vs. Buddhist takes on awareness/reality

Postby Son of Buddha » Thu Jan 17, 2013 11:17 pm

Astus wrote:
Jeff wrote:Advaita teaches "oneness" which can be described as interdependence.


Oneness means that everything has the same substance. Buddhism teaches that everything is without substance (nihsvabhava = empty) and dependently originated.



So everything is without substance it is empty and dependently originated.

Is Enlightenment empty without substance and dependently originated?

(that is your definition of empty everything that is dependently originated correct?)
User avatar
Son of Buddha
 
Posts: 777
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 6:48 pm

Re: Advaitin vs. Buddhist takes on awareness/reality

Postby Sherab Dorje » Thu Jan 17, 2013 11:31 pm

Son of Buddha wrote:Is Enlightenment empty without substance and dependently originated?
Yesirree, indeed it is! Just in reverse order.
Upanisa Sutta

While staying at Savatthi the Exalted One said:

"The destruction of the cankers, monks, is for one who knows and sees, I say, not for one who does not know and does not see. Knowing what, seeing what does the destruction of the cankers occur? 'Such is material form, such is the arising of material form, such is the passing away of material form. Such is feeling... perception... mental formations... consciousness; such is the arising of consciousness, such is the passing away of consciousness' — for one who knows and sees this, monks, the destruction of the cankers occurs.

"The knowledge of destruction with respect to destruction has a supporting condition, I say, it does not lack a supporting condition. And what is the supporting condition for the knowledge of destruction? 'Emancipation' should be the reply.

"Emancipation, monks, also has a supporting condition, I say, it does not lack a supporting condition. And what is the supporting condition for emancipation? 'Dispassion' should be the reply.

"Dispassion, monks, also has a supporting condition, I say, it does not lack a supporting condition. And what is the supporting condition for dispassion? 'Disenchantment' should be the reply.

"Disenchantment, monks, also has a supporting condition, I say, it does not lack a supporting condition. And what is the supporting condition for disenchantment? 'The knowledge and vision of things as they really are' should be the reply.

"The knowledge and vision of things as they really are, monks, also has a supporting condition, I say, it does not lack a supporting condition. And what is the supporting condition for the knowledge and vision of things as they really are? 'Concentration' should be the reply.

"Concentration, monks, also has a supporting condition, I say, it does not lack a supporting condition. And what is the supporting condition for concentration? 'Happiness' should be the reply.

"Happiness, monks, also has a supporting condition, I say, it does not lack a supporting condition. And what is the supporting condition for happiness? 'Tranquillity' should be the reply.

"Tranquillity, monks, also has a supporting condition, I say, it does not lack a supporting condition. And what is the supporting condition for tranquillity? 'Rapture' should be the reply.

"Rapture, monks, also has a supporting condition, I say, it does not lack a supporting condition. And what is the supporting condition for rapture? 'Joy' should be the reply.

"Joy, monks, also has a supporting condition, I say, it does not lack a supporting condition. And what is the supporting condition for joy? 'Faith' should be the reply.

"Faith, monks, also has a supporting condition, I say, it does not lack a supporting condition. And what is the supporting condition for faith? 'Suffering' should be the reply.

"Suffering, monks, also has a supporting condition, I say, it does not lack a supporting condition. And what is the supporting condition for suffering? 'Birth' should be the reply.

"And what is the supporting condition for birth?. 'Existence' should be the reply.

"What is the supporting condition for existence? 'Clinging' should be the reply.

"What is the supporting condition for clinging? 'Craving' should be the reply.

"What is the supporting condition for craving? 'Feeling' should be the reply.

"What is the supporting condition for feeling? 'Contact' should be the reply.

"What is the supporting condition for contact? 'The sixfold sense base' should be the reply.

"What is the supporting condition for the sixfold sense base? 'Mentality-materiality' should be the reply.

"What is the supporting condition for mentality-materiality? 'Consciousness' should be the reply.

"What is the supporting condition for consciousness? 'Kamma formations' should be the reply.

"Kamma formations, monks, also have a supporting condition, I say, they do not lack a supporting condition. And what is the supporting condition for kamma formations? 'Ignorance' should be the reply.

"Thus, monks, ignorance is the supporting condition for kamma formations, kamma formations are the supporting condition for consciousness, consciousness is the supporting condition for mentality-materiality, mentality-materiality is the supporting condition for the sixfold sense base, the sixfold sense base is the supporting condition for contact, contact is the supporting condition for feeling, feeling is the supporting condition for craving, craving is the supporting condition for clinging, clinging is the supporting condition for existence, existence is the supporting condition for birth, birth is the supporting condition for suffering, suffering is the supporting condition for faith, faith is the supporting condition for joy, joy is the supporting condition for rapture, rapture is the supporting condition for tranquillity, tranquillity is the supporting condition for happiness, happiness is the supporting condition for concentration, concentration is the supporting condition for the knowledge and vision of things as they really are, the knowledge and vision of things as they really are is the supporting condition for disenchantment, disenchantment is the supporting condition for dispassion, dispassion is the supporting condition for emancipation, and emancipation is the supporting condition for the knowledge of the destruction (of the cankers).

"Just as, monks, when rain descends heavily upon some mountaintop, the water flows down along with the slope, and fills the clefts, gullies, and creeks; these being filled fill up the pools; these being filled fill up the ponds; these being filled fill up the streams; these being filled fill up the rivers; and the rivers being filled fill up the great ocean — in the same way, monks, ignorance is the supporting condition for kamma formations, kamma formations are the supporting condition for consciousness, consciousness is the supporting condition for mentality-materiality, mentality-materiality is the supporting condition for the sixfold sense base, the sixfold sense base is the supporting condition for contact, contact is the supporting condition for feeling, feeling is the supporting condition for craving, craving is the supporting condition for clinging, clinging is the supporting condition for existence, existence is the supporting condition for birth, birth is the supporting condition for suffering, suffering is the supporting condition for faith, faith is the supporting condition for joy, joy is the supporting condition for rapture, rapture is the supporting condition for tranquillity, tranquillity is the supporting condition for happiness, happiness is the supporting condition for concentration, concentration is the supporting condition for the knowledge and vision of things as they really are, the knowledge and vision of things as they really are is the supporting condition for disenchantment, disenchantment is the supporting condition for dispassion, dispassion is the supporting condition for emancipation, and emancipation is the supporting condition for the knowledge of the destruction (of the cankers)."
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... 7.html#sut
"When one is not in accord with the true view
Meditation and conduct become delusion,
One will not attain the real result
One will be like a blind man who has no eyes."
Naropa - Summary of the View from The Eight Doha Treasures
User avatar
Sherab Dorje
Former staff member
 
Posts: 7892
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Advaitin vs. Buddhist takes on awareness/reality

Postby Astus » Thu Jan 17, 2013 11:58 pm

Son of Buddha wrote:So everything is without substance it is empty and dependently originated.

Is Enlightenment empty without substance and dependently originated?

(that is your definition of empty everything that is dependently originated correct?)


Indeed, as Greg said. Just look at the four noble truths. The first two tells about samsara and its cause, the second two about nirvana and its cause. Very simple.
"There is no such thing as the real mind. Ridding yourself of delusion: that's the real mind."
(Sheng-yen: Getting the Buddha Mind, p 73)

“Don’t rashly seek the true Buddha;
True Buddha can’t be found.
Does marvelous nature and spirit
Need tempering or refinement?
Mind is this mind carefree;
This face, the face at birth."

(Nanyue Mingzan: Enjoying the Way, tr. Jeff Shore; T51n2076, p461b24-26)
User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
 
Posts: 4126
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Re: Advaitin vs. Buddhist takes on awareness/reality

Postby songhill » Fri Jan 18, 2013 1:22 am

Putting nirvana under the category of dependently originated thingees [sic] is not something the Buddha taught. According to Pande (Origins of Buddhism, p.414) dependent origination may be designated as "the principle of non-ultimate experience" or composed/composite things (Vasubandhu identifies dependent origination with samskritadharmas). The relation of nirvana and dependent origination is like that between Advaita Vedanta's Brahman and Maya. The essential intention of dependent origination is denying the independent existence or reality of finite things.
User avatar
songhill
 
Posts: 245
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2012 12:23 am

Re: Advaitin vs. Buddhist takes on awareness/reality

Postby Astus » Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:07 am

songhill wrote:Putting nirvana under the category of dependently originated thingees [sic] is not something the Buddha taught.


True, because nirvana is not a permanent or impermanent thingee but the end of suffering, just as when a fire is extinguished we can't say that non-fire is some new thing, it's just the end of burning. If there were a new thing coming out of the end of suffering or appearing because of the elimination of ignorance it would be a dependently originated phenomenon.
"There is no such thing as the real mind. Ridding yourself of delusion: that's the real mind."
(Sheng-yen: Getting the Buddha Mind, p 73)

“Don’t rashly seek the true Buddha;
True Buddha can’t be found.
Does marvelous nature and spirit
Need tempering or refinement?
Mind is this mind carefree;
This face, the face at birth."

(Nanyue Mingzan: Enjoying the Way, tr. Jeff Shore; T51n2076, p461b24-26)
User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
 
Posts: 4126
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Re: Advaitin vs. Buddhist takes on awareness/reality

Postby futerko » Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:13 am

songhill wrote:Putting nirvana under the category of dependently originated thingees [sic] is not something the Buddha taught. According to Pande (Origins of Buddhism, p.414) dependent origination may be designated as "the principle of non-ultimate experience" or composed/composite things (Vasubandhu identifies dependent origination with samskritadharmas). The relation of nirvana and dependent origination is like that between Advaita Vedanta's Brahman and Maya. The essential intention of dependent origination is denying the independent existence or reality of finite things.

Surely to deny the independent existence of finite things leads to the realisation that there are no such things - it is just a flow of the same insubstantial "stuff" hitting and bouncing off itself.
we cannot get rid of God because we still believe in grammar - Nietzsche
User avatar
futerko
 
Posts: 993
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 5:58 am

Re: Advaitin vs. Buddhist takes on awareness/reality

Postby songhill » Fri Jan 18, 2013 4:34 pm

Astus wrote:
songhill wrote:Putting nirvana under the category of dependently originated thingees [sic] is not something the Buddha taught.


True, because nirvana is not a permanent or impermanent thingee but the end of suffering, just as when a fire is extinguished we can't say that non-fire is some new thing, it's just the end of burning. If there were a new thing coming out of the end of suffering or appearing because of the elimination of ignorance it would be a dependently originated phenomenon.


I would recommend that you take at look at the Sautrantikas. They generally believed in the negative character of nirvana (it is the one Sankara criticizes according to Pande). In other words, nothing essentially survives — it is abhâva all the way down. As you probably know Buddhaghosa was no fan-boy of the Sautrantikas. He attacked them without mercy. For Buddhaghosa nirvana was positive, it brought peace of mind (santi), it was imperishable (accuti), and brought solace (assâswkarana). The list goes on of positives. One argument Buddhaghosa posed to the Sautrantikas that if the existence of nirvana is denied, the various Buddhist practices become fruitless. My own opinion of the Sautrantikas is they are nihilists.
User avatar
songhill
 
Posts: 245
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2012 12:23 am

Re: Advaitin vs. Buddhist takes on awareness/reality

Postby Astus » Fri Jan 18, 2013 5:11 pm

songhill wrote:I would recommend that you take at look at the Sautrantikas. They generally believed in the negative character of nirvana (it is the one Sankara criticizes according to Pande). In other words, nothing essentially survives — it is abhâva all the way down. As you probably know Buddhaghosa was no fan-boy of the Sautrantikas. He attacked them without mercy. For Buddhaghosa nirvana was positive, it brought peace of mind (santi), it was imperishable (accuti), and brought solace (assâswkarana). The list goes on of positives. One argument Buddhaghosa posed to the Sautrantikas that if the existence of nirvana is denied, the various Buddhist practices become fruitless. My own opinion of the Sautrantikas is they are nihilists.


Nagarjuna explains clearly that such interpretations of Nirvana are mistaken, illogical, unreasonable and doesn't agree with the Buddha's teachings: MMK 25. See also: SN 22.85, MN 72, MN 44 and AN 4.174.
"There is no such thing as the real mind. Ridding yourself of delusion: that's the real mind."
(Sheng-yen: Getting the Buddha Mind, p 73)

“Don’t rashly seek the true Buddha;
True Buddha can’t be found.
Does marvelous nature and spirit
Need tempering or refinement?
Mind is this mind carefree;
This face, the face at birth."

(Nanyue Mingzan: Enjoying the Way, tr. Jeff Shore; T51n2076, p461b24-26)
User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
 
Posts: 4126
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Re: Advaitin vs. Buddhist takes on awareness/reality

Postby songhill » Fri Jan 18, 2013 5:59 pm

Astus wrote:
Jainarayan wrote:Yes, I know that's the prevailing belief. If I'm not mistaken however, and I could be, there are schools of Buddhism that are either silent on it or do not reject the idea of a "ground of all existence" as Brahman is called


There is no such ultimate root of existence in the Buddha's teachings. See this sutta: AN 10.58. Do you know of any Buddhist tradition that teaches an ultimate "ground of existence"?


Does the Buddha teach nirvana? How about this:

Monks, there is a not-born, a not-become, a not-made, a not-compounded. Monks, if that unborn, not-become, not-made, not-compounded were not, there would be apparent no escape from this here that is born, become, made, compounded. But since, monks, tere is an unborn ... therefore the escape from this here is born, become ... is apparent. — Udâna 80 Source: http://www.mesacc.edu/~davpy35701/text/ ... tioned.pdf
User avatar
songhill
 
Posts: 245
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2012 12:23 am

Re: Advaitin vs. Buddhist takes on awareness/reality

Postby Son of Buddha » Fri Jan 18, 2013 7:21 pm

"gregkavarnos"]
Son of Buddha wrote:Is Enlightenment empty without substance and dependently originated?
Yesirree, indeed it is! Just in reverse order.
Upanisa Sutta (example posted)


well lets look at the notes from the translator concerning the Upanisa Sutta.

"This application, occurring only sporadically in the Pali canon, allows the same principle of conditionality to structure the path leading to deliverance from suffering"
"the sutta reveals the entire course of man's faring in the world as well as his treading of the path to its transcendence."

this sutta is simply showing how a conditioned dependently arisen man treads on the dependently arisen path(Samsara) leading up toward his transcendence from the conditioned dependent originated reality to what is unconditioned,unproduced and not dependent upon anything for its own Nature.
this sutta does not say that Enlightenment is depently originated but simply states how a being that is dependently originated tranverses throught the path of dependent orgination leading itself to that which is Enlightenement(unconditioned and not conditioned arising(Dependent arising).

to further prove this lets look at the Udana chapter 8(Patali village) john D Irelands Translation)

There is Bhikkhus,a Not born a not brought into being, a not made,a not conditioned.If bhikkhus,there were NO not-born,not brought to being,not made,not unconditioned,no escape would be discerned from what is born,brought into being,made,conditioned(Enlightenment is the end/escape) of Dependent originated Samsara).
But since there is a not born,a not brought to being,a not made,a not conditioned,therefore an escape is discerned from what is born,brought to being,made,conditioned.(thats right dependent orgination is what is born,brought to being,made,and conditioned and Enlightenment is NOT these things,Enlightenement is the escape/end of dependently originated Samsara)

(parentheses are MINE to emphasis the meaning to those who dont quite "get it")

you have made it clear that you beleive that enlightenment is Dependently originated.

(1)okay well that which is Dependently originated has as its source IGNORANCE,it has as its origin ignorance,they are born and produced from ignorance.(Culasihanada sutta)

so sir you are saying that the Buddha/Enlightenement is dependently originated then you are saying that the Buddha/Enlightenement is originated born and produced from ignorance correct?

also how is this so when the Buddha doesnt have the 3 poisons(greed,Anger,IGNORANCE) the Buddha not having IGNORANCE means the Buddha doesnt have the ORIGIN of Dependent origination(hence the Budha is NOT of Dependent origination which is produced from Ignorance which is one of the 3 poisons the Buddha does not have)


from (my) view the Buddha/Enlightenment is unconditioned,not dependently originated/not brought into being,and has no ignorance.

from (your) view the Buddha/Enlightenement is conditioned,is dependently originated/brought into being through dependent conditions,and has as its ORIGIN and is PRODUCED from ignoranance(as is D.O)

so did i get that about right?
User avatar
Son of Buddha
 
Posts: 777
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 6:48 pm

Nirvana - Unborn or Created

Postby Sherab Dorje » Fri Jan 18, 2013 8:27 pm

Son of Buddha wrote:this sutta is simply showing how a conditioned dependently arisen man treads on the dependently arisen path(Samsara) leading up toward his transcendence from the conditioned dependent originated reality to what is unconditioned,unproduced and not dependent upon anything for its own Nature.
this sutta does not say that Enlightenment is depently originated but simply states how a being that is dependently originated tranverses throught the path of dependent orgination leading itself to that which is Enlightenement(unconditioned and not conditioned arising(Dependent arising).
It shows the path, dependent upon the actions of those that traverse the path, which leads to liberation. The rest is just your imagination.

to further prove this lets look at the Udana chapter 8(Patali village) john D Irelands Translation)
There is Bhikkhus,a Not born a not brought into being, a not made,a not conditioned.If bhikkhus,there were NO not-born,not brought to being,not made,not unconditioned,no escape would be discerned from what is born,brought into being,made,conditioned(Enlightenment is the end/escape) of Dependent originated Samsara).
But since there is a not born,a not brought to being,a not made,a not conditioned,therefore an escape is discerned from what is born,brought to being,made,conditioned.(thats right dependent orgination is what is born,brought to being,made,and conditioned and Enlightenment is NOT these things,Enlightenement is the escape/end of dependently originated Samsara)
What is this gibberish? Here is the Udana Sutta, where do you see this nonsense being said by the Buddha?
so sir you are saying that the Buddha/Enlightenement is dependently originated then you are saying that the Buddha/Enlightenement is originated born and produced from ignorance correct?...so did i get that about right?
No. Go read the Sutta I referenced. I read the Udana Sutta and there is not much there to back your point. Actually it states quite clearly the actions necessary to achieve liberation and what it is that is liberated:
The ending of consciousness
24 Bhikshu, one might say this:
‘Apart from form, apart from feeling, apart from perception, apart from formations, apart from consciousness,
I will declare the coming and going of consciousness, or its passing away and rebirth, or its
growth, increase, abundance’—this is impossible.
25 Bhikshu, if a monk has abandoned lust for the form element,33 with the abandoning of lust, the
basis is cut off—there is no support for consciousness.34
26 Bhikshu, if a monk has abandoned lust for the feeling element, with the abandoning of lust, the
basis is cut off—there is no support for consciousness.
27 Bhikshu, if a monk has abandoned lust for the perception element, with the abandoning of lust,
the basis is cut off—there is no support for consciousness.
28 Bhikshu, if a monk has abandoned lust for the formation element, with the abandoning of lust, the
basis is cut off—there is no support for consciousness.
29 Bhikshu, if a monk has abandoned lust for the consciousness element, with the abandoning of
lust, the basis is cut off—there is no support for consciousness.
Liberation
30 That consciousness that has no support would not increase, would not be formed—it is liberated.
Through being liberated, it remains steady.
Through remaining steady, it is contented.
Through contentment, it it is not agitated.
Through not being agitated, he personally attains nirvana. He understands:
‘Destroyed is birth. The holy life has been lived. What needs to be done has been done. There is (for
me) no more of arising in any state of being.’
31 Bhikshu, it is for one who knows thus, who sees thus, that there is the immediate destruction of
the cankers.”
:namaste:
"When one is not in accord with the true view
Meditation and conduct become delusion,
One will not attain the real result
One will be like a blind man who has no eyes."
Naropa - Summary of the View from The Eight Doha Treasures
User avatar
Sherab Dorje
Former staff member
 
Posts: 7892
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Advaitin vs. Buddhist takes on awareness/reality

Postby Son of Buddha » Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:19 pm

"gregkavarnos"]
Son of Buddha wrote:this sutta is simply showing how a conditioned dependently arisen man treads on the dependently arisen path(Samsara) leading up toward his transcendence from the conditioned dependent originated reality to what is unconditioned,unproduced and not dependent upon anything for its own Nature.
this sutta does not say that Enlightenment is depently originated but simply states how a being that is dependently originated tranverses throught the path of dependent orgination leading itself to that which is Enlightenement(unconditioned and not conditioned arising(Dependent arising).
It shows the path, dependent upon the actions of those that traverse the path, which leads to liberation. The rest is just your imagination.


yes it show the path through Samsara)the person walking the path is dependently originated,the Samsara he is walking through is dependently originated
,and the path itself is dependently originated hence why the pali canon states that after you have used the raft(stages of the path) to cross to the other shore you no longer need the raft(path), this is not saying that Enlightenement is dependently originated.

to further prove this lets look at the Udana chapter 8(Patali village) john D Irelands Translation)
"Son of Buddha"
There is Bhikkhus,a Not born a not brought into being, a not made,a not conditioned.If bhikkhus,there were NO not-born,not brought to being,not made,not unconditioned,no escape would be discerned from what is born,brought into being,made,conditioned(Enlightenment is the end/escape) of Dependent originated Samsara).
But since there is a not born,a not brought to being,a not made,a not conditioned,therefore an escape is discerned from what is born,brought to being,made,conditioned.(thats right dependent orgination is what is born,brought to being,made,and conditioned and Enlightenment is NOT these things,Enlightenement is the escape/end of dependently originated Samsara)

"gregkavarnos"]
What is this gibberish? Here is the Udana Sutta, where do you see this nonsense being said by the Buddha?


the "nonsense you speak of"
is the udana Prataligamiyavagga-The chapter about Patali Village which is found in the Khuddaka Nikāya which is translated by John D ireland who also translated for Assension into insight
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... index.html

the sutta you are talking about is not the same one,nor is it even from the same Nikaya
so you still have to contend with my proof

"Son of Buddha "
so sir you are saying that the Buddha/Enlightenement is dependently originated then you are saying that the Buddha/Enlightenement is originated born and produced from ignorance correct?...so did i get that about right?

"gregkavarnos"]
No. Go read the Sutta I referenced. I read the Udana Sutta and there is not much there to back your point. Actually it states quite clearly the actions necessary to achieve liberation and what it is that is liberated:


um you are not answering my question(and you have the wrong sutta)
you STATED: that Enlightenment is dependently originated;

we know from the Culasihanada Sutta MN 11 that ALL of dependent origination "have ignorance as their source,ingnorance as their origin,they are born and produced from ignorance"

so if as YOU SAY ENlightenment is dependently originated then you would also have to admit that Enlightenement "has ignorance as its source,ingnorance as its origin,and it is born and produced from ignorance" as is everything else that is dependently originated.

you cant have it both ways by saying Enlightenement is dependently originated then saying Enlightenment doesnt have the very thing(Ignorance) that produces dependent origination.

if Enlightenement is Dependently originated then it also has the THING that dependent origination is orininated,born and produced from=Ignorance.

(as far the udana sutta from the SN(not mine) you posted it doesnt refute the
Culasihanada Sutta MN 11 that ALL of dependent origination "have ignorance as their source,ingnorance as their origin,they are born and produced from ignorance"

if it did refute it then it would say that Dependent origination DOESNT have as its source ignorance ,it DOESNT have as its origin ignorance and it ISNT born and produced from ignorance,the rest is just your imagination.
User avatar
Son of Buddha
 
Posts: 777
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 6:48 pm

Re: Advaitin vs. Buddhist takes on awareness/reality

Postby Sherab Dorje » Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:44 pm

Okay, at last we found which Sutta you are referring to. Hurray! You reduced it to gibberish through your nonsensical embellishments. This is how it actually reads:
Nibbāna Sutta: Parinibbana (3)
translated from the Pali by
John D. Ireland
© 1998–2013
Alternate translation: ThanissaroThen, on realizing its significance, the Lord uttered on that occasion this inspired utterance:

There is, bhikkhus, a not-born, a not-brought-to-being, a not-made, a not-conditioned. If, bhikkhus, there were no not-born, not-brought-to-being, not-made, not-conditioned, no escape would be discerned from what is born, brought-to-being, made, conditioned. But since there is a not-born, a not-brought-to-being, a not-made, a not-conditioned, therefore an escape is discerned from what is born, brought-to-being, made, conditioned.
But this teaching has to be seen in the light of this Sutta:
Nibbāna Sutta: Parinibbana (1)
translated from the Pali by
John D. Ireland
© 1998–2013
Alternate translation: Thanissaro
Thus have I heard. At one time the Lord was staying near Savatthi in the Jeta Wood at Anathapindika's monastery. On that occasion the Lord was instructing, rousing, inspiring, and gladdening the bhikkhus with a Dhamma talk connected with Nibbana, and those bhikkhus, being receptive and attentive and concentrating the whole mind, were intent on listening to Dhamma.

Then, on realizing its significance, the Lord uttered on that occasion this inspired utterance:

There is, bhikkhus, that base where there is no earth, no water, no fire, no air; no base consisting of the infinity of space, no base consisting of the infinity of consciousness, no base consisting of nothingness, no base consisting of neither-perception-nor-non-perception; neither this world nor another world nor both; neither sun nor moon. Here, bhikkhus, I say there is no coming, no going, no staying, no deceasing, no uprising. Not fixed, not movable, it has no support. Just this is the end of suffering.
Where the Buddha clearly states that enlightenment is beyond the dualism of born/unborn.

And this Sutta:
Nibbāna Sutta: Parinibbana (2)
translated from the Pali by
John D. Ireland
© 1998–2013
Alternate translation: ThanissaroThus have I heard. At one time the Lord was staying near Savatthi in the Jeta Wood at Anathapindika's monastery. On that occasion the Lord was instructing... the bhikkhus with a Dhamma talk connected with Nibbana, and those bhikkhus... were intent on listening to Dhamma.

Then, on realizing its significance, the Lord uttered on that occasion this inspired utterance:


The uninclined is hard to see,
The truth is not easy to see;
Craving is penetrated by one who knows,
For one who sees there is nothing.
Hmmmm... I'm going to have to mull this one over to make it come together.
:namaste:
"When one is not in accord with the true view
Meditation and conduct become delusion,
One will not attain the real result
One will be like a blind man who has no eyes."
Naropa - Summary of the View from The Eight Doha Treasures
User avatar
Sherab Dorje
Former staff member
 
Posts: 7892
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Advaitin vs. Buddhist takes on awareness/reality

Postby Son of Buddha » Fri Jan 18, 2013 10:23 pm

"gregkavarnos"
Okay, at last we found which Sutta you are referring to. Hurray! You reduced it to gibberish through your nonsensical embellishments. This is how it actually reads:
Nibbāna Sutta: Parinibbana (3)
translated from the Pali by
John D. Ireland
© 1998–2013
Alternate translation: ThanissaroThen, on realizing its significance, the Lord uttered on that occasion this inspired utterance:

There is, bhikkhus, a not-born, a not-brought-to-being, a not-made, a not-conditioned. If, bhikkhus, there were no not-born, not-brought-to-being, not-made, not-conditioned, no escape would be discerned from what is born, brought-to-being, made, conditioned. But since there is a not-born, a not-brought-to-being, a not-made, a not-conditioned, therefore an escape is discerned from what is born, brought-to-being, made, conditioned


hey now I posted the same exact thing and I clearly stated the nonsensical embellishments that were in
parentheses were mine. but the meaning is still the same Dependent origination is brought into being throught conditions,Enlightenement is is not brought into being and it is is not conditioned.
="gregkavarnos"]
But this teaching has to be seen in the light of this Sutta:
Nibbāna Sutta: Parinibbana (1)
translated from the Pali by
John D. Ireland
© 1998–2013
Alternate translation: Thanissaro
Thus have I heard. At one time the Lord was staying near Savatthi in the Jeta Wood at Anathapindika's monastery. On that occasion the Lord was instructing, rousing, inspiring, and gladdening the bhikkhus with a Dhamma talk connected with Nibbana, and those bhikkhus, being receptive and attentive and concentrating the whole mind, were intent on listening to Dhamma.

Then, on realizing its significance, the Lord uttered on that occasion this inspired utterance:

There is, bhikkhus, that base where there is no earth, no water, no fire, no air; no base consisting of the infinity of space, no base consisting of the infinity of consciousness, no base consisting of nothingness, no base consisting of neither-perception-nor-non-perception; neither this world nor another world nor both; neither sun nor moon. Here, bhikkhus, I say there is no coming, no going, no staying, no deceasing, no uprising. Not fixed, not movable, it has no support. Just this is the end of suffering.

Where the Buddha clearly states that enlightenment is beyond the dualism of born/unborn.


all words are based on dualism(the point of the creation of words themselves was for us to show the difference of one object from anouther)so no word that is ever used is "none dual" even the word none dual is a duality itself to show the opposite of what is dual.

and even as being seen in the light of this sutta,it still doesnt change that Enlightenment
is unconditioned,and not brought into being,which is what Dependent origination is.

="gregkavarnos"]And this Sutta:
Nibbāna Sutta: Parinibbana (2)
translated from the Pali by
John D. Ireland
© 1998–2013
Alternate translation: ThanissaroThus have I heard. At one time the Lord was staying near Savatthi in the Jeta Wood at Anathapindika's monastery. On that occasion the Lord was instructing... the bhikkhus with a Dhamma talk connected with Nibbana, and those bhikkhus... were intent on listening to Dhamma.

Then, on realizing its significance, the Lord uttered on that occasion this inspired utterance:


The uninclined is hard to see,
The truth is not easy to see;
Craving is penetrated by one who knows,
For one who sees there is nothing.Hmmmm... I'm going to have to mull this one over to make it come together.
:namaste:



41. "What do you think, monks: if people were to carry away the grass, sticks, branches and leaves in this Jeta Grove, or burnt them or did with them what they pleased, would you think: These people carry us away, or burn us, or do with us as they please?" — "No, Lord." — "Why not?" Because, Lord, that is neither our self nor the property of our self." — "So, too, monks, give up what is not yours! Your giving it up will for a long time bring you welfare and happiness. What is it that is not yours? Corporeality... feeling... perception... mental formations... consciousness are not yours. Give them up! Your giving them up will for a long time bring you welfare and happiness."

"you" are the grass and sticks,its nothing to burn "you"
once you give up the 5 aggreagates their is nothing left to call "you"
the fire goes out("you""self" cease)=nothing
of course this is just my view on the meaning.
User avatar
Son of Buddha
 
Posts: 777
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 6:48 pm

Re: Nirvana - Unborn or Created

Postby songhill » Sat Jan 19, 2013 12:47 am

This might be helpful in the discussion. There is a huge difference between samskrta reality and asamskrita reality. In this passage there is to be made a clear distinction between conditioned genesis/dependent origination and nirvana.

“I teach to monks this Dharma: the noble, the supramundane, connected with emptiness, according to the dharma of conditioned genesis. … Profound is this, namely conditioned genesis; even more profound, more difficult to see is this, namely the renunciation of all attachments, the extinction of craving, fading away of desire, cessation: nirvana. These two dharmas are namely the compounded (Skt. samskrta, P. samkhata, i.e., conditioned genesis) and uncompounded (Skt. asamskrit, P. asmakhata, i.e. nirvana). The compounded is arising, persisting, changing, passing away. The uncompounded is not arising, not persisting, not changing, not passing away. ~ SA 293, from The Notion of Emptiness in Early Buddhism by Mun-keat Choong, pages 20-21
User avatar
songhill
 
Posts: 245
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2012 12:23 am

Re: Nirvana - Unborn or Created

Postby futerko » Sat Jan 19, 2013 9:39 am

songhill wrote:This might be helpful in the discussion. There is a huge difference between samskrta reality and asamskrita reality. In this passage there is to be made a clear distinction between conditioned genesis/dependent origination and nirvana.

“I teach to monks this Dharma: the noble, the supramundane, connected with emptiness, according to the dharma of conditioned genesis. … Profound is this, namely conditioned genesis; even more profound, more difficult to see is this, namely the renunciation of all attachments, the extinction of craving, fading away of desire, cessation: nirvana. These two dharmas are namely the compounded (Skt. samskrta, P. samkhata, i.e., conditioned genesis) and uncompounded (Skt. asamskrit, P. asmakhata, i.e. nirvana). The compounded is arising, persisting, changing, passing away. The uncompounded is not arising, not persisting, not changing, not passing away. ~ SA 293, from The Notion of Emptiness in Early Buddhism by Mun-keat Choong, pages 20-21
The issue here as I see it is the mistaken idea that "conditioned" is somehow a property of phenomenal reality, and therefore behind or beyond this illusion is operating another more fundamental "unconditioned reality".
we cannot get rid of God because we still believe in grammar - Nietzsche
User avatar
futerko
 
Posts: 993
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 5:58 am

Re: Nirvana - Unborn or Created

Postby Sherab Dorje » Sat Jan 19, 2013 1:25 pm

Okay, I slept on the issue and this is what seems to make sense to me given all the teachings that we have refered to.

Right now we live in dualism and ignorance, dependently arisen, yet continuously present is the potential for enlightenment.

The path to liberation depends on our effort (or lack of effort, where lack of effort means attempting to not cling to or repel phenomena) and thus is dependent on our intentional action (or non-action).

Enlightenment (Nirvana, realisation, etc...) as a state of being is not conditionally arisen (per se) since if it was it would depend on ignorance. Still, to achieve this state it requires effort (or non-effort).

Once having achieve this state we find, as it states in the Nibbāna Sutta: Parinibbana (2), nothing. Nothing here does not mean lacking something, but describes the dharmadhatu, the living space or sphere where appearance is possible.

I have to admit that this understanding was made clear to me last night after/during reading "The Sovereign All-Creating Mind - The Motherly Buddha" (Kun byed rgyal po'i mdo)

"Homage to the All-Creating Sovereign, the mind of complete purity, the victorious one!"
:anjali:
"When one is not in accord with the true view
Meditation and conduct become delusion,
One will not attain the real result
One will be like a blind man who has no eyes."
Naropa - Summary of the View from The Eight Doha Treasures
User avatar
Sherab Dorje
Former staff member
 
Posts: 7892
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Nirvana - Unborn or Created

Postby ground » Sat Jan 19, 2013 1:36 pm

Since there is dependent arising of this or that from the outset there is nothing (no this or that). "From the outset" does not refer to "a past moment". :sage:
User avatar
ground
 
Posts: 1782
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2009 8:31 am

Re: Nirvana - Unborn or Created

Postby Sherab Dorje » Sat Jan 19, 2013 3:01 pm

ground wrote:Since there is dependent arising of this or that from the outset there is nothing (no this or that).
Good point!
:namaste:
"When one is not in accord with the true view
Meditation and conduct become delusion,
One will not attain the real result
One will be like a blind man who has no eyes."
Naropa - Summary of the View from The Eight Doha Treasures
User avatar
Sherab Dorje
Former staff member
 
Posts: 7892
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Nirvana - Unborn or Created

Postby songhill » Sat Jan 19, 2013 4:13 pm

futerko wrote:
songhill wrote:This might be helpful in the discussion. There is a huge difference between samskrta reality and asamskrita reality. In this passage there is to be made a clear distinction between conditioned genesis/dependent origination and nirvana.

“I teach to monks this Dharma: the noble, the supramundane, connected with emptiness, according to the dharma of conditioned genesis. … Profound is this, namely conditioned genesis; even more profound, more difficult to see is this, namely the renunciation of all attachments, the extinction of craving, fading away of desire, cessation: nirvana. These two dharmas are namely the compounded (Skt. samskrta, P. samkhata, i.e., conditioned genesis) and uncompounded (Skt. asamskrit, P. asmakhata, i.e. nirvana). The compounded is arising, persisting, changing, passing away. The uncompounded is not arising, not persisting, not changing, not passing away. ~ SA 293, from The Notion of Emptiness in Early Buddhism by Mun-keat Choong, pages 20-21
The issue here as I see it is the mistaken idea that "conditioned" is somehow a property of phenomenal reality, and therefore behind or beyond this illusion is operating another more fundamental "unconditioned reality".


Do you think that it is illusions all the way down?
User avatar
songhill
 
Posts: 245
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2012 12:23 am

Next

Return to Open Dharma

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Dan74, tomamundsen and 17 guests

>