Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
What is Nirvana?
Namada
Veteran
Hi
Do somebody know what Nirvana is (more or less)?
In Theravada Buddhism its understood as a
"liberation from the cycle of death and rebirth and freedom from the effects of karma"
And His Holiness Dalai Lama defined Nirvana as
"state of freedom from cyclic existence".
can it be experienced in this life or only after death?
If we are free from the effects of karma...what then, when we loose good and bad, ying and yang?
And when the humanity is gone will Nirvana dissolve as well? Plants/animals cant read Dharma and attain enlightenment
(and humans will not exist again because the sun is gone).
Was Buddha the first person to come into this state, and how did he know this, just like Jesus open up heaven, Buddha opened up Nirvana?
What do you think/believe?
Do somebody know what Nirvana is (more or less)?
In Theravada Buddhism its understood as a
"liberation from the cycle of death and rebirth and freedom from the effects of karma"
And His Holiness Dalai Lama defined Nirvana as
"state of freedom from cyclic existence".
can it be experienced in this life or only after death?
If we are free from the effects of karma...what then, when we loose good and bad, ying and yang?
And when the humanity is gone will Nirvana dissolve as well? Plants/animals cant read Dharma and attain enlightenment
(and humans will not exist again because the sun is gone).
Was Buddha the first person to come into this state, and how did he know this, just like Jesus open up heaven, Buddha opened up Nirvana?
What do you think/believe?
0
Comments
I submit as proof, a perusal of any of NB previous threads on this subject.
Not meaning to mock anyone's sacred cow. Oh wait...I am!
Perhaps, one person's holy hand grenade is another person's Holy Grail.
Check out the intensity & dissension that has blossomed on the other NB threads about getting the description for Nirvana, just right.
I think it's mostly about ego because I'm dammed sure Nirvana doesn't care.
I have often found that the conceptualization of Nirvana to be both a hindrance to the practice as well as one of the more common Buddhist manifestations of spiritual avarice.
So much attachment to the ungraspable.
Yes it doesn't have to be........but that's still a lot of suffering over imagining the transcendence of suffering.
And we do good to others because the karma will bring us to a Nirvana state. Is it the ego speaking?
"Do compassionate deeds, but Dont expect to get anything back" they say,
but deep inside we laugh and say "We will get reward sooner or later".
Is it the egoistic mind speaking, is it hypocritical?
And who is counting the karma? Who decide if you are going to be an animal next life, or a flower or coming into Nirvana. So there need to be a Judge/God?
Its about faith i think...faith in what Buddha said..or should we kill the Buddha?
According to the Suttas, to gain release from samsara (literally 'wandering on') — referring to the continual cycle of death and rebirth of beings and the continual cycle of death and rebirth of the conceit 'I am,' the self-identification that designates a being (satta) — one must put an end to all types of kamma, not just the negative since kamma is a mental component inherently tied to, and influenced by, greed, hatred, and delusion (AN 3.33).
That's why the noble eightfold path is called "the path of practice leading to the cessation of kamma" (SN 35.145). They're skillful actions that, when used appropriately, have the potential to ultimately lead to the elimination of the skillful/unskillful dichotomy altogether, leaving only happiness (Dhp XV), contentment (Thag 9), peace (Snp 2.1), freedom (SN 36.31), and moral perfection behind (AN 9.7). As St. Maximus writes in Opuscula theologica et polemica (albeit from a Christian perspective), "A perfect nature has no need of choice, for it knows naturally what is good. Its freedom is based on this knowledge."
While there's some disagreement about the nature of nibbana as a dhamma (phenomenon), the commentarial tradition of Theravada, as well as many scholars such as Bhikkhu Bodhi, take the position that "nibbana is not only the destruction of defilements and the end of samsara but a reality transcendent to the entire world of mundane experience, a reality transcendent to all the realms of phenomenal existence." Hence nibbana doesn't depend on any causes or conditions, including the existence of human beings.
Finally, from the Theravadin perspective, a samma-sambuddha is someone who has attained awakening at a time when the Dhamma has been forgotten and has the ability to teach it. One who hears the teachings, practices, and attains awakening is called an arahant. And then there's the pacceka-buddha, someone who attains awakening by their own effort, without hearing the Dhamma and independent of any teacher, but doesn't have the capacity to teach the path to others.
@how said:
I'm not sure if I understand, but are you saying nirvana is ego? It's actually non-ego. It means the extinguishing of concoction, fabrication, sankhara.
@how said: Right on. We can always screw up our practice if it isn't light hearted enough. If you make a heavy project of trying to get to Nirvana it is a hindrance. But just because the dharma can be turned into a demon does not mean that it will for everyone. For a lot of people it is inspiring to think of nirvana. It's a core teaching that Thich Nhat Hanh says is the fourth dharma seal. You can't have a path without a destination. And for many people that destination is the freedom from birth and death.
Good luck - there is the middle way just over there, it's quite interesting and there are some nice stories about it, but it is easy to get a little lost at times so it's a good idea to pick up the free guide about the eight-fold path that is really an extension of the 4NTs and may be useful along the way
ah here's one, take it if you will:
http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/8foldpath.htm
No it's not explosive, but could be expansive
"There is no judge of karma. So that I have no idea of. Who judges what pip a dice rolled will turn up? Do we need a god or judge for a dice roll? "
-----------------
No, but some one need to roll the dice? And gambling is not a wholesome action either, so i dont think or next life depends on a dice roll...
I'm not sure if I understand, but are you saying nirvana is ego? It's actually non-ego. It means the extinguishing of concoction, fabrication, sankhara.
You can't have a path without a destination. And for many people that destination is the freedom from birth and death.
@Jeffrey
My Bad!
I thought shooting Nirvana in it's foot before it ran away on us again was worth a
shot. Now all I have is holy shoes.
Nirvana itself is a good description of the absence of ego. It was the grasping after Nirvana which I was pointing out as ego.
&
A path without a destination is a passable description of Zen meditation.
The dice example doesn't correlate perfectly to a 'karma king' scenario. I'm just saying that phenomena in the world operating does not need a God. Through science we understand physics and chemistry and we don't need a God making the molecules dance. So how about a better example than dice? Do we need a judge to make the wind blow?
Anyway its impossible to understand...why iam born in this body? Did i get what i deserved? Is it a weight saying: Sorry Little bit (or actually many) more good deeds and you would be born as a prince...
Maybe its here "the dont know mind" is coming in, and let it be as it is.
"the don't know mind" is a pretty alright place to be.
@heyimacrab
One of the ways I've seen karma described that resonated with me is as "volition," which is similar to it's literal translation of "action" but includes motivation and intention as well as physical action. Although it's good to remember that by saying karma is "action" you include all mental formations(or mental "actions") as well.
The Buddha asked us to reflect upon nirvana (or pali: nibbana), so asking questions such as this are part of the practice. Nirvana is not a thing, not a place, not a state of being. I think it's often best to see nirvana as meaning 'going out' or as in the quote above, as a synonym for cessation. The most important thing I think there is to know is that the Buddha used the word to refer to multiple things cessating. The most prominent place in the suttas where that is described is here: (nibbana-dhatu is nibbana-elements or nibbana-'natures'). This also answers the question "can it be experienced in this life or only after death?" - depends on which you are talking about. We shouldn't see these in terms of what's left behind, but by what is abandoned. The one with 'residue left' is the 'going out' of greed, anger and misunderstanding. This is the 'experience' of a living enlightened being and the residue is the five aggregates that make up that being.
The 'no residue left' is after death of an enlightened being. Here the aggregates also fall apart. All that is conditioned is cessated. Birth is ended and so there will be no new life: existence is cessated.
Perhaps I'll try to find my older posts on this while I'm finishing my tea (which will mainly come down to the same thing, but still).
Metta to all,
Sabre
It should also be noted that not all desires are unskillful. Unlike craving (tahna, literally 'thirst'), which is an aspect of our psychology that's directly tied to suffering, desire (chandha) is a neutral term and can be either skillful (kusala) or unskillful (akusala) depending on the context. The desire for happiness, especially long-term welfare and happiness, for example, is actually an important part of the Buddhist path. Moreover, desire is listed as one of the four bases of power (iddhipada), which themselves are included in the seven sets of qualities that lead to the end of suffering (MN 103). The four qualities listed in the bases of power are desire, persistence, intent, and discrimination. In Wings to Awakening, Thanissaro Bhikkhu points to this passage: He goes on to explain that, "This passage shows that the problem lies not in the desire, effort, intent or discrimination, but in the fact that these qualities can be unskillfully applied or improperly tuned to their task." If we take a look at the exchange between Ananda and the brahmin Unnabha in SN 51.15, for example, we can see that the attainment of the goal is indeed achieved through desire, even though paradoxically, the goal is said to be the abandoning of desire. That's because at the end of the path desire, as well as the other three bases of power, subside on their own. As Ananda explains at the end of SN 51.15: So, in essence, desire can be beneficial in certain contexts, and one shouldn't be worried about the desire to do skillful things. Craving, on the other hand, is something that, by its very nature, conditions suffering through the way it encourages the mind to feed upon sensory experiences and either causes it to intensely cling to pleasant experiences or violently push away unpleasant ones. It may have helped us at some point in our evolution, but now it tends to do more harm than good.
edit: I now see EvenThird already said this.
In terms of moving towards the Deathless, I think one can look at it in terms of either connecting internally or externally - or both.
Nirvana is peace, the sort of happiness where you aren't ecstatic or sad, but a sort of balance see-saw in the middle at peace-- a state of equanimity, where you can still react, but aren't overly bother by things or jumping up and down happy about it.
I think it can be obtained in this life, before you die, by a lay person or a monk, maybe animals (maybe it's easier for an animal, hard to ask them if they feel at peace). I think it is easy enough that modestly smart and modestly talented people can achieve it. I think non-buddhists can achieve it accidentally and monks might have a easier time of it because they simplify their life down the the point there the problem of finding peace is more manageable.
But the more I read about monks, I'm not sure about if monastic life makes things simpler. Where I struggle with the complexities of a job and family, Zen monks struggle with the complexities of applying a stamp perfectly straight, mapping the tiny crevices in the wall they zazen at and the minutia of ringing bells-- the small stuff just gets magnified until it fills the consciousness again.
Thank you for this post namhada
Few people inspire me - well done - in this way!
Just have faith in the ability to be what you already are... How lucky are 'you' and 'I' to be incarnate... Let me provide a definition of incarnate: to embody or represent (something or/and/not/with/equal to nothing) in human form.
Clouds - Rain - River - Sea - evaporate (repeat) - life is a cycle of birth, death and re-birth - (Nirvana?) - But this is just a point a view. It is not 'the view', it is a concept. When it is fully understood 'I' cannot conceptualise 'it' that is Nirvana... Or do you conceptualise it otherwise?
These online Sanghas are really just worlds of words and sentences that convey the limits of our understanding and fragility and suffering. Sometimes they ring true sometimes not.
Just be honest and true to yourself.
Mark Twain said - 'If you never tell a lie you never have to remember anything'
Nirvana literaly translated means a blowing out, extinction, or extinguishing. The syntactic implications of this can be deduced from the fire sermon. In other words there is no more suffering. By no more suffering i mean exactly that, there is no suffering in nirvana. The difficulty for sentient minds regarding this principal lies in the fact that buddhas and arhats live in the world and in nirvana. The buddha still dies, he still feels hunger and thirst, he or she still gets sick. The 3rd noble truth says that there is an end of suffering, it does not say that there is and end of phenomena. In nirvana there is still cause and effect, but for a buddha there is no pain in any effect.
Think of it this way, pain is only pain because one sees it as such. If you remove the negative associations from pain all it is is sensation; it is nerves firing, the same nerves that feel pleasure. Phenomena are devoid of a self or intrinsic essence, this does not mean that they are not there; it means that the "nature" of theses occurences are projections of the mind.
The reason getting beaten hurts is becuase being beaten leads to death. If it was simply the impact that caused pain, we would fear hitting someone as much as being hit because the body in turn impacts the fist. One can and often does break ones hand upon hitting someone.
Death, likewise, is nothing but the cesation of bodily function; it is the end of a chemical reaction. The reason we fear death is because of our associations with death. Damnation, greving, the unknown, these are the pains not death it self.
Conversely the same is true of pleasure.
A buddha or arhat, has looked so deeply upon the world, and all of its suffering, for so long that he or she has perfectly realized this truth in every function. His or her mind is not the same as a sentient beings because instead of the ingrained tendency for aversion and attatchment, he or she has ingrained the tendency for buddhahood.
If you do not believe me, the next time you meditate make sure you are hungry. Cast aside all of your persistant thoughts about your hunger, let go of your emotions of frustration, lethargy, and otherwise, and sit quietly and peacefully looking one pointedly at your hunger.
I have done this many times, apart from the sensation in your stomach there is an atendent lightness and coolness in the body that is actualy kind of nice, and also once the mind is setled, for and hour or so it is more calm and focused than when full. Again we only see hunger as pain because it leads to death, all our atendent frustrations and anxietys arise from that. It takes several weeks to die of hunger, why are we so frigtened?
The buddha saw this in all the sufferings of his life, when you can do that as well it is called nirvana.
Right view, right view, right view, right view, right view!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The first and most important of the 8.
Om mani padme hum
Gate gate paragate parasamgate bodhi svha
Not that there is anything wrong with that.
Some things are worth seeing many times. This teaching is like that. mtgby
When I try to find Nirvana. Nothing.
Bliss!
Anyway I think Buddhism its kind of counterproductive when its coming to helping others in a strange way. We are supposed to not cling and get attached, but if we dont have this kind of feelings how can we help our self or others?
You do metta meditation because you are attached to your self, and others. You cling to it, and as long as you are attached and are clinging its difficult to let things go.
But Maybe some of you have heard about Hiri, and Ottapa?
I found it another forum where they defines it as: "Hiri (moral shame) and ottapa (moral fear), which are collectively said to be "guardians of the world" in the sense that they provide self-restraint and help forestall degeneration into shameful behaviours".
So there is fear involved in the path of liberation, fear of not doing right effort, fear of not having the right view?
Have some of you heard about Hiri and Ottapa?
"...All too often in the Buddhist world, we're told that desire is a bad thing, it causes suffering. But the actual truth is that there are good and bad desires."
Cyclic existence can be viewed as the compulsive creation of thought after thought.
This is dual perception or thought with an object. Not simple awareness.
This is from Shantidiva and I'm pretty sure that is the Dalai Lama's view also. Gautama said: "when a person was looked for none was found." What would reincarnate.
Probably not the person.
In all seriousness, I have absolutely no idea what Nirvana is; as, at least as far as I know, I haven't experienced such a thing.
Perhaps Nirvana is something completely different than what most people consider it to be? Maybe it's not a literal place of bliss, but merely an idea. Or maybe it's a state of being.
Perhaps Nirvana is nothingness itself?