fofoo`s syllogism

fofoo

let me start with Arthur Schopenhauer:

"On the contrary, we freely acknowledge that what remains after the complete abolition of the will is, for all who are still full of the will, assuredly nothing. But also conversely, to those in whom the will has turned and denied itself, this very real world of ours with all its suns and galaxies, is - nothing."

"This "nothing," however, "is also the Prajna-Paramita of the Buddhists, the 'beyond all knowledge,' in other words, the point where subject and object no longer exist.""

"that state which is experienced by all who have attained to complete denial of the will, and which is denoted by the names ecstasy, rapture, illumination, union with God, and so on. But such a state cannot really be called knowledge, since it no longer has the form of subject and object; moreover, it is accessible only to one's own experience that cannot be further communicated."

If we see enlightenment (illumination) and Nirvana synonymous, then we get:

Premises:

1. Reasoning
All knowledge we possibly can have is divided into (knowing) subject and (known) object.

2. Nirvana
Nirvana is the state of mind where the division of subject and object no longer exists.

conclusion

Nirvana is not any kind of knowledge (super-knowledge, intuitive knowledge, higher knowledge, transcendend knowledge or whatever it is called)

genkaku

Fofoo -- No disrespect intended, but if you put all that together with a dollar, you might get a bus ride. If Buddhism "concluded" anything, how could it possibly be Buddhism? More important, how could you be at peace?

Cloud

You're right Nirvana isn't any kind of knowledge. It's the non-clinging mind, or the absence of craving/clinging. The wisdom is in the nature of all phenomena, the effect is Nirvana.

Jeffrey

From letting go of preconceived ideas the knowledge of the connections of dependently arisen phenomenon become aparent. You act as if the mind of nirvana is not a sensitive experience. But remember that the experience buddha displayed was also filled with appropriate action, wisdom, and love.

TheJourney

You got the right idea, but you're denying the other half of the coin.

fofoo

@genkaku:

This conclusion is the end of all conclusions. The important point in this syllogism is that we cannot achieve nirvana thru reasoning. Once this has been accepted, your mind is pacified. There you have your peace

Talisman

If you cannot acheive nirvana through any form of reasoning, how can nirvana be acheived?

(not saying what you said is incorrect, just trying to continue the discussion)

fofoo

@Talisman Schopenhauer would say thru the denial of the will.

The Buddha says:
"Extinction of greed, extinction of hate, extinction of delusion: this is called Nibbāna" see here: http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/n_r/nibbaana.htm

Like cloud said, Nirvana is the end of clinging (tanha):
"This, o monks, truly is the peace, this is the highest, namely the end of all formations, the forsaking of every substratum of rebirth, the fading away of craving, detachment, extinction, Nibbāna" (A. III, 32).

Talisman

I'm not sure if you are using the same definition of "will" as buddhists texts do, but will (specifically called Volitional Formations or saṃskāra) is the 2nd link in dependent origination that arises due to ignorance. So in a sense, the cessation of volitional impulses or "will" would indeed give rise to nirvana, as it causes the cessation of consciousness, etc. The real question then is how volitional impulses may cease, which of course occurs with the cessation of ignorance, the purpose of the 8-fold path.

fofoo

@Talisman

Thanks for your post, you have interesting things to say.
According to Schopenhauer, the will is lost either thru
1. personal experience of an extremely great suffering that leads to loss of the will to live
or
2.observation of the suffering of other people.

It is to be noted that, the loss of will to live does not mean suicide , on contrary Schopenhauer says it is a strong affirmation of the will (the one who kills himself does not want death, he merely is unhappy with his life)

The Buddha seems to have experienced 2.), when he saw the 4 sights ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_sights )

fofoo

I read this recently, it fits to the topic and I want to share it with you:

"the classifications of Nibbana are all negative in character. On the other hand, it is noteworthy that Nibbana is definitly termed a dhamma, even in classificationswhere it cannot be viewed as an object of thought. (that is, a dhamma in the sense of a mental object, correlated to mano, mind). So we have to admit that this sole nonphenomenal entity belongs likewise to the system of the of the Abhidhamma, but - and this reinforces our point- it is never enlarged upon because Nibbana is an object of realization and not of philosophical research.
-page 20, "Abhidhamma Studies" by Ven Nynaponika


The dhammapada says:

"Verse 96. The Tranquillity Of The Saints

Peaceful his mind and peaceful
his speech and actions too,
perfect in knowledge of freedom,
One Thus is of utmost peace.

Explanation: A noble arahat, who is freed by ‘disknowing’, or freedom from knowing, is calm and unshaken by the impact of changing circumstances. His mind is at peace. His words are peaceful. His actions are peaceful."

see http://www.buddhanet.net/dhammapada/d_saints.htm

Obviously, "knowledge of freedom" is not really knowledge, like the commentary says it is "Disknowing" or "freedom from knowing. This is in agreement with my opening post and the purley negative character of Nibbana in the Abhidhamma.