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.
Nirvana and Cosmology
Theres something thats I've been wondering:
If one does not believe in any cosmology connected to Buddhism then what does the idea/state of Nirvana become?
What then is its meaning.
If one does not believe in any cosmology connected to Buddhism then what does the idea/state of Nirvana become?
What then is its meaning.
0
Comments
Its like drinking water, practical and free from elaboration.
Also not a state, nor does anything become nirvana, etc.
Hope this helps.
TLDR: belief isn't required, do the practices and find release.
From my reading Nirvana is directly connected to Cosmological theories. Indeed the whole attainment of nirvana is for the sake of cosmological reasons (e.g. to transcend the cycle of rebirth).
Nirvana as a state is the natural state (buddha nature) or natural nirvana.
This is a consciousness that apprehends the voidness of itself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddha-nature
This leads to nirvana with remainder, which is arhatship baby.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arhat_(Buddhism)
Then when the Arhat body/mind end then there is nirvana without remainder.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parinirvana
It isn't a state, nor is it a place of abiding. It is the end of fabrication, release of mind. Thus it cannot be made into another metaphysical entity. It cannot be said to be permanent or impermanent, those are dualistic labels asserting a thing. Nothing can be said about it. Can't call it nothing, something, both or neither.
But I personally like the idea of consciousness without feature. Not to make this consciousness into a thing because then that would be an Atman essentially. It is consciousness freed from construction. That release is nirvana.
But this is just my opinion, which could be horribly wrong. =]
"[nibbana/nirvana] is permanent by nature (niccasvabhavatta ), it is without an end, beyond death and cessation; it is immortal (amatam)."
There is no connection between nirvana and modern cosmological theories, like big bang and string theory. The latter are literally 'science fictions' unlike nirvana which can be realized by anyone.
if the wound is cured = no dukka = no suffering = nirvana
There just seems to be a difference in what is not Nibbana.
But what a thing is not does not define what a thing is. That is just plain old dualistic thinking. It is just pure fiction and has no place in reality.
Therefore, I say, Right Understanding is of two kinds:
1. The view that alms and offerings are not useless; that there
is fruit and result, both of good and bad actions; that there are
such things as this life, and the next life; that father and
mother, as also spontaneously born beings (in the heavenly
worlds), are no mere words; that there are in the world monks
and priests, who are spotless and perfect, who can explain
this life and the next life, which they themselves have understood:
this is called the ‘Mundane Right Understanding’
(lokiya-samm -di hi), which yields worldly fruits and brings
good results.
2. But whatsoever there is of wisdom, of penetration, of right
understanding conjoined with the ‘Path’ (of the Sot panna,
Sakad g mi, An g mi, or Arahat)—the mind being turned
away from the world and conjoined with the path, the holy
path being pursued: this is called the ‘Supermundane Right
Understanding’ (lokuttara-samm -di hi), which is not of the
world, but is supermundane and conjoined with the path.
M. 117
See?
/Victor
You say you are not interested in defining nirvana. But how can you discuss it if you do not have an idea of what it is? And most of all if you will not agree to discuss what other people think it is?
Now I do understand what you say to some extent. I feel so too that my greatest motivation for cultivation is my understanding of reincarnation and samsara.
But different strokes for different blokes right?
What your question is concearned with is not nibbana but what it releases you from. Right? Either you end samsara and reincarnation or you just end up in a "state of mind" that is barely distinguishable from death.
Is not that what your question is about?
/Victor
Here's an interesting sutta quote:
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.8.01.irel.html
I can't say for you personally, because I've come across like 10 or more different interpretations of nirvana, one even fancier than the other. Include there is no real nirvana, or nirvana is temporary. It seems like people often just pick one that suits their desires. But the Buddha tells us exactly that our desires are clouded by delusion. So if our understanding of nirvana is shaped by what we think it should be, we're in for trouble.
To have a certain view of nirvana can be helpful sometimes, but at other times it may just as well become a hindrance, because people try to imitate it, grasp it or think they have it while they don't.
So what can we do? Just practice the path, practice happiness and have faith that if we put forth that effort long enough and deep enough, we'll understand what the Buddha meant with nirvana, and finally realize it. He called it the highest happiness, the highest peace, so if we go in the direction of that, perhaps we'll find it. And we go there through letting go of all desires, including desiring nirvana -or understanding nirvana- itself.
With metta,
Sabre
The difference between non-aryans and arya-pudgal including bodhisattvas is that non-aryans lack an initial glimpse of nirvana. In other words, they have never entered the mystical current that leads to complete nirvana (parinirvana).
On this same score, there is no accidental attainment of nirvana by a non-transcending practice/methods because such practices are always based on the psycho-physical body. The adept must first see the transcendent then, by prajñâ, expand/perfect the initial intuition.
to describe in your post.
Can you use different terms or an analogy maybe?
Gratitude.
Indeed, that's why I said, practice the path.
Now of course, part of practice is finding the path. But the Buddha said, the way towards nirvana is that path. So we don't have to know what nirvana is exactly. If we are practicing the path, or practicing finding the path, perhaps one day we will get there. Along our travels we get a better idea of what nirvana is until one day we can see the destination, know what it's like and just need to go a little further.
Also, I have to agree with the others. Although I understand your post, using all pali and sanskrit words doesn't really make it more readable, especially if you don't explain them. Just my opinion.
The difference between non-aryans and arya-pudgal including bodhisattvas is that non-aryans lack an initial glimpse of nirvana. In other words, they have never entered the mystical current that leads to complete nirvana (parinirvana).
On this same score, there is no accidental attainment of nirvana by a non-transcending practice/methods because such practices are always based on the psycho-physical body. The adept must first see the transcendent then, by prajñâ, expand/perfect the initial intuition.
If we are to believe the old texts then belief in reincarnation and karma or even practise of jhana are NOT required for attaining enlightenment.
It means noble. Not by birth but by accomplishment.
Read about sotapanna, sakadagami and anagami if you will.
/Victor
"Children of Arya are led by the light" (Praja arya jyotiragrah). ~ RV, VII. 33.17
"Light" is a very important terms in Buddhism, both in the Pali Nikayas and the Mahayana. In a word, an aryan is a spiritual being who senses the spiritual light.
Very sorry I missrote. The first 4 jhanas are required to my current understanding.
But not belief or direct knowledge of the Cosmology as the question is about.
Kindly
Victor
Obviously, right view with asava ain't right view which is ariyan:
"Right view is, in short, to see nibbana (M i 510f: cp AA ii 195ff: sotâpattimaggakkhana nibbânadassanam), just as Nârada above claimed he had done" (Masefield, Divine Revelation in Pali Buddhism, p.44).
I don't believe that our average Dharma center followers have had a glimpse of nirvana (nibbanadassana) by which they become sotapanna (current-entrants; German, Stromeingetretenen). Hence, they are not on the ariyan eightfold path.
On the other hand, nirvana is very real. It is real food—not a dry old bone in a dry land of the spiritually dead.
Right view is the beginning and the end of the path, it simply means to see and to understand things as they really are and to realise the Four Noble Truth. As such, right view is the cognitive aspect of wisdom. It means to see things through, to grasp the impermanent and imperfect nature of worldly objects and ideas, and to understand the law of karma and karmic conditioning. Right view is not necessarily an intellectual capacity, just as wisdom is not just a matter of intelligence. Instead, right view is attained, sustained, and enhanced through all capacities of mind. It begins with the intuitive insight that all beings are subject to suffering and it ends with complete understanding of the true nature of all things. Since our view of the world forms our thoughts and our actions, right view yields right thoughts and right actions."
http://www.thebigview.com/buddhism/eightfoldpath.html
"And what, monks is the right view that is ariyan, cankerless, supermundane, a component of the Way? Whatever, monks, is wisdom, the cardinal faculty of wisdom, the power of wisdom, the component of enlightenment that is the investigation into things, the right view that is a component of the Way in one who, by developing the ariyan Way, is of ariyan thought, cankerless thought, conversant with the ariyan Way--this, monks, is a right view that is ariyan cankerless, supermundane, a component of the Way” (M.iii.72).
This is contrasted with right view that has cankers (âsavo/âsrava).
"And what ,monks is the right view that has cankers, that is on the side of merit, that ripens unto cleaving (to new birth)? There is (result of) gift ... offering ... sacrifice; there is fruit and ripening of deeds well done or ill done; there is this world, there is a world beyond; there is (benefit from serving) mother and father; there are spontaneously arising of beings; there are in the world recluses and brahmans ... who proclaim this world and the world beyond having realised them by their own super-knowledge."
There is also a tenfold ariyan path (M.iii.76) to which is added, “right gnosis” (S., samyak jñâna ) followed by the tenth, “right liberation” (S., samyak vimukta).
And by the way the jhanas feature prominently in the suttas as a precursor to awakening, so I'm not sure on what grounds you make your assertions.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.009.ntbb.html
Cosmology is about the nature and laws of universe that contains us.
Dharma straddles this in that:
On one side, its roots come before this or any universe; emptiness, impermanence, interconnectivity are true of all possible cosmologies, not just this one.
On the other side, Dharma practice is just about the reduction or dukka and the cultivation of sukka, it is entirely to do with experience, ultimately/ideally towards nibbana.
So Cosmology does not meaningfully connect with the origin or the end of dharma.
Dharma is about suffering, its causes and cessation, not about stars in spacetime, their origins and explosions:)