No Consciousness or Perception in Buddhist Nirvana?

[Vouthon]

Right. And Mark makes it clear that the “inner circle” didn’t have a clue what he was on about. The true mystery isn’t one that is understood by a hidden elite and not by the masses. It’s one that no one can truly understand, especially those who think they have special insight.

Edwin

Amen to that!

“…One day some old men came to see Abba Anthony. In the midst of them was Abba Joseph. Wanting to test them, the old man suggested a text from the Scriptures, and, beginning with the youngest, he asked them what it meant. Each gave his opinion as he was able. But to each one the old man said, “You have not understood it”. Last of all he said to Abba Joseph, “How would you explain this saying?” and he replied, “I don’t know”. Then Abba Anthony said, “Indeed, Abba Joseph has found the way, for he has said: ‘I do not know’”…”

***- St. Anthony the Great (ca. 251–356), (17) ***

“…Believing that you are so smart
and understand it all
condemns you to ignore your ignorance
— this is the meaning of the Fall…”

***- Angelus Silesius (1624 – 1677), German Catholic mystic & poet ***

“…You must give up human understanding if you want to reach the goal, because the truth is known by not knowing…”

***- Blessed Henry Suso (c. 1296-1366), German Catholic mystic & Dominican priest ***

 

[notself]

Orthodox anything. Any religion. Is neatly trimmed, packaged, and presented to the people by the powers that be. Look at the New Testament. What does Jesus teach? Parables stories then he expounds to his disciples. And says “It’s not for them to know”. God has a hidden and permissive will. He permits sin. He reveals his hidden will to those he chooses. This is all divine providence. In buddhism, The same thing is done. I’ve seen many people fall for their interpretation based on a sutra or such that without a teacher can’t be reached or understood.

Not all traditions of Buddhism have hidden teachings or require a teacher. I understand that Tibetan Buddhism does so, but others do not.

Most of the suttas of the Pali Canon are available in hard copy or on line. accesstoinsight.org/index-subject.html These are among the oldest Buddhist works. One can find them incorporated in all forms of Buddhist writings. Although some certainly require deep thought, one must understand several concepts to understand, for example, dependent origination, most are fairly straight forward and clear.

Here is a link to a timeline of the history of Buddhist teachings. One notes that the teachings were transmitted orally for quite some time. buddhanet.net/e-learning/history/b_chron-txt.htm Regardless of tradition, the texts are not considered to be divinely inspired nor are they considered to be without error from numerous transcriptions. The earliest written texts that have been found date from the First Century.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gandh%C4%81ran_Buddhist_texts

I don’t believe it is a problem for each person to interpret the suttas for him or herself. As one progresses on the path, one’s understanding also progresses. Buddhism, like most philosophical structures, requires practice and study. After all, Buddhism is ultimately the training of one’s mind.

 

[billcu1]

Completely untrue. My experience is that the people who exalt secret wisdom and a spiritual elite typically have a very neat, undemanding spirituality, while orthodox Christianity is complex, paradoxical, challenging, and open to mystery.

It doesn’t sound to me as if you’ve given orthodoxy half a chance.

Don’t confuse orthodox Christianity with the neat packaging of “Catholic apologetics.” Apologetics betrays orthodoxy far more often than it upholds it.

Have you read any Chesterton, by any chance? Don’t listen to anything he has to say about Eastern religions–he has no idea what he’s talking about. But on the nature of orthodoxy he can’t be beat (especially in his book of that name).

Right. And Mark makes it clear that the “inner circle” didn’t have a clue what he was on about. The true mystery isn’t one that is understood by a hidden elite and not by the masses. It’s one that no one can truly understand, especially those who think they have special insight.

Edwin

Hidden Elite? That sounds like something the Catholic church is propagating. Either by misunderstanding or intention. To understand God one must have a reasonable intellect. What about those who don’t? They have to be told something. We ARE different. Some of us work harder than others. Shouldn’t those who care have more revealed to them than those who don’t? It’s not being elite but chosen for a different path. I think The Bishop of Athens sums it up pretty well. The first bishop of Athens. In some of his writings.

 

[billcu1]

Also I think a lot of people think of time as a linear progression. God breathes in and out they say and we are constantly coming in and out of existence. Also we jump constantly from moment to moment and in and out of bodies. As rossum said you can never cross the same river twice.

 

[Emese]

Right. There will be transformation. But that’s quite different from saying that you inhabit one body after another.

Paul Griffiths, a Catholic theologian who is also an expert on Buddhism, uses the word “transmigration” to describe the view of reincarnation I’m talking about here. He uses “reincarnation” more broadly, in a way that would include the Christian view of the afterlife (we do, after all, believe that we will be re-embodied). He argues that only this broad definition applies to Buddhism.

So as I said, I think that the case isn’t open and shut.

I have in the past toyed with the idea that reincarnation might offer a solution to the problem of “extra ecclesiam nulla salus.” Perhaps people who have not made a definite decision for or against the truth keep coming back until they do. But this idea is hard to fit into the Christian theological tradition, and it seems to be squarely contradicted by Hebrews 9:27. One could argue that this passage is only speaking of those who have heard the Word (after all, Hebrews also says that people who sin willfully after they receive the knowledge of the truth can’t be forgiven, and we don’t take those passages at face value). Prooftexting doctrine is a bad idea. But in this case the prooftext stands in complete harmony with the whole body of Christian tradition, which stresses the uniqueness of this life.

So it seems to me that reincarnation as transmigration is very hard to square with the orthodox Christian tradition (probably impossible), but that a broadly defined Buddhist concept of rebirth as causal connection across lives probably isn’t. Whether that’s an acceptable way to talk about Buddhism is, of course, for Buddhists to decide!

And as I keep saying, the bigger issue is the doctrine of impermanence. I think Christian/Buddhist dialogue needs to focus on this.

Edwin

If the transformation is so great that it is unrecognizable than it really doesn’t matter which body we get anyway if we do get a body like this which I truly doubt…For example I know that I wouldn’t even want to have a body in heaven anyway…Don’t misunderstand me I have a healthy body I’m perfectly happy with, but let’s face it: it is very restrictive and from the perspective of true happiness it is totally useless.

I think reincarnation is like Groundhog Day. We probably all go through stages of hedonism like there’s no tomorrow, depression, despair, self distraction, enjoying life, mastering ego games and how to achieve materialistic goals, until at one point we realize that there’s more to life than this earthly existence and we begin to work for our true happiness to find our way back “home”, to God. And we all get there in the end …the short way or the long one. Because we have to…there’s no choice, we can’t be truly fulfilled otherwise. It’s all about learning and experiencing. Hebrews 9:27 can be interpreted as this is the one life, the here and now that we have to focus on. And yes, there’s “judgement” after each life, when we have to face ourselves through God’s eyes.

To be honest I actually find it hard to “see” the differences between buddhism and christianity (or should I say the teachings of Jesus, the New Testament) both seek the ultimate Unity with God, both teach Love and exceptance and both incorporate the “doctrine” of imperpanence as well. There’s even resurrection and salvation in both.

 

[billcu1]

Our problem here is the senses and their objects. The tongue is the most unruly member the bible says and the sense of taste is everyone’s downfall. Also sexual addictions are bad for many. We keep coming here because we are attached and crave sense gratification. The more sexually active one is the more they want that buzz. And they crave it. And want to come here and not give it up. It higher realms those sensual joys aren’t present so much anyway.

 

[daler]

I read that all five aggregates (form, feelings, perception, mental formations, and consciousness) are annihilated upon attaining Nirvana. If consciousness is annihilated, isn’t that basically the same as death, since there is no awareness of anything? I’m also confused because I have seen Nirvana described as ultimate happiness, but how can there be happiness if there is no perception or consciousness?

I think that Nirvana refers to the absence of self in the presence of God

.

 

[dsully]

I think that Nirvana refers to the absence of self in the presence of God

.

I used to have the same concerns as Leelee82, but now I think I agree with Daler.

I am pessimistic that the Buddha would want to lead people down a path towards death.

What the Buddha experienced as enlightenment seems to have been good, very good. I assume that final enlightenment, or nirvana, would also be good and satisfying, though the Buddha might be hesitant to predicate any such thing about it.

FWIW, I think there could be some similarities seen between Buddhist meditation practices and certain Eastern mystical prayer practices. Understandably, the conceptual universes employed are very different between the two of them, but the results may be the same. This similarity might be the key to appreciating Buddhism as a Christian.

Leelee82 may want to disagree, which would certainly be her right!

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hesychastic

 

[Contarini]

I think that Nirvana refers to the absence of self in the presence of God

.

Buddhism doesn’t really speak about God, but one can interpret it that way from a Christian perspective.

I would say that Buddhism is a radically “apophatic” tradition. From a Christian point of view, I’d say that the Buddhist denial of permanent being is not the final truth, but is the “flip side” of the natural theology on which traditional Western Christian theology tends to rest. Since it’s a longstanding principle of Christian theology that negations about God are truer than affirmations, I would actually say that Buddhism is more profound and “truer” than natural theology, but that neither are the ultimate truth. No form of words can be, and Buddhists recognize that better than anyone.

Christian revelation is another matter altogether.

Edwin

 

[daler]

Buddhism doesn’t really speak about God, but one can interpret it that way from a Christian perspective.

I would say that Buddhism is a radically “apophatic” tradition. From a Christian point of view, I’d say that the Buddhist denial of permanent being is not the final truth, but is the “flip side” of the natural theology on which traditional Western Christian theology tends to rest. Since it’s a longstanding principle of Christian theology that negations about God are truer than affirmations, I would actually say that Buddhism is more profound and “truer” than natural theology, but that neither are the ultimate truth. No form of words can be, and Buddhists recognize that better than anyone.

Christian revelation is another matter altogether.

Edwin

Edwin,
. You offer some very good insights here. In regards to Buddha speaking, or not speaking about the existence of God, it should be viewed in the context of the Hindu splintering and multiplication of God into millions, and that the addition of yet One more would fall on spiritually deaf ears. Nevertheless, these words are attributed to Him:

. “There is, O monks, an Unborn, Unoriginated, Uncreated, Unformed, …”

. As to the inadequacy of words:

. "How great the multitude of truths which the garment of words can never contain! How vast the number of such verities as no expression can adequately describe, whose significance can never be unfolded, and to which not even the remotest allusions can be made! How manifold are the truths which must remain unuttered until the appointed time is come! Even as it hath been said: “Not everything that a man knoweth can be disclosed, nor can everything that he can disclose be regarded as timely, nor can every timely utterance be considered as suited to the capacity of those who hear it.”

. “Of these truths some can be disclosed only to the extent of the capacity of the repositories of the light of Our knowledge, and the recipients of Our hidden grace. We beseech God to strengthen thee with His power, and enable thee to recognize Him Who is the Source of all knowledge, that thou mayest detach thyself from all human learning, for, “what would it profit any man to strive after learning when he hath already found and recognized Him Who is the Object of all knowledge?” Cleave to the Root of Knowledge, and to Him Who is the Fountain thereof, that thou mayest find thyself independent of all who claim to be well versed in human learning, and whose claim no clear proof, nor the testimony of any enlightening book, can support.”

. from the Writings of Baha’u’llah, believed also to be the Maitreye of Buddhism

.

 

[ShameonMe]

Now that this thread is properly discusing Buddhism, I’m curious as to what rebirth entails. I know it’s neither Annihilationist or Eternalist, but I don’t see how the cessation of consciousness is not Annihilationism.

 

[rossum]

Do you lose consciousness when you go to sleep? People can be in comas for days, weeks, years and recover consciousness.

rossum

 

[ShameonMe]

Do you lose consciousness when you go to sleep? People can be in comas for days, weeks, years and recover consciousness.

rossum

I suppose I have a hard time seeing a difference between the consciousness and self. Buddhists on another forum I frequent make it seem like Death is Death and you won’t experience anything afterwords.

I can’t recollect being conscious before I was alive, whereas when I wake up from sleep, I can recollect being conscious, even if it’s vague.

 

[billcu1]

I suppose I have a hard time seeing a difference between the consciousness and self. Buddhists on another forum I frequent make it seem like Death is Death and you won’t experience anything afterwords.

I can’t recollect being conscious before I was alive, whereas when I wake up from sleep, I can recollect being conscious, even if it’s vague.

Most people can’t recollect consciousness before they were born. Few do.

 

[rossum]

I suppose I have a hard time seeing a difference between the consciousness and self.

There is a big difference in Buddhism, since self is a mistaken perception. We think we have one, but actually we don’t. Consciousness is one of the the things that we do have.

Buddhists on another forum I frequent make it seem like Death is Death and you won’t experience anything afterwords.

Strictly speaking, you can’t experience anything before death either, since there is no “you” to experience it. You just think there is. Buddhism analyses a human being into five parts, some of which survive death. None of those parts is a self, a “you”.

I can’t recollect being conscious before I was alive, whereas when I wake up from sleep, I can recollect being conscious, even if it’s vague.

Can you recall being born? Can you recall what happened 22 days after your 10th birthday? There are a lot of things that we cannot recall. That does not mean that they didn’t happen. Human memory is good at forgetting things, for most of us anyway.

The technique for remembering past consciousnesses from previous lives is described in Chapter Thirteen of the Visuddhimagga.

rossum

 

[billcu1]

The technique for remembering past consciousnesses from previous lives is described in Chapter Thirteen of the Visuddhimagga.

rossum

Does this technique open you up to outside influences? I was always told by my kagyu lama that until you reach a certain level of purity you are going to be deceived. Are there any purification sadhannas you know of?

Oh sorry I guess this is purification. Do you have a hinayanna teacher? Or mahayanna since you like that great nagarjuna He’s one of my favorites with Chandrakirti and Atisha.

 

[ShameonMe]

Maybe I can put this a different way:

I can see the Buddhist points on the Self: I’m not really attached to myself per se. I have serious depression and can be obsessive. I have desires and wants that will lead to suffering.

I am however (probably unbuddhist like) very attached to Consciousness and Cognition. It seems to me that, if Consciousness and Cognition were to disappear, then it is Annihilationism.

If my consciousness and cognition were to continue, it would be eternalism.

 

[billcu1]

Do you ever get angry? I rarely do. Do you experience emotions? Then I would say you have attachments. Only something viewing itself as “self” has such things.

 

[ShameonMe]

Do you ever get angry? I rarely do. Do you experience emotions? Then I would say you have attachments. Only something viewing itself as “self” has such things.

Angry? Not especially, but I can easily point to depression for that because it’s hard to care about anything enough to get angry about it.

Emotions I experience are nearly exclusively negative nowadays.

I would say my primary attachment is to existence, even though it sounds odd considering how horrible I seem to present mine as.

 

[daler]

Angry? Not especially, but I can easily point to depression for that because it’s hard to care about anything enough to get angry about it.

Emotions I experience are nearly exclusively negative nowadays.

I would say my primary attachment is to existence, even though it sounds odd considering how horrible I seem to present mine as.

Friend,
. The lamp of search must be lit when darkness envelopes one’s being. We are all attached to this world, and the agony of letting it go, having nowhere to ascend, leaves one without hope.

. We have the capacity for hope only because there is something to hope for. When life afflicts us with its torments, we are cautious about ever raising the flag of hope for fear of having it torn down once again.

. What this experience points to is light we have yet to find. We know where it is not, for we encounter darkness everywhere. We must then look beyond everywhere for the Source of the Light for which our souls yearn. Indeed, we yearn not but because there is something to yearn for.

.