[Buddha-l] Nirvana

[Joy Vriens]

Hugo wrote:

> Just watch out what do you mean with "consciousness", remember what
> Bhikkhu Sati thought about it:

No matter how one turns the Nirvana/immortality/deathless around, it 
remains contradictory if taken quite literally, whether one watches out 
or not. Or rather, especially when one watches out ;-)

Part of the problem is the use of the word "consciousness" as a 
translation. Is it limited to knowledge of sensory input or does it mean 
"that which experiences"/life?

  > Majjhima Nikaya 38
> Mahatanhasankhayasuttam
> The Longer Discourse on the Destruction of Craving
> http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/6774/mn38.htm

> "Sati, what is that conscciousness?"

> "Venerable sir, it is that which feels and experiences, that which
> reaps the results of good and evil actions done here and there."

> "Foolish man, to whom do you know me having taught the Dhamma like
> this. Haven't I taught, in various ways that consciousness is
> dependently arisen. Without a cause, there is no arising of
> consciousness. Yet you, foolish man, on account of your wrong view,
> you misrepresent me, as well as destroy yourself and accumulate much
> demerit, for which you will suffer for a long time."

This text obviously dates from after the primitive Buddhist teachings 
had started to be "systematised" and some of the initial contradictions 
had been "clarified" but when pudgalavada hadn't been completely rooted 
out in spite of the many efforts to do so. Hence the impatience: 
"Foolish man", "Haven't I told you so many times, in so many ways", 
"wrong view" followed by many other threats. "You misrepresent me" 
obviously dates from a time when the Buddha's teaching wasn't anymore in 
the process of being constituted by means of dialogue, but from a time 
when an official version of it        was being taught repetitively. 
Holding and probably transmitting (hence the need of writing this sutta) 
an unorthodox view  was thereferore an act of deliberate "foolishness". 
"You misrepresent me" and the demerit this represents shows that the 
status of the Buddha by that time had become such that doing so was the 
highest sacrilege.

I would be interested in seeing studies that look at Buddhist suttas 
with this sort of criteria.

Joy Vriens