2

In my experience, zen and tibetan buddhism do not claim that the self of an enlightened one can be completely non existent. In fact a zen master when asked this question might answer "Uncertain." or "yes" or "no". Ask for definite answers is a limiting factor in an unlimited universe. The following article discusses your question in far more detail than I ...


2

Yes One of the qualities of the teaching is "Akalika" which means "Timeless". Lord Buddha directly said that the teaching is fruitful regardless of the time it is practiced in. So there is nothing stopping you or anyone from realizing the teaching. Nirvana is not a place like "Heaven" mentioned in other religions. It is a state of mind. As long as true ...


2

Very standard critique, and very confused about Buddhism. Probably too much to unload in single post but here we go. First, he does not understand what Buddhism means by "suffering". By suffering Buddhism means the painful state of discontent and frustration when things don't go the way we want and can't be easily fixed. Obviously, when you want something ...


2

You're probably thinking of Itivuttaka 44: This was said by the Blessed One, said by the Arahant, so I have heard: "Monks, there are these two forms of the Unbinding property. Which two? The Unbinding property with fuel remaining, & the Unbinding property with no fuel remaining. And what is the Unbinding property with fuel remaining? There ...


1

I believe such peculiar experiences may be significant, or may not; but in Buddhism one shouldn't cling to them. Enlightenment would involve an understanding of the three marks of existence: impermanence, no-self, and suffering. I mean, if you delve into that experience and gain enlightenment, good! But if you do so and then everything remains exactly the ...


1

Yes, for the one who is blind Buddhism is Nihilistic. Imagine someone who has only a sense of touch, and you, having a faculty of sight, try to explain to him what the world of sight is, how would you explain it to him? If he asks "is the color blue is rough or smooth or is it in between?" how would you answer? Would you not answer it’s neither rough or ...


1

Avijjā does not know the ariya-sacca, such as: Not knowing what desire is. Not knowing what suffering is. Not knowing what happiness is. Not knowing what existence is. Not knowing what non-existence is. Not knowing what death is. Not knowing what life is. Not knowing all this, beings formulate views about all this. They define what desire is, what ...


1

The main problem with the critique is that he doesn't distinguish tanha (i.e. craving or thirst) from chanda (i.e. desire, possibly wholesome desire). He therefore assumes that Buddhism is nihilist. He also didn't mention "clinging", and so on. In summary I think the critique is based on a false premise, i.e. it's a critique of his own (strawman) rendition ...


1

You can read a very nice explanation of the Heart Sutra's emptiness teaching in Zen master Thich Nhat Hanh's writing "The Fullness of Emptiness", in which he also introduces the term "inter-being" which he coined: If I am holding a cup of water and I ask you, “Is this cup empty?” you will say, “No, it is full of water.” But if I pour out the water and ...


1

No. If you are unconscious or in a coma then you are not laying there in a blissful state. Chances are your bodily functions are ticking over and there will be some brain activity. Just not enough to say or do anything. You can get a "lock in" syndrome where you can think but just not move your body. To the outsider you appear unconscious but you are ...


1

It is a condition with no happiness or sorrow, no pain,no darkness or light,no noise or sound etc....and finally we can say "unconditional state of mind." and closer to description of "Nirvana" Actually that's far from Nirvana. If that was the case any sleeping newborn baby would've been in Nirvana without the need for any Dhamma cultivation. A person in a ...


1

My understanding of this is as follows; Illusion is impure, but a water wave is beyond purity and impurity; May I be reborn in a hell to purify it and save the living beings there.


1

This Dhamma is not sterile. The Dhamma is alive. The Dhamma has the quality of “Akalika” (not belonging to time). So for those who walk this Noble Eightfold Path in an orderly manner, it is still possible to attain Nirvana. Having said that I have to now say that it is much harder for a person to realise Nirvana (Nibbana) in the present day. It is because ...


1

(I'll assume the actual question is in the body, not in the title). Naturally, no one can answer why someone didn't do something but that specific someone (but if you really wanted to know from the Buddha, you wouldn't be asking this here...). But there are practical reasons that could explain. Writing is not teaching. While you are writing, you are not ...


1

Don't look at it that way; look at it as the extinction of suffering. The problem is that Buddhism is dealing with the ineffable, so any attempt to define these phenomena will be imperfect at best and a disaster at worst. Unfortunately, people have felt compelled to add details and in the process... well, your question is a classic example of the kinds of ...


1

From a buddhist point of view, i think the question is flawed already from the beginning by assuming that there exists a "self or person" by using the words "whose nirvana, my death, person, his or her nirvana". By using these words it is implied that a self exists which it do not. There exist a physical and a mental stream and nowhere is there a self to ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible