
''The following article is about the term Nirvana in the context of Buddhism. See Nirvana (disambiguation) for other meanings.'' ---- In Buddhism, nirvāņa (from the Sanskrit -- Pali: Nibbāna -- Chinese language: 涅槃; Pinyin: niè pán), literally "extinction" and/or "extinguishing", is the culmination of the Buddhist pursuit of liberation. Gautama Buddha, the Buddha, described Buddhism as a raft which, after floating across a river, will enable the passenger to reach nirvana. Hinduism also uses nirvana as a synonym to its ideas of moksha, and it is spoken of in several Hindu Tantra texts as well as the Bhagavad Gita. The Hindu and Buddhist concepts of nirvana should not necessarily be regarded as equivalent. Etymologically, nirvana connotes an extinguishing or "blowing out" of a fire or candle flame. In the Buddhist context it carries the further connotations of stilling, cooling, and peace; the person realizing nirvana is compared to a fire gone out when its fuel supply is finished, this fuel being primarily the false idea of self (soul), which causes (and is caused by) among other things craving, consciousness, birth, death, greed, hate, delusion, ignorance. Nirvana, then, is not a place nor a state, it is an absolute truth to be realized, and a person can do so without dying. When a person who has realized nirvana dies, his death is referred as his ''parinirvana'', his ''fully passing away'', as his life was his last link to the cycle of death and rebirth (''samsara''), and he will not be reborn again. The ultimate goal of Buddhism is realization of nirvana; what happens to a man after his parinirvana cannot be explained, as it is outside of all conceivable experience. As a negation of samsara (i.e., the whole phenomenal world), nirvana is impossible to define directly; it can only be experienced or realized. One may not even be able to say this, since saying this implies the existence of an experiencing subject--which in fact would not persist after full nirvāṇa. While some of the side-effects of nirvana can be identified, a definition of nirvāṇa can only be approximated by what it is not. It is not the clinging existence with which man is understood to be afflicted. It is not any sort of becoming. It has no origin or end. It is not made or fabricated. It has no dualities, so that it cannot be described in words. It has no parts that may be distinguished one from another. It is not a subjective state of consciousness. It is not conditioned on or by anything else. Calling "nirvana" the opposite of samsara may not be doctrinally accurate since even in early Buddhism and by the time of , there are teachings of the identity of nirvana and samsara. However, even here it is assumed that the natural man suffers from at the very least a confusion regarding the nature of samsara. We can also say that, given the vital importance of the idea of anatta (Pāli; Sanskrit: Anātman), which negates not merely the grasping mind but also any concept of essential substance or permanent self, it is clear that nirvāṇa is not to be understood as a union with monistic ideal. Since there is essentially no self and no not-self, there is nothing to unite, instead it is an experience of non-separation. It should also be noted that the Buddha discouraged certain lines of speculation, including speculation into the state of an enlightened being after death, on the grounds that these were not useful for pursuing enlightenment; thus definitions of nirvāṇa might be said to be doctrinally unimportant. == Nirvana in the Mahaparinirvana Sutra == However, in certain Mahayana teachings of the Buddha, Nirvana, or "Great Nirvana" in particular (higher than "ordinary" Nirvana), is said to be the sphere or domain ("visaya") of the True Self. In the "Mahayana Mahaparinirvana Sutra", as well as in a number of other important Mahayana sutras, Great Nirvana is seen as the state which constitutes the attainment of that which is "Eternal, Self, Bliss, and Pure". ''Maha-nirvana'' thus becomes equivalent to the ineffable, unshakeable, blissful, all-pervading and deathless Selfhood of the Buddha himself - a mystery which no words can adequately reach and which can only be fully known by an Awakened Being directly. An important facet of Nirvana in general is that it is not something that comes about from a concatenation of causes, that springs into existence as a result of causes and conditions: it always was, is and will be. But due to the moral and mental darkness of ordinary, samsarically enmeshed sentient beings, it remains hidden from unawakened perception. The Buddha of the Mahaparinirvana Sutra insists on its eternal nature, saying: "It is not the case that the inherent nature of Nirvana did not primordially exist but now exists. If the inherent nature of Nirvana did not primordially exist but does now exist, then it would not be free from taints [''asravas''] nor would it be eternally [''nitya''] present in nature. Regardless of whether there are Buddhas or not, its intrinsic nature and attributes are eternally present ... Because of the obscuring darkness of the mental afflictions [''kleshas''], beings do not see it. The Tathagata, endowed with omniscient awareness [''sarvajna-jnana''], lights the lamp of insight with his skill-in-means [''upaya-kausalya''] and causes Bodhisattvas to perceive the Eternal, Bliss, the Self, and the Pure of Nirvana." Vitally, according to Mahayana teachings, any being who has reached Nirvana is not blotted out or extinguished: there is the extinction of the impermanent and suffering-prone "worldly self" or ego, but not of the immortal "supramundane" Self of the indwelling Buddha. The Buddha states in the "Mahayana Mahaparinirvana Sutra" (Tibetan version): "Nirvana is deathless ... Those who have passed into Nirvana are deathless. I say that anybody who is endowed with careful assiduity is not compounded and, even though they involve themselves in compounded things, they do not age, they do not die, they do not perish." == Quotations == *Gautama: **"Where there is nothing; where naught is grasped, there is the Isle of No-Beyond. Nirvana do I call it -- the utter extinction of aging and dying." **"There is, monks, an unborn -- unbecome -- unmade -- unfabricated. If there were not that unborn -- unbecome -- unmade -- unfabricated, there would not be the case that emancipation from the born -- become -- made -- fabricated would be discerned. But precisely because there is an unborn -- unbecome -- unmade -- unfabricated, emancipation from the born -- become -- made -- fabricated is discerned." [Udana VIII.3] *Sutta Nipāta, tr. Rune Johansson: **accī yathā vātavegena khitto
atthaṁ paleti na upeti sankhaṁ
evaṁ muni nāmakāyā kimutto
atthaṁ paleti na upeti sankhaṁ **atthan gatassa na pamāṇam atthi
ynea naṁ vajju taṁ tassan atthi
sabbesu dhammesu samūhatesu
samūhatā vādapathāpi sabbe
Like a flame that has been blown out by a strong wind goes to rest and cannot be defined, just so the sage who is freed from name and body goes to rest and cannot be defined.
For him who has gone to rest there is no measure by means of which one could describe him; that is not for him. When all (dharmas) have gone, all signs of recognition have also gone. ==See also== * Atman (Buddhism) * Bhagavad Gita * Buddhism * Enlightenment (Buddhism) * God in Buddhism * Mahaparinirvana * Moksha * Nagarjuna * Nirvana Sutra * Parinirvana * Paramita * Satori == Further reading == * Jon Kabit-Zin, ''Wherever You Go, There You Are'' * ''The Mahayana Mahaparinirvana Sutra'' (Nirvana Publications, London 1999-2000), translated by Kosho Yamamoto, revised and edited by Dr. Tony Page. == External links == *[http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/nibbana.html Nibbana] - more excerpts from the Pali Tripitaka defining Nibbana *[http://www.religiousbook.net/Books/Online_books/Ec/Ecology_34.html Nirvana and Samadhi] *[http://www.nirvanasutra.org.uk "Nirvana Sutra": full English translation of the "Nirvana Sutra" and appreciation of its teachings.] *[http://www.beyondthenet.net/calm/clm_main1.asp In-depth explanation of Nibbana according to the Pali Canon] Buddhist philosophical concepts Buddhist terms Hindu philosophical concepts
==Kukkurovaca vs. Mysterious Stranger== --------- There is some confusion about Nirvana as a goal or as a soteriological goal. Soteriology is the Christian doctrine of salvation (according to the OED) Calling it a goal is not quite accurate since one needs to give up all striving or even the idea of attaining it in order to reach it (an irony, I know). :Soteriology in the 20th century has become dispersed throughout religious studies, and simply means "having to do with salvation or the study of salvation." It is routinely used in Buddhist studies. However, it is not essential that it be used here. :On the other hand, I'm nervous about "Nirvana...is the fruit or culmination of enlightenment." I don't think it's clear that enlightenment is a process of which nirvana is the end; many would say "enlightenment" and mean "nirvana", and vice versa. Certainly "fruit" seems unnecessarily flowery language. I agree they are often used interchangably. Fruit can be changed to something more suitable. The essential meaning I was going for was that nirvana is something that can be experienced once things are seen or understood as they really are (a.k.a. enlightenment). :I gave it another shot; tell me what you think. Also, are you the "Indian physics" person? Because I'm worried that "physics" erroneously implies that Indian philosophy was anything like Aristotelian philosophy or even, god forbid, modern science. Besides which, the concept of fire had a much more lively life as a rhetorical device in Indian philosophy than as a physical concept. Thank you Kukkurovaca, you said it better than I could have. I am new to Wikipedia and working on getting an identity. I am not the Indian physics person, and I fully support any changes you will make about this part of the article. ==Usedbook vs. Smack?== ------ What does ''a continuity of void processes'' mean? :I think my paragraph about the frogs and tadpoles should help you understand that :p User:Smack ---- I had to remove the following for too many reasons. I was hesitant at first for this may cause conflict between myself and User:Smack. There are many descriptions and explanations about Unbinding (Nirvana) in the scriptures. To generalize that all teachers in such a manner teach the uselessness of their students questioning Nirvana is disturbing. You may ask your teacher anything about Nirvana. Although I agree 100% with his intent, what User:Smack is attempting to convey with his article is extremely obscure, especially to those unfamiliar with the subject wishing to learn. Lastly, the dangerous paraphrasing is always avoided in religious articles. You should bring reference. I've read a similar simile expounded from Sariputta or the Milinda Debate but I'm unsure. In what sutra did Gautama say this? The difficulty with labeling Buddhism a philosophy is having Gautama being quoted vaguely like Plato enthusiasts while we have a canon to consider like a religion. User:Usedbook 17:00 20 May 2003 (UTC) ''"In fact, the Buddha and other teachers have left us with much fewer descriptions of nirvana than explanations of why it cannot be described. One such explanation is thus: ordinary people are like tadpoles, and those who have achieved nirvana are like frogs; the dry land represents nirvana. The tadpoles may ask the frog, "Does the dry land have fish?" "Is the air anything like water?" "Can you swim on dry land?" The frog's answer to all of these questions will be negative or indeterminate, perhaps leading the tadpoles to wonder whether dry land exists at all. Similarly, Buddhist teachers have said, it is useless for common people to ask questions about nirvana."'' ==Deletions== I removed "Often considered ineffable, Nirvana may be denoted as ''a continuity of void processes.'' " as it is confusing and possibly meaningless, at least without considerable elaboration. Also killed "However, when teaching his own disciples, the Buddha used nibbana more as an image of freedom. Apparently, all Indians at the time saw burning fire as agitated, dependent, and trapped, both clinging and being stuck to its fuel as it burned. To ignite a fire, one had to "seize" it. When fire let go of its fuel, it was "freed," released from its agitation, dependence, and entrapment -- calm and unconfined. "--There's no point in the history of Indian philosophy about which one could get away with a statement like "Apparently, all Indians at the time x." Nor am I at all sure this was even a particularly common view; fire is pretty well revered in Indian thought, and metaphorically in the realm of philosophy, logic, and theological debate it usually stood in not for entrapment or agitation but for motion and power. I also deleted the attribution of one quote to Suttinapatti, as that looks entirely wrong (Sutta Nipāta, perhaps?) to my eye, and a quick google turned up no references to anything of that name. User:Kukkurovaca 22:44, 1 Apr 2004 (UTC) ==Refugees from Buddhism main page== ---- I trimmed the following from the Buddhism main page. Someone may want to try to work it in at Nirvana, though I'd want to see it explained historically and contextually, rather than simply declared like this. Which version of Nirvana, discussed where, is being called on here? That sort of thing.User:Kukkurovaca 17:22, 4 Apr 2004 (UTC) "Nirvana is a supramundane state which is unconditioned, unmade, unborn, unfabricated and results from unbinding from or extinguishing all that was conditioned, born, made, or fabricated; Nirvana can be thought of as a state of ultimate peace or reality in which all duality in the universe is resolved." ==Organizing Afterlife Articles== I would like to organize the articles that deal with an otherworld as a real existence. I propose that Afterlife would be the best hub for such articles. Eschatology and Underworld are other possibilities, but I don't think they work as well as Afterlife. Any thoughts on such a project? Please come to Talk:Afterlife to discuss. User:Hawstom 14:46, 6 May 2004 (UTC) :Nirvana is ''so'' not an afterlife.User:Kukkurovaca|User talk:Kukkurovaca 22:28, May 6, 2004 (UTC) ::Can you explain? Is Nirvana then a totally worldy concept, rather than an "otherworld"-ly one? User:Hawstom 17:17, 7 May 2004 (UTC) :::Well, properly speaking, Nirvana can't be defined; Buddhist scripture identifies the condition of the enlightened as indescribable. But speaking conventionally, one can make generalizations. Those following Nagarjuna claim that there is no distinction between samsara and nirvana; this is not precisely the same as saying that Nirvana is "worldly" in the sense of being vulgar or secular, but it is worldly in the sense that, under such an analysis, Nirvana is precisely the correct way of experiencing the world. More traditionally, however, nirvana would have to be defined as ''nonworldly'', neither belonging to this world nor to any other. In neither case is it an "afterlife" because there is no one to live it, no being engaged in it. The same problem would hold for discussing enlightenment in Advaita Vedanta, though this is not to say that the two forms of enlightenment are in agreement. ::grin::User:Kukkurovaca|User talk:Kukkurovaca 17:42, May 7, 2004 (UTC) ::Both Underworld and Afterlife articles would be great, Tom. But concerning Nirvana, as Kukku says, Nirvana is not to do with afterlife. Practitioners 'arrive' at Nirvana before death. According to certain tantric traditions, death can be used as an opportunity to 'arrive' at Nirvana, but this is not relavant to ideas of underworld etc. You may be more interested in Bardo (the state between lives), which is a late Indian buddhist development. As Kukku says, ::In Nagarjuna's MMK XXV:19, he says :::''There is not the slightest difference'' :::''Between Samsara and Nirvana'' ::If you wish to understand Nirvana, it would be a good idea to understand the non-affirming negative used in Indian logic (Dignaga) as a basis of what Kukku is expressing. This form of negative is one that does not imply something else in its negation. ::For instance, if you were to ask me what color my coffee cup was, and I were to say "Not yellow", we normally assume that this would imply that the coffee cup was another color. However, if I were to ask you if your mind was yellow, and you were to reply "No, not yellow", then it does not necessarily imply that it actually had a color (just not yellow). So, when we ask about Nirvana "Is it worldly, is it non-worldly?", the answer may be "Not worldly, not non-worldly" - this does not mean that we are asserting a third state of being for things, but that this form of identification is merely not applicable. (User:20040302 09:33, 8 May 2004 (UTC)) Great. That helps a lot. I agree then that Nirvana wouldn't belong under the afterlife heading. User:Hawstom 02:37, 9 May 2004 (UTC) == Regarding my recent revert of Usedbook == I reverted several changes by User:Usedbook for a couple reasons. First, Nirvana does not literally mean "unbinding". "transcendent and singularly ineffable freedom" is (a) perhaps a little flowery for an encyclopedia and (b) ungrammatical (sentence fragment). I would be opent to changing "culmination" to "goal" with some other restructuring, however. Nirvana does not connote ''an'' indescribable reality ''etymologically''; it is taken to refer to or depict one, but not on the etymological level. If part of the article is a misunderstanding, we probably shouldn't include it at all. However, it's not clear to me which part is supposed to be a misunderstanding why. Nirvana's often-asseted ineffability, while valid for inclusion in this article, belongs nowhere near the etymology section. Also, your edits sound like they reflect the teachings of some particular school, in which case they can be included under a special section devoted to that school's interpretations, but I can't do it for you if I don't know what school that is.User:Kukkurovaca|User talk:Kukkurovaca 16:28, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)
nirvāṇa
Grunge groups American musical groups
nirvāṇa
See other meanings of words starting from letter:
Words begining with Nirvana:
Nirvana
Nirvana
Nirvana
Nirvana
Nirvana
Nirvana's_In_Utero
Nirvana's_Nevermind
Nirvana's_Smells_Like_Teen_Spirit
Nirvana's_Smells_Like_Teen_Spirit
Nirvana/60sband
Nirvana/Grunge_band
Nirvana2013
NirvanaBand
Nirvanaband
Nirvanaband
Nirvanaband
Nirvanaband
NirvanaBuddhism
NIRVANAnet
Nirvana_(1960s_band)
Nirvana_(60s_band)
Nirvana_(album)
Nirvana_(album)
Nirvana_(band)
Nirvana_(band)
Nirvana_(band)
Nirvana_(band)
Nirvana_(disambiguation)
Nirvana_(leafhopper)
Nirvana_(movie)
Nirvana_2003_(album)
Nirvana_albums
Nirvana_Ave.,_Melbourne,_Australia
Nirvana_Avenue,_Melbourne
Nirvana_fallacy
Nirvana_Song
Nirvana_songs
Nirvana_Sutra
Nirvana_Sutra
Nirvana
''The following article is about the term Nirvana in the context of Buddhism. See Nirvana (disambiguation) for other meanings.'' ---- In Buddhism, nirvāņa (from the Sanskrit -- Pali: Nibbāna -- Chinese language: 涅槃; Pinyin: niè pán), literally "extinction" and/or "extinguishing", is the culmination of the Buddhist pursuit of liberation. Gautama Buddha, the Buddha, described Buddhism as a raft which, after floating across a river, will enable the passenger to reach nirvana. Hinduism also uses nirvana as a synonym to its ideas of moksha, and it is spoken of in several Hindu Tantra texts as well as the Bhagavad Gita. The Hindu and Buddhist concepts of nirvana should not necessarily be regarded as equivalent. Etymologically, nirvana connotes an extinguishing or "blowing out" of a fire or candle flame. In the Buddhist context it carries the further connotations of stilling, cooling, and peace; the person realizing nirvana is compared to a fire gone out when its fuel supply is finished, this fuel being primarily the false idea of self (soul), which causes (and is caused by) among other things craving, consciousness, birth, death, greed, hate, delusion, ignorance. Nirvana, then, is not a place nor a state, it is an absolute truth to be realized, and a person can do so without dying. When a person who has realized nirvana dies, his death is referred as his ''parinirvana'', his ''fully passing away'', as his life was his last link to the cycle of death and rebirth (''samsara''), and he will not be reborn again. The ultimate goal of Buddhism is realization of nirvana; what happens to a man after his parinirvana cannot be explained, as it is outside of all conceivable experience. As a negation of samsara (i.e., the whole phenomenal world), nirvana is impossible to define directly; it can only be experienced or realized. One may not even be able to say this, since saying this implies the existence of an experiencing subject--which in fact would not persist after full nirvāṇa. While some of the side-effects of nirvana can be identified, a definition of nirvāṇa can only be approximated by what it is not. It is not the clinging existence with which man is understood to be afflicted. It is not any sort of becoming. It has no origin or end. It is not made or fabricated. It has no dualities, so that it cannot be described in words. It has no parts that may be distinguished one from another. It is not a subjective state of consciousness. It is not conditioned on or by anything else. Calling "nirvana" the opposite of samsara may not be doctrinally accurate since even in early Buddhism and by the time of , there are teachings of the identity of nirvana and samsara. However, even here it is assumed that the natural man suffers from at the very least a confusion regarding the nature of samsara. We can also say that, given the vital importance of the idea of anatta (Pāli; Sanskrit: Anātman), which negates not merely the grasping mind but also any concept of essential substance or permanent self, it is clear that nirvāṇa is not to be understood as a union with monistic ideal. Since there is essentially no self and no not-self, there is nothing to unite, instead it is an experience of non-separation. It should also be noted that the Buddha discouraged certain lines of speculation, including speculation into the state of an enlightened being after death, on the grounds that these were not useful for pursuing enlightenment; thus definitions of nirvāṇa might be said to be doctrinally unimportant. == Nirvana in the Mahaparinirvana Sutra == However, in certain Mahayana teachings of the Buddha, Nirvana, or "Great Nirvana" in particular (higher than "ordinary" Nirvana), is said to be the sphere or domain ("visaya") of the True Self. In the "Mahayana Mahaparinirvana Sutra", as well as in a number of other important Mahayana sutras, Great Nirvana is seen as the state which constitutes the attainment of that which is "Eternal, Self, Bliss, and Pure". ''Maha-nirvana'' thus becomes equivalent to the ineffable, unshakeable, blissful, all-pervading and deathless Selfhood of the Buddha himself - a mystery which no words can adequately reach and which can only be fully known by an Awakened Being directly. An important facet of Nirvana in general is that it is not something that comes about from a concatenation of causes, that springs into existence as a result of causes and conditions: it always was, is and will be. But due to the moral and mental darkness of ordinary, samsarically enmeshed sentient beings, it remains hidden from unawakened perception. The Buddha of the Mahaparinirvana Sutra insists on its eternal nature, saying: "It is not the case that the inherent nature of Nirvana did not primordially exist but now exists. If the inherent nature of Nirvana did not primordially exist but does now exist, then it would not be free from taints [''asravas''] nor would it be eternally [''nitya''] present in nature. Regardless of whether there are Buddhas or not, its intrinsic nature and attributes are eternally present ... Because of the obscuring darkness of the mental afflictions [''kleshas''], beings do not see it. The Tathagata, endowed with omniscient awareness [''sarvajna-jnana''], lights the lamp of insight with his skill-in-means [''upaya-kausalya''] and causes Bodhisattvas to perceive the Eternal, Bliss, the Self, and the Pure of Nirvana." Vitally, according to Mahayana teachings, any being who has reached Nirvana is not blotted out or extinguished: there is the extinction of the impermanent and suffering-prone "worldly self" or ego, but not of the immortal "supramundane" Self of the indwelling Buddha. The Buddha states in the "Mahayana Mahaparinirvana Sutra" (Tibetan version): "Nirvana is deathless ... Those who have passed into Nirvana are deathless. I say that anybody who is endowed with careful assiduity is not compounded and, even though they involve themselves in compounded things, they do not age, they do not die, they do not perish." == Quotations == *Gautama: **"Where there is nothing; where naught is grasped, there is the Isle of No-Beyond. Nirvana do I call it -- the utter extinction of aging and dying." **"There is, monks, an unborn -- unbecome -- unmade -- unfabricated. If there were not that unborn -- unbecome -- unmade -- unfabricated, there would not be the case that emancipation from the born -- become -- made -- fabricated would be discerned. But precisely because there is an unborn -- unbecome -- unmade -- unfabricated, emancipation from the born -- become -- made -- fabricated is discerned." [Udana VIII.3] *Sutta Nipāta, tr. Rune Johansson: **accī yathā vātavegena khitto
atthaṁ paleti na upeti sankhaṁ
evaṁ muni nāmakāyā kimutto
atthaṁ paleti na upeti sankhaṁ **atthan gatassa na pamāṇam atthi
ynea naṁ vajju taṁ tassan atthi
sabbesu dhammesu samūhatesu
samūhatā vādapathāpi sabbe
Like a flame that has been blown out by a strong wind goes to rest and cannot be defined, just so the sage who is freed from name and body goes to rest and cannot be defined.
For him who has gone to rest there is no measure by means of which one could describe him; that is not for him. When all (dharmas) have gone, all signs of recognition have also gone. ==See also== * Atman (Buddhism) * Bhagavad Gita * Buddhism * Enlightenment (Buddhism) * God in Buddhism * Mahaparinirvana * Moksha * Nagarjuna * Nirvana Sutra * Parinirvana * Paramita * Satori == Further reading == * Jon Kabit-Zin, ''Wherever You Go, There You Are'' * ''The Mahayana Mahaparinirvana Sutra'' (Nirvana Publications, London 1999-2000), translated by Kosho Yamamoto, revised and edited by Dr. Tony Page. == External links == *[http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/nibbana.html Nibbana] - more excerpts from the Pali Tripitaka defining Nibbana *[http://www.religiousbook.net/Books/Online_books/Ec/Ecology_34.html Nirvana and Samadhi] *[http://www.nirvanasutra.org.uk "Nirvana Sutra": full English translation of the "Nirvana Sutra" and appreciation of its teachings.] *[http://www.beyondthenet.net/calm/clm_main1.asp In-depth explanation of Nibbana according to the Pali Canon] Buddhist philosophical concepts Buddhist terms Hindu philosophical concepts
Nirvana
==Kukkurovaca vs. Mysterious Stranger== --------- There is some confusion about Nirvana as a goal or as a soteriological goal. Soteriology is the Christian doctrine of salvation (according to the OED) Calling it a goal is not quite accurate since one needs to give up all striving or even the idea of attaining it in order to reach it (an irony, I know). :Soteriology in the 20th century has become dispersed throughout religious studies, and simply means "having to do with salvation or the study of salvation." It is routinely used in Buddhist studies. However, it is not essential that it be used here. :On the other hand, I'm nervous about "Nirvana...is the fruit or culmination of enlightenment." I don't think it's clear that enlightenment is a process of which nirvana is the end; many would say "enlightenment" and mean "nirvana", and vice versa. Certainly "fruit" seems unnecessarily flowery language. I agree they are often used interchangably. Fruit can be changed to something more suitable. The essential meaning I was going for was that nirvana is something that can be experienced once things are seen or understood as they really are (a.k.a. enlightenment). :I gave it another shot; tell me what you think. Also, are you the "Indian physics" person? Because I'm worried that "physics" erroneously implies that Indian philosophy was anything like Aristotelian philosophy or even, god forbid, modern science. Besides which, the concept of fire had a much more lively life as a rhetorical device in Indian philosophy than as a physical concept. Thank you Kukkurovaca, you said it better than I could have. I am new to Wikipedia and working on getting an identity. I am not the Indian physics person, and I fully support any changes you will make about this part of the article. ==Usedbook vs. Smack?== ------ What does ''a continuity of void processes'' mean? :I think my paragraph about the frogs and tadpoles should help you understand that :p User:Smack ---- I had to remove the following for too many reasons. I was hesitant at first for this may cause conflict between myself and User:Smack. There are many descriptions and explanations about Unbinding (Nirvana) in the scriptures. To generalize that all teachers in such a manner teach the uselessness of their students questioning Nirvana is disturbing. You may ask your teacher anything about Nirvana. Although I agree 100% with his intent, what User:Smack is attempting to convey with his article is extremely obscure, especially to those unfamiliar with the subject wishing to learn. Lastly, the dangerous paraphrasing is always avoided in religious articles. You should bring reference. I've read a similar simile expounded from Sariputta or the Milinda Debate but I'm unsure. In what sutra did Gautama say this? The difficulty with labeling Buddhism a philosophy is having Gautama being quoted vaguely like Plato enthusiasts while we have a canon to consider like a religion. User:Usedbook 17:00 20 May 2003 (UTC) ''"In fact, the Buddha and other teachers have left us with much fewer descriptions of nirvana than explanations of why it cannot be described. One such explanation is thus: ordinary people are like tadpoles, and those who have achieved nirvana are like frogs; the dry land represents nirvana. The tadpoles may ask the frog, "Does the dry land have fish?" "Is the air anything like water?" "Can you swim on dry land?" The frog's answer to all of these questions will be negative or indeterminate, perhaps leading the tadpoles to wonder whether dry land exists at all. Similarly, Buddhist teachers have said, it is useless for common people to ask questions about nirvana."'' ==Deletions== I removed "Often considered ineffable, Nirvana may be denoted as ''a continuity of void processes.'' " as it is confusing and possibly meaningless, at least without considerable elaboration. Also killed "However, when teaching his own disciples, the Buddha used nibbana more as an image of freedom. Apparently, all Indians at the time saw burning fire as agitated, dependent, and trapped, both clinging and being stuck to its fuel as it burned. To ignite a fire, one had to "seize" it. When fire let go of its fuel, it was "freed," released from its agitation, dependence, and entrapment -- calm and unconfined. "--There's no point in the history of Indian philosophy about which one could get away with a statement like "Apparently, all Indians at the time x." Nor am I at all sure this was even a particularly common view; fire is pretty well revered in Indian thought, and metaphorically in the realm of philosophy, logic, and theological debate it usually stood in not for entrapment or agitation but for motion and power. I also deleted the attribution of one quote to Suttinapatti, as that looks entirely wrong (Sutta Nipāta, perhaps?) to my eye, and a quick google turned up no references to anything of that name. User:Kukkurovaca 22:44, 1 Apr 2004 (UTC) ==Refugees from Buddhism main page== ---- I trimmed the following from the Buddhism main page. Someone may want to try to work it in at Nirvana, though I'd want to see it explained historically and contextually, rather than simply declared like this. Which version of Nirvana, discussed where, is being called on here? That sort of thing.User:Kukkurovaca 17:22, 4 Apr 2004 (UTC) "Nirvana is a supramundane state which is unconditioned, unmade, unborn, unfabricated and results from unbinding from or extinguishing all that was conditioned, born, made, or fabricated; Nirvana can be thought of as a state of ultimate peace or reality in which all duality in the universe is resolved." ==Organizing Afterlife Articles== I would like to organize the articles that deal with an otherworld as a real existence. I propose that Afterlife would be the best hub for such articles. Eschatology and Underworld are other possibilities, but I don't think they work as well as Afterlife. Any thoughts on such a project? Please come to Talk:Afterlife to discuss. User:Hawstom 14:46, 6 May 2004 (UTC) :Nirvana is ''so'' not an afterlife.User:Kukkurovaca|User talk:Kukkurovaca 22:28, May 6, 2004 (UTC) ::Can you explain? Is Nirvana then a totally worldy concept, rather than an "otherworld"-ly one? User:Hawstom 17:17, 7 May 2004 (UTC) :::Well, properly speaking, Nirvana can't be defined; Buddhist scripture identifies the condition of the enlightened as indescribable. But speaking conventionally, one can make generalizations. Those following Nagarjuna claim that there is no distinction between samsara and nirvana; this is not precisely the same as saying that Nirvana is "worldly" in the sense of being vulgar or secular, but it is worldly in the sense that, under such an analysis, Nirvana is precisely the correct way of experiencing the world. More traditionally, however, nirvana would have to be defined as ''nonworldly'', neither belonging to this world nor to any other. In neither case is it an "afterlife" because there is no one to live it, no being engaged in it. The same problem would hold for discussing enlightenment in Advaita Vedanta, though this is not to say that the two forms of enlightenment are in agreement. ::grin::User:Kukkurovaca|User talk:Kukkurovaca 17:42, May 7, 2004 (UTC) ::Both Underworld and Afterlife articles would be great, Tom. But concerning Nirvana, as Kukku says, Nirvana is not to do with afterlife. Practitioners 'arrive' at Nirvana before death. According to certain tantric traditions, death can be used as an opportunity to 'arrive' at Nirvana, but this is not relavant to ideas of underworld etc. You may be more interested in Bardo (the state between lives), which is a late Indian buddhist development. As Kukku says, ::In Nagarjuna's MMK XXV:19, he says :::''There is not the slightest difference'' :::''Between Samsara and Nirvana'' ::If you wish to understand Nirvana, it would be a good idea to understand the non-affirming negative used in Indian logic (Dignaga) as a basis of what Kukku is expressing. This form of negative is one that does not imply something else in its negation. ::For instance, if you were to ask me what color my coffee cup was, and I were to say "Not yellow", we normally assume that this would imply that the coffee cup was another color. However, if I were to ask you if your mind was yellow, and you were to reply "No, not yellow", then it does not necessarily imply that it actually had a color (just not yellow). So, when we ask about Nirvana "Is it worldly, is it non-worldly?", the answer may be "Not worldly, not non-worldly" - this does not mean that we are asserting a third state of being for things, but that this form of identification is merely not applicable. (User:20040302 09:33, 8 May 2004 (UTC)) Great. That helps a lot. I agree then that Nirvana wouldn't belong under the afterlife heading. User:Hawstom 02:37, 9 May 2004 (UTC) == Regarding my recent revert of Usedbook == I reverted several changes by User:Usedbook for a couple reasons. First, Nirvana does not literally mean "unbinding". "transcendent and singularly ineffable freedom" is (a) perhaps a little flowery for an encyclopedia and (b) ungrammatical (sentence fragment). I would be opent to changing "culmination" to "goal" with some other restructuring, however. Nirvana does not connote ''an'' indescribable reality ''etymologically''; it is taken to refer to or depict one, but not on the etymological level. If part of the article is a misunderstanding, we probably shouldn't include it at all. However, it's not clear to me which part is supposed to be a misunderstanding why. Nirvana's often-asseted ineffability, while valid for inclusion in this article, belongs nowhere near the etymology section. Also, your edits sound like they reflect the teachings of some particular school, in which case they can be included under a special section devoted to that school's interpretations, but I can't do it for you if I don't know what school that is.User:Kukkurovaca|User talk:Kukkurovaca 16:28, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Nirvana
nirvāṇa
Nirvana
Grunge groups American musical groups
Nirvana
nirvāṇa
See other meanings of words starting from letter:
N
NA | NB | NC | ND | NE | NF | NG | NH | NI | NJ | NK | NL | NM | NO | NP | NR | NS | NT | NU | NW | NX | NY | NZ |Words begining with Nirvana:
Nirvana
Nirvana
Nirvana
Nirvana
Nirvana
Nirvana's_In_Utero
Nirvana's_Nevermind
Nirvana's_Smells_Like_Teen_Spirit
Nirvana's_Smells_Like_Teen_Spirit
Nirvana/60sband
Nirvana/Grunge_band
Nirvana2013
NirvanaBand
Nirvanaband
Nirvanaband
Nirvanaband
Nirvanaband
NirvanaBuddhism
NIRVANAnet
Nirvana_(1960s_band)
Nirvana_(60s_band)
Nirvana_(album)
Nirvana_(album)
Nirvana_(band)
Nirvana_(band)
Nirvana_(band)
Nirvana_(band)
Nirvana_(disambiguation)
Nirvana_(leafhopper)
Nirvana_(movie)
Nirvana_2003_(album)
Nirvana_albums
Nirvana_Ave.,_Melbourne,_Australia
Nirvana_Avenue,_Melbourne
Nirvana_fallacy
Nirvana_Song
Nirvana_songs
Nirvana_Sutra
Nirvana_Sutra
These materials are based on Wikipedia and licensed under the GNU FDL
YouTube.com videos better site than Turbo Tax 2007
