Almost all early Western interpreters of Buddhism wore negative spectacles. When they read Buddhism they saw Buddhism as a form of annihilationism. They understood that nirvana meant utter extinction. The translator Max Müller even condemned Buddhism for “hurling man into the abyss, at the very moment when he thought he had arrived at the stronghold of the eternal” (Becker, Breaking the Circle, p. 25–26). But what the Buddha an annihilationist? Here is what the Buddha says:
“Although I, monks, am one who speaks thus, who points out thus, there are some recluses and brahmans who misrepresent me untruly, vainly, falsely, not in accordance with fact saying: ‘The recluse Gotama is a nihilist [venayika], he lays down the cutting off, the destruction, the disappearance [vibhava] of the existent entity [sato satta].’ But as this, monks, is just what I am not, as this is just what I do not say, therefore these worthy recluses and brahmans misrepresent me untruly, vainly, falsely, and not in accordance with fact when they say: ‘The recluse Gotama is a nihilist [venayika], he lays down the cutting off, the destruction, the disappearance [vibhava] of the existent entity.’ Formerly I, monks, as well as now, lay down simply anguish [dukkha] and the stopping [nirodha] of anguish. If, in regard to this, monks, other revile, abuse, annoy the Tathagata, there is in the Tathagata no resentment, no distress, no dissatisfaction of mind concerning them” (M. i. 140).
We would not be wrong to say the existent entity (sato satta) spiritually survives whereas its suffering (dukkha) is brought to an end. On the same track, it is only the fire of craving or desire (S. i. 39) that is extinguished—not the real, or existent entity. Indeed, the Buddha says, “By destroying craving with root, one being free from hunger attains the perfect nirvana” (S. iii. 26). As we can see from this, there is an attainer of nirvana who has destroyed craving.
Of course, is one looks at nirvana with an eye only to making it appear to be a state of complete extinction, where nothing survives, it can be marketed that way. But nirvana has its positive epithets, too. Nirvana is said to be the ultimate, the truth, the further shore, the subtle, the stable, the peaceful, the excellent, the good, the security, the wonderful, the marvelous, the purity, the island, the cave, the protection, the refuge, the goal (S. iv. 373).
Nirvana is, itself, positive but as unconditioned. In this respect, it is transcendent meaning it is beyond the plane of phenomenal causation, including the Five Aggregates, and of course, rebirth. Put in more direct words, nirvana is nowhere to be found in the sphere of conditioned things. This is seen in this passage from the Udana (80).
“Monks, there exists that condition where is neither earth nor water nor fire nor air: wherein is neither the sphere of infinite space nor of infinite consciousness nor of nothingness nor of neither-consciousness-nor-unconsciousness; where there is neither this world nor a world beyond nor both together nor moon-and-sun. Thence, monks, I declare is no coming to birth; thither is no going (from life); therein is no duration; thence is not falling; there is no arising. It is not something fixed, it moves not on, it is not based on anything (anârmmanam = it cannot be made an object of thought or sense). That indeed is the end of Ill [dukkha]” (PTS).
In the Udana Atthakatha to the above, we also learn that nirvana is “deathless” and has an “immaterial nature.” We also learn that it cannot be seen by those who do not possess the “aryan eye.”
Turning in a slightly different direction, in one passage of the Samyutta-Nikaya (S. iii. 55) we read that when a Monk abandons attachment for the Five Aggregates, there being no longer any finite object or support for consciousness (vijñâna), his consciousness attains nirvana.
“When that consciousness is unestablished, not coming to growth, nongenerative, it is liberated. By being liberated, it is steady; by being steady, it is content; by being content, he is not agitate. Being unagitated, he personally attains Nibbana [nirvana]” (trans. Bhikkhu Bodhi).
Since Buddhism began on a sour note with many of its Western interpreters treating nirvana as a kind of mystical annihilation or absorption into nothingness, rehabilitating the image of Buddhism to be one which is entirely positive and joyful (sukha) has not been easy. Turning the tables, Paul Oltramare has this to say about life in contrast with nirvana.
“According to the principles laid at the base of the ontology, life—not nirvana—annihilates life. The law of the momentariness of all things and that of Conditioned Production make life and not nirvana a ceaseless destroyer. And it is in life and not in nirvana that one is made conscious of the absence of a soul” (Welbon, The Buddhist Nirvana and its Western Interpreters, p. 304).
Thanks for writing! Very good Article.
Posted by: Rojer | February 02, 2010 at 11:04 PM