|
The Fuzz word Nirvana (nibbana)
The Tathagata
wandered around Northern India for forty years. He lived as a beggar
bartering food, clothing (and sometimes shelter) for wisdom. During his
long career he frequently used the word nirvana (Pali: nibbana), and which,
he claimed was the ultimate goal (or end, read: sanctuary) of his ‘way’ (or
dhamma). However, not once during those 40 years did he define the term. He
did not produce a compressed and abstracted (hence universally applicable)
notion or concept of the meaning (hence peculiarity = atta = own substance)
of the word. What he did do was generate a plethora of context related
descriptions (i.e. adjectives) that purported to indicate either the approach
to nirvana or the affects of the attainment of nirvana (if indeed nirvana
(i.e. as state) could be attained). In short, he
never told (i.e. explained to) anyone what the word nirvana actually meant
(either to him or in general). Consequently devoid of meaning the word
nirvana was (and still is) a fuzz word (i.e. a word that points in
the general direction of but does not fix/hold the final destination). The
word has entered the English language because it is not translatable (as are
the other key words, i.e. dhamma, dukkha, samma-sambodhi and tathagata). The
etymological interpretation of nirvana can mean ‘blown out’, ‘extinguished’.
Yet, nirvana is described by the Tathagata as: Deathless (amrta, i.e. no mata ‘death’ (or no mara, possibly ‘evil’);
unchanging, imperishable, without end, non-production, extinction of birth,
unborn, not liable to dissolution, uncreated, free from disease, un-ageing,
freedom from transmigration, utmost, cessation of pain (i.e. dukkha), final
release. And/or:
peace; bliss; sam-bodhi (perfect awakening), knowledge, security. And/or,
figuratively: the cool cave, the island in the floods, the further shore, the
holy city, the refuge, the shelter, the asylum. Note: All these
examples seriously contradict the negative descriptions. None of the
above descriptions actually explain the notion (or experience) of nirvana.
Specifically the negative descriptions are unhelpful. The positive
descriptions remain uncertain in that they describe either nirvana or the
response to attaining nirvana. The
Tathagata, it is claimed, said: “There is an Un-born, Un-become, Un-made,
Un-compounded; for if there were not this Un-born, Un-become, Un-made,
Un-compounded, there would be no escape for this here that is born, become,
made and compounded.” The logic
fallacy of this statement if obvious, though the general idea is made clear.
And that is: Nirvana happens if and when a
process
(of arising and ceasing) comes to a
stop
(i.e. reaches @rest status, and when all internal turbulence, stress,
dis’ease (to wit: storm in a teacup) and so on has ceased). That
interpretation of nirvana does not imply (as Mahayanists falsely assumed)
that it is a state. In short, nirvana is more expediently interpreted not as
a noun (recall that Pali had neither the definite nor the indefinite article
and which served to nominalize functions) but as a past participle, namely:
stopped, ended, ceased (in modern science understood as: attainment of either
maximum entropy or maximum anti-entropy).
|