NIRVANA II
A recent talk was about nirvana. Now I’m going to flog a dead horse and say some more about the subject.
Just for the fun of it, I looked up nirvana in the American Heritage Dictionary. There, the word is related to Buddhism, and is defined as the ineffable ultimate in which one has attained disinterested wisdom and compassion. Some synonyms are bliss, cloud nine, utopia, dreamland.
Nirvana is a Sanskrit word that is sometimes printed as nibbana. It is supposedly the goal of Buddhist life.
But this implies a contradiction.
Buddhism, and in particular, Zen, does not have a goal. Rather than striving to attain an objective, Zen is being.
For another definition, nirvana is a mental, physical, and spiritual state that lies beyond the normal range of perception. That sounds pretty spooky to most Westerners. As I said earlier, the word is Sanskrit, and it literally means “to blow out,” as to blow out a candle flame.
This is where Western thinking goes awry. To blow out a candle flame is to extinguish it. To extinguish is to make an end to life, to expire, even to go to the so-called abode of righteous souls after death: Heaven with a capital “H.”
But nirvana is not Heaven. Nirvana is not a place but a state.
A principle of Buddhism says that all life is suffering. Suffering involves the flames of hatred, craving, greed, and ignorance. Only in nirvana are these flames snuffed out.
Within Western scholarship, debates go on over whether nirvana involves total annihilation or eternal bliss. Trying to settle this is like trying to resolve that medieval conundrum that occupied church authorities for centuries as to how many angels could dance on the head of a pin.
Who cares?
What does it matter?
Nirvana is indescribable and can be known only directly. It is not an external goal but one’s innermost nature.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home