(nibbana) = (Nirguna Brahman) ?

[Jaldhar H. Vyas]

On Fri, 26 Sep 1997 un824 at FREENET.VICTORIA.BC.CA wrote:

> Namaste,
>
> Good to hear from you again, Jaldhar... congratulations on the
> engagement. I wonder if we will notice any change in your
> tune (tone?) ?
>

Does my tune or tone require changing?

> I don't recall getting a straight answer to this question last time
> I asked, so I'll ask you Jaldhar -- do you think Buddhism fails to
> assert nirvanna (nibbana)?  Do you think Buddhism fails to assert
> that nibbana is the truth? I thought the Buddha did assert this,
> regardless of whatever subsequent centuries of Buddhist exegesis may
> say about it, but perhaps you know better than I.
>
> Assuming Buddha did assert nibbana and nibbana is not what you call the
> "one ultimate reality", then what *is* nibbana -- the Buddha's imagination?

Caveat: I don't know anymore about Buddhism than is explained and argued
against in the astika shastras.  I have no reason to suspect they
misrepresent Buddhist views but it could be the case.

I believe what the Buddhists mean by Nirvana is the cessation of
everything.  That's not the same as one ultimate reality.  For the
Buddhists the main feature of consciousness is that it only exists from
moment to moment and constantly changes.  So when that consciousness stops
there is nothing.

For Advaita Vedantins what is meant by Brahman is pure consciousness which
_never_ changes.

Any similiarity in language is probably due to the fact the two religions
grew in a common environment.

--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at braincells.com>
I got engaged! See the pictures ==> http://www.braincells.com/jaldhar/sagpan