I’ve translated (via AI) a section of the Abhidhammāvatāro-nāmarūpaparicchedo which discusses Nibbāna. Note that Ācariya Anuruddha explicitly denies that Nibbāna is a cessation, which is something you quite commonly hear in Theravādin circles these days. For Ācariya Anuruddha to claim that Nibbāna = cessation is to read the texts too literally.
“Therefore, do not speak thus, following the shadow of the letter. Instead, the meaning of both suttas should be examined.”
Also if Nibbāna = cessation this would mean that change-of-lineage etc have no object
Moreover, if destruction were Nibbāna, what would you say is the object of the change-of-lineage, purification, path, and fruition consciousnesses?
Its on coming to Nibbāna that the defilements etc cease, and so figuratively its spoken of as cessation.
There, nibbāna (nirvana) is called the extinction of existence and non-existence. Craving is called ‘vāna’ because it weaves together [various states of] existence. Nibbāna is also called the deathless, the unconditioned, the supreme bliss, because it has departed from craving. Indeed, it has been said: “That which is the stilling of all formations, the relinquishment of all attachments, the destruction of craving, dispassion, cessation, Nibbāna.”
By the attainment of which there would be
The destruction of all defilements;
That is declared as Nibbāna
By those skilled in Nibbāna.And this Nibbāna should be understood as having the characteristic of peace, the flavor of deathlessness, or the flavor of providing comfort, the manifestation of signlessness, or the manifestation of escape. Here one might ask: “Does Nibbāna as an ultimate reality not exist as a single nature, like the Self of the heretics, or like a rabbit’s horn, being unattainable?” No, because it is attainable by those seeking benefit when examined with the eye of wisdom through appropriate practice. For what ordinary people do not attain should not be said to “not exist.” Now, when the Venerable Sāriputta, the General of the Dhamma, was asked, “What, friend, is Nibbāna?”, he showed only the destruction of lust, hatred, and delusion, saying, “The destruction of lust, friend, the destruction of hatred, the destruction of delusion.” Therefore, if one says that Nibbāna is merely the destruction of lust and so forth, that is not correct. Why? Because it would result in the fault of Arahantship also being merely the destruction of lust and so forth. How? Immediately after being asked about Nibbāna, when asked “What, friend, is Arahantship?”, he said, “The destruction of lust, friend, the destruction of hatred, the destruction of delusion,” showing only the destruction of lust and so forth. Therefore, according to your view, even the fruit of Arahantship would be merely the destruction of lust and so forth. This is not proper, as it would result in the unsurpassed supramundane fruit consciousness being reduced to mere destruction of lust. Therefore, do not speak thus, following the shadow of the letter. Instead, the meaning of both suttas should be examined.
By attaining this dhamma, the destruction of lust and so forth occurs. This dhamma, though itself indestructible, is called “the destruction of lust and so forth” through the metaphor of destruction, because it is the supporting condition for the destruction of lust and so forth. It should be understood as stated by the metaphor of effect, as in “tin is old age, a ball is phlegm” and so on. Arahantship, however, is called “destruction” because it arises at the end of destruction.
If Nibbāna were merely the destruction of lust and so forth, all foolish ordinary people would have attained Nibbāna and realized cessation. Furthermore, there would be the fault of multiplicity and so forth for Nibbāna. For if this were so, due to the multiplicity of destructions of lust and so forth, there would be multiplicity of Nibbāna. Nibbāna would have the characteristic of the conditioned, and being of the nature of the conditioned, it would be included among the conditioned. Being included among the conditioned, Nibbāna would be impermanent and suffering. Moreover, if destruction were Nibbāna, what would you say is the object of the change-of-lineage, purification, path, and fruition consciousnesses? Speak, O blessed one! If you say, “I say it is just the destruction of lust and so forth,” are lust and so forth destroyed at the moment of change-of lineage and so on, or will they be destroyed, or are they destroyed? What do you say to this, “I speak of destruction in those that are destroyed”. Consider carefully and speak, O blessed one! If you speak of destruction in those that are destroyed, the state of Nibbāna being the object of change-of-lineage consciousness and so on is not established. Why? At the moment of change-of-lineage, lust and so forth will be destroyed; likewise at the moment of purification. At the moment of the path, they are being destroyed, not destroyed. At the moment of fruition, they are destroyed. This being so, according to your view, only the fruit has destruction as its object, not the others. What do you say is the object of the others?
Surely, not seeing an object, he will be without an answer. Furthermore, the destruction of defilements is indeed done by good people; it means it is produced by appropriate practice. But Nibbāna is not done by anyone, is not produced, therefore Nibbāna is deathless and unconditioned. Knowing that it is unmade, the noble disciple is called “one who knows the unmade.” And this has been said:
“The man who has no faith, who knows the uncreated,
Who has cut off all connections,
Who has destroyed all opportunities and vomited all desires,
He indeed is the supreme person.”Moreover, because it has been called “escape” by the Blessed One. For “escape” is a name for Nibbāna. As he said: “There are, bhikkhus, these three things that are difficult to penetrate. What three things are difficult to penetrate? These three elements of escape. This is the escape from sensual pleasures, namely, renunciation. This is the escape from forms, namely, the formless. Whatever is existent, conditioned, dependently arisen, its cessation is the escape from it.” Thus it has been said. If this Nibbāna, spoken of thus, were to reach the fault of non-existence, then the first jhāna and the base of infinite space would also be non-existent. Therefore, it is improper for the indestructible Nibbāna to incur the fault of destruction. Thus, destruction is not Nibbāna.
Because it has been said by the Lord of the Dhamma, the Tathāgata, the Fully Enlightened One, in many discourses in the ultimate sense: “There is an escape in the world, well-touched by my wisdom” and “There is, bhikkhus, the unborn, unbecome, unmade, unconditioned,” the conclusion should be reached here that “There is indeed one dhamma called Nibbāna.”
Moreover, in the Triplet of the Limited, after raising the question “What dhammas are immeasurable?”, it is said: “The four paths that are supramundane, the four fruits of recluseship, and Nibbāna—these dhammas are immeasurable.” How can the destruction of lust and so forth be immeasurable? Therefore, in the ultimate sense, there is indeed one nature called Nibbāna. However, it is not non-existent like the primordial nature of the naturalists, or like the self of the sectarians, or like a rabbit’s horn.
If one says that Nibbāna is merely a designation, that too is improper. Why? Because the mind and mental factors that have Nibbāna as their object would have an indescribable object. How? In the Triplet of Objects that are Limited, after raising the question “What dhammas have immeasurable objects?”, it is said: “The four paths that are supramundane and the four fruits of recluseship—these dhammas have immeasurable objects.” If these had a concept as their object, they would not properly have immeasurable objects; they would belong to the group with indescribable objects. For it is said: “The fourth jhāna of the fine-material sphere, wholesome, resultant, and functional; the resultant of the fourth jhāna; the base of infinite space and the base of nothingness, wholesome, resultant, and functional—these dhammas have indescribable objects.” Therefore, Nibbāna is not merely a designation.
And since the nature of a concept is not appropriate for Nibbāna, therefore it should be accepted that there is Nibbāna, which is the object condition for the path and fruition, which is permanent due to the absence of arising and so forth, formless due to the absence of material nature, and without proliferation due to the absence of mental proliferation.
Ultimate, endless, peaceful,
Deathless, uncrumbling,
Excellent, refuge, security,
Protection, shelter, final goal.Auspicious and subtle, truth,
Destruction of suffering, without taints,
Very hard to see, the far shore,
Nibbāna, not to be seen.Destruction of craving, stable, island,
Without affliction, without calamity,
Without clinging and formless,
State of the deathless, imperishable.Dispassion and cessation,
Liberation and freedom indeed,
By these names
Nibbāna is spoken of.Having understood thus,
Nibbāna too as deathless,
The means for its attainment
Should always be done by the wise.He who knows this, which produces faith and understanding in the doctrine of the Tathāgata, Which destroys delusion, which produces wisdom and inspires confidence, Which is rich in meaning and phrasing, very sweet, amazing to the discerning, In the profound, subtle Abhidhamma Pitaka, he reaches the final state.