The heretical claim is that consciousness doesn’t really utterly cease at parinibbana. It is eternal. Specious word use and linguistic gymnastics ostensibly prove this is what the suttas actually teach.
Here’s the checkmate: if that’s true, then suffering doesn’t really cease, either. Both suffering and consciousness are both said to cease using the same word nirodha/nirujjhati.
For example, in SN 12.2 we have:
Avijjāya tveva asesavirāganirodhā saṅkhāranirodho; saṅkhāranirodhā viññāṇanirodho…
“With the remainderless fading away and cessation of ignorance, there is the cessation of formations; with the cessation of formations, the cessation of consciousness…”
And in SN 12.61 we have:
Yañca kho idaṁ vuccati cittaṁ iti pi mano iti pi viññāṇaṁ iti pi, taṁ rattiyā ca divasassa ca aññadeva uppajjati aññaṁ nirujjhati.
“That which is called mind, mentality, and consciousness arises as one thing and ceases as another, by night and by day.”
So, if we say that nirodha/nirujjhati does not mean “cease” with regards to consciousness, but only some kind of change of an otherwise eternal thing, then the same must be true of suffering. If that’s the case then the path is worthless, which is obviously false and an unacceptable, absurd conclusion.
That’s that.
As to the outrageous notion of a consciousness outside the aggregates that ostensibly would circumvent this checkmate, the Buddha was clear and emphatic throughout the suttas that this is not only non-existent, but that if it did exist it would make the path impossible. He spelled it out so clearly there can be no mistaking the situation: Eternal consciousness does not exist. Period.
See SN 22.97 for one of many examples:
“Sir, is there any consciousness at all that’s permanent, everlasting, eternal, imperishable, and will last forever and ever? “
Atthi nu kho, bhante, kiñci viññāṇaṁ, yaṁ viññāṇaṁ niccaṁ dhuvaṁ sassataṁ avipariṇāmadhammaṁ sassatisamaṁ tatheva ṭhassatī”ti?
…
“Mendicant, there is no consciousness at all that’s permanent, everlasting, eternal, imperishable, and will last forever and ever."
kiñci viññāṇaṁ, yaṁ viññāṇaṁ niccaṁ dhuvaṁ sassataṁ avipariṇāmadhammaṁ sassatisamaṁ tatheva ṭhassatī”ti.
…
Then the Buddha, picking up a little bit of dirt on his fingernail, said to that mendicant:
Atha kho bhagavā parittaṁ nakhasikhāyaṁ paṁsuṁ āropetvā taṁ bhikkhuṁ etadavoca: There’s not even this much consciousness that’s permanent, everlasting, eternal, imperishable, and will last forever and ever.
Ettakampi kho, bhikkhu, viññāṇaṁ natthi niccaṁ dhuvaṁ sassataṁ avipariṇāmadhammaṁ sassatisamaṁ tatheva ṭhassati.
If there were, this living of the spiritual life for the complete ending of suffering would not be found.
Ettakañcepi, bhikkhu, rūpaṁ abhavissa niccaṁ dhuvaṁ sassataṁ avipariṇāmadhammaṁ, nayidaṁ brahmacariyavāso paññāyetha sammā dukkhakkhayāya.
But since there isn’t, this living of the spiritual life for the complete ending of suffering is found.
Yasmā ca kho, bhikkhu, ettakampi rūpaṁ natthi niccaṁ dhuvaṁ sassataṁ avipariṇāmadhammaṁ, tasmā brahmacariyavāso paññāyati sammā dukkhakkhayāya”.
And another from MN 38
Middle Discourses 38 Majjhima Nikāya 38 The Longer Discourse on the Ending of Craving Mahātaṇhāsaṅkhayasutta So I have heard. Evaṁ me sutaṁ—At one time the Buddha was staying near Sāvatthī in Jeta’s Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika’s monastery. ekaṁ samayaṁ bhagavā sāvatthiyaṁ viharati jetavane anāthapiṇḍikassa ārāme. Now at that time a mendicant named Sāti, the fisherman’s son, had the following harmful misconception: Tena kho pana samayena sātissa nāma bhikkhuno kevaṭṭaputtassa evarūpaṁ pāpakaṁ diṭṭhigataṁ uppannaṁ hoti: “As I understand the Buddha’s teaching, it is this very same consciousness that roams and transmigrates, not another.” “tathāhaṁ bhagavatā dhammaṁ desitaṁ ājānāmi yathā tadevidaṁ viññāṇaṁ sandhāvati saṁsarati anaññan”ti. Several mendicants heard this rumour. Assosuṁ kho sambahulā bhikkhū: “sātissa kira nāma bhikkhuno kevaṭṭaputtassa evarūpaṁ pāpakaṁ diṭṭhigataṁ uppannaṁ: ‘tathāhaṁ bhagavatā dhammaṁ desitaṁ ājānāmi yathā tadevidaṁ viññāṇaṁ sandhāvati saṁsarati, anaññan’”ti. They went up to Sāti and said to him, Atha kho te bhikkhū yena sāti bhikkhu kevaṭṭaputto tenupasaṅkamiṁsu; upasaṅkamitvā sātiṁ bhikkhuṁ kevaṭṭaputtaṁ etadavocuṁ: “Is it really true, Reverend Sāti, that you have such a harmful misconception: “saccaṁ kira te, āvuso sāti, evarūpaṁ pāpakaṁ diṭṭhigataṁ uppannaṁ: ‘As I understand the Buddha’s teaching, it is this very same consciousness that roams and transmigrates, not another’?” ‘tathāhaṁ bhagavatā dhammaṁ desitaṁ ājānāmi yathā tadevidaṁ viññāṇaṁ sandhāvati saṁsarati, anaññan’”ti? “Indeed, reverends. As I understand the Buddha’s teaching, it is this very same consciousness that roams and transmigrates, not another.” “Evaṁ byā kho ahaṁ, āvuso, bhagavatā dhammaṁ desitaṁ ājānāmi yathā tadevidaṁ viññāṇaṁ sandhāvati saṁsarati, anaññan”ti. Then, wishing to dissuade Sāti from his view, the mendicants pursued, pressed, and grilled him, Atha kho te bhikkhū sātiṁ bhikkhuṁ kevaṭṭaputtaṁ etasmā pāpakā diṭṭhigatā vivecetukāmā samanuyuñjanti samanugāhanti samanubhāsanti: “Don’t say that, Sāti! Don’t misrepresent the Buddha, for misrepresentation of the Buddha is not good. And the Buddha would not say that. “mā evaṁ, āvuso sāti, avaca, mā bhagavantaṁ abbhācikkhi, na hi sādhu bhagavato abbhakkhānaṁ, na hi bhagavā evaṁ vadeyya. In many ways the Buddha has said that consciousness is dependently originated, that without a cause, consciousness does not come to be.” Anekapariyāyenāvuso sāti, paṭiccasamuppannaṁ viññāṇaṁ vuttaṁ bhagavatā, aññatra paccayā natthi viññāṇassa sambhavo”ti. But even though the mendicants pressed him in this way, Sāti obstinately stuck to his misconception and insisted on it. Evampi kho sāti bhikkhu kevaṭṭaputto tehi bhikkhūhi samanuyuñjiyamāno samanugāhiyamāno samanubhāsiyamāno tadeva pāpakaṁ diṭṭhigataṁ thāmasā parāmāsā abhinivissa voharati: “evaṁ byā kho ahaṁ, āvuso, bhagavatā dhammaṁ desitaṁ ājānāmi yathā tadevidaṁ viññāṇaṁ sandhāvati saṁsarati anaññan”ti. When they weren’t able to dissuade Sāti from his view, the mendicants went to the Buddha, bowed, sat down to one side, and told him what had happened. Yato kho te bhikkhū nāsakkhiṁsu sātiṁ bhikkhuṁ kevaṭṭaputtaṁ etasmā pāpakā diṭṭhigatā vivecetuṁ, atha kho te bhikkhū yena bhagavā tenupasaṅkamiṁsu; upasaṅkamitvā bhagavantaṁ abhivādetvā ekamantaṁ nisīdiṁsu. Ekamantaṁ nisinnā kho te bhikkhū bhagavantaṁ etadavocuṁ: “sātissa nāma, bhante, bhikkhuno kevaṭṭaputtassa evarūpaṁ pāpakaṁ diṭṭhigataṁ uppannaṁ: ‘tathāhaṁ bhagavatā dhammaṁ desitaṁ ājānāmi yathā tadevidaṁ viññāṇaṁ sandhāvati saṁsarati, anaññan’ti. Assumha kho mayaṁ, bhante, sātissa kira nāma bhikkhuno kevaṭṭaputtassa evarūpaṁ pāpakaṁ diṭṭhigataṁ uppannaṁ: ‘tathāhaṁ bhagavatā dhammaṁ desitaṁ ājānāmi yathā tadevidaṁ viññāṇaṁ sandhāvati saṁsarati, anaññan’ti. Atha kho mayaṁ, bhante, yena sāti bhikkhu kevaṭṭaputto tenupasaṅkamimha; upasaṅkamitvā sātiṁ bhikkhuṁ kevaṭṭaputtaṁ etadavocumha: ‘saccaṁ kira te, āvuso sāti, evarūpaṁ pāpakaṁ diṭṭhigataṁ uppannaṁ: “tathāhaṁ bhagavatā dhammaṁ desitaṁ ājānāmi yathā tadevidaṁ viññāṇaṁ sandhāvati saṁsarati, anaññan”’ti? Evaṁ vutte, bhante, sāti bhikkhu kevaṭṭaputto amhe etadavoca: ‘evaṁ byā kho ahaṁ, āvuso, bhagavatā dhammaṁ desitaṁ ājānāmi yathā tadevidaṁ viññāṇaṁ sandhāvati saṁsarati, anaññan’ti. Atha kho mayaṁ, bhante, sātiṁ bhikkhuṁ kevaṭṭaputtaṁ etasmā pāpakā diṭṭhigatā vivecetukāmā samanuyuñjimha samanugāhimha samanubhāsimha: ‘mā evaṁ, āvuso sāti, avaca, mā bhagavantaṁ abbhācikkhi, na hi sādhu bhagavato abbhakkhānaṁ, na hi bhagavā evaṁ vadeyya. Anekapariyāyenāvuso sāti, paṭiccasamuppannaṁ viññāṇaṁ vuttaṁ bhagavatā, aññatra paccayā natthi viññāṇassa sambhavo’ti. Evampi kho, bhante, sāti bhikkhu kevaṭṭaputto amhehi samanuyuñjiyamāno samanugāhiyamāno samanubhāsiyamāno tadeva pāpakaṁ diṭṭhigataṁ thāmasā parāmasā abhinivissa voharati: ‘evaṁ byā kho ahaṁ, āvuso, bhagavatā dhammaṁ desitaṁ ājānāmi yathā tadevidaṁ viññāṇaṁ sandhāvati saṁsarati, anaññan’ti. Yato kho mayaṁ, bhante, nāsakkhimha sātiṁ bhikkhuṁ kevaṭṭaputtaṁ etasmā pāpakā diṭṭhigatā vivecetuṁ, atha mayaṁ etamatthaṁ bhagavato ārocemā”ti. So the Buddha addressed one of the monks, Atha kho bhagavā aññataraṁ bhikkhuṁ āmantesi: “Please, monk, in my name tell the mendicant Sāti that “ehi tvaṁ bhikkhu, mama vacanena sātiṁ bhikkhuṁ kevaṭṭaputtaṁ āmantehi: the Teacher summons him.” ‘satthā taṁ, āvuso sāti, āmantetī’”ti. “Yes, sir,” that monk replied. He went to Sāti and said to him, “Evaṁ, bhante”ti kho so bhikkhu bhagavato paṭissutvā yena sāti bhikkhu kevaṭṭaputto tenupasaṅkami; upasaṅkamitvā sātiṁ bhikkhuṁ kevaṭṭaputtaṁ etadavoca: “Reverend Sāti, the Teacher summons you.” “satthā taṁ, āvuso sāti, āmantetī”ti. “Yes, reverend,” Sāti replied. He went to the Buddha, bowed, and sat down to one side. The Buddha said to him, “Evamāvuso”ti kho sāti bhikkhu kevaṭṭaputto tassa bhikkhuno paṭissutvā yena bhagavā tenupasaṅkami; upasaṅkamitvā bhagavantaṁ abhivādetvā ekamantaṁ nisīdi. Ekamantaṁ nisinnaṁ kho sātiṁ bhikkhuṁ kevaṭṭaputtaṁ bhagavā etadavoca: “Is it really true, Sāti, that you have such a harmful misconception: “saccaṁ kira te, sāti, evarūpaṁ pāpakaṁ diṭṭhigataṁ uppannaṁ: ‘As I understand the Buddha’s teaching, it is this very same consciousness that roams and transmigrates, not another’?” ‘tathāhaṁ bhagavatā dhammaṁ desitaṁ ājānāmi yathā tadevidaṁ viññāṇaṁ sandhāvati saṁsarati, anaññan’”ti? “Indeed, sir. As I understand the Buddha’s teaching, it is this very same consciousness that roams and transmigrates, not another.” “Evaṁ byā kho ahaṁ, bhante, bhagavatā dhammaṁ desitaṁ ājānāmi yathā tadevidaṁ viññāṇaṁ sandhāvati saṁsarati, anaññan”ti. “Sāti, what is that consciousness?” “Katamaṁ taṁ, sāti, viññāṇan”ti? “Sir, he is the one who speaks, the one who knows, who experiences the results of good and bad deeds in all the different realms.” “Yvāyaṁ, bhante, vado vedeyyo tatra tatra kalyāṇapāpakānaṁ kammānaṁ vipākaṁ paṭisaṁvedetī”ti. “Futile man, who on earth have you ever known me to teach in that way? “Kassa nu kho nāma tvaṁ, moghapurisa, mayā evaṁ dhammaṁ desitaṁ ājānāsi? Haven’t I said in many ways that consciousness is dependently originated, that without a cause, consciousness does not come to be? Nanu mayā, moghapurisa, anekapariyāyena paṭiccasamuppannaṁ viññāṇaṁ vuttaṁ, aññatra paccayā natthi viññāṇassa sambhavoti? But still you misrepresent me by your wrong grasp, harm yourself, and brim with much wickedness. Atha ca pana tvaṁ, moghapurisa, attanā duggahitena amhe ceva abbhācikkhasi, attānañca khaṇasi, bahuñca apuññaṁ pasavasi. This will be for your lasting harm and suffering.” Tañhi te, moghapurisa, bhavissati dīgharattaṁ ahitāya dukkhāyā”ti. Then the Buddha said to the mendicants, Atha kho bhagavā bhikkhū āmantesi: “What do you think, mendicants? “Taṁ kiṁ maññatha, bhikkhave, Has this mendicant Sāti kindled even a spark of ardor in this teaching and training?” api nāyaṁ sāti bhikkhu kevaṭṭaputto usmīkatopi imasmiṁ dhammavinaye”ti? “How could that be, sir? “Kiñhi siyā, bhante? No, sir.” No hetaṁ, bhante”ti. When this was said, Sāti sat silent, dismayed, shoulders drooping, downcast, depressed, with nothing to say. Evaṁ vutte, sāti bhikkhu kevaṭṭaputto tuṇhībhūto maṅkubhūto pattakkhandho adhomukho pajjhāyanto appaṭibhāno nisīdi. Knowing this, the Buddha said, Atha kho bhagavā sātiṁ bhikkhuṁ kevaṭṭaputtaṁ tuṇhībhūtaṁ maṅkubhūtaṁ pattakkhandhaṁ adhomukhaṁ pajjhāyantaṁ appaṭibhānaṁ viditvā sātiṁ bhikkhuṁ kevaṭṭaputtaṁ etadavoca: “Futile man, you will be known by your own harmful misconception. “paññāyissasi kho tvaṁ, moghapurisa, etena sakena pāpakena diṭṭhigatena. I’ll question the mendicants about this.” Idhāhaṁ bhikkhū paṭipucchissāmī”ti. Then the Buddha said to the mendicants, Atha kho bhagavā bhikkhū āmantesi: “Mendicants, do you understand my teachings as Sāti does, when he misrepresents me by his wrong grasp, harms himself, and brims with much wickedness?” “tumhepi me, bhikkhave, evaṁ dhammaṁ desitaṁ ājānātha yathāyaṁ sāti bhikkhu kevaṭṭaputto attanā duggahitena amhe ceva abbhācikkhati, attānañca khaṇati, bahuñca apuññaṁ pasavatī”ti? “No, sir. “No hetaṁ, bhante. For in many ways the Buddha has told us that consciousness is dependently originated, that without a cause, consciousness does not come to be.” Anekapariyāyena hi no, bhante, paṭiccasamuppannaṁ viññāṇaṁ vuttaṁ bhagavatā, aññatra paccayā natthi viññāṇassa sambhavo”ti. “Good, good, mendicants! “Sādhu sādhu, bhikkhave. It’s good that you understand my teaching like this. Sādhu kho me tumhe, bhikkhave, evaṁ dhammaṁ desitaṁ ājānātha. For in many ways I have told you that consciousness is dependently originated, that without a cause, consciousness does not come to be. Anekapariyāyena hi vo, bhikkhave, paṭiccasamuppannaṁ viññāṇaṁ vuttaṁ mayā, aññatra paccayā natthi viññāṇassa sambhavo”ti. But still this Sāti misrepresents me by his wrong grasp, harms himself, and brims with much wickedness. Atha ca panāyaṁ sāti bhikkhu kevaṭṭaputto attanā duggahitena amhe ceva abbhācikkhati, attānañca khaṇati, bahuñca apuññaṁ pasavati. This will be for his lasting harm and suffering. Tañhi tassa moghapurisassa bhavissati dīgharattaṁ ahitāya dukkhāya. Consciousness is reckoned according to the very same condition dependent upon which it arises. “Yaṁ yadeva, bhikkhave, paccayaṁ paṭicca uppajjati viññāṇaṁ, tena teneva viññāṇantveva saṅkhyaṁ gacchati. Consciousness that arises dependent on the eye and sights is reckoned as eye consciousness. Cakkhuñca paṭicca rūpe ca uppajjati viññāṇaṁ, cakkhuviññāṇantveva saṅkhyaṁ gacchati; Consciousness that arises dependent on the ear and sounds is reckoned as ear consciousness. sotañca paṭicca sadde ca uppajjati viññāṇaṁ, sotaviññāṇantveva saṅkhyaṁ gacchati; Consciousness that arises dependent on the nose and smells is reckoned as nose consciousness. ghānañca paṭicca gandhe ca uppajjati viññāṇaṁ, ghānaviññāṇantveva saṅkhyaṁ gacchati; Consciousness that arises dependent on the tongue and tastes is reckoned as tongue consciousness. jivhañca paṭicca rase ca uppajjati viññāṇaṁ, jivhāviññāṇantveva saṅkhyaṁ gacchati; Consciousness that arises dependent on the body and touches is reckoned as body consciousness. kāyañca paṭicca phoṭṭhabbe ca uppajjati viññāṇaṁ, kāyaviññāṇantveva saṅkhyaṁ gacchati; Consciousness that arises dependent on the mind and ideas is reckoned as mind consciousness. manañca paṭicca dhamme ca uppajjati viññāṇaṁ, manoviññāṇantveva saṅkhyaṁ gacchati. It’s like fire, which is reckoned according to the very same condition dependent upon which it burns. Seyyathāpi, bhikkhave, yaṁ yadeva paccayaṁ paṭicca aggi jalati tena teneva saṅkhyaṁ gacchati. A fire that burns dependent on logs is reckoned as a log fire. Kaṭṭhañca paṭicca aggi jalati, kaṭṭhaggitveva saṅkhyaṁ gacchati; A fire that burns dependent on twigs is reckoned as a twig fire. sakalikañca paṭicca aggi jalati, sakalikaggitveva saṅkhyaṁ gacchati; A fire that burns dependent on grass is reckoned as a grass fire. tiṇañca paṭicca aggi jalati, tiṇaggitveva saṅkhyaṁ gacchati; A fire that burns dependent on cow-dung is reckoned as a cow-dung fire. gomayañca paṭicca aggi jalati, gomayaggitveva saṅkhyaṁ gacchati; A fire that burns dependent on husks is reckoned as a husk fire. thusañca paṭicca aggi jalati, thusaggitveva saṅkhyaṁ gacchati; A fire that burns dependent on rubbish is reckoned as a rubbish fire. saṅkārañca paṭicca aggi jalati, saṅkāraggitveva saṅkhyaṁ gacchati. In the same way, consciousness is reckoned according to the very same condition dependent upon which it arises. … Evameva kho, bhikkhave, yaṁ yadeva paccayaṁ paṭicca uppajjati viññāṇaṁ, tena teneva saṅkhyaṁ gacchati. Cakkhuñca paṭicca rūpe ca uppajjati viññāṇaṁ, cakkhuviññāṇantveva saṅkhyaṁ gacchati; sotañca paṭicca sadde ca uppajjati viññāṇaṁ, sotaviññāṇantveva saṅkhyaṁ gacchati, ghānañca paṭicca gandhe ca uppajjati viññāṇaṁ, ghānaviññāṇantveva saṅkhyaṁ gacchati, jivhañca paṭicca rase ca uppajjati viññāṇaṁ, jivhāviññāṇantveva saṅkhyaṁ gacchati. Kāyañca paṭicca phoṭṭhabbe ca uppajjati viññāṇaṁ, kāyaviññāṇantveva saṅkhyaṁ gacchati. Manañca paṭicca dhamme ca uppajjati viññāṇaṁ, manoviññāṇantveva saṅkhyaṁ gacchati. Mendicants, do you see that this has come to be?” Bhūtamidanti, bhikkhave, passathā”ti? “Yes, sir.” “Evaṁ, bhante”. “Do you see that it came to be with that as fuel?” “Tadāhārasambhavanti, bhikkhave, passathā”ti? “Yes, sir.” “Evaṁ, bhante”. “Do you see that when that fuel ceases, what has come to be is liable to cease?” “Tadāhāranirodhā yaṁ bhūtaṁ, taṁ nirodhadhammanti, bhikkhave, passathā”ti? “Yes, sir.” “Evaṁ, bhante”. “Does doubt arise when you’re uncertain whether or not this has come to be?” “Bhūtamidaṁ nossūti, bhikkhave, kaṅkhato uppajjati vicikicchā”ti? “Yes, sir.” “Evaṁ, bhante”. “Does doubt arise when you’re uncertain whether or not this has come to be with that as fuel?” “Tadāhārasambhavaṁ nossūti, bhikkhave, kaṅkhato uppajjati vicikicchā”ti? “Yes, sir.” “Evaṁ, bhante”. “Does doubt arise when you’re uncertain whether or not when that fuel ceases, what has come to be is liable to cease?” “Tadāhāranirodhā yaṁ bhūtaṁ, taṁ nirodhadhammaṁ nossūti, bhikkhave, kaṅkhato uppajjati vicikicchā”ti? “Yes, sir.” “Evaṁ, bhante”. “Is doubt given up in someone who truly sees with right understanding that this has come to be?” “Bhūtamidanti, bhikkhave, yathābhūtaṁ sammappaññāya passato yā vicikicchā sā pahīyatī”ti? “Yes, sir.” “Evaṁ, bhante”. “Is doubt given up in someone who truly sees with right understanding that this has come to be with that as fuel?” “Tadāhārasambhavanti, bhikkhave, yathābhūtaṁ sammappaññāya passato yā vicikicchā sā pahīyatī”ti? “Yes, sir.” “Evaṁ, bhante”. “Is doubt given up in someone who truly sees with right understanding that when that fuel ceases, what has come to be is liable to cease?” “Tadāhāranirodhā yaṁ bhūtaṁ, taṁ nirodhadhammanti, bhikkhave, yathābhūtaṁ sammappaññāya passato yā vicikicchā sā pahīyatī”ti? “Yes, sir.” “Evaṁ, bhante”. “Are you free of doubt as to whether this has come to be?” “Bhūtamidanti, bhikkhave, itipi vo ettha nibbicikicchā”ti? “Yes, sir.” “Evaṁ, bhante”. “Are you free of doubt as to whether this has come to be with that as fuel?” “Tadāhārasambhavanti, bhikkhave, itipi vo ettha nibbicikicchā”ti? “Yes, sir.” “Evaṁ, bhante”. “Are you free of doubt as to whether when that fuel ceases, what has come to be is liable to cease?” “Tadāhāranirodhā yaṁ bhūtaṁ taṁ nirodhadhammanti, bhikkhave, itipi vo ettha nibbicikicchā”ti? “Yes, sir.” “Evaṁ, bhante”. “Have you truly seen clearly with right understanding that this has come to be?” “Bhūtamidanti, bhikkhave, yathābhūtaṁ sammappaññāya sudiṭṭhan”ti? “Yes, sir.” “Evaṁ, bhante”. “Have you truly seen clearly with right understanding that this has come to be with that as fuel?” “Tadāhārasambhavanti, bhikkhave, yathābhūtaṁ sammappaññāya sudiṭṭhan”ti? “Yes, sir.” “Evaṁ, bhante”. “Have you truly seen clearly with right understanding that when that fuel ceases, what has come to be is liable to cease?” “Tadāhāranirodhā yaṁ bhūtaṁ taṁ nirodhadhammanti, bhikkhave, yathābhūtaṁ sammappaññāya sudiṭṭhan”ti? “Yes, sir.” “Evaṁ, bhante”. “Pure and bright as this view is, mendicants, if you cling to it, dally with it, treasure it, and treat it as your own, would you be understanding my simile of the teaching as a raft: for crossing over, not for holding on?” “Imañce tumhe, bhikkhave, diṭṭhiṁ evaṁ parisuddhaṁ evaṁ pariyodātaṁ allīyetha kelāyetha dhanāyetha mamāyetha, api nu me tumhe, bhikkhave, kullūpamaṁ dhammaṁ desitaṁ ājāneyyātha nittharaṇatthāya no gahaṇatthāyā”ti? “No, sir.” “No hetaṁ, bhante”. “Pure and bright as this view is, mendicants, if you don’t cling to it, dally with it, treasure it, and treat it as your own, would you be understanding my simile of the teaching as a raft: for crossing over, not for holding on?” “Imañce tumhe, bhikkhave, diṭṭhiṁ evaṁ parisuddhaṁ evaṁ pariyodātaṁ na allīyetha na kelāyetha na dhanāyetha na mamāyetha, api nu me tumhe, bhikkhave, kullūpamaṁ dhammaṁ desitaṁ ājāneyyātha nittharaṇatthāya no gahaṇatthāyā”ti? “Yes, sir.” “Evaṁ, bhante”.
From there the claim is made that “fire” means some vedic sense of the word which is actually an eternal thing, and so the mind in nibbana is like eternal fire: even when it’s nirodha/nirujjhati it’s still eternally existent. But, the checkmate obliterates this, too: if that’s the case, and nirodha/nirujjhati inexplicably doesn’t mean to cease utterly for consciousness, then it doesn’t mean that for suffering, either. And this is exactly what the Buddha was pointing out in the sutta referenced: if eternal consciousness exists, the path cannot.
Further, the Buddha did not always use Vedic terms identical to their normal usage. That’s a very well established fact. So, there’s zero reason to assume he was using fire in that sense, and, considering his clear explanations about what he actually meant, every reason to believe he meant fire in the more conventional sense: something dependent that ceases without fuel. Exactly as he said.
Hence, it’s kind of bizarre that people do gymnastics to ostensibly create an eternal consciousness. The Buddha utterly obliterated this view in no uncertain terms repeatedly in the very suttas people use to claim the opposite.