That’s from a different commentary, no?
1 Like
Same commentary ( udanaatthakatha). Personally I think this should be enough to show, by your own language , it is not a given that he(Ven Dhammapala) is not being metaphorical.
2 Likes
This is getting in to personal opinion territory, which I tried to avoid, but let’s see,
Yes, Nibbana is one of the sabhāvadhamma, and it is possible to use ‘sabhāva’ in context of sabhāvadhamma in senses other than what you seem to be thinking.Let’s take a look at something like the following
saṅkhārānañca sabhāvo sudiṭṭho
By sankhara , sabhāvadhamma except Nibbana is meant. And by sabhāvo what is meant is impermanence and so forth.
And if you indeed looked at the Pali , you would have seen the following at the end of paṭhama nibbāna paṭisaṃyutta suttavaṇṇanā.
yadidaṃ "appatiṭṭha"ntiādīhi vacanehi vaṇṇitaṃ thomitaṃ yathāvuttalakkhaṇaṃ nibbānaṃ, eso eva sakalassa vaṭṭadukkhassa anto pariyosānaṃ tadadhigame sati sabbadukkhābhāvato. tasmā "dukkhassa anto"ti ayameva tassa sabhāvoti dasseti.
Indeed translating Nibbana having as it’s own nature solely that of light is some translators choice. It does not seem even to be sensible english.
This will be my last post in this thread
Dear @moderators I don’t mind if you wish to close this thread.
2 Likes
Thank you for your excellent contributions on this thread.
2 Likes