user-1: according to wikipedia anyway:

The noumenon (/ˈnɒuːmɨnɒn/) is a posited object or event that is known
  (if at all) without the use of the senses.

I know that the term is used in Buddhism, at least after its sinification. Often noumenon seems to mean reality itself, the buddha nature.
Avoiding that last gloss, may I ask if the "noumenon" is "mind"?
And whether extinction, be that impermanence, nirvana or final nirvana, is noumenally real?

user4722: Well actually in the teachings with regard to the sense-consciousnesses, six are enumerated:

Auditory consciousness (sense of hearing, the ear, its "objects" like sounds)
Visual consciousness (sense of seeing, the eye, its "objects" like sights)
Scent consciousness (sense of smelling, the nose, " " smells/scents/odors/aromas)
Taste consciousness (sense of tasting, the tongue, " " tastes)
Tactile consciousness (sense of touching, the body/skin, " " textures, etc.)
Mind consciousness, or mental consciousness

The raw perceptions of the first 5 themselves have no dialogue, no commentary, no "story" ... the sixth one can meld and blend the first 5
So in Buddha's teachings, there is nothing outside the Six sense-consciousnesses, and therefore it seems untenable that one could argue that mind is "knowable but beyond the senses" unless one is referring to a different breakdown of the sense faculties, their focal points/objects, and the combined consciousness.
You should know that it is possible for a yogin to "withdraw" from the five coarse sense perceptions and experience the luminosity and delight of the sixth sense-consciousness.  There are instructions in the suttas/sutras, most notable is perhaps the Buddha's discourse on breathing meditation, which is in most traditions the foundation to introspection, insight, attainment, and liberation.

user745: I think that this might be the result of a translation problem. The concept of a noumenon in western philosophy is very foreign to Buddhism I think. In western philosophy a noumenon is the opposite of a phenomenon. A phenomenon is something that is experienced, whereas a noumenon is something that is somehow outside of experience all together but somehow exists anyways.
Most forms of Buddhism don't settle well with the idea of any kind of reality having some sort of existence that is independent like that because it falls into the error of essentialism, or at least it appears to.
I think you may be coming across this word in an off translation or something relying on such a translation, because I suspect a translator may be trying to translate the concept of 體用 (tǐ yòng, usually now translated as essence and function) as noumena-phenomena, but I don't think this is a very good comparison at all. Definately the term 體 does not mean noumena, but something more like the nature of something.

-1: <p>according to wikipedia anyway:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>The noumenon (/ˈnɒuːmɨnɒn/) is a posited object or event that is known
  (if at all) without the use of the senses.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>I know that the term is used in Buddhism, at least after its sinification. Often noumenon seems to mean reality itself, the buddha nature.</p>

<p>Avoiding that last gloss, may I ask if the "noumenon" is "mind"?</p>

<p>And whether extinction, be that impermanence, nirvana or final nirvana, is noumenally real?</p>
 4722: <p>Well actually in the teachings with regard to the sense-consciousnesses, six are enumerated:</p>

<ol>
<li>Auditory consciousness (sense of hearing, the ear, its "objects" like sounds)</li>
<li>Visual consciousness (sense of seeing, the eye, its "objects" like sights)</li>
<li>Scent consciousness (sense of smelling, the nose, " " smells/scents/odors/aromas)</li>
<li>Taste consciousness (sense of tasting, the tongue, " " tastes)</li>
<li>Tactile consciousness (sense of touching, the body/skin, " " textures, etc.)</li>
<li>Mind consciousness, or mental consciousness</li>
</ol>

<p>The raw perceptions of the first 5 themselves have no dialogue, no commentary, no "story" ... the sixth one can meld and blend the first 5</p>

<p>So in Buddha's teachings, there is nothing outside the Six sense-consciousnesses, and therefore it seems untenable that one could argue that mind is "knowable but beyond the senses" unless one is referring to a different breakdown of the sense faculties, their focal points/objects, and the combined consciousness.</p>

<p>You should know that it is possible for a yogin to "withdraw" from the five coarse sense perceptions and experience the luminosity and delight of the sixth sense-consciousness.  There are instructions in the suttas/sutras, most notable is perhaps the Buddha's discourse on breathing meditation, which is in most traditions the foundation to introspection, insight, attainment, and liberation.</p>
 745: <p>I think that this might be the result of a translation problem. The concept of a noumenon in western philosophy is very foreign to Buddhism I think. In western philosophy a noumenon is the opposite of a phenomenon. A phenomenon is something that is experienced, whereas a noumenon is something that is somehow outside of experience all together but somehow exists anyways.</p>

<p>Most forms of Buddhism don't settle well with the idea of any kind of reality having some sort of existence that is independent like that because it falls into the error of essentialism, or at least it appears to.</p>

<p>I think you may be coming across this word in an off translation or something relying on such a translation, because I suspect a translator may be trying to translate the concept of 體用 (tǐ yòng, usually now translated as essence and function) as noumena-phenomena, but I don't think this is a very good comparison at all. Definately the term 體 does not mean noumena, but something more like the nature of something.</p>
