Not annihilation, so does that means that there are still “something” exists after an Arahant had passed away? Or there is “nothing” left at all? No dukkha, but no sukkha ad well, since there is “nothing” left?
A puthujjana will crack his head trying to figure out what’s is it like after an Arahant had passed away, but he will continue cracking his head forever…if he remains as a puthujjana!
Dhammapada verse 92:
Arahats do not hoard (anything); when taking food they reflect well over it (i.e., in accordance with the three parinnas). They have as their object liberation from existence, that is, Nibbana which is Void and Signless.
Their destination, like the course of birds in the air, cannot be traced.
Maybe the following text can shed some light for a puthujjana…
A plausible explanation is necessary for the traditional silence regarding the state of the arahant after death. Existence in the world implies time and space. One exists within a particular period in a particular space or locality. If one passes beyond time and beyond space, it is not possible to speak of existence with reference to such a one. To speak of both time and space one needs a point of reference, e.g. A is 50 years old. This means 50 years have passed since the event of A’s birth. If A is not born, it is impossible to speak of “time” or existence with reference to him. Similarly with space. Without points of reference it is not possible to grasp space. There is a definite distance between any two specific points. Nor can one speak of direction without a point of reference. When the notion of “I,” which is the point of personal reference, is eradicated, one goes beyond time, beyond space, and beyond causality. Therefore it is not possible to speak of the liberated being as existing or not existing.
Here we are reminded of a statement made by Fritjof Capra in his Tao of Physics relevant to our present context. He states: “Physicists can ‘experience’ the four dimensional space-time world through the abstract mathematical formalism of their theories, but their visual imagination, like everybody else’s, is limited to the three-dimensional world of the senses. Our language and thought patterns have evolved in this three-dimensional world and therefore we find it extremely hard to deal with the four-dimensional reality of relativistic physics.”[99] Thus, when the four-dimensional reality too eludes the perceptual experience of the average man, how can Nibbana, which transcends all these four dimensions, come within mere verbal experience? Therefore it is impossible to speak of the arahant’s state in terms of existence or non-existence.
From: https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/desilva/wheel407.html