Many lifetimes of paramita development needed to be aryan?

[retrofuturist]

Greetings,

You have not shown anything from the commentaries - or any text - that supports your position that the perfections require many, many multiple lives to become ariya. You claim it, but you really need to back it up.

Hear, hear!

Metta,
Retro.

[retrofuturist]

Greetings venerable Paññāsikhara,

Looks like this is the "Dhamma-Vinaya Only Forum", not the "General Theravada Discussion Forum" after all, huh?

As I stated last time you raised this perception, the Theravadin commentaries themselves state that when there is conflict between the Tipitaka and the Commentaries, the Tipitaka takes precedence. That is the commentarial view. Given that, what is your objection based on?

Also, to the best of my knowledge, there has been no moderation or deletion or anyone's posts in this discussion. Everyone here is posting as a member and no authority has been exerted by anyone.



Metta,
Retro.

[Paññāsikhara]

Perhaps we could start counting from the time Angulimala started out in a career of mass murder?

We could. But I am not at all sure why we should. Do we have evidence that the time when he started his career as such he had hitherto not engaged in any sort of wholesome activities at all? In fact, evidence suggests the contrary, that even in that one life, he had lived for some time as an admirable spiritual practitioner. How about prior to that life? Again, we do not know.

Hi Bhante

Furthermore, if one wished, there is supporting evidence in the form of the Devadatta saga.

metta
Jack

For the Devadatta sage, I recommend reading Ray's Buddhist Saints in India. The Sthaviravadins really stitched him up good and proper.

[Virgo]

I've provided a link to a whole online book replete with such quotes from the Tipitika. Since people don't want to leaf through it, I will spend some of the day tomorrow compiling quotes from the scriptures and post them here online. Good thing I don't have to work until the evening.

See you all then.

Kevin

[Ben]

Hi Venerable,

Looks like this is the "Dhamma-Vinaya Only Forum", not the "General Theravada Discussion Forum" after all, huh?

No, that's not true. The commentaries are very highly regarded and the Visuddhimagga is a constant companion of mine which has, and continues to be, a precious text which illuminates the path.
kind regards

Ben

[Paññāsikhara]

Greetings venerable Paññāsikhara,

Looks like this is the "Dhamma-Vinaya Only Forum", not the "General Theravada Discussion Forum" after all, huh?

As I stated last time you raised this perception, the Theravadin commentaries themselves state that when there is conflict between the Tipitaka and the Commentaries, the Tipitaka takes precedence. That is the commentarial view. Given that, what is your objection based on?

Also, to the best of my knowledge, there has been no moderation or deletion or anyone's posts in this discussion.

Metta,
Retro.

So where is the conflict such that one would need to reject later works? I do not actually see a conflict.

Note: I am also not arguing that one "must" have practiced the paramis in the past, because I see no clear cut evidence either way. But on the other hand, I feel that there is no evidence to state categorically that past parami practice is "not needed" at all. Case studies in the suttas themselves are inconclusive, because they do not specify a "starting point", and so cannot be generalized.

[BlackBird]

For the Devadatta sage, I recommend reading Ray's Buddhist Saints in India. The Sthaviravadins really stitched him up good and proper.

Indeed, here's the relevant extract from the aforementioned text available online, for anyone interested:
http://www.leighb.com/Devadatta.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

With full awareness of the historical reality, I still think such examples support the argument that those who build up perfections for a long, long time are still very capable of going 'bad.'

metta
Jack

[Ben]

Hi Jack
Thank you for that. But does it address the overriding concern of this thread, which is, is it necessary to develop the paramitta for multiple lives to achieve enlightenment in this life?
metta

Ben

[Paññāsikhara]

Seems a bit strange to quote my own post, but perhaps it would be helpful, as nobody seems to have noticed the Pali.

According to Theravada it is possible to achieve enlightenment in this lifetime, but only if you have been developing all of the perfections for many. many lifetimes already.

That's not true at all.

What requires "developing all of the perfections for many. many lifetimes" is only for those who aspire to be Buddhas in accordance with the commentarial writings on bodhisattas.

Extreme, broad-brush and factually inaccurate comments such as the above are not beneficial to anyone.

I was responding to Retro's statement ""developing all of the perfections for many. many lifetimes" is only for those who aspire to be Buddhas" (emphasis added).

According to the Theravada, developing the perfections for many, many lifetimes is also for savakas and paccekabuddhas, too, not just those on the path to great awakening.
Check out the commentary to the Theragatha, i 10.

Tadatthato pana yathā mahābodhisattānaṃ heṭṭhimaparicchedena cattāri asaṅkhyeyyāni kappānaṃ satasahassañca bodhisambhārasambharaṇaṃ icchitabbaṃ majjhimaparicchedena aṭṭha asaṅkhyeyyāni kappānaṃ satasahassañca, uparimaparicchedena soḷasa asaṅkhyeyyāni kappānaṃ satasahassañca ete ca bhedā paññādhikasaddhādhikavīriyādhikavasena veditabbā. Paññādhikānañhi saddhā mandā hoti paññā tikkhā, tato ca upāyakosallassa visadanipuṇabhāvena nacirasseva pāramiyo pāripūriṃ gacchanti. Saddhādhikānaṃ paññā majjhimā hotīti tesaṃ nātisīghaṃ nātisaṇikaṃ pāramiyo pāripūriṃ gacchanti. Vīriyādhikānaṃ pana paññā mandā hotīti tesaṃ cireneva pāramiyo pāripūriṃ gacchanti.

Na evaṃ paccekabodhisattānaṃ. Tesañhi satipi paññādhikabhāve dve asaṅkhyeyyāni kappānaṃ satasahassañca bodhisambhārasambharaṇaṃ icchitabbaṃ, na tato oraṃ. Saddhādhikavīriyādhikāpi vuttaparicchedato paraṃ katipaye eva kappe atikkamitvā paccekasambodhiṃ abhisambujjhanti, na tatiyaṃ asaṅkhyeyyanti.

Sāvakabodhisattānaṃ pana yesaṃ aggasāvakabhāvāya abhinīhāro, tesaṃ ekaṃ asaṅkhyeyyaṃ kappānaṃ satasahassañca sambhārasambharaṇaṃ icchitabbaṃ. Yesaṃ mahāsāvakabhāvāya, tesaṃ kappānaṃ satasahassameva, tathā buddhassa mātāpitūnaṃ upaṭṭhākassa puttassa ca.

Basically:
Mahabodhisattas (ie. those seeking full awakening) need four incalculable and 100 000 aeons of accumulating the requisites to awakening. ...
Paccekabodhisattas (ie. those seeking paccekabuddha awakening) need two incalculable and 100 000 aeons ...
Savakabodhisattas (ie. those seeking arhatship) have distinctions: chief savakas (eg. like Sariputta and Moggalana) need one incalculable and 100 000; great disciples (the top 80, eg. Mahakassapa) need 100 000 aeons.

Now, that is sufficient to refute Retro's comments that it is only Mahabodhisattas seeking full Buddhahood, but not sufficient to support Virgos claims that basically everyone requires it. Moreover, these claims are viz final awakening, not ariya status. However, given max distance is 7 lifetimes, the point still stands, 100 000 aeons minus 7 lives is still basically 100 000 aeons (rounding up!)

I also asked Prof T Endo (formerly of Kelaniya Uni, Sri Lanka, now at HKU) about this, and I've sat through a lot of his classes, and this is also how he understands it. He's a specialist in this area, actually, having written a nice book about the idea of the Buddha in the Theravada, from early to late periods.

That regular (sic) arhats or ariyas are not mentioned is the difficulty I mention above. The above does not confirm it, but it is suggestive that a heck of a lot of time is needed in general. Claims of suttas like the Satipatthana etc. are not conclusive to me either, they only indicate that from the point of cultivating that particular requisite, attainment made swiftly be made. However, the perfections include others, like giving, and I feel that these are in general cultivated prior. But for how long? Starting from when? This is the difficulty.

[retrofuturist]

Greetings,

Putting together the collective commentarial and sutta sources, it would appear that parami-based path takes 100 000 aeons to attain arahantship, and a satipatthana-based path takes 7 years.

I was responding to Retro's statement ""developing all of the perfections for many. many lifetimes" is only for those who aspire to be Buddhas"

And I happily retract it based on the quotation you provide. If people want to spend 100 000 aeons on a parami-based path to arahant-hood that is described only in the post-canonical literature then I wish them well.

Metta,
Retro.

[retrofuturist]

Greetings venerable Paññāsikhara,

So where is the conflict such that one would need to reject later works? I do not actually see a conflict.

Well actually, there isn't any yet, because Virgo has yet to provide anything even from the commentaries that supports his argument that "it is possible to achieve enlightenment in this lifetime, but only if you have been developing all of the perfections for many. many lifetimes already".

If he even something quoted from the commentaries to support his claims it would be a welcome change.

Metta,
Retro.

[robertk]

Greetings venerable Paññāsikhara,

Tilt, and everyone else for that matter, what would your thoughts be, with reference to the tradition if you will, on when to start calculating?

Perhaps we could start counting from the time Angulimala started out in a career of mass murder?

Could someone with the alleged "many lifetimes of paramita development needed to be aryan" tucked under his belt commit such horrendous murders? It just doesn't stack up. A mass murderer is a long long way from any kind of spiritual "perfection".

Yet, within a short time of encountering the Buddha and the Dhamma, he went from mass-murderer to arahant.

This demonstrates the efficacy of the Dhamma as a means to arahantship in this very life... without many kappa of paramita development. Attributing it to paramita development rather than the Buddha's intervention, in my opinion, diminishes the value placed on the Dhamma as a vehicle for enlightenment and transformation.

Metta,
Retro.

In the Maha-Sutasoma Jataka (no. 458),
Angulimala in a former life was King Brahmadatta. His cook could not obtain
meat and therefore he served him part of a human body. The King had been a
Yakka in a former birth and had accumulated liking for human flesh. He could
not resist having humans killed to obtain human flesh.
Thus he became a man-eater. Later in that same life he was able to overcome his desire for human flesh. He then went on to develop wisdom as he had done also in the past. He had accumulations for violence and for wisdom - in his last life as angulimala both of these became obvious. Nothing unusual I think?

[robertk]

Greetings venerable Paññāsikhara,

So where is the conflict such that one would need to reject later works? I do not actually see a conflict.

Well actually, there isn't any yet, because Virgo has yet to provide anything even from the commentaries that supports his argument that "it is possible to achieve enlightenment in this lifetime, but only if you have been developing all of the perfections for many. many lifetimes already".

If he even something quoted from the commentaries to support his claims it would be a welcome change.

Metta,
Retro.

http://www.abhidhamma.org/Paramis-%20pe ... nsight.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Introduction

It should be noted that in established Theravada tradition the paramis are not regarded as a discipline peculiar to candidates for Buddhahood alone but as practices which must be fulfilled by all aspirants to enlightenment and deliverance, whether as Buddhas paccekabuddhas, or disciples. What distinguishes the supreme bodhisattva from aspirants in the other two vehicles is the degree to which the paramis must be cultivated and the length of time they must be pursued. But the qualities themselves are universal requisites for deliverance, which all must fulfill to at least a minimal degree LO merit the fruits of the liberating path.

The present translation has been based on the version in the Cariyapitaka Atthakatha, in the Burmese-script Sixth Council edition. This has been abridged in places in deference to the size limits of a Wheel booklet. For a translation of the complete text, the reader is directed to my translation of the Brahmajala Sutta and its commentaries, The Discourse on the All-Embracing Net of Views (BPS 1978, 1992), Part IV.

BHIKKHU BODHI

[retrofuturist]

Greetings Robert,

Thank you for that, but no one here is disputing that paramitas are positive attributes, and that individually (though not necessarily as a set called paramitas) that they were taught by the Buddha. I agree with Bhikkhu Bodhi that it is hard to fathom someone becoming enlightened without at least some minimal development in this space.

This discussion is specifically about Virgo's argument that "it is possible to achieve enlightenment in this lifetime, but only if you have been developing all of the perfections for many. many lifetimes already". You are learned in the Abhidhamma and the commentaries - do you have anything that might support or refute his argument?

Metta,
Retro.

[robertk]

Hi Venerable

Then how does one reconcile the prediction at the end of the Satipatthana Sutta?

"Now, if anyone would develop these four frames of reference in this way for seven years, one of two fruits can be expected for him: ...

kind reards

Ben

In fact it is impossible that one without sufficient parami could have even an instant of satipatthana in that life(let alone 7 days!!).
Like the many people these days who take focussing on an object as satipatthana- they are simply increasing silabataparamsa - wrong path. Thus most of us at these times are so bereft of accumulations of panna that even starting to understand what satipatthana is, is very hard.