Challenging the Sotapanna cannot break the Five Precepts View

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
Post Reply
R1111 = rightviewftw
Posts: 1019
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2015 4:17 am

Re: Challenging the Sotapanna cannot break the Five Precepts View

Post by R1111 = rightviewftw » Sun May 07, 2017 3:02 am

1) It is specified that the offense is incurred wether done knowingly or unknowingly of the supposed attainment.
2) let it seem to you
3) I think it does not matter if one is hurt or not.
As i see it it is one thing to criticize a person for misbehaving another is to deny his attainments, third id denying it bssed on a view. There is a difference between thinking it and saying it as well. Another thing is not being restrained in speech and clinging to views presenting ones own guesses and views as facts in general.

In regards to the Vinaya i dont know about the story, lmk if you find out.

I personally dont see any reason to categorically deny people attainments, if they are right then Sadhu if not then it is bad enough as it is for them. if they teach wrong view then it is their problem and they can be challenged for scriptural support to the teachings.
As Ven. Nanavira said the point is to become Ariya yourself, not to worship them or put them on a pedestal. As i see it if this is to be achieved one is better off focusing on one's own attainments.

chownah
Posts: 7327
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Challenging the Sotapanna cannot break the Five Precepts View

Post by chownah » Sun May 07, 2017 4:04 am

I think that we agree that for a sotapanna the first three fetters have faded away. Those three would be (from an10.13) Self-identity views, uncertainty, grasping at precepts & practices....while the other two of the lower fetters have not necessarily faded away with those being (same reference) sensual desire, & ill will.

It seems like a big part of this debate is what does it mean that a sotapanna has not escapaed from sensual desire. Does it mean that the sotapanna has desire but does not act on that desire? I suppose it could mean that....but I think it would also have to mean that the sensual desire of the sotapanna is devoid of intention. Is it possible to have sensual desire without there being any intention involved?

By the way, I am not taking either side in this debate because I think they are both wrong.
chownah

User avatar
binocular
Posts: 5405
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Challenging the Sotapanna cannot break the Five Precepts View

Post by binocular » Sun May 07, 2017 8:06 am

R1111 wrote:In regards to the Vinaya i dont know about the story, lmk if you find out.
You are the one aspiring to ordain, you should know these things, title, chapter, and verse, especially since this is a topic of your interest.
I personally dont see any reason to categorically deny people attainments, if they are right then Sadhu if not then it is bad enough as it is for them. if they teach wrong view then it is their problem and they can be challenged for scriptural support to the teachings.
Here's a real example: I was once acquainted with a Buddhist who was convinced that he was enlightened, he said that he knows exactly what the Buddha knew. He was bossy and patronizing toward me and other people (all lays, including him). Him providing scriptural support for what he claimed was off limits for him, he dismissed the Pali Canon without even having read it. Eventually, I started mocking him and his "enlightenment" (e.g. "So you're enlightened, eh? No s***!"). He didn't understand and kept telling me that I was on the outside, that I didn't know, that I was supposed to do things as he does them (and forget about the Pali Canon). He considered me his student, even though no vow and no agreement to this effect had been made.

In hindsight, I can say that the whole situation was very displeasing, to say the least, for all of us. Given this Buddhist's bossiness and his demand for our submission, I felt jaded, I felt that I am nothing more but a slightly alive thing, a puppet, a cog in the system, and that true happiness can be attained only if one gives in to being such a puppet. I resented the power that he had over us and I resented the system that was making this kind of power-gaming possible.
As Ven. Nanavira said the point is to become Ariya yourself, not to worship them or put them on a pedestal.
I agree with that, however Nanavira Thera is one of the most controversial persons in Buddhism in the last 100 years, so referring to him can be a potentially problematic matter. Buddhist culture still seems to be heavily focused on putting monks and anyone else who seems to have or who claims to have any attainment on a pedestal. I think this can create resentment in ordinary people, which can then become expressed in criticism of those monks and supposedly attained lays, and in denying their attainment. IOW, it's not just about the intentions of an individual critic or denier, it's also something bigger than that, it's systemic.
As i see it if this is to be achieved one is better off focusing on one's own attainments.
Individualism is sometimes nothing but an attempt to maintain the social status quo, however dysfunctional it may be.

User avatar
binocular
Posts: 5405
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Challenging the Sotapanna cannot break the Five Precepts View

Post by binocular » Sun May 07, 2017 8:09 am

chownah wrote:By the way, I am not taking either side in this debate because I think they are both wrong.
Could you say a bit more about why you think that both are wrong?

R1111 = rightviewftw
Posts: 1019
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2015 4:17 am

Re: Challenging the Sotapanna cannot break the Five Precepts View

Post by R1111 = rightviewftw » Sun May 07, 2017 8:38 am

I understand where you are coming from better now with the background provided binocular. I should learn the vinaya indeed but i cant be expected to both train and study the whole tipitaka in two years, which is how long it has been since i was introduced to the Dhamma. Im interested in the topic but it is not important for my training so i study the Sutta pitaka and meditate.

Fwiw after getting a flavor of views within the Theravada i am quite sure that i want to live in the forest alone, keeping a low profile and enjoy solitude and the forest. The diversity of opinions and sangha politics is too much to take on. I dont want to spend my life debating, it is quite stressful. Santa was definitely right about me spending valuable time on relatively useless things here.

chownah
Posts: 7327
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Challenging the Sotapanna cannot break the Five Precepts View

Post by chownah » Sun May 07, 2017 1:44 pm

binocular wrote:
chownah wrote:By the way, I am not taking either side in this debate because I think they are both wrong.
Could you say a bit more about why you think that both are wrong?
I mis-spoke with that comment.
I think that to talk about whether a sotapanna would or would not do this or that is to misrepresent what the concept of a sotapanna is and to make it into an identity. My view is that some people get to the point where they can see the truth of some core teachings and are convinced that the buddha's teachings are pointing to the way things really are and when those people get to that point they don't need to struggle to stay on the path as it is seen that there is no other viable option. They might transgress some "rules" from time to time but they will see their mistakes and will gradually eliminate those transgressions over time. My view is that to mentally copy and paste all the sutta references on the sotapanna to try to make one iron clad definition will not lead to how it really is....I don't think the buddha intended for people to do that....I think the buddha described the essence of one who is convinced of the truth of the path in different ways at different times so that it would be understood by different people. He also taught that the training was like the gradual slope of the ocean floor....he didn't say that there were a few rapid changes.
chownah

User avatar
khlawng
Posts: 225
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2010 2:28 pm

Re: Challenging the Sotapanna cannot break the Five Precepts View

Post by khlawng » Sun May 07, 2017 2:20 pm

:goodpost:

@Chownah
You hit the nail right on the head.
Thanks for penning down your thoughts.

User avatar
binocular
Posts: 5405
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Challenging the Sotapanna cannot break the Five Precepts View

Post by binocular » Sun May 07, 2017 7:49 pm

chownah wrote:I think that to talk about whether a sotapanna would or would not do this or that is to misrepresent what the concept of a sotapanna is and to make it into an identity.
I, too, got that impression. Talking about sotapanna as if it were the same kind of characteristic as, for example, race (ie. something that remains the same regardless of what one does) seems problematic.
My view is that some people get to the point where they can see the truth of some core teachings and are convinced that the buddha's teachings are pointing to the way things really are and when those people get to that point they don't need to struggle to stay on the path as it is seen that there is no other viable option.
This is where I personally struggle to appreciate Dhammic religions. Namely, both in Buddhism as well as in some schools of Hinduism, there is the idea that after a certain point, there is no falling away from the path anymore. Coming from a Christian background, my first association to this is that it is an idea similar to the Protestant idea "once saved, always saved". This Protestant idea is contrasted with the Catholic idea that it is possible to completely fall away even on one's deathbed (and so earn oneself eternal damnation), regardless of the life one has lived up to then.
In the Catholic conception of things, one always has free will (primarily in regard to religious choice and religious committment) as long as one lives (in this body), whereas in the Protestant and the Dhammic, one doesn't seem to have such free will.

So for me here, the question is whether someone who has reached some intermediate stage on the path (such as sotapanna or once-returner) can still change their mind and go back to the run-off-the-mill way of life. And if they can't, what implications does this have, for their free will and for anything else that could be relevant.

User avatar
khlawng
Posts: 225
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2010 2:28 pm

Re: Challenging the Sotapanna cannot break the Five Precepts View

Post by khlawng » Mon May 08, 2017 4:39 am

binocular wrote:...
So for me here, the question is whether someone who has reached some intermediate stage on the path (such as sotapanna or once-returner) can still change their mind and go back to the run-off-the-mill way of life. And if they can't, what implications does this have, for their free will and for anything else that could be relevant.
they don't change their minds per-se.
it takes effort in maintaining the mind-state that promotes sotapanna-hood.
but since sotapannas don't have a permanent mind-state being unenlighten and all,
they are subject to mind-state changes all the time due to anicca.
and as we know it, states can change for the better or for the worst.
how far does it change for the worst, i have no idea and can't venture a guess.
and since kamma is acinteyya, i don't think it matters to define the line where one falls into bad states after death.
so to say someone who is a sotatpanna can maintain this state permanently effortlessly is well,
for me an incorrect concept.
but that wouldn't stop the sutta comy quoting warriors here from making such claims.

santa100
Posts: 2920
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: Challenging the Sotapanna cannot break the Five Precepts View

Post by santa100 » Mon May 08, 2017 5:11 am

Rest assured that as long as there're sutta/comy distorters, there will be sutta/comy protectors. And no, it's not their job to make any claim. Their job is to protect and fight if necessary, to uphold the integrity of the Great Teacher's words. There will come a day their kind will be wiped out and the sound of the Dhamma will go completely silent. But not today.

User avatar
khlawng
Posts: 225
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2010 2:28 pm

Re: Challenging the Sotapanna cannot break the Five Precepts View

Post by khlawng » Mon May 08, 2017 6:47 am

unfortnuately, you missed out the worst kind.
verbatim regurgitators.
they are by far more harmful than distortors.

If all u have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

User avatar
binocular
Posts: 5405
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Challenging the Sotapanna cannot break the Five Precepts View

Post by binocular » Mon May 08, 2017 10:40 am

khlawng wrote:so to say someone who is a sotatpanna can maintain this state permanently effortlessly is well,
for me an incorrect concept.
And yet:
"For a person endowed with virtue, consummate in virtue, there is no need for an act of will, 'May freedom from remorse arise in me.' It is in the nature of things that freedom from remorse arises in a person endowed with virtue, consummate in virtue.

"For a person free from remorse, there is no need for an act of will, 'May joy arise in me.' It is in the nature of things that joy arises in a person free from remorse.

"For a joyful person, there is no need for an act of will, 'May rapture arise in me.' It is in the nature of things that rapture arises in a joyful person.

"For a rapturous person, there is no need for an act of will, 'May my body be serene.' It is in the nature of things that a rapturous person grows serene in body.

"For a person serene in body, there is no need for an act of will, 'May I experience pleasure.' It is in the nature of things that a person serene in body experiences pleasure.

"For a person experiencing pleasure, there is no need for an act of will, 'May my mind grow concentrated.' It is in the nature of things that the mind of a person experiencing pleasure grows concentrated.

"For a person whose mind is concentrated, there is no need for an act of will, 'May I know & see things as they actually are.' It is in the nature of things that a person whose mind is concentrated knows & sees things as they actually are.

"For a person who knows & sees things as they actually are, there is no need for an act of will, 'May I feel disenchantment.' It is in the nature of things that a person who knows & sees things as they actually are feels disenchantment.

"For a person who feels disenchantment, there is no need for an act of will, 'May I grow dispassionate.' It is in the nature of things that a person who feels disenchantment grows dispassionate.

"For a dispassionate person, there is no need for an act of will, 'May I realize the knowledge & vision of release.' It is in the nature of things that a dispassionate person realizes the knowledge & vision of release.

/.../

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
Apparently, from a certain point on, some things are effortless.

User avatar
khlawng
Posts: 225
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2010 2:28 pm

Re: Challenging the Sotapanna cannot break the Five Precepts View

Post by khlawng » Mon May 08, 2017 11:05 am

binocular wrote:
Apparently, from a certain point on, some things are effortless.
absolutely correct.
but i question if a sotapanna has reached this point?
afterall, he is not free from sensual desire and ill will.

santa100
Posts: 2920
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: Challenging the Sotapanna cannot break the Five Precepts View

Post by santa100 » Mon May 08, 2017 2:42 pm

khlawng wrote:unfortnuately, you missed out the worst kind.
verbatim regurgitators.
they are by far more harmful than distortors.
No, distortors destroy the Dhamma. Regurgitators do not.
khlawng wrote:If all u have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
At least try to get the hammer first. It's much worse to have nothing and make up things out of thin air.

User avatar
khlawng
Posts: 225
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2010 2:28 pm

Re: Challenging the Sotapanna cannot break the Five Precepts View

Post by khlawng » Tue May 09, 2017 12:28 am

santa100 wrote: No, distortors destroy the Dhamma. Regurgitators do not.
distortors are easy to spot.
they have a agenda and ulterior motive.
more often they come across as disingenuous.

regurgitators does something worst.
they apply the buddha's teaching without:
context, understanding, and backing it up with experience.
they come across as genuine.
and they end up leading a lot of people down the wrong paths.

so that hammer in the wrong hands destroys more than just the dhamma.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Dhammarakkhito, dudette, Google [Bot], Kim OHara, Majestic-12 [Bot], retrofuturist and 37 guests