What would a sotapanna do?

[perkele]

So to summarize...
I agree with this:

My understanding is that a stream-winner can break any of precepts on very rare conditions and never up to the level of gravity when this will lead him to rebirth as animal or worse Generally, he is very virtuous all the time, for sure. But still - no, he is not an arahant for whom breaking precepts is just an impossibility.

And also with this:

let's not preclude the possibility of getting rid of the worm in a wholesome way

But a harmless solution to such a case seems difficult to come by.

My understanding is Sotapanna can break the five precepts but with the knowledge.

See also Unwholesome done knowingly and unknowingly (the German version is better) - I found this essay helpful at some point in my life, and quite informative (and leaving room for developing one's own judgment).

[dylanj]

A sotāpanna cannot break the 5 precepts.

Then Anāthapiṇḍika the householder, surrounded by about 500 lay followers, went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. So the Blessed One said to Ven. Sāriputta: "Sāriputta, when you know of a householder clothed in white, that he is restrained in terms of the five training rules and that he obtains at will, without difficulty, without hardship, four pleasant mental abidings in the here & now, then if he wants he may state about himself: 'Hell is ended; animal wombs are ended; the state of the hungry shades is ended; states of deprivation, destitution, the bad bourns are ended! I am a stream-winner, steadfast, never again destined for states of woe, headed for self-awakening!'

"Now, in terms of which five training rules is he restrained?

"There is the case where a disciple of the noble ones abstains from taking life, abstains from taking what is not given, abstains from illicit sex, abstains from lying, abstains from distilled & fermented drinks that cause heedlessness.

"These are the five training rules in terms of which he is restrained.

AN 5.279

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html

[Dhammarakkhito]

oh, i see. they aren't guilty of killing, but if you persuade me to believe otherwise i will accept. one thing, the man was so far away from them he quite likely would have died with or without them. also being florida there may have been alligators/crocodiles but certainly the group that recorded and laughed about it were behaving very unwholesomely and making kamma. of course, i think of one sutta where the buddha states that withholding a skillful doctrine from others is a demerit
refer to kālāma sutta when the buddha says 'don't go by (or rely on) logic'
i have supported my view thus far with suttas and i definitely see what you're saying, but we don't have any examples of a sotāpanna intentionally (intention is kamma) taking life. we don't have any examples of the buddha declaring the necessary conditions to be less than 1) allaying the fivefold guilty dread and 2) possessing the four limbs. it is quite almost maybe possible you are onto something, but it doesn't hold my interest

[perkele]

A sotāpanna cannot break the 5 precepts.

/.../

AN 5.279

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html

Again, these are stated as sufficient conditions, which may be overstated (complementing the necessary conditions listed in the "impossibilities", which may be understated).

it is quite almost maybe possible you are onto something, but it doesn't hold my interest

Yeah, we can agree to disagree here.

[LG2V]

I would imagine that a sotapanna, being possessed of a somewhat constant understanding of the impermanence of things, would be able to get over things quickly. Such a person would likely be too happy and too detached to have the amount of strong hatred needed to intentionally kill someone. Similar cases for other violations of precepts, especially their grosser forms.


I may be wrong, but I think that stream-entry is common and attainable in this modern age. I think that anyone who practices Mahasi-style dry insight meditation long and hard enough would attain stream entry. I'm confident that other meditation practices lead there as well.

[Dhammarakkhito]

contrary to what i said earlier, perkele, this thread held my attention. i counter you with sarakāni sutta:

[At Kapilavasthu] Now at that time Sarakaani the Sakyan, who had died, was proclaimed by the Blessed One to be a Stream-Winner, not subject to rebirth in states of woe, assured of enlightenment. At this, a number of the Sakyans, whenever they met each other or came together in company, were indignant and angry, and said scornfully: "A fine thing, a marvelous thing! Nowadays anyone can become a Stream-Winner, if the Blessed One has proclaimed Sarakaani who died to be Stream-Winner... assured of enlightenment! Why, Sarakaani failed in his training and took to drink!"

[...] "Why, Mahaanaama, if these great sal trees could distinguish what is well spoken from what is ill spoken, I would proclaim these great sal trees to be Stream-Winners... bound for enlightenment, how much more so then Sarakaani the Sakyan! Mahaanaama, Sarakaani the Sakyan fulfilled the training at the time of death.'
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .wlsh.html

[robertk]

contrary to what i said earlier, perkele, this thread held my attention. i counter you with sarakāni sutta:

[At Kapilavasthu] Now at that time Sarakaani the Sakyan, who had died, was proclaimed by the Blessed One to be a Stream-Winner, not subject to rebirth in states of woe, assured of enlightenment. At this, a number of the Sakyans, whenever they met each other or came together in company, were indignant and angry, and said scornfully: "A fine thing, a marvelous thing! Nowadays anyone can become a Stream-Winner, if the Blessed One has proclaimed Sarakaani who died to be Stream-Winner... assured of enlightenment! Why, Sarakaani failed in his training and took to drink!"

[...] "Why, Mahaanaama, if these great sal trees could distinguish what is well spoken from what is ill spoken, I would proclaim these great sal trees to be Stream-Winners... bound for enlightenment, how much more so then Sarakaani the Sakyan! Mahaanaama, Sarakaani the Sakyan fulfilled the training at the time of death.'
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .wlsh.html

Could you explain how that is relevant?

[Dhammarakkhito]

yes, i could

[dylanj]

In multiple suttas (Dhp, Rahulovada) the Buddha says that for one who lies, there is no evil they cannot do

[robertk]

THE MINOR READINGS
(KHUDDAKATÄTHA)
translated by NÄNAMOLI

Herein, the * four states of deprivation ' are the hells, animals, the
ghost realm and the body of Asuras (demons). The meaning is that
even if he takes seven existences, he is nevertheless immune from
[rebirth among] them. Having thus shown his abandoning of the
Round of Action's Result, he now said he cannot do the major six
wrongdoings (cha cäbhithänäni abhabbo katum), pointing out the
abandoning of the Round-of-Action, which is the root ofthat Roundof-
Action's-Result. Major wrongdoings (abhithäna) are gross wrongdoings.
These, which he cannot do, are six. They are stated in the
Book of Ones in the way beginning ' Bhikkhus, it is impossible, it
cannot happen, that a person perfected in his view should deprive
his mother of life ' (A. i. 27; M. iii. 64-5), and they should be understood
as the actions consisting in matricide, parricide. Arahanticide,
drawing the blood [of a Perfect One], causing schism in the Community,
and choosing someone other [than the Enlightened One] for
one's teacher. They are mentioned more for the purpose of condemning
the ordinary man's state, since actually a Noble Disciple
whose view is perfected does not even deprive an ant of life (cf.
MA. iv, 108); for an ordinary man does do even such greatly reprehensible
major wrongdoings because his view is not perfected (has no
excellence), but one whose seeing is perfected (has excellence) is
unable to do them. The incapability is mentioned here in order to
show that he does not do them even in the next existence; for in the
next existence, even if he does not know about his own noblediscipleship,
he does not, in virtue of the essential idea [of his
nature], do either these six or [190] [incur] the five risks (see A. iii,
204-6) beginning with normal killing of breathing things,

[DooDoot]

A sotāpanna cannot break the 5 precepts.

I think these monks cannot argue 'unintentionality' in regards to what, based on your ideas, appears to be gross negligence.

[dylanj]

A sotāpanna cannot break the 5 precepts.

I think these monks cannot argue 'unintentionality' in regards to what, based on your ideas, appears to be gross negligence.

I don't understand what you mean.

[DooDoot]

I don't understand what you mean.

These monks are obviously killing many living creatures while they sweep. Whilst it can be claimed the killing is unintentional; such a claim would be extremely negligent; since it is quite obvious sweeping the path kills living creatures, such as ants. Its like driving a large truck without breaks and then claiming you didn't intend to kill the people that were killed when the truck crashed into a shopping mall.

[dylanj]

I don't understand what you mean.

These monks are obviously killing many living creatures while they sweep. Whilst it can be claimed the killing is unintentional; such a claim would be extremely negligent; since it is quite obvious sweeping the path kills living creatures, such as ants. Its like driving a large truck without breaks and then claiming you didn't intend to kill the people that were killed when the truck crashed into a shopping mall.

That's certainly not obvious to me. Why is intention not relevant? Assuming that they are in fact killing bugs, & that intention is irrelevant, then maybe they are not stream-enterers

[DooDoot]

That's certainly not obvious to me. Why is intention not relevant? Assuming that they are in fact killing bugs, & that intention is irrelevant, then maybe they are not stream-enterers

I lived in a forest monastery for some years in Thailand, which, like most Thai forest monasteries, certain monks are reputed to be enlightened. Yet in the monastery, everyone sweeps the path, everyone works in the swamp, everyone works on the building projects in the forest, etc. No exceptions.