Path vs Fruit of stream-entry

A forum for members who wish to develop a deeper understanding of the Pali Canon and associated Commentaries, which for discussion purposes are both treated as authoritative.

Moderator: Mahavihara moderator

rightviewftw
Posts: 1633
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm

Re: Path vs Fruit of stream-entry

Post by rightviewftw » Thu Feb 01, 2018 3:31 pm

theY wrote:
Thu Feb 01, 2018 3:27 pm
rightviewftw wrote:
Thu Feb 01, 2018 12:17 pm
...
Various people are called Sotapanna, ie if Taken as a Pair then there is two Stream Entrants, those guaranteed fruit attainment and those who have the attainement, they are very close but one can recollect the peace and has already cut the 3 fetters.

The Cula Sotapanna is one of those who has a favorable destiny in the next birth it is said in Abhidhamma afaik.


The Cula Sotapanna appeared in MN Mūlapaṇṇāsaka, Alagaddūpamasutta. It is not just an abhidhamma comment.
...Those bhikkhus who have dispelled the three fetters, all of them enter the stream of the Teaching, do not fall from there intending only extinction. My Teaching is so well proclaimed, made manifest, open and threadbare. Those who have some faith in me, some love for me they all are intent on heaven....
Tipitaka memorizing is very important to understand abhidhamma and commentary.
ty, i heard that before too somehow did not recall.

Attainment of Dhamma-Follower one cannot fall away from as i understand.

User avatar
Dhammarakkhito
Posts: 1115
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2017 7:31 am
Contact:

Re: Path vs Fruit of stream-entry

Post by Dhammarakkhito » Sat Feb 03, 2018 5:00 am

why not find out for yourself _/\_

but yeah, read viññāṇa sutta brother
"Just as the ocean has a single taste — that of salt — in the same way, this Dhamma-Vinaya has a single taste: that of release."
— Ud 5.5

https://www.facebook.com/noblebuddhadha ... 34/?type=3

http://seeingthroughthenet.net/
https://sites.google.com/site/santipada ... allytaught

User avatar
Nwad
Posts: 160
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2018 7:24 pm

Re: Path vs Fruit of stream-entry

Post by Nwad » Sun Feb 04, 2018 11:24 am

santa100 wrote:
Sat Apr 15, 2017 1:38 am
I'm not a Sotapanna and so won't be able to provide any info. in an "experiential" sense. But some conceptual info. from Ven. Bodhi's "Eightfold Path" might be useful:
8NP wrote:Insofar as they bind us to the round of becoming, the defilements are classified into a set of ten "fetters" (samyojana) as follows: (1) personality view, (2) doubt, (3) clinging to rules and rituals, (4) sensual desire, (5) aversion, (6) desire for fine-material existence, (7) desire for immaterial existence, (8) conceit, (9) restlessness, and (10) ignorance. The four supramundane paths each eliminate a certain layer of defilements. The first, the path of stream-entry (sotapatti-magga), cuts off the first three fetters, the coarsest of the set, eliminates them so they can never arise again. "Personality view" (sakkaya-ditthi), the view of a truly existent self in the five aggregates, is cut off since one sees the selfless nature of all phenomena. Doubt is eliminated because one has grasped the truth proclaimed by the Buddha, seen it for oneself, and so can never again hang back due to uncertainty. And clinging to rules and rites is removed since one knows that deliverance can be won only through the practice of the Eightfold Path, not through rigid moralism or ceremonial observances.

The path is followed immediately by another state of supramundane consciousness known as the fruit (phala), which results from the path's work of cutting off defilements. Each path is followed by its own fruit, wherein for a few moments the mind enjoys the blissful peace of Nibbana before descending again to the level of mundane consciousness. The first fruit is the fruit of stream-entry, and a person who has gone through the experience of this fruit becomes a "stream-enterer" (sotapanna). He has entered the stream of the Dhamma carrying him to final deliverance. He is bound for liberation and can no longer fall back into the ways of an unenlightened worldling. He still has certain defilements remaining in his mental makeup, and it may take him as long as seven more lives to arrive at the final goal, but he has acquired the essential realization needed to reach it, and there is no way he can fall away.
:goodpost:

rightviewftw
Posts: 1633
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm

Re: Path vs Fruit of stream-entry

Post by rightviewftw » Sun Mar 04, 2018 6:15 pm

santa100 wrote:
Sat Apr 15, 2017 1:38 am
I'm not a Sotapanna and so won't be able to provide any info. in an "experiential" sense. But some conceptual info. from Ven. Bodhi's "Eightfold Path" might be useful:
8NP wrote:...
The path is followed immediately by another state of supramundane consciousness known as the fruit (phala), which results from the path's work of cutting off defilements. Each path is followed by its own fruit, wherein for a few moments the mind enjoys the blissful peace of Nibbana before descending again to the level of mundane consciousness. The first fruit is the fruit of stream-entry, and a person who has gone through the experience of this fruit becomes a "stream-enterer" (sotapanna). He has entered the stream of the Dhamma carrying him to final deliverance. He is bound for liberation and can no longer fall back into the ways of an unenlightened worldling. He still has certain defilements remaining in his mental makeup, and it may take him as long as seven more lives to arrive at the final goal, but he has acquired the essential realization needed to reach it, and there is no way he can fall away.
obviously sounds like Nibbana in the here and now
guidelines for this sub-forum: viewtopic.php?f=19&t=373

Posts should also include support from a reference or a citation (Tipitaka, commentarial, or from a later work from an author representative of the Classical point-of-view).
I have a problem with the bolded part in the classical theravada sub. Afaik Venerable Bhikkhu Bodhi is not considered to be "an author representative of the Classical point-of-view" .
Thread for evidence viewtopic.php?f=29&t=31358

I ask for the posts to be removed if no sufficient Tipitaka support for the bolded part is provided.

santa100
Posts: 2961
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: Path vs Fruit of stream-entry

Post by santa100 » Sun Mar 04, 2018 6:41 pm

rightviewftw wrote:obviously sounds like Nibbana in the here and now
Before jumping to conclusion, please define exactly what you mean when you say "Nibbana in the here and now" and what logic did you use to jump from "a few moments the mind enjoys the blissful peace of Nibbana" to: "Nibbana in the here and now"?

perkele
Posts: 888
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 2:37 pm

Re: Path vs Fruit of stream-entry

Post by perkele » Sun Mar 04, 2018 7:03 pm

Bhikkhu Bodhi wrote:...
The path is followed immediately by another state of supramundane consciousness known as the fruit (phala), which results from the path's work of cutting off defilements. Each path is followed by its own fruit, wherein for a few moments the mind enjoys the blissful peace of Nibbana before descending again to the level of mundane consciousness. The first fruit is the fruit of stream-entry, and a person who has gone through the experience of this fruit becomes a "stream-enterer" (sotapanna). He has entered the stream of the Dhamma carrying him to final deliverance. He is bound for liberation and can no longer fall back into the ways of an unenlightened worldling. He still has certain defilements remaining in his mental makeup, and it may take him as long as seven more lives to arrive at the final goal, but he has acquired the essential realization needed to reach it, and there is no way he can fall away.
rightviewftw wrote:
Sun Mar 04, 2018 6:15 pm
obviously sounds like Nibbana in the here and now
guidelines for this sub-forum: viewtopic.php?f=19&t=373
rightviewftw wrote:I have a problem with the bolded part in the classical theravada sub.
Can you elaborate? Not to clarify what exactly is the problem you perceive is at the very least lazy. At worst stingy. It also seems arrogant.
rightviewftw wrote:
Sun Mar 04, 2018 6:15 pm
Nor is Venerable Bhikkhu Bodhi considered to be "an author representative of the Classical point-of-view"
Thread for evience viewtopic.php?f=29&t=31358
What is the evidence? Please be more clear. What is the (in your eyes heretical, I suppose) doctrine of "nibbana in the here and now"? Is it the idea that at the moment of sotapatti-phala, ... up to arahatta-phala, each time the "peace of nibbana" is experienced? I have heard that interpretation many times, from people who I thought would base their view on the classical commentaries. Do you not think that a sotapanna has "seen nibbana" somehow, and thus now clearly knows what he is striving towards?
Do you believe that nibbana is experienced by arahats all the time, or only at some times when they put their mind to it?

I would be interested in your views, and equally if not more, since this is the Classical Theravada forum in what the classical Theravada position would be if you can explain it.
rightviewftw wrote:I ask for the post to be removed if no sufficient Tipitaka support for the bolded part is provided.
I think it is very bad kamma to call for people's contributions which were made with helpful intent to be removed. What use would that serve if something which you think is wrong should simply be removed? Who would be able to learn anything from it?
AN 3.57 wrote:"Vaccha, whoever prevents another from giving a gift creates three obstructions, three impediments. Which three? He creates an obstruction to the merit of the giver, an obstruction to the recipient's gains, and prior to that he undermines and harms his own self. Whoever prevents another from giving a gift creates these three obstructions, these three impediments.
If there is a problem, point out what you perceive as a problem and clarify and rectify it. Don't be lazy. Don't be stingy.
AN 5.254: Stinginess wrote:"Monks, there are these five forms of stinginess. Which five? Stinginess as to one's monastery [lodgings], stinginess as to one's family [of supporters], stinginess as to one's gains, stinginess as to one's status, and stinginess as to the Dhamma. These are the five forms of stinginess. And the meanest of these five is this: stinginess as to the Dhamma."

[Edited once for small omission: "I would be interested also in the Classical Theravada Position" and once for grammar]
Last edited by perkele on Sun Mar 04, 2018 7:21 pm, edited 2 times in total.

perkele
Posts: 888
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 2:37 pm

Re: Path vs Fruit of stream-entry

Post by perkele » Sun Mar 04, 2018 7:47 pm

rightviewftw wrote:
Sun Mar 04, 2018 7:09 pm
if mahavihara moderators want i will consider explaining but i am not going to do all that work because some people do not care to follow the guidelines and citate commentary by modern translators who are heavily criticized for being wrong view as representatives of Classical Theravada.
How are people supposed to learn what is right or what is wrong by simply hearing "This is wrong" without anything being explained to them? Why would you only consider explaining something that you know "if moderators want"? You are free to explain and discuss here. This is what this forum is for.
rightviewftw wrote:
Sun Mar 04, 2018 7:09 pm
I am not lazy or stingy i think it is redundant that's all.
If people cite in good faith interpretations which according to you are not in line with the Mahavihara position, on this forum, which is the Mahavihara forum, then it seems the right thing to do is explain the Mahavihara position. I thought this forum was about learning about the Mahavihara position, not necessarily knowing everything from the beginning. If everyone had to know what is the Mahavihara position from the outset, what use would this forum have? If posting anything not in line with Mahavihara position is redundant then I think this forum is probably redundant.

In my eyes you are just being lazy and very stingy, and you don't recognize that as a fault. I think that's very bad.
rightviewftw wrote:
Sun Mar 04, 2018 7:09 pm
I would much rather see people post their own interpretation because that we can work with here but commentary by Venerable Bhikkhu Bodhi in here, i find that rediculous in light of him being in opposition with a large portion of the learned monastic Sangha. Especially that passage and he is not here to explain himself.
It does not matter that he is not here to explain himself. Maybe there are people who don't have a better interpretation of their own and they would like to know how this interpretation fits together with the Mahavihara interpretation. It seems to me this forum, and this thread in particular, would be a good place to explore and clarify this.

Of course you are not obligated to share with us what you (supposedly) know. And I won't beg you for it anymore. I'll just leave it at stating that I think you're very stingy with regards to sharing your understanding of the Dhamma and very arrogant. Which is very sad.

Virgo
Posts: 1424
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 10:52 pm

Re: Path vs Fruit of stream-entry

Post by Virgo » Sun Mar 04, 2018 7:53 pm

dylanj wrote:
Sat Apr 15, 2017 12:01 am
From what I have gathered there are two aspects to the attainment of stream-entry...Sotāpattimagga & Sotāpattiphala, the path & fruit. Of these, & similarly with other noble states, which is it that is impossible to fall back from? Which occurs along with the abandoning of the three lower fetters? What is the distinction? How does the former occur compared to the latter, in an experiential sense? As much clarification as possible is appreciated, I have wondered about this for sometime & as such can't recollect all of my questions & confusions regarding the issue.
https://www.budsas.org/ebud/nina-abhidh ... bhi-23.htm

Kevin

rightviewftw
Posts: 1633
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm

Re: Path vs Fruit of stream-entry

Post by rightviewftw » Sun Mar 04, 2018 8:57 pm

perkele wrote:
Sun Mar 04, 2018 7:47 pm
I will explain it quickly since you really want to know it seems but i cba going to look up sources. I was told that this Sub-Forum was moderated differently and therefore i assumed that moderators would figure it out themselves and moderate. How is this Sub-Forum different if it is exactly the same procedure i have to do here as elsewhere? Anyway i will not be stingy, it is not right no matter what forum etc.. Here is what i do not like:
The path is followed immediately by another state of supramundane consciousness known as the fruit (phala),
Followed implies "arising of" and not "the cessation of" this could be mitigated by context but it is not in this context.
which results from the path's work of cutting off defilements.
"Result" here also in line with Arising of Supramundane Consciousness. Viññanam anidassanam which Venerable Bhikkhu Bodhi does not consider to be Nibbana;
Venerable Bhikkhu Bodhi;http://www.sbinstitute.com/sites/defaul ... evised.pdf
The sutta, if you look at it carefully, does not explicitly state that this “signless, boundless, all-luminous consciousness”is nibbāna itself. I don’t interpret it as being nibbāna itself, and I do agree with you that nibbāna is an unconditioned reality, without production, without alteration, without passing (see AN 3:47, I 152), a real dhamma that one actually sees and experiences with the attainment of path and fruition.
This is his view, absence of proof is not evidence of absence. This alone is enough to raise both eyebrows.
Also i quote him again from same work;
Venerable BB:
Dear BAW, The relationship between nibbāna and consciousness wasa topic of heated discussion among us Western monks in Sri Lanka, and our position in relation to this problemdivided us into opposing camps. Though I have pondered the issue for long years, I have to admit I don’t have a clear solution to the problem.
I would even challenge this and say that surely i would expect more than 2 camps.
Further;
Each path is followed by its own fruit,
This is ambiguous statement and i dont want to get into it but Is fruit Nibbana or Not is the main question and if is what is the Difference there, is it in the defilements they cut or are we talking about a fundamentally different types of Viññanam anidassanam or Nibbana (Maybe he is talking about the Eye of Wisdom? :shrug: ). Further;
wherein for a few moments the mind enjoys the blissful peace of Nibbana before descending again to the level of mundane consciousness.
So The Mind enjoys peace of Nibbana for a few moments, as an elevated state of consciousness before the same mind descends to mundane levels.
Here he postulates Mind in Nibbana, Peace of Nibbana, Duration for Nibbana, multitude and arising of Nibbana.

I hope i have demonstrated now how Venerable Author seems to adhere to the doctrine of Nibbana in the Here&Now as explained here;
Brahmajāla Sutta: The All-embracing Net of Views Pt. 5. Doctrines of Nibbāna Here and Now (Diṭṭhadhammanibbānavāda): Views 58–62 DN 1

93. "There are, bhikkhus, some recluses and brahmins who maintain a doctrine of Nibbāna here and now and who, on five grounds, proclaim Nibbāna here and now for an existent being. And owing to what, with reference to what, do these honorable recluses and brahmins proclaim their views?

94. "Herein, bhikkhus, a certain recluse or a brahmin asserts the following doctrine or view: 'When this self, good sir, furnished and supplied with the five strands of sense pleasures, revels in them — at this point the self attains supreme Nibbāna here and now.' In this way some proclaim supreme Nibbāna here and now for an existent being.

95. "To him another says: 'There is, good sir, such a self as you assert. That I do not deny. But it is not at that point that the self attains supreme Nibbāna here and now. What is the reason? Because, good sir, sense pleasures are impermanent, suffering, subject to change, and through their change and transformation there arise sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and despair. But when the self, quite secluded from sense pleasures, secluded from unwholesome states, enters and abides in the first jhāna, which is accompanied by initial and sustained thought and contains the rapture and happiness born of seclusion — at this point, good sir, the self attains supreme Nibbāna here and now.' In this way others proclaim supreme Nibbāna here and now for an existent being.

96. "To him another says: 'There is, good sir, such a self as you assert. That I do not deny. But it is not at that point that the self attains supreme Nibbāna here and now. What is the reason? Because that jhāna contains initial and sustained thought; therefore it is declared to be gross. But when, with the subsiding of initial and sustained thought, the self enters and abides in the second jhāna, which is accompanied by internal confidence and unification of mind, is free from initial and sustained thought, and contains the rapture and happiness born of concentration — at this point, good sir, the self attains supreme Nibbāna here and now.' In this way others proclaim supreme Nibbāna here and now for an existent being.

97. "To him another says: 'There is, good sir, such a self as you assert. That I do not deny. But it is not at that point that the self attains supreme Nibbāna here and now. What is the reason? It is declared to be gross because of the mental exhilaration connected with rapture that exists there. But when, with the fading away of rapture, one abides in equanimity, mindful and clearly comprehending, and still experiencing happiness with the body, enters and abides in the third jhāna, so that the ariyans announce: "He abides happily, in equanimity and mindfulness" — at this point, good sir, the self attains supreme Nibbāna here and now.' In this way some proclaim supreme Nibbāna here and now for an existent being.

98. "To him another says: 'There is, good sir, such a self as you assert. That I do not deny. But it is not at that point that the self attains supreme Nibbāna here and now. What is the reason? It is declared to be gross because a mental concern, 'Happiness,' exists there. But when, with the abandoning of pleasure and pain, and with the disappearance of previous joy and grief, one enters and abides in the fourth jhāna, which is without pleasure and pain and contains purification of mindfulness through equanimity — at this point, good sir, the self attains supreme Nibbāna here and now.' In this way some proclaim supreme Nibbāna here and now for an existent being.

"This, bhikkhus, the Tathāgata understands... and it is concerning these that those who would rightly praise the Tathāgata in accordance with reality would speak.

99. "It is on these five grounds, bhikkhus, that these recluses and brahmins who maintain a doctrine of Nibbāna here and now proclaim supreme Nibbāna here and now for an existent being. Whatever recluses or brahmins proclaim supreme Nibbāna here and now for an existent being, all of them do so on these five grounds or on a certain one of them. Outside of these there is none.

"This, bhikkhus, the Tathāgata understands... and it is concerning these that those who would rightly praise the Tathāgata in accordance with reality would speak.

100. "It is on these forty-four grounds, bhikkhus, that those recluses and brahmins who are speculators about the future and hold settled views about the future assert various conceptual theorems referring to the future. Whatever recluses or brahmins, bhikkhus, are speculators about the future, hold settled views about the future, and assert various conceptual theorems referring to the future, all of them do so on these forty-four grounds or on a certain one of them. Outside of these there is none.

"This, bhikkhus, the Tathāgata understands... and it is concerning these that those who would rightly praise the Tathāgata in accordance with reality would speak.

101. "It is on these sixty-two grounds, bhikkhus, that those recluses and brahmins who are speculators about the past, speculators about the future, and speculators about the past and the future together, who hold settled views about the past and the future, assert various conceptual theorems referring to the past and the future.

102. "Whatever recluses or brahmins, bhikkhus, are speculators about the past or speculators about the future or speculators about the past and the future together, hold settled views about the past and the future, and assert various conceptual theorems referring to the past and the future, all of them do so on these sixty-two grounds or on a certain one of them. Outside of these there is none.

103. "This, bhikkhus, the Tathāgata understands. And he understands: 'These standpoints, thus assumed and thus misapprehended, lead to such a future destination, to such a state in the world beyond.' He understands as well what transcends this, yet even that understanding he does not misapprehend. And because he is free from misapprehension, he has realized within himself the state of perfect peace. Having understood as they really are the origin and the passing away of feelings, their satisfaction, their unsatisfactoriness, and the escape from them, the Tathāgata, bhikkhus, is emancipated through non-clinging.

104. "These are those dhammas, bhikkhus, that are deep, difficult to see, difficult to understand, peaceful and sublime, beyond the sphere of reasoning, subtle, comprehensible only to the wise, which the Tathāgata, having realized for himself with direct knowledge, propounds to others; and it is concerning these that those who would rightly praise the Tathāgata in accordance with reality would speak.
V. The Round of Conditions and Emancipation from the Round
1. Agitation and Vacillation (Paritassitavipphandita)

105. Therein, bhikkhus, when those recluses and brahmins who are eternalists proclaim on four grounds the self and the world to be eternal — that is only the feeling of those who do not know and do not see; that is only the agitation and vacillation of those who are immersed in craving.

106. "When those recluses and brahmins who are eternalists in regard to some things and non-eternalists in regard to other things proclaim on four grounds the self and the world to be partly eternal and partly non-eternal — that too is only the feeling of those who do not know and do not see; that is only the agitation and vacillation of those who are immersed in craving.

107. "When those recluses and brahmins who are extensionists proclaim on four grounds the world to be finite or infinite —

108. "When those recluses and brahmins who are endless equivocators on four grounds resort to evasive statements and endless equivocation when questioned on this or that point —

109. "When those recluses and brahmins who are fortuitous originationists proclaim on two grounds the self and the world to originate fortuitously —

110. "When those recluses and brahmins who are speculators about the past and hold settled views about the past assert on eighteen grounds various conceptual theorems referring to the past —

111. "When those recluses and brahmins who maintain a doctrine of percipient immortality proclaim on sixteen grounds the self to survive percipient after death —

112. "When those recluses and brahmins who maintain a doctrine of non-percipient immortality proclaim on eight grounds the self to survive non-percipient after death —

113. "When those recluses and brahmins who maintain a doctrine of neither percipient nor non-percipient immortality proclaim on eight grounds the self to survive neither percipient nor non-percipient after death —

114. "When those recluses and brahmins who are annihilationists proclaim on seven grounds the annihilation, destruction, and extermination of an existent being —

115. "When those recluses and brahmins who maintain a doctrine of Nibbāna here and now proclaim on five grounds supreme Nibbāna here and now for an existent being —

116. "When those recluses and brahmins who are speculators about the future and hold settled views about the future assert on forty-four grounds various conceptual theorems referring to the future —

117. "When those recluses and brahmins who are speculators about the past, speculators about the future, speculators about the past and the future together, who hold settled views about the past and the future, assert on sixty-two grounds various conceptual theorems referring to the past and the future — that too is only the feeling of those who do not know and do not see; that is only the agitation and vacillation of those who are immersed in craving.
I hope you are satisfied because i really do not enjoy it nor do i want to spend my days doing this kind of basic text analysis.
Last edited by rightviewftw on Sun Mar 04, 2018 10:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.

perkele
Posts: 888
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 2:37 pm

Re: Path vs Fruit of stream-entry

Post by perkele » Sun Mar 04, 2018 9:54 pm

rightviewftw wrote:
Sun Mar 04, 2018 8:57 pm
i will not be stingy, it is not right no matter what forum etc..
Sadhu! :anjali:
rightviewftw wrote:
Sun Mar 04, 2018 8:57 pm
Here is what i do not like:
The path is followed immediately by another state of supramundane consciousness known as the fruit (phala),
"Followed implies arising of" and not "the cessation of" this could be mitigated by context but it is not in this context.
which results from the path's work of cutting off defilements.
"Result" here also in line with Arising of Supramundane Consciousness. Viññanam anidassanam which Venerable Bhikkhu Bodhi does not consider to be Nibbana;
Very good point, clarifying a lot.
rightviewftw wrote:
Sun Mar 04, 2018 8:57 pm
Venerable Bhikkhu Bodhi;http://www.sbinstitute.com/sites/defaul ... evised.pdf
The sutta, if you look at it carefully, does not explicitly state that this “signless, boundless, all-luminous consciousness”is nibbāna itself. I don’t interpret it as being nibbāna itself, and I do agree with you that nibbāna is an unconditioned reality, without production, without alteration, without passing (see AN 3:47, I 152), a real dhamma that one actually sees and experiences with the attainment of path and fruition.
//...//

This is his view, absence of proof is not evidence of absence. This alone is enough to raise both eyebrows.
Also i quote him again from same work;
Venerable BB:
//...//
Each path is followed by its own fruit,
This is ambiguous statement and i dont want to get into it but Is fruit Nibbana or Not is the main question and if is how are the Different, is it in the defilements they cut or are we talking about a fundamentally different Viññanam anidassanam or Nibbana. Further;
wherein for a few moments the mind enjoys the blissful peace of Nibbana before descending again to the level of mundane consciousness.
The mind enjoys peace of Nibbana for a few moments, as an elevated state of consciousness before the same mind descends to mundane levels. Do i really have to explain what is wrong with this last part? Here he postulates Mind in Nibbana, Peace of Nibbana, Duration for Nibbana, multitude and arising of Nibbana.

I hope i have demonstrated now how Venerable Author seems to adhere to the doctrine of Nibbana in the Here&Now as explained here;
Brahmajāla Sutta: The All-embracing Net of Views Pt. 5. Doctrines of Nibbāna Here and Now (Diṭṭhadhammanibbānavāda): Views 58–62 DN 1

93. "There are, bhikkhus, some recluses and brahmins who maintain a doctrine of Nibbāna here and now and who, on five grounds, proclaim Nibbāna here and now for an existent being. And owing to what, with reference to what, do these honorable recluses and brahmins proclaim their views?

//...//

98. "To him another says: 'There is, good sir, such a self as you assert. That I do not deny. But it is not at that point that the self attains supreme Nibbāna here and now. What is the reason? It is declared to be gross because a mental concern, 'Happiness,' exists there. But when, with the abandoning of pleasure and pain, and with the disappearance of previous joy and grief, one enters and abides in the fourth jhāna, which is without pleasure and pain and contains purification of mindfulness through equanimity — at this point, good sir, the self attains supreme Nibbāna here and now.' In this way some proclaim supreme Nibbāna here and now for an existent being.

"This, bhikkhus, the Tathāgata understands... and it is concerning these that those who would rightly praise the Tathāgata in accordance with reality would speak.
//...//
Thank you very much. I am satisfied. But I am sorry that you did not enjoy it and that I have "forced" you. But I think it is a very beneficial explanation, and hopefully useful to many others as well, clarifying very incisively that nibbana is not something that is "arising" and not a "luminous mind" or state of mind.
Much clearer and better than I ever could have expected. Sadhu sadhu sadhu!

I retract my accusations of you being lazy and stingy and apologize. I can see that it requires a good amount of work to cite one's sources and back up one's arguments, which you have now done in a very convincing way and thus clarified things, at least for me, very much, although I have still much left to ponder and would probably do good studying the Brahmajala sutta more deeply, which beyond the points you explained still raises more questions for me than it answers, I think. The meaning of "nibbana here and now" as one of the wrong understandings of nibbana listed in the Brahmajala sutta is now clear to me, I think.
rightviewftw wrote:
Sun Mar 04, 2018 8:57 pm
I was told that this Sub-Forum was moderated differently and therefore i assumed that moderators would figure it out themselves and moderate. How is this Sub-Forum different if it is exactly the same procedure i have to do here as elsewhere?
I think that moderators cannot possibly do all the work for us especially with difficult doctrinal matters. Many things need to be left open for discussion for this forum to serve any purpose. Not everything that is written and discussed here should be taken to be 100% in line with the Buddha's teachings or not allowed otherwise. This would make this forum sterile and useless in my opinion. It is good to explain things again and again if one knows something and others have it wrong. In my opinion that is the purpose of such a forum as this here. Santa100 made his contribution with a disclaimer that he is not so sure of himself. So in my opinion that is inviting discussion and clarification - as just done here by you, which I think is a good thing.

:anjali:

User avatar
SDC
Posts: 4392
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: Path vs Fruit of stream-entry

Post by SDC » Mon Mar 05, 2018 10:48 pm

Moderator Note: This thread has been somewhat cleaned up of all the off topic ranting and returned to "Classical Theravada" - though some off topic stuff remains since there was some useful posting therein. Bear in mind, that the "Classical Theravada" section has its own set of rules that should be followed when posting. These rules include:

Posts should also include support from a reference or a citation (Tipitaka, commentarial, or from a later work from an author representative of the Classical point-of-view).

Posts that contain personal opinions and conjecture, points of view arrived at from meditative experiences, conversations with devas, blind faith in the supreme veracity of one's own teacher's point of view etc. are all regarded as off-topic, and as such, will be subject to moderator review and/or removal.


Obviously some "opinion and conjecture" can be present in one's delivery of the Classical POV (as long as it is made clear), but such talk should only be there to enhance or clarify that POV and not be the entirety of the post. If there are any questions please contact the staff.

Please, no further off topic posts in this thread.

theY
Posts: 354
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 12:07 pm
Contact:

Re: Path vs Fruit of stream-entry

Post by theY » Tue Mar 06, 2018 3:46 am

SDC wrote:
Mon Mar 05, 2018 10:48 pm
...
You have to explain to them what is the mahāvihāra, classical theravāda,'s view:

Tipiṭaka and atthakathā are keep by oral study system. So:
  1. There are uncountable descriptions that atthakathā described in previous atthakathā and in visuddhimagga, so this atthakathā is not complete. This is the problem of reading study system, but is not a problem of reciting study system which is ancient method.
  2. Original text in pāli-language is the best, easiest, and maximum performance way to learn tipiṭaka and atthakathā. The translation is just an alternative way.
  3. Tipitaka-memorizer is very important qualification to be a teacher in atthakathā culture.
  4. Each sutta and it's explanation must complete in itself, by the relation of words/sentence/paragraph. And they must be compatible with the other sutta by meaning.
    • So, mostly atthakathā are not comment or opinion, but it is description. Because atthakathā describing the reference to prove the relation of each word in tipitaka. Mostly words of atthakathā has it's own reference from it's sutta context or the other sutta which is relating. Then sariputta and the other tipitaka memorizers use these relations to author their own canons, such as khuddakapātha, paṭisambhidāmagga, niddesa, abhidhamma, parivāra, netti, commentary, etc. In contrast, mostly comment or opinion words base on concepts, which mostly without reference.  So, mostly explanations in atthakathā are not just the comment, but it is the description.
  5. Atthkathā-teachers are very serious to keep tipiṭaka as original. Changing anything in tipitaka is seriously denied by tipitaka and atthakathā.
  6. There are 4 ages of atthakathā: 
    1. 1st-saṅgāyanā-atthakathā (0BE), 
    2. 2nd-3rd-saṅgāyanā-atthakathā (~100BE, ~218BE), 
    3. siṅhala-atthakathā (450BE-900BE), modern-atthakathā (~950BE). 
    4. The modern-atthakathā. This is the combined version of the other atthakathās, so nowadays just modern-atthakathā still available. But we can say the other atthakathās still going on in modern-atthakathā, because the modern-atthakathā composer, buddhaghosa,  swore to the mahāvihāra-saṅgha that he must did just translating and merging all atthakathā together. This swearing still appear in the introduction of every modern-atthakathā.
  7. Modern-atthakathā were categorized very clear. The 1st-saṅgāyanā-atthakathā is the primary structure. When something in the other atthakathā is difference from the primary structure, it is added next to it with note mark, if is necessary, as an extension, such as "in pañcarī (siṅhala-atthakathā) wrote...", then the structure return to the primary structure again. Buddhaghosa's opinions are the same. So no any complication between each age of atthakathās that were combined in the modern-atthakathās.
  8. Reading study system doesn't has good enough performance to understand tipiṭaka and atthakathā. Many misunderstanding in tipiṭaka and atthakathā come from reading. Because reading through often cross many syllable/word/sentence/paragraph/sutta/vagga/etc, but reciting is harder to cross.
I may be add or modify something in the future here:
https://unmixedtheravada.blogspot.com/2 ... katha.html
Above message maybe out of date. Latest update will be in massage's link.
--------------------------------------------------
Tipitaka memorization is a rule of monks. It isn't just a choice. They must done it.
bahussuto nāma tividho hoti – nissayamuccanako, parisupaṭṭhāpako, bhikkhunovādakoti.
http://UnmixedTheravada.blogspot.com/20 ... monks.html

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests