I think it is quite important that the Sutta draws a clear distinction between knowing and seeing things as they are and the realization of knowledge & vision of release.pegembara wrote: ↑Wed Oct 24, 2018 4:38 am It seems one who has right samadhi will automatically have the right knowing and seeing.
"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.
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
In Sutta such as ;
The referent for what is known and seen is the nature of consciousness. Therefore it is actually acceptable evidence to me for a case of a person knowing & seeing before the realization of knowledge & vision of release.At Savatthi. "Monks, eye-consciousness is inconstant, changeable, alterable. Ear-consciousness... Nose-consciousness... Tongue-consciousness... Body-consciousness... Intellect-consciousness is inconstant, changeable, alterable.
"One who has conviction & belief that these phenomena are this way is called a faith-follower: one who has entered the orderliness of rightness, entered the plane of people of integrity, transcended the plane of the run-of-the-mill. He is incapable of doing any deed by which he might be reborn in hell, in the animal womb, or in the realm of hungry shades. He is incapable of passing away until he has realized the fruit of stream-entry.
"One who, after pondering with a modicum of discernment, has accepted that these phenomena are this way is called a Dhamma-follower: one who has entered the orderliness of rightness, entered the plane of people of integrity, transcended the plane of the run-of-the-mill. He is incapable of doing any deed by which he might be reborn in hell, in the animal womb, or in the realm of hungry shades. He is incapable of passing away until he has realized the fruit of stream-entry.
"One who knows and sees that these phenomena are this way is called a stream-enterer, steadfast, never again destined for states of woe, headed for self-awakening."
I am still not sure tho because the passages;
Can be interpreted to mean that if a person realizes 1 he realizes 2 and having realized 2 he realizes 3, automatically or in rapid succession
- "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.
Alternatively it can be interpreted to be more of a gradual a process
Two things are certain imo;
1) One can speak of knowing & seeing to the extent of learning the doctrine, in as far as mere lip-reciting & repetition, speaking the words of knowledge.
2) One can speak of knowing & seeing to the extent of entering & dwelling in a Dhamma, having realized it for oneself through direct knowledge.
It is still not entirely clear to me where the cut-off between a Dhamma-Follower and a Stream-Enterer is.