1. SarathW said,
Thank you, Lal, in your opinion what is the salient difference in Buddha's teaching and another Brahmanical teaching?
Do you think Anatta is a pre-Buddha's teaching?
Only a Buddha can reveal the three words (anicca, dukkha, anatta) to the world.
“Attakkara theenapada Sambuddhena pakasitha, na hi sila vatan hotu uppajjatthi Tathagata
“, which means, “a Buddha (Tathagata) is born NOT just to show how to live a moral life, but to reveal three words (theenapada) to the world” .
Anicca – that nothing in this world can bring a permanent happiness in the long run.
Dukkha – despite our struggles, we will be subjected to much more suffering than pleasures if we remain in the rebirth process. The truth about Dukkha is not the feeling of dukkha, but that dukkha arises because of craving for enjoyments.
Anatta – therefore, one is truly helpless in this struggle to attain “something of essence in this world”. The only refuge is in Nibbana.
So, there is no way to become a Sotapanna if one believes anicca is impermanence, dukkha is suffering (not the cause of suffering), and anatta is “no self”.Here is an important point that needs to be given some thought for those who believe anatta means “no self”
I am not saying this in a derogatory way, but just to emphasize the importance of it. The true meanings have been covered not due to intentional acts by anyone, as I have explained in the post: https://puredhamma.net/historical-backg ... retations/
The Patama Adhamma Sutta in the Anguttara Nikaya (https://suttacentral.net/pi/an10.113
) says:“Adhammo ca, bhikkhave, veditabbo anattho ca; dhammo ca veditabbo attho ca“.
It means: “Bhikkhus, it is to be comprehended that adhamma leads to anattä (helplessness), and dhamma leads to attä (refuge in Nibbana)”.
Furthermore, one should be able to clearly see that it leads to the foolish statement: “Bhikkhus, it is to be comprehended that adhamma leads to no-self, and dhamma leads to self“.
The Anatta Lakkhana Sutta (https://suttacentral.net/pi/sn22.59
) says, "..Vedanā anattā. Vedanā ca hidaṃ, bhikkhave, attā abhavissa, nayidaṃ vedanā ābādhāya saṃvatteyya, labbhetha ca vedanāya: ‘evaṃ me vedanā hotu, evaṃ me vedanā mā ahosī’ti. Yasmā ca kho, bhikkhave, vedanā anattā,."
So, what is meant by "..vedana is no self"?
Same for sanna, sankhara, and vinnana. How can they be "no self"?
2. SarathW said,
In the following video Ven. Abhaya says that Sotapanna can break the five precepts.
A Sotapanna clearly understands the dangers of dasa akusala.
But he has removed only one of them: mica ditthi, which is the strongest. 99% of the defilements are removed from his/her mind. https://puredhamma.net/seeking-nibbana/ ... sotapanna/
There are six things that a Sotapanna is incapable of: killing mother or father, killing an Arahant, injuring a Buddha, knowingly causing schism in Sangha, and having niyata micca ditthi or established wrong views.
The first five are anantariya papa kamma, i.e., one WILL be born in the apayas when one dies. If one has having niyata micca ditthi, then one has not lost the POTENTIAL to be born in the apayas in the future.
In the Ratana sutta: "..Catūhapāyehi ca vippamutto,
Chaccābhiṭhānāni abhabba kātuṃ";
Or “..catu apeye hi ca vippamutto, cha ca abhithanani abhabba katum” or “(A Sotapanna is) free of the four apayas, and impossible (abhabba) for him/her to do (katum) six (cha) major wrong doings (abhithanani), which includes five anantariya papa kamma and niyata mica ditthi".
With metta, Lal