From: The Literature of the Personalists of Early Buddhism by
Bhikshu Thich Thien Chau, Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi 1999.
The secondary theses of the Pudgalavadins - number 13 -The Arhat is
susceptible to regression. [ page 205 ]
Part of note 756:
The Sarvastivadins had the same opinion as the Pudgalavadins on the
regression of the Arhat. Kosa VI, 56, admits that among the six kinds
of Arhat able to exist in the three worlds (dhatu), the first five
(except he who is immovable - akopyadharman, since he is not susceptible
to falling, cf. Kosa VI, 57) are all susceptible to regression: four
(except he-who-regresses - parihanadharman) fall from the family (gotra),
five fall from the fruit (cf. Kosa VI, 58). Nonetheless, they do not fall
from the first family or the first fruit (cf. ibid.)
The Theravadins always considered that to admit the regression of the
Arhat is a false view (cf. Kathavatthu, pp.69, 398, Points of Controversy,
pp.34, 228). In Pug. pp.5, 11, 12, 14, the term parihanadhamma is applied
only to practitioners who acquire the absorptions (jhana) of the world of
form (rupadhatu) and the attainments (samapatti) of the formless world
(arupadhatu), but not in relation to the Path (magga). Furthermore, the
words sekkhassa parihani in AN III, 116, only designate the regression of
those who have not yet obtained the Arhat fruit. The Petakopadesa II, p32,
counts he-who-regresses (parihanadhamma) [one of the texts in Burmese
characters contains aparihanadhammo instead of parihanadhammo] or he
who-attains-both-aims-simultaneously ( the destruction of impurities and
and the end of life (samisisi)) as one of the nine categories of Arhat
(cf. Pug. p.13, Nettipakarana, p.190) ..............
The schools which accepted regression of the Arhat: Pudgalavadins,
Sarvastivadins, Purvassailas, a section of the Mahasamghikas.
The schools which rejected the regression of the Arhat: Theravadins,
Sautrantikas, Mahasamghikas, Mahisasakas, Vihajyavadins.