"There is the case where a monk is wholly accomplished in virtue, moderately accomplished in concentration, and moderately accomplished in discernment. With reference to the lesser and minor training rules, he falls into offenses and rehabilitates himself. Why is that? Because I have not declared that to be a disqualification in these circumstances. But as for the training rules that are basic to the holy life and proper to the holy life, he is one of permanent virtue, one of steadfast virtue. Having undertaken them, he trains in reference to the training rules. With the wasting away of [the first] three fetters, he is a stream-winner, never again destined for states of woe, certain, headed for self-awakening.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
Zom wrote:In Ven. Pa-Auk's Sayadaw book about Kamma I've read out that it is impossible that a stream-enterer would deliberately kill any living being, steal anything, tell any lie, commit adultery.
As far as I know, suttas only say that it is impossible for him to kill father/mother/arahant, split sangha, spill Buddha's blood. That's it.
And, suttas say, that it is impossible for an arahant to kill, steal, so on...
So, from where does Ven. Sayadaw took that information on such an impossibility about sotapanna?
Licchavi Sutta: To the Licchavi" (SN 55.30), translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. wrote:"He/she is endowed with virtues that are appealing to the noble ones: untorn, unbroken, unspotted, unsplattered, liberating, praised by the wise, untarnished, leading to concentration.
this means that they do not at the very least break the five precepts, as the qualification makes clear
Actually no, this is not clear.
Because why does Buddha speak at all about "impossibility" concerning killing mother, father, arahant, if he could just say: "No, monks, this is IMPOSSIBLE that a sotapanna could deliberately kill any living being". But he does not say that. Instead he says: "he can't deliberately kill father, mother and arahant". That's it.
Still being a subject to greed, hatred and delusion, I think, he can deliberately kill a living being in some circumstances - but not to the extent that he will fall into lower realms because of that, since killing doesn't necessarily lead to a lower realm.
"Cakkhu Sutta: The Eye" (SN 25.1), translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. Access to Insight, 30 June 2010, wrote:At Savatthi. "Monks, the eye is inconstant, changeable, alterable. The ear... The nose... The tongue... The body... The mind 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."
then can a sotapanna go to lower realm of existance? Why?
Zom wrote:then can a sotapanna go to lower realm of existance? Why?
As I've said already, for example, killing doesn't necessarily leads to lower realms. It depends on what kind of killing it is. For example, I don't think that killing a mosquito is a kamma that will lead you to a lower realm. So, I guess, sotapanna is able to do such minor kind of transgression of 5 precepts. And it won't lead him to lower realms. But it will be wrong to say that "it is impossible for him to kill" - since killing mosquito is actually a killing. And the same situation with all other 5 precepts. Concerning the impossibility - Buddha says it is impossible for him to kill father and mother. THAT is impossible, yes. While for puthujjana it is POSSIBLE. Though this is a rare case even for puthujjana, as we may notice.
We can draw a logical conclusion: Because a sotapanna understands karma, it is very unlikely they will do something like intentionally breaking the moral precepts. Out of delusion, it may happen accidentally or when very unmindful, but not un purpose and certainly not regularly.
I've never found one. I think it comes from the Commentaries. Event he Buddha lied when he promised Nanda the nymphs if he would go through the with training. Of course, he said it with a completely pure heart, and being Omniscient knew what the outcome would be of it (Nanda followed the training and attained Arahantship, then relieved the Buddha of his promise), so it is a bit different.
Users browsing this forum: up&down and 5 guests