Sotapanna and five precepts

Buddhist ethical conduct including the Five Precepts (Pañcasikkhāpada), and Eightfold Ethical Conduct (Aṭṭhasīla).
User avatar
Sam Vara
Site Admin
Posts: 13482
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Portsmouth, U.K.

Re: If you become a Sotapanna will you know that?

Post by Sam Vara »

thepea wrote: Wed Jan 26, 2022 5:55 pm As I said I’m happy to look at any suttas you bring forward to question any of my actions you deem not characteristic of a sota. I am 100% confident you will find zero words of the Buddha that state it impossible for a sotapanna to kill.
In AN 10.176 we have Cunda being taught by the Buddha about purity, and what makes a person pure and impure. One of the 10 things that makes them impure is killing:
And how is one made impure in three ways by bodily action? There is the case where a certain person takes life, is a hunter, bloody-handed, devoted to killing & slaying, showing no mercy to living beings.
And can that person be a sotapanna?
as a result of being endowed with these ten courses of unskillful action, [rebirth in] hell is declared, [rebirth in] an animal womb is declared, [rebirth in] the realm of hungry shades is declared — that or any other bad destination.
So the answer is no, they can't be a sotapanna.

And in AN 8.40, there is this:
Monks, the taking of life — when indulged in, developed, & pursued — is something that leads to hell, leads to rebirth as a common animal, leads to the realm of the hungry shades. The slightest of all the results coming from the taking of life is that, when one becomes a human being, it leads to a short life span.
So no chance of being a sotapanna, then.

The logic is simple. If a person kills, they go to a bad destination after death. A sotapanna is a being who does not go to a bad destination after death. Therefore, a person who kills cannot be a sotapanna.

It's nothing personal. You have many odd beliefs, about yourself and the world. You are welcome to them. I'm just showing what a sotapanna is, by demonstrating how someone who kills ( and that person just happens to be yourself) does not meet the criteria laid out in the suttas.
thepea
Posts: 4047
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: If you become a Sotapanna will you know that?

Post by thepea »

Sam Vara wrote: Wed Jan 26, 2022 7:03 pm
thepea wrote: Wed Jan 26, 2022 5:55 pm As I said I’m happy to look at any suttas you bring forward to question any of my actions you deem not characteristic of a sota. I am 100% confident you will find zero words of the Buddha that state it impossible for a sotapanna to kill.
In AN 10.176 we have Cunda being taught by the Buddha about purity, and what makes a person pure and impure. One of the 10 things that makes them impure is killing:
And how is one made impure in three ways by bodily action? There is the case where a certain person takes life, is a hunter, bloody-handed, devoted to killing & slaying, showing no mercy to living beings.
And can that person be a sotapanna?
as a result of being endowed with these ten courses of unskillful action, [rebirth in] hell is declared, [rebirth in] an animal womb is declared, [rebirth in] the realm of hungry shades is declared — that or any other bad destination.
So the answer is no, they can't be a sotapanna.

And in AN 8.40, there is this:
Monks, the taking of life — when indulged in, developed, & pursued — is something that leads to hell, leads to rebirth as a common animal, leads to the realm of the hungry shades. The slightest of all the results coming from the taking of life is that, when one becomes a human being, it leads to a short life span.
So no chance of being a sotapanna, then.

The logic is simple. If a person kills, they go to a bad destination after death. A sotapanna is a being who does not go to a bad destination after death. Therefore, a person who kills cannot be a sotapanna.

It's nothing personal. You have many odd beliefs, about yourself and the world. You are welcome to them. I'm just showing what a sotapanna is, by demonstrating how someone who kills ( and that person just happens to be yourself) does not meet the criteria laid out in the suttas.
Yes, a sotapanna can be this hunter man. But a sotapanna has mercy. It’s mindset as I’ve mentioned. You don’t kill with hatred or mercyless behaviour. I already answered to this.

Now answer my question?
Your coward ness speaks volumes.
You can’t answer my question because it makes me right and you know it. So you dig through suttas addressed to monks for descriptions of a lay sotapanna.
Wrong, wrong, wrong.
Now answer my question.
User avatar
Rambutan
Posts: 753
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2021 6:35 pm

Re: If you become a Sotapanna will you know that?

Post by Rambutan »

thepea wrote: Wed Jan 26, 2022 2:29 am
JamesTheGiant wrote: Tue Jan 25, 2022 11:57 pm I think if someone is arguing online that they're a sotapanna, that pretty much guarantees they're not.

Just my opinion.
Where do you base this opinion from?
And this brings us back to the OP:
Ven Suddasana said that he is not a Sotapanna.
and the reason why is that no one proclaims their attainment. It’s an ego trip. Even one of the Ajahns I know, who leads a Lao/Thai temple, if asked if he is realized in any way, he will laugh with humility and shake his head “no” even though everybody can tell that he is perfectly accomplished and would more than definitely fit the definition of sotapanna.

Not only are there issues of it being close to bragging, but one is also aware that making such claims, even if true, can put false impressions into the minds of others (about 15 years ago these same monks lived at a wat in a little more rough part of town, and people there would ask them if they were kung fu monks). Everyone who has ever made claims to have any attainment, except perhaps the Buddha, turns out to be full of BS.
User avatar
Sam Vara
Site Admin
Posts: 13482
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Portsmouth, U.K.

Re: If you become a Sotapanna will you know that?

Post by Sam Vara »

thepea wrote: Wed Jan 26, 2022 7:29 pm
Now answer my question?
Your coward ness speaks volumes.
You can’t answer my question because it makes me right and you know it. So you dig through suttas addressed to monks for descriptions of a lay sotapanna.
Wrong, wrong, wrong.
Now answer my question.
I'll try to, but looking back over your posts to me you don't appear to have asked me a single question, except this one:
You can try to discredit my claim, but why? What purpose does this serve you or other members here?
I think I already answered that, by saying that it's nothing personal, it's just about being accurate concerning the criteria for stream-entry which are found in the suttas.

Do you have any more questions?
thepea
Posts: 4047
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: If you become a Sotapanna will you know that?

Post by thepea »

Rambutan wrote: Wed Jan 26, 2022 7:30 pm
thepea wrote: Wed Jan 26, 2022 2:29 am
JamesTheGiant wrote: Tue Jan 25, 2022 11:57 pm I think if someone is arguing online that they're a sotapanna, that pretty much guarantees they're not.

Just my opinion.
Where do you base this opinion from?
And this brings us back to the OP:
Ven Suddasana said that he is not a Sotapanna.
and the reason why is that no one proclaims their attainment. It’s an ego trip. Even one of the Ajahns I know, who leads a Lao/Thai temple, if asked if he is realized in any way, he will laugh with humility and shake his head “no” even though everybody can tell that he is perfectly accomplished and would more than definitely fit the definition of sotapanna.

Not only are there issues of it being close to bragging, but one is also aware that making such claims, even if true, can put false impressions into the minds of others (about 15 years ago these same monks lived at a wat in a little more rough part of town, and people there would ask them if they were kung fu monks). Everyone who has ever made claims to have any attainment, except perhaps the Buddha, turns out to be full of BS.
There are different rules for monastics.
I am sotapanna, nothing to do with ego trip and I expect nothing from anyone. I am inclined to do things differently from others. But feel free to produce a sutta to challenge my claim.
thepea
Posts: 4047
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: If you become a Sotapanna will you know that?

Post by thepea »

Sam Vara wrote: Wed Jan 26, 2022 8:43 pm
thepea wrote: Wed Jan 26, 2022 7:29 pm
Now answer my question?
Your coward ness speaks volumes.
You can’t answer my question because it makes me right and you know it. So you dig through suttas addressed to monks for descriptions of a lay sotapanna.
Wrong, wrong, wrong.
Now answer my question.
I'll try to, but looking back over your posts to me you don't appear to have asked me a single question, except this one:
You can try to discredit my claim, but why? What purpose does this serve you or other members here?
I think I already answered that, by saying that it's nothing personal, it's just about being accurate concerning the criteria for stream-entry which are found in the suttas.

Do you have any more questions?
Referring to your translation provided,
“it’s when a noble disciple doesn’t kill.....”
This does not say a noble disciple CANNOT kill. It says when a noble disciple doesn’t kill, which lends to a period when they do kill. Just read the translations as they are and it’s not an absolute. I have provided the absolutes, which have NOT been addressed by you or Santa.
-murder ones mother
-murder ones father
-murdering an arahant.

Nowhere does this say a sotapanna cannot kill a fish, a bedbug, another man/woman in defence.
Please address this? as I have clearly answered to your translation.

I have answered to your sutta responses and shown how to words used are in no way absolutes. They leave the door open to a sotapanna being capable and able to kill. The portion I provided gives absolutes, it states the actions s a sotapanna is incapable of performing.
As stated above;
-murder of ones mother
-murder of ones father
-murder of an arahant
Now why would it be necessary to state the actions a sotapanna is incapable of performing if in your suttas it is clearly comprehended that a sotapanna cannot kill period?
These are pretty specific actions here, and this is murder, why wouldn’t Buddha just say a sotapanna cannot kill?
User avatar
Sam Vara
Site Admin
Posts: 13482
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Portsmouth, U.K.

Re: If you become a Sotapanna will you know that?

Post by Sam Vara »

thepea wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 12:54 am
Sam Vara wrote: Wed Jan 26, 2022 8:43 pm
thepea wrote: Wed Jan 26, 2022 7:29 pm
Now answer my question?
Your coward ness speaks volumes.
You can’t answer my question because it makes me right and you know it. So you dig through suttas addressed to monks for descriptions of a lay sotapanna.
Wrong, wrong, wrong.
Now answer my question.
I'll try to, but looking back over your posts to me you don't appear to have asked me a single question, except this one:
You can try to discredit my claim, but why? What purpose does this serve you or other members here?
I think I already answered that, by saying that it's nothing personal, it's just about being accurate concerning the criteria for stream-entry which are found in the suttas.

Do you have any more questions?
Referring to your translation provided,
“it’s when a noble disciple doesn’t kill.....”
This does not say a noble disciple CANNOT kill. It says when a noble disciple doesn’t kill, which lends to a period when they do kill. Just read the translations as they are and it’s not an absolute. I have provided the absolutes, which have NOT been addressed by you or Santa.
-murder ones mother
-murder ones father
-murdering an arahant.

Nowhere does this say a sotapanna cannot kill a fish, a bedbug, another man/woman in defence.
Please address this? as I have clearly answered to your translation.

I have answered to your sutta responses and shown how to words used are in no way absolutes. They leave the door open to a sotapanna being capable and able to kill. The portion I provided gives absolutes, it states the actions s a sotapanna is incapable of performing.
As stated above;
-murder of ones mother
-murder of ones father
-murder of an arahant
Now why would it be necessary to state the actions a sotapanna is incapable of performing if in your suttas it is clearly comprehended that a sotapanna cannot kill period?
These are pretty specific actions here, and this is murder, why wouldn’t Buddha just say a sotapanna cannot kill?
You seem to be making two points here. The first is that those who have entered the stream are capable of habitual killing, because it says (presumably in Sn 2.1?) that they will not be able to commit the six grave crimes, and these six do not include killing animals. But the fact that they do not refer to the killing of animals does not mean that the killing of animals is allowable. I can specify six things that the law does not allow me to do, but that does not mean that there aren't many more things that the law does not allow me to do. It depends on why those six things are specified. If they are specified because they are an exhaustive list, then that's fine. Everything else is possible for a lay sotapanna. But there is no evidence in Sn2.1 (or elsewhere, as far as I know) that the six grave crimes are an exhaustive list which actually defines what a sotapanna can do. They might just be examples.

I am basing the idea that a stream-entrant would not kill animals on the sutta provided by Santa and myself earlier. This is the second point that you are raising. That sutta (AN 5.179) has the Buddha saying that some lay people have restrained actions, can dwell in higher thoughts, by virtue of which can rightly call themselves stream-entrants. He asks the rhetorical question as to what restrained actions do those people have. One of them is that they don't kill. So anyone who does kill is not entitled to rightly call themselves a stream-entrant. That's an absolute. Rather than specifying what types of killing are proscribed, it proscribes killing.

That's in line with other suttas which I have provided. Here's another, AN 5.173:
Mendicants, a lay follower with five qualities is cast down to hell.
“Pañcahi, bhikkhave, dhammehi samannāgato upāsako yathābhataṁ nikkhitto evaṁ niraye.
What five?
Katamehi pañcahi?
They kill living creatures, steal, commit sexual misconduct, lie, and use alcoholic drinks that cause negligence.
Pāṇātipātī hoti …pe… surā­meraya­majja­pamādaṭ­ṭhā­yī hoti.
A lay follower with these five qualities is cast down to hell.
Imehi kho, bhikkhave, pañcahi dhammehi samannāgato upāsako yathābhataṁ nikkhitto evaṁ niraye.
Note that there is nothing about killing mothers, fathers, arahants, or particular living beings. It's just killing living beings, and no exceptions. So a lay follower who kills is cast down to hell. And because a stream-enterer has done with hell, a lay follower who kills cannot be a stream-enterer.
thepea
Posts: 4047
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: If you become a Sotapanna will you know that?

Post by thepea »

Sam Vara wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 11:07 am
You seem to be making two points here. The first is that those who have entered the stream are capable of habitual killing, because it says (presumably in Sn 2.1?) that they will not be able to commit the six grave crimes, and these six do not include killing animals. But the fact that they do not refer to the killing of animals does not mean that the killing of animals is allowable. I can specify six things that the law does not allow me to do, but that does not mean that there aren't many more things that the law does not allow me to do. It depends on why those six things are specified. If they are specified because they are an exhaustive list, then that's fine. Everything else is possible for a lay sotapanna. But there is no evidence in Sn2.1 (or elsewhere, as far as I know) that the six grave crimes are an exhaustive list which actually defines what a sotapanna can do. They might just be examples.

I am basing the idea that a stream-entrant would not kill animals on the sutta provided by Santa and myself earlier. This is the second point that you are raising. That sutta (AN 5.179) has the Buddha saying that some lay people have restrained actions, can dwell in higher thoughts, by virtue of which can rightly call themselves stream-entrants. He asks the rhetorical question as to what restrained actions do those people have. One of them is that they don't kill. So anyone who does kill is not entitled to rightly call themselves a stream-entrant. That's an absolute. Rather than specifying what types of killing are proscribed, it proscribes killing.

That's in line with other suttas which I have provided. Here's another, AN 5.173:
Mendicants, a lay follower with five qualities is cast down to hell.
“Pañcahi, bhikkhave, dhammehi samannāgato upāsako yathābhataṁ nikkhitto evaṁ niraye.
What five?
Katamehi pañcahi?
They kill living creatures, steal, commit sexual misconduct, lie, and use alcoholic drinks that cause negligence.
Pāṇātipātī hoti …pe… surā­meraya­majja­pamādaṭ­ṭhā­yī hoti.
A lay follower with these five qualities is cast down to hell.
Imehi kho, bhikkhave, pañcahi dhammehi samannāgato upāsako yathābhataṁ nikkhitto evaṁ niraye.
Note that there is nothing about killing mothers, fathers, arahants, or particular living beings. It's just killing living beings, and no exceptions. So a lay follower who kills is cast down to hell. And because a stream-enterer has done with hell, a lay follower who kills cannot be a stream-enterer.
Not habitual killing, the sotapanna is capable of killing.
With only three fetters removed this is only wisdom to prevent one from performing acts leading to lower realms.
Habitual(without mercy) killing can lead one to lower realms. A sotapanna’s mind is not habitually thinking of killing although death and impermanence is seen continuously.

My statement is a sotapanna is capable of taking life(killing).
Buddha clearly states the training rules one is to abstain from in order to develop in samadhi.
The Buddha spoke plainly and clearly, my question is why give three specific acts of murder that a sota is incapable of performing, when according to you he has stated a sota cannot kill period?
It’s confusing to teach this way and it wouldn’t be done by the wise.
You are putting nobility on a pedestal unreachable to the masses. Stream entry is very much attainable by any who practice as Buddha taught.
Once this occurs the unbinding process is inevitable, one can if they desire take robes and dedicate their life to finishing the path or one with family can settle in to quiet rural life and farm/fish and relax while raising offspring.
User avatar
Sam Vara
Site Admin
Posts: 13482
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Portsmouth, U.K.

Re: If you become a Sotapanna will you know that?

Post by Sam Vara »

thepea wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 1:08 pm
Sam Vara wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 11:07 am
You seem to be making two points here. The first is that those who have entered the stream are capable of habitual killing, because it says (presumably in Sn 2.1?) that they will not be able to commit the six grave crimes, and these six do not include killing animals. But the fact that they do not refer to the killing of animals does not mean that the killing of animals is allowable. I can specify six things that the law does not allow me to do, but that does not mean that there aren't many more things that the law does not allow me to do. It depends on why those six things are specified. If they are specified because they are an exhaustive list, then that's fine. Everything else is possible for a lay sotapanna. But there is no evidence in Sn2.1 (or elsewhere, as far as I know) that the six grave crimes are an exhaustive list which actually defines what a sotapanna can do. They might just be examples.

I am basing the idea that a stream-entrant would not kill animals on the sutta provided by Santa and myself earlier. This is the second point that you are raising. That sutta (AN 5.179) has the Buddha saying that some lay people have restrained actions, can dwell in higher thoughts, by virtue of which can rightly call themselves stream-entrants. He asks the rhetorical question as to what restrained actions do those people have. One of them is that they don't kill. So anyone who does kill is not entitled to rightly call themselves a stream-entrant. That's an absolute. Rather than specifying what types of killing are proscribed, it proscribes killing.

That's in line with other suttas which I have provided. Here's another, AN 5.173:
Mendicants, a lay follower with five qualities is cast down to hell.
“Pañcahi, bhikkhave, dhammehi samannāgato upāsako yathābhataṁ nikkhitto evaṁ niraye.
What five?
Katamehi pañcahi?
They kill living creatures, steal, commit sexual misconduct, lie, and use alcoholic drinks that cause negligence.
Pāṇātipātī hoti …pe… surā­meraya­majja­pamādaṭ­ṭhā­yī hoti.
A lay follower with these five qualities is cast down to hell.
Imehi kho, bhikkhave, pañcahi dhammehi samannāgato upāsako yathābhataṁ nikkhitto evaṁ niraye.
Note that there is nothing about killing mothers, fathers, arahants, or particular living beings. It's just killing living beings, and no exceptions. So a lay follower who kills is cast down to hell. And because a stream-enterer has done with hell, a lay follower who kills cannot be a stream-enterer.
Not habitual killing, the sotapanna is capable of killing.
With only three fetters removed this is only wisdom to prevent one from performing acts leading to lower realms.
Habitual(without mercy) killing can lead one to lower realms. A sotapanna’s mind is not habitually thinking of killing although death and impermanence is seen continuously.
There's nothing there about habitual killing. There's the Pali, with its translation. What word corresponds to "habitual"? I would expect something like abhinha, possibly, but there doesn't appear to be one. Nor is there any thing about mercy. Just killing. Leading to the lower realms, as it says here.
My statement is a sotapanna is capable of taking life(killing).
Sure. I'm just showing the difference between your statement and the Buddha's statement.
Buddha clearly states the training rules one is to abstain from in order to develop in samadhi.
He does. Here, though, he is clearly stating what one need to abstain from in order to avoid the lower realms.
my question is why give three specific acts of murder that a sota is incapable of performing, when according to you he has stated a sota cannot kill period?
There is no contradiction there, is there? If he is incapable of killing, then he is incapable of specific acts of murder. Just as we are now incapable of landing people on any of the planets of the solar system, we are incapable of landing people on Jupiter, Mars, and Mercury. No contradiction. And note that it is not according to me. It is according to the Buddha. Both Sn 2.1 and AN 5.173 are the Buddha's words.
It’s confusing to teach this way and it wouldn’t be done by the wise.
I don't find it all that confusing. As you said, the Buddha spoke plainly and clearly. There's no contradiction between the two suttas at all.
You are putting nobility on a pedestal unreachable to the masses.
I'm only quoting the suttas here. But it is hard to live adhering to all the precepts.
Once this occurs the unbinding process is inevitable, one can if they desire take robes and dedicate their life to finishing the path or one with family can settle in to quiet rural life and farm/fish and relax while raising offspring.
Sounds great! But is this what the Buddha said, or did you make it up?
thepea
Posts: 4047
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: If you become a Sotapanna will you know that?

Post by thepea »

Sam Vara wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 1:39 pm
thepea wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 1:08 pm
Sam Vara wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 11:07 am
You seem to be making two points here. The first is that those who have entered the stream are capable of habitual killing, because it says (presumably in Sn 2.1?) that they will not be able to commit the six grave crimes, and these six do not include killing animals. But the fact that they do not refer to the killing of animals does not mean that the killing of animals is allowable. I can specify six things that the law does not allow me to do, but that does not mean that there aren't many more things that the law does not allow me to do. It depends on why those six things are specified. If they are specified because they are an exhaustive list, then that's fine. Everything else is possible for a lay sotapanna. But there is no evidence in Sn2.1 (or elsewhere, as far as I know) that the six grave crimes are an exhaustive list which actually defines what a sotapanna can do. They might just be examples.

I am basing the idea that a stream-entrant would not kill animals on the sutta provided by Santa and myself earlier. This is the second point that you are raising. That sutta (AN 5.179) has the Buddha saying that some lay people have restrained actions, can dwell in higher thoughts, by virtue of which can rightly call themselves stream-entrants. He asks the rhetorical question as to what restrained actions do those people have. One of them is that they don't kill. So anyone who does kill is not entitled to rightly call themselves a stream-entrant. That's an absolute. Rather than specifying what types of killing are proscribed, it proscribes killing.

That's in line with other suttas which I have provided. Here's another, AN 5.173:



Note that there is nothing about killing mothers, fathers, arahants, or particular living beings. It's just killing living beings, and no exceptions. So a lay follower who kills is cast down to hell. And because a stream-enterer has done with hell, a lay follower who kills cannot be a stream-enterer.
Not habitual killing, the sotapanna is capable of killing.
With only three fetters removed this is only wisdom to prevent one from performing acts leading to lower realms.
Habitual(without mercy) killing can lead one to lower realms. A sotapanna’s mind is not habitually thinking of killing although death and impermanence is seen continuously.
There's nothing there about habitual killing. There's the Pali, with its translation. What word corresponds to "habitual"? I would expect something like abhinha, possibly, but there doesn't appear to be one. Nor is there any thing about mercy. Just killing. Leading to the lower realms, as it says here.
My statement is a sotapanna is capable of taking life(killing).
Sure. I'm just showing the difference between your statement and the Buddha's statement.
Buddha clearly states the training rules one is to abstain from in order to develop in samadhi.
He does. Here, though, he is clearly stating what one need to abstain from in order to avoid the lower realms.
my question is why give three specific acts of murder that a sota is incapable of performing, when according to you he has stated a sota cannot kill period?
There is no contradiction there, is there? If he is incapable of killing, then he is incapable of specific acts of murder. Just as we are now incapable of landing people on any of the planets of the solar system, we are incapable of landing people on Jupiter, Mars, and Mercury. No contradiction. And note that it is not according to me. It is according to the Buddha. Both Sn 2.1 and AN 5.173 are the Buddha's words.
It’s confusing to teach this way and it wouldn’t be done by the wise.
I don't find it all that confusing. As you said, the Buddha spoke plainly and clearly. There's no contradiction between the two suttas at all.
You are putting nobility on a pedestal unreachable to the masses.
I'm only quoting the suttas here. But it is hard to live adhering to all the precepts.
Once this occurs the unbinding process is inevitable, one can if they desire take robes and dedicate their life to finishing the path or one with family can settle in to quiet rural life and farm/fish and relax while raising offspring.
Sounds great! But is this what the Buddha said, or did you make it up?
Let’s stay on point.
If according to you and your interpretation of the suttas a sotapanna is incapable of killing, why the redundancy of listing the actions a sota is incapable of performing?
It’s not in alignment with the consistency and clarity of the teachings.
A sotapanna is restrained from killing, is said which is not an absolute. Then in another statement specific actions a sota is incapable of performing is used as he lists the three specific types of murder.
It’s simple to comprehend that a sota can kill, but they simply are incapable of performing murder upon ones mother, father or arahant, as these require a mind residing in the lower realms which has been liberated in a sota.
User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 17191
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: If you become a Sotapanna will you know that?

Post by DNS »

thepea wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 2:27 pm If according to you and your interpretation of the suttas a sotapanna is incapable of killing, why the redundancy of listing the actions a sota is incapable of performing?
It’s not in alignment with the consistency and clarity of the teachings.
A sotapanna is restrained from killing, is said which is not an absolute. Then in another statement specific actions a sota is incapable of performing is used as he lists the three specific types of murder.
It’s simple to comprehend that a sota can kill, but they simply are incapable of performing murder upon ones mother, father or arahant, as these require a mind residing in the lower realms which has been liberated in a sota.
I know the Sutta you are referring to regading that a sotapanna cannot kill father, mother, or arahant. However, there are numerous other Suttas that state a noble one (Sotapanna or higher) does not kill or that killing leads to a low destination, hell or animal womb. A sotapanna is guaranteed not to go to a lower realm.

As Sam Vara noted, it was not necessarily meant to be an exhaustive list regarding not killing parents or arahant. Perhaps it's meaning is that anyone who kills their mother, father, or arahant will never reach sotapanna or higher, in this life. Whereas someone who kills an animal, could potentially repent, change his ways and eventually become a noble one.
He is freed from the possibility of rebirth in the four lower realms. (Ratanasutta Sn. 234)
He has abandoned any lust, hate or delusion that would be strong enough to cause rebirth in the lower realms. (Abhabba Sutta AN. iii. 438)
Monks, one possessed of three qualities is put into Purgatory according to his actions. What three? One is himself a taker of life, encourages another to do the same and approves thereof. Monks, one possessed of three qualities is put into heaven according to his actions. What three? He himself abstains from taking life, encourages another to so abstain, and approves of such abstention. Anguttara Nikaya, 3.16
(Those who kill go to lower realms, but a sotapanna does not because a sotapanna does not kill.)
"Bhikkhus, a noble disciple who possesses four things is a stream-enterer, . . . He possesses the virtues (precepts) dear to the noble ones, unbroken." Samyutta Nikaya 55.2
"The stream winner, with virtues (precepts) dear to noble ones endowed, which are unbroken and without a rent, untarnished and without a blemish, purifying, praised by the wise, uncontaminated and conducive to concentration." Anguttara Nikaya 9.27
Shortly after the death of a lay person named Sarakani, the Buddha identified him as a stream-entrant. Then some monks complained that Sarakani could not have been a stream-entrant as this lay person indulged in alcohol. But the Buddha remarked that, "Sarakani the Sakyan undertook the training at the time of his death." Samyutta Nikaya 55.24 The lay person Sarakani practiced the moral precepts in full before his death, thus, confirming that one cannot be a stream-entrant or higher if one violates the moral precepts. In the more positive way, one who follows the precepts and practices diligently, stream-entry or higher can be attained.
tamdrin
Posts: 616
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 7:34 pm
Location: Chiang Mai, Thailand

Re: If you become a Sotapanna will you know that?

Post by tamdrin »

Common sense says, yes of course you will know it. If you're not sure. You're not :juggling:
User avatar
Sam Vara
Site Admin
Posts: 13482
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Portsmouth, U.K.

Re: If you become a Sotapanna will you know that?

Post by Sam Vara »

thepea wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 2:27 pm
Sam Vara wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 1:39 pm
thepea wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 1:08 pm
Not habitual killing, the sotapanna is capable of killing.
With only three fetters removed this is only wisdom to prevent one from performing acts leading to lower realms.
Habitual(without mercy) killing can lead one to lower realms. A sotapanna’s mind is not habitually thinking of killing although death and impermanence is seen continuously.
There's nothing there about habitual killing. There's the Pali, with its translation. What word corresponds to "habitual"? I would expect something like abhinha, possibly, but there doesn't appear to be one. Nor is there any thing about mercy. Just killing. Leading to the lower realms, as it says here.
My statement is a sotapanna is capable of taking life(killing).
Sure. I'm just showing the difference between your statement and the Buddha's statement.
Buddha clearly states the training rules one is to abstain from in order to develop in samadhi.
He does. Here, though, he is clearly stating what one need to abstain from in order to avoid the lower realms.
my question is why give three specific acts of murder that a sota is incapable of performing, when according to you he has stated a sota cannot kill period?
There is no contradiction there, is there? If he is incapable of killing, then he is incapable of specific acts of murder. Just as we are now incapable of landing people on any of the planets of the solar system, we are incapable of landing people on Jupiter, Mars, and Mercury. No contradiction. And note that it is not according to me. It is according to the Buddha. Both Sn 2.1 and AN 5.173 are the Buddha's words.
It’s confusing to teach this way and it wouldn’t be done by the wise.
I don't find it all that confusing. As you said, the Buddha spoke plainly and clearly. There's no contradiction between the two suttas at all.
You are putting nobility on a pedestal unreachable to the masses.
I'm only quoting the suttas here. But it is hard to live adhering to all the precepts.
Once this occurs the unbinding process is inevitable, one can if they desire take robes and dedicate their life to finishing the path or one with family can settle in to quiet rural life and farm/fish and relax while raising offspring.
Sounds great! But is this what the Buddha said, or did you make it up?
Let’s stay on point.
I am on point. Everything I said above was in direct response to your post. Not an extraneous word.
If according to you and your interpretation of the suttas a sotapanna is incapable of killing, why the redundancy of listing the actions a sota is incapable of performing?
It’s not in alignment with the consistency and clarity of the teachings.
There's no redundancy there. In one sutta, the Buddha said that the sotapanna does not kill. In another sutta, he says that the sotapanna does not kill specific people. The second is logically derivable from the first as a simple syllogism. The stream-enterer does not kill living beings. Mothers, fathers and arahants are living beings. Therefore the stream-enterer does not kill mothers, fathers, and arahants.

Are you saying that whenever the Buddha gives a list, he intends it to be read as an exhaustive list? i.e. that the three things listed always have to be the only three things in that category? That he wouldn't bother to give a list if there were things outside of the list which had the same characteristics?
A sotapanna is restrained from killing, is said which is not an absolute.
It says quite clearly in the quote I gave that he refrains from killing. Pāṇātipātā paṭivirato hoti. That's not qualified or modified in any way. There is no mention of whether it is done compassionately, or just to feed one's family, or who or what is killed. The noble disciple simply refrains from it. Similarly, in the other quote, the person who kills goes to hell. It's unmodified, not qualified, just a simple statement of fact.
It’s simple to comprehend that a sota can kill,
It might be simple if you didn't read the suttas.
thepea
Posts: 4047
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: If you become a Sotapanna will you know that?

Post by thepea »

DNS wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 4:34 pm
I know the Sutta you are referring to regading that a sotapanna cannot kill father, mother, or arahant. However, there are numerous other Suttas that state a noble one (Sotapanna or higher) does not kill or that killing leads to a low destination, hell or animal womb. A sotapanna is guaranteed not to go to a lower realm.

As Sam Vara noted, it was not necessarily meant to be an exhaustive list regarding not killing parents or arahant. Perhaps it's meaning is that anyone who kills their mother, father, or arahant will never reach sotapanna or higher, in this life. Whereas someone who kills an animal, could potentially repent, change his ways and eventually become a noble one.
He is freed from the possibility of rebirth in the four lower realms. (Ratanasutta Sn. 234)
He has abandoned any lust, hate or delusion that would be strong enough to cause rebirth in the lower realms. (Abhabba Sutta AN. iii. 438)
Monks, one possessed of three qualities is put into Purgatory according to his actions. What three? One is himself a taker of life, encourages another to do the same and approves thereof. Monks, one possessed of three qualities is put into heaven according to his actions. What three? He himself abstains from taking life, encourages another to so abstain, and approves of such abstention. Anguttara Nikaya, 3.16
(Those who kill go to lower realms, but a sotapanna does not because a sotapanna does not kill.)
"Bhikkhus, a noble disciple who possesses four things is a stream-enterer, . . . He possesses the virtues (precepts) dear to the noble ones, unbroken." Samyutta Nikaya 55.2
"The stream winner, with virtues (precepts) dear to noble ones endowed, which are unbroken and without a rent, untarnished and without a blemish, purifying, praised by the wise, uncontaminated and conducive to concentration." Anguttara Nikaya 9.27
Shortly after the death of a lay person named Sarakani, the Buddha identified him as a stream-entrant. Then some monks complained that Sarakani could not have been a stream-entrant as this lay person indulged in alcohol. But the Buddha remarked that, "Sarakani the Sakyan undertook the training at the time of his death." Samyutta Nikaya 55.24 The lay person Sarakani practiced the moral precepts in full before his death, thus, confirming that one cannot be a stream-entrant or higher if one violates the moral precepts. In the more positive way, one who follows the precepts and practices diligently, stream-entry or higher can be attained.
That is your opinion, the sutta is clearly written and there is no need to assume this was a longer list. It is simply what it is.

Agreed.

Agreed.

Purgatory: the term applied to a sworn statement where a person purges himself and attempts to clear himself of wrong doing or misconduct.
This sutta is addressed to monastic who have to follow precepts, I assume a monastic who breaks precept will be placed in purgatory until this has been properly dealt with.
Layman does not have to follow precepts as a monastic does.

I disagree that a sotapanna does not kill. A mattress infested with bedbugs and a sota saying all living beings residing in this mattress please leave now as this is soon to be superheated and this will not be good for you. This killing does not lead to lower realms. A sota dropping a hook in the water and saying only fish who desire to offer their flesh as merit to feed my family take this bait all others please leave it alone. This type of killing is not leading to lower realms of hell.

Virtue is behaviour. I possess the behaviour dear to the noble ones. To those not noble my behaviour may seem quite in opposition to the masses. This is because I am noble and possess this wisdom which the masses do not.
You could find a noble in court being found guilty of offence by a judge, this still does not mean this man is not noble. It means society is not ready for this level of behaviour. Take the persecution of blacks or Jews in past, a sota could have been present in these groups and killed or jailed.

That last sutta is fraudulent waste added in afterwords to conflate another agenda. The guy drank his entire life then concentration leading to insight would be impossible. Unless he abstained for a period of time for this to occur.
Who cares after dead, it becomes belief and Buddha taught wisdom not belief.
thepea
Posts: 4047
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: If you become a Sotapanna will you know that?

Post by thepea »

tamdrin wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 5:43 pm Common sense says, yes of course you will know it. If you're not sure. You're not :juggling:
I know I have no doubt.
Post Reply