Living remotely isn't for the unenlightened?

[TRobinson465]

So I found this sutta here. It seems to imply that dwelling in the forest isn't a good idea if your not an arahant, or at least very far along the path. So like what, does this mean we shouldnt go into the forest unless we already have some attainments? It seems almost like theravada buddhists encourage forest dwelling nowadays but it isn't even recommended unless you have attainments already. Thoughts?

“But Master Gotama, remote lodgings in the wilderness and the forest are challenging. It’s hard to maintain seclusion and hard to find joy in it. Staying alone, the forests seem to rob the mind of a mendicant who isn’t immersed in samādhi.”

“That’s so true, brahmin! Everything you say is true, brahmin! Before my awakening—when I was still unawakened but intent on awakening—I too thought, ‘Remote lodgings in the wilderness and the forest are challenging. It’s hard to maintain seclusion, and hard to find joy in it. Staying alone, the forests seem to rob the mind of a mendicant who isn’t immersed in samādhi.’ Then I thought, ‘There are ascetics and brahmins with unpurified conduct of body, speech, and mind who frequent remote lodgings in the wilderness and the forest. Those ascetics and brahmins summon unskillful fear and dread because of these defects in their conduct. But I don’t frequent remote lodgings in the wilderness and the forest with unpurified conduct of body, speech, and mind. My conduct is purified. I am one of those noble ones who frequent remote lodgings in the wilderness and the forest with purified conduct of body, speech, and mind.’"

https://suttacentral.net/mn4/en/sujato

[Nicolas]

These quotes from the Vinaya may be useful (my bolding):

Now at that time a certain monk was staying in a forest and there came to be comfort for him in this lodging. Then it occurred to this monk: “It is laid down by the Lord that one should not live independently. I am in need of guidance, but I am staying in a forest and there comes to be comfort for me in this lodging. Now what line of conduct should be followed by me?” They told this matter to the Lord. He said:

“I allow a monk, monks, if he is a forest-dweller and is thinking about abiding in comfort and is not receiving guidance, to live independently, thinking: ‘If a suitable giver of guidance comes along, I will live under his guidance’.”

Earlier, this following quote: the qualities possessed of which one may live independently are pretty much the same as the qualities a preceptor should have (the major difference being 10+ years for the preceptor and 5+ years to live independently):

“I allow, monks, an experienced competent monk to live five years in dependence (but) an inexperienced one all his life.

Monks, if a monk is possessed of five qualities he may live independently [repeated]:
[...]
if he is possessed of an adept’s (asekkhena) body of moral habit … body of concentration … body of wisdom … body of freedom … body of vision and knowledge of freedom.
[...]
if he comes to have faith, if he comes to feel shame, if he comes to be cautious, if he comes to be of stirred up energy, if he comes to be of ready mindfulness.
[...]
if, in regard to moral habit, he does not come to have fallen away from moral habit; if, in regard to good habits, he does not come to have fallen away from good habits; if, in regard to (right) view, he does not come to have fallen away from (right) view; if he comes to have heard much; if he comes to be intelligent.
[...]
if he knows what is an offence, if he knows what is not an offence, if he knows what is a slight offence, if he knows what is a serious offence, if he is of five years’ standing or of more than five years’ standing.
[...]
[+a sixth quality:] if he is of five years’ standing or more than five years’ standing.

And a last one:

Five forest-dwellers: one is a forest-dweller from stupidity from confusion; one of evil desires, filled with covetousness is a forest-dweller; one is a forest-dweller from madness, from a deranged mind; one is a forest-dweller at the thought, “It is praised by Buddhas and disciples of Buddhas”; one is a forest-dweller because he is of few wishes, because of contentment, because of subduedness, because of aloofness, because this is of good avail.

[BKh]

You might also like the Meghiya sutta
https://suttafriends.org/sutta/an9-2/

And the Upali sutta:
https://suttacentral.net/an10.99/en/sujato

But it is good to make the distinction between living away from society and living away from other humans. Living away from society is important. It's living away from any kalyanamitta that is dangerous.

[sentinel]

Surely newbies are not encouraged to do so . It seems to have trainings under a good teacher or dhamma adept that could help us trains in the forest is necessary . For a novice that is a dangerous move . Learning precepts follows by suttas first then proceeds to meditation is more
appropriate .

[form]

Certain things like not handling money etc. Are definitely not easy at all. Living remotely, does that mean in some remote spot and not seeing another human?

[dharmacorps]

I'd suggest looking up translations of this sutta from other sources. The translation here looks a little problematic.

[2600htz]

Hi:

Well the Buddha as a bodhisattva was not an arahant, he didnt even have jhana for the most part of that time. But he was a forest dweller, as many ascetics did, not even buddhists.

The point of the sutta is that you need to have an inclination to renunciation (personality), and you need to be a moral person with some control over your mind in order to have that kind of life.

Regards.

[bodhifollower]

Your quote says it all. Living remotely isn't for the unvirtuous. But if you are virtuous, highly virtuous, not doing the slightest things wise person would censor, the wilderness is very peaceful.