Imperfect morality and sotapanna

Buddhist ethical conduct including the Five Precepts (Pañcasikkhāpada), and Eightfold Ethical Conduct (Aṭṭhasīla).
thepea
Posts: 1731
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Imperfect morality and sotapanna

Post by thepea »

SDC wrote: Mon Sep 14, 2020 3:56 am
thepea wrote: Sun Sep 13, 2020 11:41 pm Support for practice, to develop in parmis is important.
If a monestary doesn’t agree with you, to foreign or doing a different practice, then this is not suitable. The vibration will not be harmonious.
A sotāpanna, who knows the extent of that accomplishment, wouldn't need harmony according to the suttas (which you don't trust because they "might" be wrong). A sotāpanna is a source of Right View, lower fetters broken, inclined towards Nibbana, free from states of woe - they need food and empty lodgings to refine that view into arahantship. Indeed a lay sotāpanna can break all of the precepts according to the suttas, but that is not the point I'm arguing here. I'm saying that a sotāpanna knows what his right view is, and doesn't need ideal external conditions to maintain it.

Sorry for having such a high standard for the state of sotāpatti, but I've grown weary of many of the contemporary notions that treat it as a choice, making it so much less than it is described.
thepea wrote: Sun Sep 13, 2020 11:41 pm Why do I have to be chill, with our human rights being stripped from us? I think the awakened saints among the sleepy masses are Inclined to rise up for the betterment of mankind.
Human rights are for the world. They are for the betterment of the world around you, external to you. In these terms, the world is the counterpart of you, the congruence of which would mean harmony for you. Wanting a better world means the change to arrange the congruence is external, and up to others, dependent on the world. Instead of ridding the experience of that need altogether, which is the real freedom described by the Buddha, the better world becomes the need.

I'm not saying this to provoke you into talking about worldly issues. I'm saying it because I don't think is about the worldly issues at all. I'd rather not look in that direction in this discussion. I don't believe the sotāpanna, let alone the arahant, has any need whatsoever for that congruence between internal and external in the terms described above. He has understood concern for that counterpart of his Self in that world was nothing other than the desire to tend to the concerns of his Self, which he now can see is not the reason for his experience and never was. Now he is concerned with the Law of Dhamma, where he is now striving to reach the end of the world.

I understand your concern about dangerous ideas being entwined in Buddhism, but considering I'm here lobbying for a very high standard found in the suttas, I doubt that can be called dangerous. Dangerous ideas that minimize and trivialize things that are very important. I'm quite sure you'll agree with me on that pont.
Of course you need harmony and suitable place to practice and develop parmis. Dhamma service is huge part in development, servitude towards others.
If you are with a group performing rituals, practices that you cannot support then there is no room for service in a whole hearted way.
It must be a proper fit.
At goenka centres, I agreed with their practice and formula, it was a perfect fit. A suitable place to practice.
Until recently with their Covid reopening, they are mandating masks and will not accept any exceptions. I was told that first course maskless I will be offered a spot but until then I am not allowed to sit or serve a course as long as this continues. As they know my attainments they said you have everything you need to practice at home. I understand that they will do whatever it takes to spread dhamma to even just one more student. This is the divisive nature of gov and health interventions currently.

Human rights are for the world, but never forget the balance required to seek out and practice dhamma. To much pleasure and no look, to much pain and no look, conditions of humanity must be a balance of the two.
This is what I keep my focus upon. At current we are heading into a globalist one governing body, they are working in lockstep and human rights are taking a backseat to their needs. I won’t go into detail of these coming changes but the buddha has warned of them. Few will be allowed to ordain.
User avatar
Dhamma Chameleon
Posts: 185
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2018 10:55 am

Re: Imperfect morality and sotapanna

Post by Dhamma Chameleon »

:goodpost:
SDC wrote: Mon Sep 14, 2020 3:56 am
Human rights are for the world. They are for the betterment of the world around you, external to you. In these terms, the world is the counterpart of you, the congruence of which would mean harmony for you. Wanting a better world means the change to arrange the congruence is external, and up to others, dependent on the world. Instead of ridding the experience of that need altogether, which is the real freedom described by the Buddha, the better world becomes the need.
Of course compassion can still move you to engage with conditions for a better world, but this is underpinned by right view too.
User avatar
SDC
Posts: 6410
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: Imperfect morality and sotapanna

Post by SDC »

thepea wrote: Mon Sep 14, 2020 11:25 am Of course you need harmony and suitable place to practice and develop parmis. Dhamma service is huge part in development, servitude towards others.
If you are with a group performing rituals, practices that you cannot support then there is no room for service in a whole hearted way.
It must be a proper fit.
All indications are that a sotāpanna no longer needs such things. It is a very high degree of development...again, according to scripture. I'm not provoking you with this my insistence on this point, I just want to be clear that I'm doing my very best to responsibly present the high standard provided in the texts, which do not trivialize or mistreat the seriousness of this matter whatsoever.
thepea wrote: Mon Sep 14, 2020 11:25 am Until recently with their Covid reopening, they are mandating masks and will not accept any exceptions. I was told that first course maskless I will be offered a spot but until then I am not allowed to sit or serve a course as long as this continues. As they know my attainments they said you have everything you need to practice at home. I understand that they will do whatever it takes to spread dhamma to even just one more student. This is the divisive nature of gov and health interventions currently.

Human rights are for the world, but never forget the balance required to seek out and practice dhamma. To much pleasure and no look, to much pain and no look, conditions of humanity must be a balance of the two.
This is what I keep my focus upon. At current we are heading into a globalist one governing body, they are working in lockstep and human rights are taking a backseat to their needs. I won’t go into detail of these coming changes but the buddha has warned of them. Few will be allowed to ordain.
All in all I have no problem with you being a part if this community, but you really need to accept how much these views put you at odds with the fundamental tenets of the themes found in the texts, which stand at the core of what people on this site are trying to follow. Any changes the Buddha warned about were inevitable deteriorations of his dispensation, which the sotāpanna would be well-inclined to accept; maybe not being totally complacent or complicit, but there surely would be no effort to prevent what is not preventable in terms of that decline. The flood has practically been crossed for the sotāpanna, and he would have no obligation to now turn around and settle the turbulent waters, which he navigated intentionally using a method that had nothing to do with making that water any less dangerous. He simply used the correct raft in the proper way. I'm just suggesting you take responsibility for the fact that the standard among the members here, who hold the texts in high regard, equally may not be willing to be complicit in accepting views that are opposed it.

That will always put you at odds. It doesn't mean you shouldn't stay, but when you make the repeated accusation that there are potential mistakes in those texts - texts that state that a sotāpanna should be able to flush out any such mistakes on his own - you can't be surprised when people are not pleased about it. Additionally, you offer no evidence for these claims, which compounds the discrepancy. Are you really so surprised that people here are struggling to accept your ideas?

Once again, I share your concern about dangerous views having been swept up with the different traditions, however I do not think you're showing enough appreciation for just how high of standard is being held in the suttas, which preceeds all traditions. You speak as if the whole thing has been deliberately reduced to a few streamlined methods that have no regard for the important nuances. That is plainly untrue, and I think you would be very pleased to see the level of detail, along with a high degree of importance placed on much of what is described.
User avatar
SDC
Posts: 6410
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: Imperfect morality and sotapanna

Post by SDC »

Dhamma Chameleon wrote: Mon Sep 14, 2020 11:46 am :goodpost:
SDC wrote: Mon Sep 14, 2020 3:56 am
Human rights are for the world. They are for the betterment of the world around you, external to you. In these terms, the world is the counterpart of you, the congruence of which would mean harmony for you. Wanting a better world means the change to arrange the congruence is external, and up to others, dependent on the world. Instead of ridding the experience of that need altogether, which is the real freedom described by the Buddha, the better world becomes the need.
Of course compassion can still move you to engage with conditions for a better world, but this is underpinned by right view too.
Seems that soothing, or otherwise beneficial effects would undoubtedly be the situation surrounding a sotāpanna, but that could not have been the primary reason for their acquisition of Right view. Sure it may have been the original reason such a person sought the Buddha, but ultimately they made the choice to clear the defilement on the closest, most personal end of the spectrum, while leaving the world as it was. What they do after is on them, but like I said above, the notion of "obligation" to tend to the world is a tough sell. But passion for the betterment of the world? Damn near inconceivable. They know that the true escape, which they have partially gained, was not done so on account of the world's betterment; so in order to generate passion and motivation in that direction for others, would require a view very discrepant from their sotāpatti.

I'm definitely out on a limb here, but based on the different accounts of Right View in the suttas, I cannot imagine it any other way.
thepea
Posts: 1731
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Imperfect morality and sotapanna

Post by thepea »

SDC wrote: Mon Sep 14, 2020 6:17 pm
thepea wrote: Mon Sep 14, 2020 11:25 am Of course you need harmony and suitable place to practice and develop parmis. Dhamma service is huge part in development, servitude towards others.
If you are with a group performing rituals, practices that you cannot support then there is no room for service in a whole hearted way.
It must be a proper fit.
All indications are that a sotāpanna no longer needs such things. It is a very high degree of development...again, according to scripture. I'm not provoking you with this my insistence on this point, I just want to be clear that I'm doing my very best to responsibly present the high standard provided in the texts, which do not trivialize or mistreat the seriousness of this matter whatsoever.
thepea wrote: Mon Sep 14, 2020 11:25 am Until recently with their Covid reopening, they are mandating masks and will not accept any exceptions. I was told that first course maskless I will be offered a spot but until then I am not allowed to sit or serve a course as long as this continues. As they know my attainments they said you have everything you need to practice at home. I understand that they will do whatever it takes to spread dhamma to even just one more student. This is the divisive nature of gov and health interventions currently.

Human rights are for the world, but never forget the balance required to seek out and practice dhamma. To much pleasure and no look, to much pain and no look, conditions of humanity must be a balance of the two.
This is what I keep my focus upon. At current we are heading into a globalist one governing body, they are working in lockstep and human rights are taking a backseat to their needs. I won’t go into detail of these coming changes but the buddha has warned of them. Few will be allowed to ordain.
All in all I have no problem with you being a part if this community, but you really need to accept how much these views put you at odds with the fundamental tenets of the themes found in the texts, which stand at the core of what people on this site are trying to follow. Any changes the Buddha warned about were inevitable deteriorations of his dispensation, which the sotāpanna would be well-inclined to accept; maybe not being totally complacent or complicit, but there surely would be no effort to prevent what is not preventable in terms of that decline. The flood has practically been crossed for the sotāpanna, and he would have no obligation to now turn around and settle the turbulent waters, which he navigated intentionally using a method that had nothing to do with making that water any less dangerous. He simply used the correct raft in the proper way. I'm just suggesting you take responsibility for the fact that the standard among the members here, who hold the texts in high regard, equally may not be willing to be complicit in accepting views that are opposed it.

That will always put you at odds. It doesn't mean you shouldn't stay, but when you make the repeated accusation that there are potential mistakes in those texts - texts that state that a sotāpanna should be able to flush out any such mistakes on his own - you can't be surprised when people are not pleased about it. Additionally, you offer no evidence for these claims, which compounds the discrepancy. Are you really so surprised that people here are struggling to accept your ideas?

Once again, I share your concern about dangerous views having been swept up with the different traditions, however I do not think you're showing enough appreciation for just how high of standard is being held in the suttas, which preceeds all traditions. You speak as if the whole thing has been deliberately reduced to a few streamlined methods that have no regard for the important nuances. That is plainly untrue, and I think you would be very pleased to see the level of detail, along with a high degree of importance placed on much of what is described.
I will be banned again if I attempt to point out the difficulties I see with Buddhism.
You are correct that there is I am in minority here with regards to suttas and their validity. The discrepancies are subtle but can be the difference in good and evil.
This is impossible for me to get into a topic discussion here at DW due to the inherent fact that this underlying force rests up and I’m hit from many sides with questions. Over the years I have developed extreme patience when discussing things here as I can only go so far until I’m cut off, silenced, censored and cast aside.
This is a truth, it leaves me quite skeptical with the wisdom of this site.
I am sotapanna, by all definition in suttas, from mahasi sayadaws descriptions, and from recognition within my teachers words. This does not mean I am free from sufferings, cannot get into arguments, cannot err in moral decisions. I am not arahant. I have sufferings that I react towards blindly, but didn’t one wise monk refer to sotapanna as “fish sauce”??
I mean fish sauce seems like the apprentice level, not the master level, am I mistaken?
At days end I have glimpsed nibanna, this single experience clarified things that I could never fathom without this experience, now with this experience and wisdom it is so easy to understand how it all fits together as this other dimension has been gifted to me.
I cannot access this this nibbanic experience on it own but I can discern nibanna is always present in the background. Just absolute peace always there regardless.
Does this make any sense to you.

With regard to DW and their views.
I am working for a banker currently, he was adamant about us being in a capitalist system. My response was can you answer one question for me, what about the bailouts in 2008?
His response was, well no system is perfect we are mostly cspatslist. I said I disagree, when you change the outcome of the systems natural outcome of failure, you have created a new system which is corrupted and benefits only the few and not the many.
Dhamma must be pure, the laws of nature function in perfect harmony based on kamma. To corrupt the buddhas teachings even in the slightest is to go against the laws of nature.
binocular
Posts: 8292
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Imperfect morality and sotapanna

Post by binocular »

thepea wrote: Mon Sep 14, 2020 8:16 pmI will be banned again if I attempt to point out the difficulties I see with Buddhism.
You are correct that there is I am in minority here with regards to suttas and their validity. The discrepancies are subtle but can be the difference in good and evil.
This is impossible for me to get into a topic discussion here at DW due to the inherent fact that this underlying force rests up and I’m hit from many sides with questions. Over the years I have developed extreme patience when discussing things here as I can only go so far until I’m cut off, silenced, censored and cast aside.
So, to quote you from elsewhere:
thepea wrote: Fri Aug 28, 2020 10:20 amAnd nobody is responsible for a kid who dies from catching a virus from a fellow student. It’s just part of life.
So you expect children and their parents to be at peace with dying from the virus, and consider it to be just part of life.

Well, right back atcha: If you can't get ordained, or don't feel appreciated here, then why aren't you at peace with it, and consider it to be just part of life?

You expect other people to just be okay with dying, but you're not okay with not being able to ordain?


Nevermind that even in times without a pandemic, someone with your requirements wouldn't likely find a place to ordain anyway.
I am sotapanna, by all definition in suttas, from mahasi sayadaws descriptions, and from recognition within my teachers words.
In that case, most people here, no matter how much they otherwise differ in their views, are pretty unanimous about your options.
I mean fish sauce seems like the apprentice level, not the master level, am I mistaken?
Then you need someone who can take you to the next level.
And if you'd really be as advanced as you say that you are, you wouldn't be looking for input in places that are, by your estimate, below your level.
Hic Rhodus, hic salta!
User avatar
Dhamma Chameleon
Posts: 185
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2018 10:55 am

Re: Imperfect morality and sotapanna

Post by Dhamma Chameleon »

SDC wrote: Mon Sep 14, 2020 6:48 pm What they do after is on them, but like I said above, the notion of "obligation" to tend to the world is a tough sell. But passion for the betterment of the world? Damn near inconceivable. They know that the true escape, which they have partially gained, was not done so on account of the world's betterment; so in order to generate passion and motivation in that direction for others, would require a view very discrepant from their sotāpatti.

I'm definitely out on a limb here, but based on the different accounts of Right View in the suttas, I cannot imagine it any other way.
Yes, I agree that any passion or obligation felt towards the world would be changed by stream entry. As I understand the canon, ariyas still have different personalities and inclinations with some strongly driven by compassion. There are plenty of accounts of lay followers and monastics who choose to remain helpfully engaged - providing teaching, service or philantrophy - out of clear-seeing compassion (temporarily until they go forth, for the remainder of their lifetime, or until their own postponed enlightenment over many lifetimes if you follow the bodhisattva ideal).
thepea
Posts: 1731
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Imperfect morality and sotapanna

Post by thepea »

binocular wrote: Tue Sep 15, 2020 5:07 am
thepea wrote: Mon Sep 14, 2020 8:16 pmI will be banned again if I attempt to point out the difficulties I see with Buddhism.
You are correct that there is I am in minority here with regards to suttas and their validity. The discrepancies are subtle but can be the difference in good and evil.
This is impossible for me to get into a topic discussion here at DW due to the inherent fact that this underlying force rests up and I’m hit from many sides with questions. Over the years I have developed extreme patience when discussing things here as I can only go so far until I’m cut off, silenced, censored and cast aside.
So, to quote you from elsewhere:
thepea wrote: Fri Aug 28, 2020 10:20 amAnd nobody is responsible for a kid who dies from catching a virus from a fellow student. It’s just part of life.
So you expect children and their parents to be at peace with dying from the virus, and consider it to be just part of life.

Well, right back atcha: If you can't get ordained, or don't feel appreciated here, then why aren't you at peace with it, and consider it to be just part of life?

You expect other people to just be okay with dying, but you're not okay with not being able to ordain?


Nevermind that even in times without a pandemic, someone with your requirements wouldn't likely find a place to ordain anyway.
I am sotapanna, by all definition in suttas, from mahasi sayadaws descriptions, and from recognition within my teachers words.
In that case, most people here, no matter how much they otherwise differ in their views, are pretty unanimous about your options.
I mean fish sauce seems like the apprentice level, not the master level, am I mistaken?
Then you need someone who can take you to the next level.
And if you'd really be as advanced as you say that you are, you wouldn't be looking for input in places that are, by your estimate, below your level.
Intention or volition is my point.
When you are not sick or asymptomatic it is not your intention to give others germs, but this happens because these germs are not ours. They are germs they are everywhere.
If you are known sick, then I feel it appropriate to take some precautions like staying home and resting until you are feeling better.
There is no foul if you don’t know you are sick and give a germ to another, there is very minor foul if you are knowingly sick and unintentionally give someone a germ.
You have no control of airborne microscopic virus particulates as in order to breathe these pass freely.

As a sotapanna, I know what needs to be done.
I am committed to bringing an end to this suffering.
thepea
Posts: 1731
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Imperfect morality and sotapanna

Post by thepea »

Dhamma Chameleon wrote: Tue Sep 15, 2020 8:02 am
SDC wrote: Mon Sep 14, 2020 6:48 pm What they do after is on them, but like I said above, the notion of "obligation" to tend to the world is a tough sell. But passion for the betterment of the world? Damn near inconceivable. They know that the true escape, which they have partially gained, was not done so on account of the world's betterment; so in order to generate passion and motivation in that direction for others, would require a view very discrepant from their sotāpatti.

I'm definitely out on a limb here, but based on the different accounts of Right View in the suttas, I cannot imagine it any other way.
Yes, I agree that any passion or obligation felt towards the world would be changed by stream entry. As I understand the canon, ariyas still have different personalities and inclinations with some strongly driven by compassion. There are plenty of accounts of lay followers and monastics who choose to remain helpfully engaged - providing teaching, service or philantrophy - out of clear-seeing compassion (temporarily until they go forth, for the remainder of their lifetime, or until their own postponed enlightenment over many lifetimes if you follow the bodhisattva ideal).
As a sotapanna, I can tell you that when you remove the stuff, nibanna remains.
Nibanna is a companion, always.
The fear of death in day to day life is removed, you know what awaits ultimately, and that there is nothing to fear or crave for.
binocular
Posts: 8292
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Imperfect morality and sotapanna

Post by binocular »

thepea wrote: Tue Sep 15, 2020 8:24 amAs a sotapanna, I know what needs to be done.
Then you should have no problem with not being able to ordain, due to the pandemic or whatever other reason.
Hic Rhodus, hic salta!
User avatar
confusedlayman
Posts: 3591
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2019 12:16 am
Location: Human Realm (as of now)

Re: Imperfect morality and sotapanna

Post by confusedlayman »

Friends

One doubt

Buddha said sotapanna wont commit 5 precepts break

Coming back to question... is that means that sota also dont think of thoughts of having xx with anyone other than wife or thoughts of killing someone (daydreaming of him being a soilder) or thought of anything which when clinging is equalent to netherworld beings (bhava) ??
dont think
User avatar
Dhamma Chameleon
Posts: 185
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2018 10:55 am

Re: Imperfect morality and sotapanna

Post by Dhamma Chameleon »

confusedlayman wrote: Tue Sep 15, 2020 8:49 am
Buddha said sotapanna wont commit 5 precepts break
He did not say this, as mentioned ever so many times on this and other threads.
User avatar
confusedlayman
Posts: 3591
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2019 12:16 am
Location: Human Realm (as of now)

Re: Imperfect morality and sotapanna

Post by confusedlayman »

Dhamma Chameleon wrote: Tue Sep 15, 2020 9:45 am
confusedlayman wrote: Tue Sep 15, 2020 8:49 am
Buddha said sotapanna wont commit 5 precepts break
He did not say this, as mentioned ever so many times on this and other threads.
What?
dont think
User avatar
SDC
Posts: 6410
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: Imperfect morality and sotapanna

Post by SDC »

confusedlayman wrote: Tue Sep 15, 2020 11:43 am
Dhamma Chameleon wrote: Tue Sep 15, 2020 9:45 am
confusedlayman wrote: Tue Sep 15, 2020 8:49 am
Buddha said sotapanna wont commit 5 precepts break
He did not say this, as mentioned ever so many times on this and other threads.
What?
DC is saying that there are numerous suttas that list what a sotāpanna can't do. Technically, they can still break all five precepts, however they cannot intentionally kill their mother, father or an arahant. That means that there is still the potential that they could intentionally kill any other person. There is still the potential to steal, lie, commit sexual misconduct, and drink alcohol. Although based on almost every other account - aside from the far-too-famous (for the wrong reason) case of Sarakāni, who was a drunk until his attainment - a lay sotāpanna seemed to go on living a very pure and wonderful life, having all but abandoned the position from which they would have the need to commit any of those most harsh physical acts.
User avatar
confusedlayman
Posts: 3591
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2019 12:16 am
Location: Human Realm (as of now)

Re: Imperfect morality and sotapanna

Post by confusedlayman »

SDC wrote: Tue Sep 15, 2020 3:19 pm
confusedlayman wrote: Tue Sep 15, 2020 11:43 am
Dhamma Chameleon wrote: Tue Sep 15, 2020 9:45 am

He did not say this, as mentioned ever so many times on this and other threads.
What?
DC is saying that there are numerous suttas that list what a sotāpanna can't do. Technically, they can still break all five precepts, however they cannot intentionally kill their mother, father or an arahant. That means that there is still the potential that they could intentionally kill any other person. There is still the potential to steal, lie, commit sexual misconduct, and drink alcohol. Although based on almost every other account - aside from the far-too-famous (for the wrong reason) case of Sarakāni, who was a drunk until his attainment - a lay sotāpanna seemed to go on living a very pure and wonderful life, having all but abandoned the position from which they would have the need to commit any of those most harsh physical acts.
how can sotapanna kill or lie or steal? do u have sutta? or u lowering the sotapnna attainment? uninteltionally is ok but intentionally is not ok.
dont think
Post Reply