7 lives after stream entry

[retrofuturist]

Greetings Lostitude,

But then I wonder why the suttas themselves contain such a wealth of information about precisely this kind of questions, if such questions are a waste of time and energy.

I would suggest they don't really do that. Here is an extended extract of what DooDoot provided above... note the differences between the two types of right view and who posesses them.

"And what is right view? Right view, I tell you, is of two sorts: There is right view with effluents, siding with merit, resulting in acquisitions [of becoming]; there is right view that is noble, without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the path.

"And what is the right view with effluents, siding with merit, resulting in acquisitions? 'There is what is given, what is offered, what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of good & bad actions. There is this world & the next world. There is mother & father. There are spontaneously reborn beings; there are contemplatives & brahmans who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is the right view with effluents, siding with merit, resulting in acquisitions.

"And what is the right view that is noble, without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the path? The discernment, the faculty of discernment, the strength of discernment, analysis of qualities as a factor for awakening, the path factor of right view in one developing the noble path whose mind is noble, whose mind is without effluents, who is fully possessed of the noble path. This is the right view that is noble, without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the path.

Again, returning to MN2 there is appropriate attention and there is inappropriate attention. To one who possesses noble right view (i.e. the Right View of the aryas), it would be inappropriate for them to attend as described in MN2. For a putthujana however, Right View with Effluents is superior to wrong view, and thus, concerns about future births etc. (i.e. "There is this world & the next world") are less inappropriate.

Regarding the current debate, if I got it right, there are two main positions:
-Those who fully trust the translations and find the concept of rebirth to be constistent with th whole corpus of the suttas, regardless of whether the word rebirth is specifically stated in the pali or not,
-Those who do not find the word rebirth in the pali and understand the idea expressed in the pali texts to refer to something more figurative, while at the same time suspecting later additions in the suttas that would explain the few instances where rebirth seems to be meant in the litteral sense.

Did I get it right?

They are two positions. I cannot say whether they are the "main ones". I can only speak for myself, as I have done in recent postings in this topic.

Metta,
Paul.

[DooDoot]

an 3.87

As an introduction, AN 3.87 is similar to AN 9.12. AN 9.12 starts with [the Arahant] Sariputta for some reason visiting wanderers of other paths (rather than sitting in meditation) and then the Buddha teaching this "secret knowledge" about the different types of stream-enterers only to Sariputta; where the Buddha says such "secret knowledge" would lead to negligence if he taught it openly:

Up until now, Sāriputta, I have not felt the need to give this exposition of the teaching to the monks, nuns, laymen, and laywomen.

For I didn’t want those who heard it to introduce negligence.

However, I have spoken it in order to answer your question.”

https://suttacentral.net/an9.12/en/sujato

My turn at Scrabble, again ... maybe DNS PhD can invent 'Dhamma Scrabble'...

[budo]

Greetings DooDoot, all,

I suppose what I am saying is it difficult to reach agreement on these matters. Buddhism began as a meditative tradition about "visible here & now Dhamma" but now everyone is speculating about how a stream-enterer carries knowledge over seven lives. In the suttas, most stream-enterer monks (such as Kondanna & Sariputta) became Arahants in a very short amount of time.

I think that's a good summary... the Buddha was always encouraging monks to strive for arahantship in this very lifetime. Anything that leads to conception of a self in the past, present or future is not aligned with the mode of perception taught by the Buddha.

"This is how he attends inappropriately: 'Was I in the past? Was I not in the past? What was I in the past? How was I in the past? Having been what, what was I in the past? Shall I be in the future? Shall I not be in the future? What shall I be in the future? How shall I be in the future? Having been what, what shall I be in the future?' Or else he is inwardly perplexed about the immediate present: 'Am I? Am I not? What am I? How am I? Where has this being come from? Where is it bound?'

...

"The well-instructed disciple of the noble ones — who has regard for noble ones, is well-versed & disciplined in their Dhamma; who has regard for men of integrity, is well-versed & disciplined in their Dhamma — discerns what ideas are fit for attention and what ideas are unfit for attention. This being so, he does not attend to ideas unfit for attention and attends [instead] to ideas fit for attention.

Therefore, that it might take a stream-enterer another seven lives to reach Arahantship seems to possibly be a later teaching to encourage lay people. Who knows???

Possibly. I like to think of it in terms of the stream, and its current, and that once the stream has been entered, the stream-enterer will eventually come to unbinding, whether they put in minimal effort and rely upon the current alone (and therefore have to wait a long time), or whether they put in a concerted effort, in which case it can be much, much sooner. This holds true regardless of precisely what the seven refers to.

Metta,
Paul.

The Buddha already addressed this, we aren't the first people to doubt rebirth... Just that most of us haven't read all the suttas yet and instead resort to speculation.

See quote, the Buddha said one doesn't require past life recollection to understand the Dhamma, doesn't mean there isn't rebirth.

We see in sutta MN 79 (Culasakuludayi Sutta) below that the Buddha was basically telling the wanderer Sakuludayi that he could discuss the past with someone who could recollect past lives, and the future with someone who possessed the divine eye. But (since Sakuludayi did not possess such psychic powers) the Buddha said to put aside the past and future, he would teach the Dhamma which concerns only the present, namely Paticca Samuppada. This very clearly shows that Paticca Samuppada is concerned with the present life and can be seen without involving past and future lives.

MN 79 “Udayin, if someone should recollect his manifold past lives ... then either he might ask me a question about the past or I might ask him a question about the past, and he might satisfy my mind with his answer to my question or I might satisfy his mind with my answer to his question. If someone with the divine eye, which is purified and surpasses the human, should see beings passing away and reappearing ... and understand how beings pass on according to their actions, then either he might ask me a question about the future or I might ask him a question about the future, and he might satisfy my mind with his answer to my question or I might satisfy his mind with my answer to his question. But let be the past, Udayin, let be the future. I shall teach you the Dhamma: When this exists, that comes to be; with the arising of this, that arises. When this does not exist, that does not come to be; with the cessation of this, that ceases.”

[retrofuturist]

Greetings Budo,

Just that most of us haven't read all the suttas yet and instead resort to speculation.

Again, it is best to speak for yourself than to extrapolate to an "us". For example, I have read the vast majority of suttas (except for those at the back end of the AN and those that are actually early commentaries) and I do not resort to speculation, because I take seriously the Buddha's admonishment that to discern in such a way leads to acquisitions.

Metta,
Paul.

[DooDoot]

an 3.87

OK. I will check out this sutta for myself following the principle in AN 10.61 of using "yoniso manasikaro" ("reasoned thorough reflection") upon hearing the teachings. Fortunately, my Scrabble partner is probably cooking dinner for her family (2,068 km away).

Take the case of a mendicant who has fulfilled their ethics, but has limited immersion and wisdom. They break some lesser and minor training rules, but are restored. Why is that? Because I don’t say they’re incapable of that. But they’re constant and steady in their precepts regarding the training rules that are fundamental, befitting the spiritual life. They keep the rules they’ve undertaken. With the ending of three fetters they have at most seven rebirths. So tiṇṇaṃ saṃyojanānaṃ parikkhayā sattakkhattuparamo hoti.

So the above appears to refute the view of [name redacted by admin] that a stream-enterer cannot break any minor training rules (such as killing a mosquito or using or taking a small object without asking). Also, there appears to be no equivalent Pali word for "rebirths". None of the Pali words mean "rebirth" or any similar word. The Pali only appears to say, per the translation of Bhikkhu Thanissaro:

With the wasting away of [the first] three fetters, he is one who has seven more times at most.

https://suttacentral.net/an3.87/en/thanissaro

Therefore, at least above, the Bhikkhu Thanissaro cannot be deemed to be a "revisionist". The translation of Bhikkhu Thanissaro, at least here, appears to be authentic to the Pali.

They will transmigrate at most seven times among gods and humans and then make an end of suffering. Sattakkhattuparamaṃ deve ca manusse ca sandhāvitvā saṃsaritvā dukkhassantaṃ karoti.

The words "sandhāvitvā saṃsaritvā" appear to not necessarily mean "transmigrate". For example, Bhikkhu Bodhi translates here as "roaming & wandering". SN 22.99 is a sutta that describes this "roaming & wandering" as:

Just as a dog, tied by a leash to a post or stake, keeps running around and circling around that very post or stake; in the same way, an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person... assumes the five aggregates to be the self... He keeps running around and circling around that very form... that very feeling... that very perception... those very fabrications... that very consciousness..

Therefore, when AN 3.87 says they will roam around at most seven times among gods and humans, this could possibly simply mean clinging to aggregates as "self"; such as: "I am so virtuous" ("human clinging") or "I am a radiant jhana attainer" ("godly clinging") or "I am more virtuous than those animals" (conceit fetter; human clinging). Note: SN 56.47 appears to equate the "human state" with "virtuousness" and "realisation".

Anyway, that is enough reading for me. Its just the usual interpretation. Some interpret physically and some interpret mentally. Some believe a set of nourishing breasts & a certain vagina is "my mother" and others view "my mother" as merely a view, concept or idea. I don't see anything urgent occurring here. Just interpretation of words. Personally, I would not cling to any of it. I think either of both interpretations are valid for a Buddhist to hold.

[Manopubbangama]

Greetings Budo,

Just that most of us haven't read all the suttas yet and instead resort to speculation.

Again, it is best to speak for yourself than to extrapolate to an "us". For example, I have read the vast majority of suttas (except for those at the back end of the AN and those that are actually early commentaries) and I do not resort to speculation, because I take seriously the Buddha's admonishment that to discern in such a way leads to acquisitions.

Metta,
Paul.

While I'm glad that both you and doodoot agree ideologically, I think "us" means basically all Theravadins except for a small minority that read buddhadasa and Harold Musson.

Believing in rebirth is extremely standard in the Buddhist world.

"The blood you have shed when, being water buffaloes, you had your water buffalo-heads cut off...

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html

Can you please let us know about what blood we shed as water buffaloes?

[DooDoot]

While I'm glad that both you and doodoot agree ideologically, I think "us" means basically all Theravadins except for a small minority

I do recall the suttas refer to it being a "very rare thing" to be a person that understands the Dhamma. While I am not claiming to be the rare person that understands, I am just saying the Dhamma doesn't seem to support your "wisdom of the masses" point of view.

174. Blind is the world; here only a few possess insight. Only a few, like birds escaping from the net, go to realms of bliss.

Dhammapada

My impression is this is a Theravada discussion forum. For me, sticking to the sutta analysis is the ideal thing.

[Manopubbangama]

While I'm glad that both you and doodoot agree ideologically, I think "us" means basically all Theravadins except for a small minority

I do recall the suttas refer to it being a "very rare thing" to be a person that understands the Dhamma. While I am not claiming to be the rare person that understands, I am just saying the Dhamma doesn't seem to support your "wisdom of the masses" point of view.

174. Blind is the world; here only a few possess insight. Only a few, like birds escaping from the net, go to realms of bliss.

Dhammapada

Did you come to this conclusion reading Buddhadasa?

Mudita to you and Paul, btw, for being so much more advanced than us unwashed masses.

So can we at least agree that Paul and doodoot believe that 99.9% of Theravadins are totally wrong about their believe in rebirth?

[DooDoot]

Did you come to this conclusion reading Buddhadasa?

I quoted the suttas. Obviously, not related to the Buddhadasa monk.

... best to abandon personality views ... which is stream-entry... this topic

[Manopubbangama]

Did you come to this conclusion reading Buddhadasa?

I quoted the suttas. Obviously, not related to the Buddhadasa monk.

... best to abandon personality views ... which is stream-entry... this topic

And this topic?

"The blood you have shed when, being water buffaloes, you had your water buffalo-heads cut off...

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html

And this one?

can we at least agree that Paul and doodoot believe that 99.9% of Theravadins are totally wrong about their believe in rebirth?

[retrofuturist]

Greetings Mano,

While I'm glad that both you and doodoot agree ideologically, I think "us" means basically all Theravadins except for a small minority that read buddhadasa and Harold Musson.

Believing in rebirth is extremely standard in the Buddhist world.

Where did I suggest it was otherwise?



Also, I think you'll find that ven. Nanavira believed in rebirth. After all, the logic behind his suicide was predicated on it.

Now, that said, any subsequent references to rebirth that are independent of the OP's question may find themselves moved to The Great Rebirth Debate.



Metta,
Paul.

[Manopubbangama]

Greetings Mano,

While I'm glad that both you and doodoot agree ideologically, I think "us" means basically all Theravadins except for a small minority that read buddhadasa and Harold Musson.

Believing in rebirth is extremely standard in the Buddhist world.

Where did I suggest it was otherwise?

So you would say that 99.9% of Theravadins are wrong in their interpretation of rebirth?

"The blood you have shed when, being water buffaloes, you had your water buffalo-heads cut off...

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html

Will I ever get an explanation for this sutta quoted in this thred?

[retrofuturist]

Greetings,

So you would say that 99.9% of Theravadins are wrong in their interpretation of rebirth?

I would say that you are off-topic yet again.

If you wish to explore off-topic tangents, take it to another new or existing topic.

Metta,
Paul.

[DooDoot]

"The blood you have shed when, being water buffaloes, you had your water buffalo-heads cut off...

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html

Will I ever get an explanation for this sutta quoted in this thred?

Sure. I'll give my opinion (after I play my next scrabble word... priorities)... its pouring rain here... non-stop...

Doo 234 vs Di 226

[Manopubbangama]

"The blood you have shed when, being water buffaloes, you had your water buffalo-heads cut off...

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html

Will I ever get an explanation for this sutta quoted in this thred?

Sure. I'll give my opinion (after I play my next scrabble word... priorities)... its pouring rain here... non-stop...

Doo 234 vs Di 226

Thanks for the mudita and metta, doodoot.

You guys are really helping me understand your superior views.