thepea wrote:So a sotapanna could drink alcohol.
This is my point. The universe will not implode.
thepea wrote:Don’t you dare accuse me of being a conspiracy theorist!!!
Back off!!
Well, well, well, looks like Mr. Sotapanna here got a little cranky after a few drinks! Seriously, there's no shame in admitting the truth, that you are no different from the blind elephant in that funny-but-full-of-wisdom story about a group of blind elephants. They never knew what human beings are like and decided to find out more about us through their empirical "direct experience". After some times, they all reached the same conclusion: "All humans are flat" and congratulated one another for their great wisdom! And by the way, your above 2 quotes have just provided the best proof against your "my direct-experience is the best, screw the suttas" approach.
Last edited by santa100 on Thu Sep 10, 2020 1:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
A sotapanna can still build a house but he wouldn't deliberately kill insects while doing so. Even an arhat may kill without intention , eg the Venerable Cakkhupala who was blind and used to walk up and down treading on caterpillars killing dozens of them. The other monks asked the Buddha about this and he explained that he was arahat.
Also accidently drinking a mouthful of beer , as dhamma chameleon explained, is without intention. It is not breaking the precept.
thepea wrote:So a sotapanna could drink alcohol.
This is my point. The universe will not implode.
thepea wrote:Don’t you dare accuse me of being a conspiracy theorist!!!
Back off!!
Well, well, well, looks like Mr. Sotapanna here got a little cranky after a few drinks! Seriously, there's no shame in admitting the truth, that you are no different from the blind elephant in that funny-but-full-of-wisdom story about a group of blind elephants. They never knew what human beings are like and decided to find out more about us through their empirical "direct experience". After some times, they all reached the same conclusion: "All humans are flat" and congratulated one another for their great wisdom! And by the way, your above 2 quotes have just provided the best proof against your "my direct-experience is the best, screw the suttas" approach.
Nice try but.... no.
I’m also not cranky with that comment, I just DO NOT care to be labelled as a conspiracy theorist.
Do you deny that a sotapanna could mistake a drink and accidentally take a drink of alcohol?
Don’t you dare accuse me of being a conspiracy theorist!!!
Back off!!
Calm down sotapanna, it’s not an accusation, but a simple observation. Being influenced by conspiracy theories is not a crime. But it can be a problem. Too bad for you that you don’t see it.
I see perfectly clear, just DO NOT start down that line of accusation.
Do we understand each other?
robertk wrote: ↑Thu Sep 10, 2020 1:58 pm
A sotapanna can still build a house but he wouldn't deliberately kill insects while doing so. Even an arhat may kill without intention , eg the Venerable Cakkhupala who was blind and used to walk up and down treading on caterpillars killing dozens of them. The other monks asked the Buddha about this and he explained that he was arahat.
Also accidently drinking a mouthful of beer , as dhamma chameleon explained, is without intention. It is not breaking the precept.
Right so intention, volition is the defining factor.
The mind is of importance not so much the body.
The sotapanna can kill, steal, lie, sexual misconduct, and consume alcohol in body. The sotapanna knows the mind they carry and that is of all importance.
thepea wrote:So a sotapanna could drink alcohol.
This is my point. The universe will not implode.
thepea wrote:Don’t you dare accuse me of being a conspiracy theorist!!!
Back off!!
Well, well, well, looks like Mr. Sotapanna here got a little cranky after a few drinks! Seriously, there's no shame in admitting the truth, that you are no different from the blind elephant in that funny-but-full-of-wisdom story about a group of blind elephants. They never knew what human beings are like and decided to find out more about us through their empirical "direct experience". After some times, they all reached the same conclusion: "All humans are flat" and congratulated one another for their great wisdom! And by the way, your above 2 quotes have just provided the best proof against your "my direct-experience is the best, screw the suttas" approach.
Nice try but.... no.
I’m also not cranky with that comment, I just DO NOT care to be labelled as a conspiracy theorist.
Do you deny that a sotapanna could mistake a drink and accidentally take a drink of alcohol?
If you're not cranky, then good, cuz it obviously smells like your were. Now, back to Sotapanna discussion, I'm perfectly fine with your statement: "a sotapanna could mistake a drink and accidentally take a drink of alcohol". But if you say: "A Sotapanna can still intentionally/deliberately drink alcohol", then I'd have a problem with that.
thepea wrote: ↑Thu Sep 10, 2020 12:35 am
Don’t you dare accuse me of being a conspiracy theorist!!!
Back off!!
Calm down sotapanna, it’s not an accusation, but a simple observation. Being influenced by conspiracy theories is not a crime. But it can be a problem. Too bad for you that you don’t see it.
I see perfectly clear, just DO NOT start down that line of accusation.
Do we understand each other?
Or what? pretty menacing for a sotapanna. You can’t seriously claim that higher powers are striving to hide the Buddha’s true teachings to prevent us from progressing on the path, without taking responsibility for this clearly conspirationist view. I’m only going down that line because you have been making pretty wild claims to that effect in several of your posts. Clearly I’m touching a nerve here. It might be a good idea for you to investigate that, if you want to move up from sotapanna to arahant.
It isn't so much the virtue that was called into question earlier in this thread (although that is the topic title). It is the suggestion that someone who has claimed sotāpatti would also express the potential of enduring doubt about the authenticity of the scriptures. Beyond the question of both saddhānusārī and dhammānusārī, someone who knows the extent of the fruition of sotāpanna to the degree that they can make the claim will, according to the suttas, know whether a suttaral description is aligned with that acquired Right View or not.
Thank you for the summary. Fwiw It is said that a Sotapanna can distinguish what is well spoken;
"Why, Mahaanaama, if these great sal trees could distinguish what is well spoken from what is ill spoken, I would proclaim these great sal trees to be Stream-Winners... https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .html#fn-8
I am not going to comment on whether they would question authenticity and to what extent i think there could be doubts of such nature.
I would like to draw attention to that the world in general does not agree on what constitutes "seeing with wisdom" and what this "fruition" is.
I hope i don't bore you with this obvious stuff but i think it would be very difficult to convince ie
saddhānusārī and dhammānusārī (if could hold that view) or someone fixated in wrong view that they didn't complete sotapanna training.
Well, well, well, looks like Mr. Sotapanna here got a little cranky after a few drinks! Seriously, there's no shame in admitting the truth, that you are no different from the blind elephant in that funny-but-full-of-wisdom story about a group of blind elephants. They never knew what human beings are like and decided to find out more about us through their empirical "direct experience". After some times, they all reached the same conclusion: "All humans are flat" and congratulated one another for their great wisdom! And by the way, your above 2 quotes have just provided the best proof against your "my direct-experience is the best, screw the suttas" approach.
Nice try but.... no.
I’m also not cranky with that comment, I just DO NOT care to be labelled as a conspiracy theorist.
Do you deny that a sotapanna could mistake a drink and accidentally take a drink of alcohol?
If you're not cranky, then good, cuz it obviously smells like your were. Now, back to Sotapanna discussion, I'm perfectly fine with your statement: "a sotapanna could mistake a drink and accidentally take a drink of alcohol". But if you say: "A Sotapanna can still intentionally/deliberately drink alcohol", then I'd have a problem with that.
Not cranky but firm in opinion regarding being labelled conspiracy theorist. That’s uncalled for.
Like I said I speak from my experience, I personally do not drink and have zero interest in alcohol or drug consumption.
thepea wrote: ↑Thu Sep 10, 2020 6:09 pm
Not cranky but firm in opinion regarding being labelled conspiracy theorist. That’s uncalled for.
So: you promote the theory that there is an unknown, secret, all-powerful group of people conspiring to hide the true teachings of the Buddha from us. This is the definition of a conspiracy theory. So how can this possibly be uncalled for.
It’s like telling people that you speak and write fluent English, but refusing to be called an English speaker. It makes zero sense.
lostitude wrote: ↑Thu Sep 10, 2020 7:17 pmSo: you promote the theory that there is an unknown, secret, all-powerful group of people conspiring to hide the true teachings of the Buddha from us. This is the definition of a conspiracy theory. So how can this possibly be uncalled for.
It’s like telling people that you speak and write fluent English, but refusing to be called an English speaker. It makes zero sense.
Yet, there are Buddhist schools that do something like that. Actually, there are posters at this forum who can name those schools. (I can't be bothered. )
binocular wrote:Yet, there are Buddhist schools that do something like that. Actually, there are posters at this forum who can name those schools. (I can't be bothered. )
Obviously Conspiracy theory is an Equal Opportunity employer. It doesn't discriminate race, color, sex, age, social status, religion, etc. Heck, our current Orange Cakkavatti is the club's biggest VIP, so nothing surprising here..
User1249x wrote: ↑Thu Sep 10, 2020 5:37 pm
I hope i don't bore you with this obvious stuff but i think it would be very difficult to convince ie
saddhānusārī and dhammānusārī (if could hold that view) or someone fixated in wrong view that they didn't complete sotapanna training.
I absolutely agree.
“Life is swept along, short is the life span; no shelters exist for one who has reached old age. Seeing clearly this danger in death, a seeker of peace should drop the world’s bait.” SN 1.3
robertk wrote: ↑Thu Sep 10, 2020 1:58 pm
A sotapanna can still build a house but he wouldn't deliberately kill insects while doing so. Even an arhat may kill without intention , eg the Venerable Cakkhupala who was blind and used to walk up and down treading on caterpillars killing dozens of them. The other monks asked the Buddha about this and he explained that he was arahat.
Also accidently drinking a mouthful of beer , as dhamma chameleon explained, is without intention. It is not breaking the precept.
Right so intention, volition is the defining factor.
The mind is of importance not so much the body.
The sotapanna can kill, steal, lie, sexual misconduct, and consume alcohol in body. The sotapanna knows the mind they carry and that is of all importance.
When you say the ' sotapanna can kill, steal, lie, sexual misconduct, and consume alcohol in body' it makes me wonder what you mean. The examples we have of not seeing an insect and treading on one, or taking a gulp of beer mistakenly thinking it is was a bottle of ginger ale are clear. But if there is any intention to lie or kill this a sotapanna doesn't do.
)