Ontheway wrote: ↑Fri Jul 01, 2022 2:10 am
Ariyakanta Sila is possessed by Stream Enterer.
Non-ariyakanta Sila is the Sila that we enforce/compel ourselves to follow or obey.
Eg: I am a Buddhist. A Buddhist follows five precepts. Therefore, I will follow five precepts as prescribed by the Sasana.
It is not unshakeable and can be breached intentionally. For example, company having drinking party, this Buddhist voluntarily drink beer and cocktails in order to fit in the norm, there breaching the fifth precept "Surameraya majjhapama datthana veramani".
Ariyakanta Sila is the Sila that we internalised within our lifestyle and mindset.
The Sila was followed voluntarily based on right understanding on Kammavipaka concept, compassion, three marks of characteristics, etc... and can never turn away when facing temptation or obstacles, even at the cost of his life.
Anyway i don't particularly disagree with any of this but i don't think you are explaining the term properly, when you say
Ariyakanta Sila is the Sila that we internalised within our lifestyle and mindset.
The Sila was followed voluntarily based on right understanding on Kammavipaka concept, compassion, three marks of characteristics, etc... and can never turn away when facing temptation or obstacles, even at the cost of his life.
Who are these "we"?
Are they the "Buddhists" or does it refer to "Stream Enterer"?
You are speaking very loosely and that is why i criticized you. This term "Buddhist" is foreign to the Canon.
If you mean "we" as in Buddhists then it follows that you are saying all Buddhists have ariyakantasila (however it's spelled), all are stream enterers.
If you mean "we" as in "stream enterer, then it's "you and other stream-enters" and you are then basically telling us that the term is virtue which you & other stream enterers have internalized, which doesn't really say much..
The whole post just claims stream entry and draws a distinction between keeping precepts and the ariyakantisila. And I already established the latter.
Again, not ariyakantisila, is Ariyakanta sila.
That post of mine wasn't aimed to claim anything. It is just a general explanation for the term Ariyakanta Sila.
And "we" used here as in the sense of giving example.
Ontheway wrote: ↑Fri Jul 01, 2022 2:10 am
Ariyakanta Sila is possessed by Stream Enterer.
Non-ariyakanta Sila is the Sila that we enforce/compel ourselves to follow or obey.
Eg: I am a Buddhist. A Buddhist follows five precepts. Therefore, I will follow five precepts as prescribed by the Sasana.
It is not unshakeable and can be breached intentionally. For example, company having drinking party, this Buddhist voluntarily drink beer and cocktails in order to fit in the norm, there breaching the fifth precept "Surameraya majjhapama datthana veramani".
Ariyakanta Sila is the Sila that we internalised within our lifestyle and mindset.
The Sila was followed voluntarily based on right understanding on Kammavipaka concept, compassion, three marks of characteristics, etc... and can never turn away when facing temptation or obstacles, even at the cost of his life.
Anyway i don't particularly disagree with any of this but i don't think you are explaining the term properly, when you say
Ariyakanta Sila is the Sila that we internalised within our lifestyle and mindset.
The Sila was followed voluntarily based on right understanding on Kammavipaka concept, compassion, three marks of characteristics, etc... and can never turn away when facing temptation or obstacles, even at the cost of his life.
Who are these "we"?
Are they the "Buddhists" or does it refer to "Stream Enterer"?
You are speaking very loosely and that is why i criticized you. This term "Buddhist" is foreign to the Canon.
If you mean "we" as in Buddhists then it follows that you are saying all Buddhists have ariyakantasila (however it's spelled), all are stream enterers.
If you mean "we" as in "stream enterer, then it's "you and other stream-enters" and you are then basically telling us that the term is virtue which you & other stream enterers have internalized, which doesn't really say much..
The whole post just claims stream entry and draws a distinction between keeping precepts and the ariyakantisila. And I already established the latter.
Again, not ariyakantisila, is Ariyakanta sila.
That post of mine wasn't aimed to claim anything. It is just a general explanation for the term Ariyakanta Sila.
And "we" used here as in the sense of giving example.
Okay, thanks for correcting the ariyakhantisila spelling and explaining what you meant by "we". I must apologize for criticizing you much and i didn't read your post properly first time i saw it, just got frustrated thinking 'here we go, another person goes on explaining terms without drawing out from the texts'. It's frustrating at times...
Ontheway wrote: ↑Fri Jul 01, 2022 2:10 am
Ariyakanta Sila is the Sila that we internalised within our lifestyle and mindset.
The Sila was followed voluntarily based on right understanding on Kammavipaka concept, compassion, three marks of characteristics, etc... and can never turn away when facing temptation or obstacles, even at the cost of his life.
For example, a hiker lost his way in forest. While seeking way out from forest, need to replenish his energy by eating something. There with his weapons, he can choose to kill wild fowls or other animals for food easily, yet he refused to do so and only pick wild fruits and edible leaves to sustain himself. He risking his life by doing so, yet with great confidence towards to Law of Dhamma and spiritual energy, he protected his Sila.
Yes, exactly.
The story of the couple going through the desert and killing their son to eat his flesh is not a story about a couple with noble levels. The Buddha was not saying what they did was good or the right thing. It's just about eating with equanimity, not for taste.
A noble one, sotapanna and higher does not kill, even for their nourishment.
DNS wrote: ↑Fri Jul 01, 2022 8:03 pm
A noble one does not kill, even for their nourishment.
This is a very bold claim. So you think a Faith Follower wouldn't do or be able to rehabilitate himself having killed an ant with himself, his family and 10 Arahants at gunpoint?
According to sutta Ariya never praise killing. It doesn't say they never do it.
Commentary to Dhammapada states that Buddha said "Sotapannas do not kill, they don't wish beings to get killed." It's not canonical tho.
I am personally not sure if it can happen or not.
Last edited by User13866 on Fri Jul 01, 2022 8:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User13866 wrote: ↑Fri Jul 01, 2022 8:21 pm
This is a very bold claim. So you think a Faith Follower wouldn't do or be able to rehabilitate himself having killed an ant with his family and 10 Arahants at gunpoint?
Of course a faith follower could rehabilitate and make progress. Angulimala was a killer, but still rehabilitated and became an arahant. But he wasn't a noble one when he was doing the killings.
User13866 wrote: ↑Fri Jul 01, 2022 8:21 pm
This is a very bold claim. So you think a Faith Follower wouldn't do or be able to rehabilitate himself having killed an ant with his family and 10 Arahants at gunpoint?
Of course a faith follower could rehabilitate and make progress. Angulimala was a killer, but still rehabilitated and became an arahant. But he wasn't a noble one when he was doing the killings.
Well a faith follower is a noble one... they have transcended the run-off-the-mill.
"One who has conviction & belief that these phenomena are this way is called a faith-follower: one who has entered the orderliness of rightness, entered the plane of people of integrity, transcended the plane of the run-of-the-mill. He is incapable of doing any deed by which he might be reborn in hell, in the animal womb, or in the realm of hungry shades. He is incapable of passing away until he has realized the fruit of stream-entry.
If they can do then why not a Dhamma-Follower or One liberated by faith, One attained to view or a Bodily witness?
So you think a faith-follower isn't practicing for fruit of stream-entry?
Eight types of Noble Ones:
1. One practicing for the fruit of stream-entry
Read carefully and think it through
One who has conviction & belief that these phenomena are this way is called a faith-follower: one who has entered the orderliness of rightness, entered the plane of people of integrity, transcended the plane of the run-of-the-mill. He is incapable of doing any deed by which he might be reborn in hell, in the animal womb, or in the realm of hungry shades. He is incapable of passing away until he has realized the fruit of stream-entry.
Do you think this fruit just 'falls on their heads' before death, so to speak, without them practicing for the attainment of that fruition?
I was saying Noble Ones, stream-entry or higher are incapable of intentionally killing. Are you saying faith followers are also incapable of intentionally killing? If so, that might be true, but wasn't even in my point.
DNS wrote: ↑Fri Jul 01, 2022 8:56 pm
I was saying Noble Ones, stream-entry or higher are incapable of intentionally killing. Are you saying faith followers are also incapable of intentionally killing? If so, that might be true, but wasn't even in my point.
I will ask you again
User13866 wrote: ↑Fri Jul 01, 2022 8:50 pm
So you think a faith-follower isn't practicing for fruit of stream-entry?
Eight types of Noble Ones:
1. One practicing for the fruit of stream-entry
Read carefully and think it through
One who has conviction & belief that these phenomena are this way is called a faith-follower: one who has entered the orderliness of rightness, entered the plane of people of integrity, transcended the plane of the run-of-the-mill. He is incapable of doing any deed by which he might be reborn in hell, in the animal womb, or in the realm of hungry shades. He is incapable of passing away until he has realized the fruit of stream-entry.
Do you think this fruit just 'falls on their heads' before death, so to speak, without them practicing for the attainment of that fruition?
User13866 wrote: ↑Fri Jul 01, 2022 8:57 pm
I will ask you again
So you think a faith-follower isn't practicing for fruit of stream-entry?
Yes, they are practicing for stream-entry. I didn't even mention faith follower in my posts, you are bringing it up, apparently to find an argument where there is none?
User13866 wrote: ↑Fri Jul 01, 2022 8:57 pm
I will ask you again
So you think a faith-follower isn't practicing for fruit of stream-entry?
Yes, they are practicing for stream-entry. I didn't even mention faith follower in my posts, you are bringing it up, apparently to find an argument where there is none?
Well, take note of this;
First you said
DNS wrote: ↑Fri Jul 01, 2022 8:03 pm
A noble one does not kill, even for their nourishment.
User13866 wrote: ↑Fri Jul 01, 2022 8:21 pm
So you think a Faith Follower wouldn't do or be able to rehabilitate himself having killed an ant with his family and 10 Arahants at gunpoint?
Of course a faith follower could rehabilitate and make progress.
And we established that a faith-follower is practicing for the first fruition
User13866 wrote: ↑Fri Jul 01, 2022 9:15 pm
After you said it is possible that a noble one would rehabilitate himself having killed.
So you are confusing me, how can one rehabilitate oneself from what is impossible to do?
Okay, you're a troll. I never said a noble one kills. I was referring to stream-entrants and higher that don't kill. You are the one who brought up faith followers and said what if a faith follower kills, could they rehabilitate. You're just trolling and I won't respond to your nonsense anymore.
Arguing for the sake of arguing is not engaging in discussion, it's just trolling.
User13866 wrote: ↑Fri Jul 01, 2022 9:15 pm
After you said it is possible that a noble one would rehabilitate himself having killed.
So you are confusing me, how can one rehabilitate oneself from what is impossible to do?
Okay, you're a troll. I never said a noble one kills. I was referring to stream-entrants and higher that don't kill. You are the one who brought up faith followers and said what if a faith follower kills, could they rehabilitate. You're just trolling and I won't respond to your nonsense anymore.
Arguing for the sake of arguing is not engaging in discussion, it's just trolling.
Well ban me then if you think i am trolling.
You said faith-follower can "of course rehabilitate himself"
User13866 wrote: ↑Fri Jul 01, 2022 8:21 pm
So you think a Faith Follower wouldn't do or be able to rehabilitate himself having killed an ant with his family and 10 Arahants at gunpoint?
Of course a faith follower could rehabilitate and make progress.
And they are by your definition noble ones.
So i ask how is it that you hold both ideas in mind simultaneously where a person can rehabilitate himself from what they can't do?
User13866 wrote: ↑Fri Jul 01, 2022 8:21 pm
So you think a Faith Follower wouldn't do or be able to rehabilitate himself having killed an ant with himself, his family and 10 Arahants at gunpoint?
You are the one who said words to the effect of "what if a faith follower killed . . ." not me. I never brought up faith followers and then qualified it that if they could kill, then yes, they could rehabilitate. I never said they kill. You did that. trollin, trollin, trollin . . .
I was only referring to stream-entrants and higher, I never discussed faith followers.
My post on previous page:
DNS wrote: ↑Fri Jul 01, 2022 8:56 pm
I was saying Noble Ones, stream-entry or higher are incapable of intentionally killing. Are you saying faith followers are also incapable of intentionally killing? If so, that might be true, but wasn't even in my point.
Yes, exactly. 