MN 21 what are thoughts of household life referring to?

[frank k]

MN 21 what are thoughts of household life referring to?
http://notesonthedhamma.blogspot.com/20 ... ehold.html

(questions and direct link to specific part of sutta included)

[santa100]

MN 21 what are thoughts of household life referring to?
http://notesonthedhamma.blogspot.com/20 ... ehold.html

(questions and direct link to specific part of sutta included)

The previous paragraph, paragraph 5, provide the background context and shows the typical thoughts ( and followed by typical reactions ) of household life:

5. “Phagguna, is it true that you are associating overmuch with bhikkhunīs, that you are associating so much with bhikkhunīs that if any bhikkhu speaks dispraise of those bhikkhunīs in your presence, you become angry and displeased and make a case of it; and if any bhikkhu speaks dispraise of you in those bhikkhunīs’ presence, they become angry and displeased and make a case of it? Are you associating so much with bhikkhunīs, as it seems?”—“Yes, venerable sir.”—“Phagguna, are you not a clansman who has gone forth out of faith from the home life into homelessness?”—“Yes, venerable sir.”

6. “Phagguna, it is not proper for you, a clansman gone forth out of faith from the home life into homelessness, to associate overmuch with bhikkhunīs. Therefore, if anyone speaks dispraise of those bhikkhunīs in your presence, you should abandon any desires and any thoughts based on the household life. And herein you should train thus: ‘My mind will be unaffected, and I shall utter no evil words; I shall abide compassionate for his welfare, with a mind of loving-kindness, without inner hate.’ That is how you should train, Phagguna.

[frank k]

But why are those angry displeased thoughts "the thoughts of a layperson"?
Monks and nuns get angry and displeased also. (displeased thoughts)
It would make more sense if it was "the speech of laypeople".

MN 21 what are thoughts of household life referring to?
http://notesonthedhamma.blogspot.com/20 ... ehold.html

(questions and direct link to specific part of sutta included)

The previous paragraph, paragraph 5, provide the background context and shows the typical thoughts ( and followed by typical reactions ) of household life:

5. “Phagguna, is it true that you are associating overmuch with bhikkhunīs, that you are associating so much with bhikkhunīs that if any bhikkhu speaks dispraise of those bhikkhunīs in your presence, you become angry and displeased and make a case of it; and if any bhikkhu speaks dispraise of you in those bhikkhunīs’ presence, they become angry and displeased and make a case of it? Are you associating so much with bhikkhunīs, as it seems?”—“Yes, venerable sir.”—“Phagguna, are you not a clansman who has gone forth out of faith from the home life into homelessness?”—“Yes, venerable sir.”

6. “Phagguna, it is not proper for you, a clansman gone forth out of faith from the home life into homelessness, to associate overmuch with bhikkhunīs. Therefore, if anyone speaks dispraise of those bhikkhunīs in your presence, you should abandon any desires and any thoughts based on the household life. And herein you should train thus: ‘My mind will be unaffected, and I shall utter no evil words; I shall abide compassionate for his welfare, with a mind of loving-kindness, without inner hate.’ That is how you should train, Phagguna.

[BVira]

Because those displeasing thoughts don’t pertain to the holy life, as opposed to something like the displeasing thoughts due to the pains of renunciation for instance.

[santa100]

But why are those angry displeased thoughts "the thoughts of a layperson"?
Monks and nuns get angry and displeased also. (displeased thoughts)

It's about expectation. If someone trashtalks your girlfriend, ( you're a layperson ), noone will blame you for becoming "angry and displeased and make a case of it". But if someone trashtalk bunch of fellow bhikkhunis who hang out frequently with you, a bhikkhu, then people will start questioning you, if you also get "angry and displeased and make a case of it".

[Mumfie]

But why are those angry displeased thoughts "the thoughts of a layperson"?
Monks and nuns get angry and displeased also. (displeased thoughts)

"Householderish" ( gehasita / gehanissita) is sutta code for anti-nekkhamma or pañcakāmaguṇanissita states of mind, no matter whether they arise in householders or in monks. Compare the use of the term in connection with the three kinds of feelings in the Saḷāyatanavibhaṅgasutta, MN137.

[SDC]

But why are those angry displeased thoughts "the thoughts of a layperson"?
Monks and nuns get angry and displeased also. (displeased thoughts)
It would make more sense if it was "the speech of laypeople".

I think it is more a matter of welcoming and engaging those displeasing thoughts, i.e. “make a case of it”, that makes them the actions of a layperson.

[frank k]

good answer. specifically though, it would be the gehasita domanassa dukkha, rather than the nekkhama here in MN 21.

MN 137:
3.3 – (6 kinds of householder mental-distress:)
Tattha katamāni cha gehasitāni domanassāni?
And in this context what are the six kinds of householder mental-distress?
Cakkhuviññeyyānaṁ rūpānaṁ …
There are forms known by the eye that are likable, desirable, agreeable, pleasing, connected with the world’s material delights. mental-distress arises when you regard it as a loss to lose such forms, or when you recollect forms you formerly lost that have passed, ceased, and perished.

But why are those angry displeased thoughts "the thoughts of a layperson"?
Monks and nuns get angry and displeased also. (displeased thoughts)

"Householderish" ( gehasita / gehanissita) is sutta code for anti-nekkhamma or pañcakāmaguṇanissita states of mind, no matter whether they arise in householders or in monks. Compare the use of the term in connection with the three kinds of feelings in the Saḷāyatanavibhaṅgasutta, MN137.