Does full confidence in Dhamma mean one will not find wisdom in other religious texts?

The Watercooler
21

Unethical conduct has its causes - craving and ignorance. As long as these causes are not eliminated, there is still subjection to unethical conduct - there is still an opening for unethical conduct. The strength of such unethical conduct, the severity of ethical transgression, will be proportional to the strength of these causes. Although the sotopanna is still subject to ignorance and craving, they are much weaker than those of the ordinary man, nevertheless the sotopanna is still subject to them. So - yes, a sotopanna may be perfect in ethical conduct, but the possibility of unethical conduct for him is nevertheless still there and not eliminated.

To say that the sotopanna is wholly and always perfect in ethical behaviour is like saying that the sotopanna has completely eliminated the causes of unethical conduct, or it is the result of ignorance or failure to consider the causal nature of unethical conduct.

22

I do not know of a sin which is not, for the noble soul, its own punishment.

Nicolas Gomez Davila

The difference between sekha and puthujjana regarding morality is that sekha has a background on which states of greed, hate and delusion are seen as painful. So for sekha who is guided by pain/pleasure principle* as much as puthujjana things are much easier, he simply wants to escape suffering.

  • On pain/pleasure:

Actually, when I first read the book,(Ulysses) it was not so much the ageing of the characters that affected me as the ultimate meaninglessness and futility of all their actions and aspirations. They are busy, all of them, seeking their immediate satisfactions and avoiding their immediate discomforts; and everything that they do—whether it is making money, making music, making love, or simply making water—is quite pointless—in terms, that is to say, of an ultimate purpose or meaning in life.

At the time I read it—when I was about twenty—I had already suspected (from my reading of Huxley and others) that there is no point in life, but this was still all rather abstract and theoretical. But Ulysses gets down to details, and I found I recognized myself, mutatis mutandis, in the futile occupations that fill the days of Joyce’s characters. And so I came to understand that all our actions, from the most deliberate to the most thoughtless, and without exception, are determined by present pleasure and present pain. Even what we pompously call our ‘duty’ is included in this law—if we do our duty, that is only because we should feel uncomfortable if we neglected it, and we seek to avoid discomfort. Even the wise man, who renounces a present pleasure for the sake of a greater pleasure in the future, obeys this law—he enjoys the presentpleasure of knowing (or believing) that he is providing for his future pleasure, whereas the foolish man, preferring the present pleasure to his future pleasure, is perpetually gnawed with apprehension about his future. And when I had understood this, the Buddha’s statement, Pubbe cāham bhikkhave etarahi ca dukkhañ c’eva paññāpemi dukkhassa ca nirodham (‘Both now and formerly, monks, it is just suffering that I make known and the ceasing of suffering’) (M. 22: i,140), came to seem (when eventually I heard it) the most obvious thing in the world—‘What else’ I exclaimed ‘could the Buddha possibly teach?’

Nanavira Thera

23

Climb the ladder of N8FP, you will see. One who had developed body, and mind that is in samadhi free of hindrances can pick up shortly.

But without hearing true dhamma. It is impossible to enter.

Anyway, good luck. There are indeed many puthujjana nowadays.

24

Since you brought up. Let analyze avijja and tanha definition.

And what is ignorance (avijja)?

Not knowing about suffering, the origin of suffering, the cessation of suffering, and the practice that leads to the cessation of suffering.

Are you saying that real sotapanna hasn’t seen 4NT? I.e. one who has attained a right view that transcend the puthujjana?

And what is craving?

There are these six classes of craving.

Craving for sights, sounds, smells, tastes, touches, and thoughts.

Or

kāmataṇhā bhavataṇhā vibhavataṇhā
craving for sensual pleasures, craving for continued existence, and craving to end existence.

Sure , craving for sensual pleasure or existence in different realms haven’t been uprooted due to samadhi development has not been fulfilled.

But to go to higher realms one needs to have perfected precepts as well do you know that? Don’t think it is easy to go to higher realm

Also, i don’t see any akusala or kusala here. Actually this should have been understood by a sotapanna as well. Otherwise, they are indeed a fake one.

In fact, if they still do bad deeds, that can only mean they haven’t become one. Because lower realm is still opened.

This has been said by Buddha on many sutta.

SN 55.1

Now suppose a noble disciple wears rags and feeds on scraps of almsfood. Still, as they have four things, they’re exempt from hell, the animal realm, or the ghost realm. They’re exempt from places of loss, bad places, the underworld.

Sn 55.8

So Ānanda, I will teach you the explanation of the Dhamma called ‘the mirror of the teaching’. A noble disciple who has this may declare of themselves: ‘I’ve finished with rebirth in hell, the animal realm, and the ghost realm. I’ve finished with all places of loss, bad places, the underworld. I am a stream-enterer! I’m not liable to be reborn in the underworld, and am bound for awakening.’

And what is that mirror of the teaching?

It’s when a noble disciple has experiential confidence in the Buddha … the teaching … the Saṅgha … And they have the ethical conduct loved by the noble ones … leading to samadhi.

An ariya can use mirror of the teaching to self reflection and self declare he/she is a stream enterer. This knowledge is independent of others, can be verified by one who has enter the stream as well at the very least.

25

No.I am saying that there is a lack of developed mindfulness - a lack of maintaining knowledge of 4NT in the mind. And when there is no knowledge of the 4NT in the mind there is place for ignorance and acting out of ignorance. Here the same SN55.40 you are quoted above:

SN55.40
“And how does a noble disciple live negligently? Firstly, a noble disciple has experiential confidence in the Buddha … They’re content with that confidence, and don’t make a further effort for solitude by day or retreat by night. When they live negligently, there’s no joy. When there’s no joy, there’s no rapture. When there’s no rapture, there’s no tranquility. When there’s no tranquility, there’s suffering. When one is suffering, the mind does not become immersed in samādhi. When the mind is not immersed in samādhi, principles do not become clear. Because principles have not become clear, they’re reckoned to live negligently.

Furthermore, a noble disciple has experiential confidence in the teaching … the Saṅgha … And they have the ethical conduct loved by the noble ones … leading to immersion. They’re content with that ethical conduct loved by the noble ones, and don’t make a further effort for solitude by day or retreat by night. When they live negligently, there’s no joy. When there’s no joy, there’s no rapture. When there’s no rapture, there’s no tranquility. When there’s no tranquility, there’s suffering. When one is suffering, the mind does not become immersed in samādhi. When the mind is not immersed in samādhi, principles do not become clear. Because principles have not become clear, they’re reckoned to live negligently. That’s how a noble disciple lives negligently.

Acquiring knowledge and understanding is one thing, keeping that knowledge and understanding in the mind at all times in all circumstances and in relation to any situation is another. Sotopanna is a trainee because although he or she has gained direct knowledge of the 4NT and has direct access to it here and now, nevertheless sotopanna is still not sufficiently trained in the application of his or her knowledge and understanding of the 4NT - there is still place for negligence, old habits, blind spots, and so on:

SN55.3
“Sir, these four factors of stream-entry that were taught by the Buddha are found in me, and I exhibit them. For I have experiential confidence in the Buddha … the teaching … the Saṅgha … And I have the ethical conduct loved by the noble ones … leading to immersion.”

“In that case, Dīghāvu, grounded on these four factors of stream-entry you should further develop these six things that play a part in realization. You should meditate observing the impermanence of all conditions, perceiving suffering in impermanence, perceiving not-self in suffering, perceiving giving up, perceiving fading away, and perceiving cessation. That’s how you should train.”

26

This session by Bhante @sujato addresses this question in regards to the Upanishads. I’m sure these insights would translate to other traditions.

Best,

Julien

27

This makes me reflect on something the Buddha touches on.

In SN 48:53, the Buddha states this:

“…a mendicant who is a trainee (i.e., someone who has attained one of the first three levels of awakening) reflects: ‘Is there any other ascetic or brahmin elsewhere whose teaching is as true, as real, as accurate as that of the Buddha?’ They understand: ‘There is no other ascetic or brahmin elsewhere whose teaching is as true, as real, as accurate as that of the Buddha.’

In MN 126 the Buddha uses similes that support this by stating that anyone who tries to attain cessation with wrong views (e.g., anything other than Right View) is like a person who tries to churn butter from water, to squeeze sesame oil from gravel, or to get milk from a cow by twisting its horn:

Suppose there was a person in need of butter. While wandering in search of butter, they tried pouring water into a pot and churning it with a stick. But by doing this, they couldn’t produce any butter, regardless of whether they made a wish, didn’t make a wish, both did and did not make a wish, or neither did nor did not make a wish. Why is that? Because that’s an irrational way to produce butter.

And so it is for any ascetics and brahmins who have wrong view … Because that’s an irrational way to win the fruit.

1 Like
29

Eclecticism is part of the new post-secular view :

"As discussed by Mcentee – one of the authors of New Monasticism: An Interspiritual
Manifesto for Contemplative Living – detraditionalisation is acknowledged as a legitimate
process of making religion and spirituality relevant for contemporary times.

I think that for many there’s a rejection of being embedded in a traditional path, and
there’s a rejection of having a spiritual life that is not directly related in some way to
serving the world we are living in right now…And there’s often a certain sponatneous
kind of antipathy at being in a particular tradition to the exclusion of others."

—Saskia Ebejer

30

And it is because it’s spontaneous it has greater value or potential than personal opinions and so on.

Who, if any can say something true about the potential of any religion, if they haven’t put all they got into understanding/realising the path they criticise?

I am able to say something very nice about n8fp, but if I then follow up with “and my religion is the one and only”, then, spontaneously, I feel this is a lie. And if I say it out loud or post it on the net, then am I not committing wrong speech?