Multiple types of arahant: a later development? Is the Pavāranā Sutta corrupted?

[Brother_Joe]

@Senryu

Roderick Bucknell wrote a very interesting article, not sure if he ever published it, about the various elucidations of the path. He had a very interesting idea about sīla samādhi paññā, countering the usual analysis of the 8fold path, and saying rather they relate to the 10fold path,

…

His analysis seems to me better than the traditional one (which divides the 8fold path into those 3). I’m not sure if the traditional one even came from the Buddha - seems it came from a nun, and perhaps rarely mentioned in the EBTs apparently (can anyone confirm?)… perhaps a later adaption?

Hi Senryu

Yes, as TheSynergist identified, I have posted a link to Rod’s article in the opening post for this topic: Suttas with other possible versions of the gradual path

It would seem either the well known Theravada commentator Buddhaghosa (~1000 years after the Buddha) followed the nun Dhammadhinna’s analysis (in MN44), or the analysis was attributed to her, possibly around Buddhaghosa’s time, or earlier. I have not found that analysis attributed to the Buddha anywhere in the First Four Nikaya.

@Senryu

Yes I think that those things are very helpful indeed! However I also believe that stream entry can happen spontaneously even in the absense of those factors. And also can happen in response to an encounter with an ariya, such as the advaita satsang even! Which I believe was very similar to what the Buddha also did, basically talking people to awakening.

The common ground we seem to share is that we both believe SE can happen in absence of (some of) those factors. If it were not the case, it would seem to me that the Buddha would not have entered the stream and realised enlightenment.

The first two would have been absent for the Buddha on his path.

1. Association with people of integrity is a factor for stream-entry.
2. Listening to the true Dhamma is a factor for stream-entry.

But the enlightenment story indicates he did develop the next two:

3. Appropriate attention is a factor for stream-entry.
4. Practice in accordance with the Dhamma is a factor for stream-entry.

@Senryu

talking people to awakening

would seem to me to cover all four factors, but I would qualify ‘awakening’ to ‘stream entry’ (path). SE fruit (=non-regression) would require some practice/application, not just sitting around listening, imo.

@Senryu

I also think that doubt of some form can come back to a stream enterer, especially if a lot of time passes after their initial awakening with no more glimpses being had. A person can slip totally back into delusion, and even loose interest in the path or gain bitterness at not having any more awakening experiences, especially if they have a bad teacher (sorry I should rather say a teacher of insufficient standard) or no teacher at all. Then they can take on doubts or re-take doubts about the path and about enlightenment. I believe.

Yes, that’s fine with me. Just that I distinguish between SE path and SE fruit. So, for me, all that can apply to SE path, when one may have only developed faith that had not yet been confirmed in experience and had not eradicated all of the first three fetters.

Even for SE fruit, for me there can be and should be doubt on various (worldly) matters, such as the quality of translations of texts, but once the path has been tested and found to be effective in experience, I believe, no one can dissuade one from it, or make one doubt it.

best wishes