Nekhamma in relation to the laity

The Watercooler
21

We do have some examples though, don’t we

Thig 11.1:

Seeing the danger in sensual pleasures,
kāmesvādīnavaṁ disvā,
seeing renunciation as sanctuary,
nekkhammaṁ daṭṭhu khemato;
I went forth in Rājagaha
sā pabbajjiṁ rājagahe,
from the lay life to homelessness.
agārasmānagāriyaṁ.

Thig 13.5:

Being diligent,
tassā me appamattāya,
I comprehended the truth;
saccābhisamayo ahu.

and then I became profoundly dispassionate
tatohaṁ sabbakāmesu,
towards all sensual pleasures.
bhusaṁ aratimajjhagaṁ;
Seeing fear in substantial reality,
sakkāyasmiṁ bhayaṁ disvā,
I longed for renunciation.
nekkhammameva pīhaye. Variant: nekkhammameva → nekkhammaññeva (bj); nekkhammasseva (sya1ed, sya2ed);

Giving up my family circle,
hitvānahaṁ ñātigaṇaṁ,
bonded servants and workers,
dāsakammakarāni ca;
and my flourishing villages and lands,
gāmakhettāni phītāni,
so delightful and pleasant,
ramaṇīye pamodite.

I went forth;
pahāyahaṁ pabbajitā,
all that is no small wealth.
sāpateyyamanappakaṁ;
Now that I’ve gone forth in faith like this,
evaṁ saddhāya nikkhamma,
in the true teaching so well proclaimed,
saddhamme suppavedite.

since I desire to have nothing,
netaṁ assa patirūpaṁ, Variant: Netaṁ → na me taṁ (bj, sya1ed, sya2ed, pts1ed, pts2ed)
it would not be appropriate
ākiñcaññañhi patthaye;
to take back gold and money,
yo jātarūpaṁ rajataṁ, Variant: Yo → yā (sya1ed, sya2ed, pts1ed, pts2ed)
having already got rid of them.
chaḍḍetvā punarāgame. Variant: Chaḍḍetvā → ṭhapetvā (sya1ed, sya2ed, pts1ed, pts2ed); thapetvā (mr) | punarāgame → punarāgahe (mr)

There’s also this sakyan guy, Snp 3.1:

Their clan is named for the Sun
ādiccā nāma gottena, Variant: Ādiccā → ādicco (mr)
they are Sakyans by birth.
sākiyā nāma jātiyā; Variant: Sākiyā → sākiyo (mr)
I have gone forth from that family—
tamhā kulā pabbajitomhi,
I do not yearn for sensual pleasure.
na kāme abhipatthayaṁ.

Seeing the danger in sensual pleasures,
kāmesvādīnavaṁ disvā,
seeing renunciation as sanctuary,
nekkhammaṁ daṭṭhu khemato;
I shall go on to strive;
padhānāya gamissāmi,
that is where my mind delights.’”
ettha me rañjatī mano”ti.

22

Yes, we have examples like the ones you give, where seeing the danger in kāmā and the benefit in nekkhamma leads householders to go forth into the homeless life.

On the other hand, we have examples where it doesn’t lead to this. For example, the hundreds of householder sekha disciples alluded to in the Mahāvacchagottasutta, MN73, some of them brahmacarīs but others who remain kāmabhogīs despite their ariyan attainment.

1 Like
23

It just says that the “white-clothed layman disciples, enjoying sensual pleasures, following instructions, and responding to advice, have gone beyond doubt, got rid of indecision, and live self-assured and independent of others regarding the Teacher’s instruction”.
I don’t see where it says they have attained ariyan status. I don’t see any mentions of nekkhamma there either.

24

That they have arrived at the plane of a sekha is shown in the very part that you quoted, which lists attributes that are present only in someone who is at least a sotāpanna. For example, no worldling could be said to be tiṇṇavicikicchā or vesārajjappattā.

If they have arrived at the plane of a sekha, then they have developed the Eightfold Path.

If they have developed the Eightfold Path, then they have developed sammā-saṅkappa.

If they have developed sammā-saṅkappa, then they have developed nekkhamma-saṅkappa.

1 Like
25

They didn’t though

MN78

And what are unskillful thoughts?
katame ca, thapati, akusalā saṅkappā?
Thoughts of sensuality, of malice, and of cruelty.
kāmasaṅkappo, byāpādasaṅkappo, vihiṁsāsaṅkappo
…
And where do these unskillful thoughts stem from?
ime ca, thapati, akusalā saṅkappā kiṁsamuṭṭhānā?
Where they stem from has been stated.
samuṭṭhānampi nesaṁ vuttaṁ.
You should say that they stem from perception.
‘saññāsamuṭṭhānā’tissa vacanīyaṁ.
What perception?
katamā saññā?
Perception takes many and diverse forms.
saññāpi hi bahū anekavidhā nānappakārakā.
Perceptions of sensuality, malice, and cruelty—
kāmasaññā, byāpādasaññā, vihiṁsāsaññā—
unskillful thoughts stem from this.
itosamuṭṭhānā akusalā saṅkappā.
…
And what are skillful thoughts?
katame ca, thapati, kusalā saṅkappā?
Thoughts of renunciation, good will, and harmlessness.
nekkhammasaṅkappo, abyāpādasaṅkappo, avihiṁsāsaṅkappo—
…
And where do these skillful thoughts stem from?
ime ca, thapati, kusalā saṅkappā kiṁsamuṭṭhānā?
Where they stem from has been stated.
samuṭṭhānampi nesaṁ vuttaṁ.
You should say that they stem from perception.
‘saññāsamuṭṭhānā’tissa vacanīyaṁ.
What perception?
katamā saññā?
Perception takes many and diverse forms.
saññāpi hi bahū anekavidhā nānappakārakā.
Perceptions of renunciation, good will, and harmlessness—
nekkhammasaññā, abyāpādasaññā, avihiṁsāsaññā—
skillful thoughts stem from this.
itosamuṭṭhānā kusalā saṅkappā.

Also, SN14.12:

The element of sensuality gives rise to sensual perceptions. Sensual perceptions give rise to sensual thoughts. Sensual thoughts give rise to sensual desires. Sensual desires give rise to sensual passions. Sensual passions give rise to searches for sensual pleasures.
kāmadhātuṁ, bhikkhave, paṭicca uppajjati kāmasaññā, kāmasaññaṁ paṭicca uppajjati kāmasaṅkappo, kāmasaṅkappaṁ paṭicca uppajjati kāmacchando, kāmacchandaṁ paṭicca uppajjati kāmapariḷāho, kāmapariḷāhaṁ paṭicca uppajjati kāmapariyesanā.
…
The element of renunciation gives rise to perceptions of renunciation.
nekkhammadhātuṁ, bhikkhave, paṭicca uppajjati nekkhammasaññā,
Perceptions of renunciation give rise to thoughts of renunciation.
nekkhammasaññaṁ paṭicca uppajjati nekkhammasaṅkappo,
Thoughts of renunciation give rise to enthusiasm for renunciation.
nekkhammasaṅkappaṁ paṭicca uppajjati nekkhammacchando,
Enthusiasm for renunciation gives rise to fervor for renunciation.
nekkhammacchandaṁ paṭicca uppajjati nekkhammapariḷāho,
Fervor for renunciation gives rise to the search for renunciation.
nekkhammapariḷāhaṁ paṭicca uppajjati nekkhammapariyesanā;

I guess you could say that those laypeople are still on their way to the “search for renunciation”, but then again, their white robes and their alleged sekha status means they’re not just “wealthy folk who just came on retreat”, they’re in training to become monks

26

I fail to see how either of your sutta passages would contradict the claim that ariyan householders, by virtue of being ariyan, must have developed the Eightfold Path; and that by virtue of having developed the said path they must have developed thoughts of renunciation (even if the said thoughts didn’t lead them to go forth into the homeless life).

Would you care to indulge me by being a little more expansive and demonstrating what relevance your sutta passages have to these claims?

1 Like
27

My point is that you can’t both renounce and enjoy sensual pleasures. They’re the opposite of each other.

DN34

Renunciation is the escape from sensual pleasures
kāmānametaṁ nissaraṇaṁ yadidaṁ nekkhammaṁ

You can go one way or the other, not both at the same time. Thought of renunciation leads to search for renunciation, like, actual renunciation, like the one from the suttas from my previous posts, where people leave their homes and their belongings. There don’t seem to be any other kinds of renunciation in the canon, or at least I couldn’t find them. Are you aware of some other examples?
If your point is that one moment you can enjoy sensual pleasures and then the other moment renounce them, then the same must be true for all the other parts of the eightfold path like abstinence from killing living creatures and stealing. Which, I’m guessing, doesn’t really work that way

28

Might I recommend Kim Allen’s excellent book on this very topic? (Full Simplicity: The Art of Renunciation and Letting Go (2023))

Best,

Julien

29

No, it does. It’s rare, but it happens. There was a Sotapanna who drank (Saranani), despite knowing it was unskillful. The only things a sotapanna cannot do are the five heavy acts or following another teacher MN 115. They are capable of killing anyone but their parents or an arahant and can endure the consequences in the realms of mixed experience (eg as a human, naga, or asura). They just almost never do because of their wisdom, but the possibility is there because of their seven remaining fetters, including ill will and sense desire. It’s only at later stages that the defilements are completely uprooted and (intentional) killing etc. become impossible.

Presumably the overwhelming majority of sotapanna have been monastics, the overwhelming majority of the remainder have been 8 precept followers, the overwhelming majority of the remainder have followed the five precepts, and the overwhelming majority of the remainder just automatically didn’t transgress those acts even without explicitly following the precepts. But this is not true categorically. Out of the thousands of Ariyas in the suttas, I believe there’s just one known to have violated the precepts, but there is that one.

At a much less extreme, Anathapindika was a Sotapanna, but maintained a great fortune. Why didn’t he renounce it? I don’t think this is explicitly stated, but it seems like the reason is that he had a deeply rooted habit of helping others with his money, and money kept flowing to him as a result of good deeds. This seems to me like a good narrative example of how right intention might manifest without culminating in full-blown monasticism. A person can get caught up doing good deeds, or mixed deeds with primarily good results, which are deeply rooted in them, and contrary to the monastic life. We don’t have many narratives of most of the other canonical lay Ariyas, but presumably the cases were similar. I think one can also find some inspiration for imagination in the Jatakas. For instance one might stay in the lay life to care for their blind parents.

30

Is Buddha talking about laypeople when he says “bhikkhu” here?
And once again, the stream should eventually be crossed, doesn’t it. So it’s not like you can have a little thought of harmlessness once in a while and a thought of renunciation every now and then, and you’re safe waiting for your seventh life, despite all the miraculous examples. That’s as far as I’m concerned, anyway.

31

No, but later when he talks about “a person accomplished in view” he is speaking inclusively about lay and monastics.

And once again, the stream should eventually be crossed, doesn’t it.

Yes, but “eventually” includes up to ~ 1 trillion years (seven lives in the highest realms).

So it’s not like you can have a little thought of harmlessness once in a while and a thought of renunciation every now and then, and you’re safe waiting for your seventh life, despite all the miraculous examples. That’s as far as I’m concerned, anyway.

OK, but you seem to be taking that to go against the texts, e.g. SN 55.24 which make it explicit that laypersons (and even rarely unvirtuous laypersons) can be ariyas.

32

They understand: ‘It’s impossible for a person accomplished in view to take any condition as pleasant.
‘aṭṭhānametaṁ anavakāso yaṁ diṭṭhisampanno puggalo kañci saṅkhāraṁ sukhato upagaccheyya, netaṁ ṭhānaṁ vijjatī’ti pajānāti;

I’m not sure how this is compatible with the “layman disciples, enjoying sensual pleasures”.

I’m pretty sure the key to understanding this miraculous story lies in its last sentence.

Killing living creatures, stealing, having sex, lying, and use of alcoholic drinks casts a monk down to hell - AN5.286. Do they stay sotāpanna in hell?

33

That sutta is irrelevant, as we’re discussing laypersons.

I’m pretty sure this is a translation issue - not that the translation is bad, but that translation is innately lossy. One needs to be careful when comparing across translated suttas even when the author is the same.

The translation you’re quoting there corresponds to “kāmabhoginī” which in context basically means “non-celibate” and the dictionary reads as " 1. gratifying desires for sensual pleasures, indulging in pleasures of the senses; especially (one) who indulges in sexual pleasure, i.e. (one) who is not celibate, not a bhikkhu or bhikkhuni" c.f. “saṅkhāraṁ sukhato” which refers to viewing conditioned things as not merely gratifying sense desires but as sukha, the opposite of dukkha.

A sotapanna, still having seven fetters, including malevolence and sensual desire, can think, “I consent to having sex with my husband or wife, for such and such a reason” (though more often they will become celibate). But they won’t think, “this sexual act is free of dukkha. It is an uncomplicated joy. I can be free from suffering identifying as the one who has sex with my partner.”

There’s a spectrum of behavior, from the thousands of monastic ariyas, to the >500 8 precept ariyas mentioned in MN 73, to the >500 5-precept ariyas mentioned in the same suttas, to the one ariya who drank, to the faint possibility of ariyas who do other unskillful things

34

Are we?

Well, it’s the kāma that’s the problem, not the sukha, you see. It’s the kāma that differentiates a learned noble disciple from an unlearned ordinary person.
SN36.6

35

Yes. If you wish to not discuss laity, you should open a new thread not titled “Nekhamma in relation to the laity”.

Well, it’s the kāma that’s the problem, not the sukha, you see. It’s the kāma that differentiates a learned noble disciple from an unlearned ordinary person.
SN36.6

The only instances of kāma in that sutta are in the compound “kāmasukhaṁ”.

A lay ariya can be a “kāmabhoginī” - they can (but usually don’t) do things like have sex. They just do so without these deluded attitudes towards such conduct. As that sutta says:

If they feel a pleasant feeling, they feel it detached.
So sukhañce vedanaṁ vedayati, visaññutto naṁ vedayati.

An ordinary person who maintains their wealth for the benefit of charitable giving would be attached to that pleasant feeling, and might have delusions like, “I am building a lasting legacy. This is the path to true happiness.” Someone like Anathapindika might do the same outward acts, but lacked those delusional beliefs. Same thing for all the other grades of behavior.

36

Yes, it says a noble disciple can experience pleasant feeling (sukha) without having a desire (kāma) for it, which kāmabhogi obviously can’t

37

You seem very persistent in this view. At this point I will respectfully agree to disagree, and wish you well.

1 Like
38

Well, it’s in their name - kāmabhogi