Questions​ on pre-anagami status

[Coemgenu]

[quote=“gnlaera, post:12, topic:5606”]
[quoting from studybuddhism.com]

The division scheme of aryas into stream-enterer (rgyun-zhugs), once-returner (phyir-‘ong), non-returner (phyir mi-‘ong), and arhat (dgra-bcom) is unique to shravaka and pratyekabuddha aryas. It does not apply to arya bodhisattvas.
[/quote]I know that a lot of Mahāyāna schools do believe in stream-entry as the first stage of significant progress, but it seems that some also do not think stream-entry is a part of Bodhisattvayāna.

I would disagree with this, as it contradicts a lot of Mahāyāna sūtras, but each schools gets to decide what they keep and reject, I suppose.

[Dhammanando]

[quote=“Dhammanando, post:14, topic:5606”]
Yes, those are three of them. I’ll post some more later.[/quote]

I will just give the names. The sources can be found in the Dictionary of Pali Proper Names. Link

Sotāpannas reborn in Cātummahārājikā
King Bimbisāra

Sotāpannas reborn in Tāvatiṃsa
Uttarā Nandamātā
Rohiṇī, sister of Anuruddha
Sunandā the garland-maker’s daughter

Sotāpannas reborn in Tusita
Anāthapiṇḍika
Tambadāṭhika
Mahādhana

Sotāpannas reborn in Yāma
Sirimā, sister of Jīvaka

Sotāpannas reborn in Nimmānarati
Visākha Migaramātā

Sakadāgāmins reborn in Tusita
Purāṇa
Isidatta
Sumanā, daughter of Anāthapiṇḍika

Sakadāgāmins reborn in the Mahābrahmā heaven
Ghaṭikāra (in the time of Kassapa Buddha; though he attained anāgāmitā at the moment of birth and was then reborn in the Avihā Suddhāvāsa)

Anāgāmins reborn in the Suddhāvāsa
Bhaddiya Thera
Piṅgiya
Citta Gahapati
Ugga of Hatthigāma
Ugga of Vesāli
Hatthaka Āḷavaka
Upaka
Asokā of Ñātika
Kāliṅga of Ñātika
Nandā of Ñātika
Tuttha of Ñātika
Subhadda of Ñātika

(There are probably a lot more anāgāmins than these, but as the thread is about pre-anāgāmin sekhas this list will suffice).

[Deeele]

@Dhammanando

One thing I should add is that in narratives of pre-anāgāmin sekhas reborn as devas, the commonest destinations are given as Tāvatiṃsa and Tusita rather than the Brahmā realms

@Dhammanando. Something I struggle with about the suttas, particularly in the AN, is how rebirth as a god seems to be taken as both positively & negatively, to the point where I am not sure if this Buddhist development was embracing the Brahman gods or debunking the Brahman gods.

For example, unless I am mistaken, suttas such as MN 1 seem to incorporate the Brahma realms as the 1st, 2nd, 3rd & 4th jhana (which I personally struggle to believe the Buddha would do that to his teaching, particularly when considering Western monks such as @Sujato, @Brahmali & @Brahmavamso seem to claim the Buddha discovered jhana). The Buddha was often ruthlessly strict about his teaching not being misrepresented yet the glory of his Noble Eightfold Path, namely, the four jhanas, start to be described in terms of Brahmanistic gods.

So did the Buddha really discover jhana or did the Buddha discover the Brahma gods?

The point I am making here is AN 4.123, for example. Here, it appears a person identifies as being a Brahma god & thus ends up reborn in hell, which is a horrible outcome for putting in all that time & effort for jhana but making a tiny error of identifying with jhana.

There is the case where an individual, withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful qualities, enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. He savors that, longs for that, finds satisfaction through that. Staying there—fixed on that, dwelling there often, not falling away from that—then when he dies he reappears in conjunction with the devas of Brahma’s retinue. The devas of Brahma’s retinue, monks, have a life-span of an eon. A run-of-the-mill person having stayed there, having used up all the life-span of those devas, goes to hell, to the animal womb, to the state of the hungry shades. But a disciple of the Blessed One, having stayed there, having used up all the life-span of those devas, is unbound right in that state of being. This, monks, is the difference, this the distinction, this the distinguishing factor, between an educated disciple of the noble ones and an uneducated run-of-the-mill person, when there is a destination, a reappearing. AN 4.123

[sujato]

@Deeele

particularly when considering Western monks such as @Sujato, @Brahmali & @Brahmavamso seem to claim the Buddha discovered jhana

I’ve never claimed this, and in fact I think it is clearly unfounded and in addition, unhelpful. I have attempted to persuade Ajahn Brahm of this, without success.

[Deeele]

My apologies for misrepresenting your view, Bhante Sujato.

However, this is unrelated to my curiosity & skepticism about the imputing of Brahma realms onto jhana in the EBTSs and then associating those Brahma realms with hell.

Regards

[Brahmali]

@Deeele

… particularly when considering Western monks such as @Sujato, @Brahmali & @Brahmavamso seem to claim the Buddha discovered jhana

I have never made this claim, either. Nevertheless, I think it is interesting. The Canon says that the Buddha-to-be jhānamabujjhi, “awoke to jhāna” (AN 9.42). Although the exact interpretation of this is uncertain, it is still a rather striking statement. Moreover, there are indications that the Buddha-to-be’s attainment of samādhi under Ālāra Kalāma and Uddaka Rāmaputta may not have been as profound as it appears from reading the Pali suttas, e.g. MN 26. I am neither willing nor able to draw a definite conclusion from this. All I can say is that the evidence is not as one-sided as it is sometimes claimed.

[niconico]

Thanks very much for the list, Bhante @Dhammanando.

Please pardon my interruption, sir. I think Uttarā Nandamātā is clearly Anāgāmin and hence cannot be reborn outside the pure abodes. This can be seen in AN 7.53 “Nandamātā”. Towards the end of the sutta, she declared to Sariputta that she has abandoned all five lower fetters taught by the Blessed one, and was duly praised by the Chief Disciple himself. She was also given special mention by the Buddha as being the foremost of female lay followers amongst meditators in AN 1.262.

With Metta and Upekkha,
Nick

[Dhammanando]

@niconico

Please pardon my interruption, sir. I think Uttarā Nandamātā is clearly Anāgāmin and hence cannot be reborn outside the pure abodes. This can be seen in AN 7.53 “Nandamātā”.

Possibly, but I don’t think it’s certain.

In the Nandamātāsutta the listener is called Veḷukaṇṭakī Nandamātā, not Uttarā Nandamātā.

So, if the commentaries are right in identifying the Uttarā of the Uttarāvimānavatthu story with Uttarā Nandamātā, then Veḷukaṇṭakī must have been a different woman and the mother of some other man called Nanda.