Reading that I just had an interesting thought: I somehow get the impression from the texts that it’s easier to become a sotapanna than to master the jhanas (mind you, just from the suttas, not the Abhidhamma). After all ‘only’ trust/no-doubt is needed. Wouldn’t that be weird, if sotapatti was easier than samadhi?
1 Like
@Gabriel Yes, that’s it. Those are the words that I actually would like to say as well: that the first three noblehood stages are achievable mile-stones, not consolation-prizes (thank you for saying those words).
3 Likes
Yes, that’s very much my impression too! 
It sounds like it usually went along with some ability to do jhana, but probably not mastery of it (and there are the described incidences where the Buddha progressively guided a receptive listener in a talk, likely with no prior jhana experience, preparing their mind and eventually got their Dhamma eye to open). It really doesn’t sound like some one-in-a-million rare Dhamma attainment in the suttas, rather something a dedicated lay follower could realistically aim for with a decent chance of attaining (if not in life perhaps then at death). Heavier-duty jhana seems more associated with later path stages. Even first jhana sounds a bit more attainable in the suttas than the later jhanas (maybe something a layperson could more likely get to grips with?). If so, which begs the question of where the sotapannas all are? Or maybe there are actually some there but the commonly understood goal posts have been moved much further along?
@suaimhneas @Gabriel
One thing for sure is that faith and works are at stake here. And that faith is on the same ground than the work of losing the self view (sakkāya-diṭṭhi /sam-Ka-ya-diṭṭhi) (viz. the “this is mine” and “I am”) + losing uncomprehendingness (as undiscerning) (~doubt ?) (vicikicchā).
3 Likes
For the same reason we have terms for stages of human development. We don’t just have the words baby and adult. If we want to talk about the stages of development of anything then we have to provide definitions for those stages. They may not be relevant for the vast majority but if you were going through these stages and you were working with someone that had already been through them - you would really want to be able to have some way of communicating about and understanding what is going on.
I don’t get the sense that these stages are at all subtle. Look at the descriptions from Ajahn Boowa for example or Thanissaro’s ‘awareness outside of time and space’ as a description of stream entry.
1 Like
Sorry for the Ajahns - and I have much much much respect for Thanissaro Bhikkhu - but I don’t think that you have to go as far as the consciousness ayatana (6th Jhana - viz. to leave the space ayatana), to be a stream enterer.
Second/third jhanas (starting with cetaso ekodibhava [transcendence of citta] and ending with sampajano [clearly discerning]) —or— the 12th/13th steps of anapanasati [freeing the mind (vimocayam cittam) and contempling impermanence (aniccanupassi)], would be quite sufficient to do away with sakkāya-diṭṭhi and vicikicchā (undiscerning), I presume.
1 Like
You don’t have to take my word for it, but neither do teachers agree nor is there a foolproof criterion for practitioners to know - outside of specific schools. Which again means that the school gives the confirmation, not the experience in itself.
Thanks, I haven’t made the connection yet: that faith can be seen as the dhamma having transformed the unconscious. One would then have a ‘buddhist mind’, not a desire-oriented mind any more. This could be indeed described as a stream-entry (though as a very gradual one - not as a ‘dip’ into a nibbana-moment).
As I understand it so far there are several possibilities:
- the attainments are real, but the concrete criteria lost
- the attainments are real, but were always meant to be confirmed by an arahant with the divine eye (e.g. in SN 55.23 “The Blessed One alone would know whether or not he possesses these things”)
- the attainments were real but meant to be theoretical, not for the practical concerns of individuals. Almost all mentions of sotapanna are not of people, but of the ‘map’: “One who… is called…”. Are you aware, apart from SN 55.24/25, where a concrete person (here Sarakani) was said to be a sotapanna?
- the attainments and the criteria are not real but functional ‘motivators’
- the attainments and the criteria are not real but attempts by the early sangha to relate to an otherwise disinterested laity and to recruit monastics with ‘intermediate’ spiritual skills
4 Likes
I think there is a very slight “connection”.
These are just two different ways to make it to stream-entry, (and its little reward not to fall into bad destinations again) .
The quality of faith must equate the difficulty of the attainment of sakkāyadiṭṭhi (viz. 3rd jhana, or 13th step of anapanasati).
This is the connection, I suppose.
Each one its own interpretation or pretence.
Some see it as the result of the end of sakkāyadiṭṭhi (4th jhana - end of dukkha), as Armstrong in the video above. Some see it as an ultimate peaceful state, as Buddha defines it.
What imports, is to start with the right course anyway (AN 10.103/104).
I don’t know what you exactly mean with “concrete criteria”. But the attainments are real, and they have to be reached again; although some underlying impressions of the attainments, (actualisation of the field of experience,) always remain; I suppose.
Attainments are ruled by the law of impermanence, as long as we live in this paticcasamuppada (dharmán).
There is a sutta where a monk does not participate in the sewing of the robes; and the other monks complain to the Buddha.
But once the Buddha speaks to that monk, he tells the other monks that this monk can attain the jhanas very easily.
It shows how states in the path have always to be attained again.
I have learned a lot also, when I understood why in His parinibbāna (lit. almost nibbāna), the Buddha does all the jhanas, and go back to the fourth before dying.
A man can go as far as he can through the states. But he still has to die as a man.
I personally take all of these descriptions of altered, elevated states with a grain of salt. It is not possible to get inside someone’s head to verify that they are really experiencing what they say they experience and think they experience. More importantly, I often suspect that if I were inside their heads, I wouldn’t describe the experiences they are having in the same way they do.
And regrettably, some people might be faking it - trying to live up to people’s expectations of the way an enlightened master is supposed to behave, and the kind of metaphysical lingo they are supposed to use.
We’ve had a few people visiting here who said they were arahants. I heard a podcast once where some guy was sure he had devised a drug that arahantized him and gave him the “enlightenment experience.” I wasn’t convinced in either case.
5 Likes
I think its possible that some people would be discouraged from practice because they would see the Arahant ideal as being too far removed from their experience - they couldn’t see themselves being able to attain it in this life.
This illustrates the problem of telling someone that you have an attachment (which you genuinely believe you have). How many people took these visitors at their word and had a genuinely beneficial experience based on this proclamation? Not many IMO. Alternatively think of monks like the Ajhans that we know who made 0 proclamations yet are beneficial to us daily.
With metta
2 Likes
I don’t see how that would be possible. Though I do believe that any level of jhana may be sufficient for stream entry to occur, there must still be the direct experience of cessation. Jhana is conditioned. As it is fabricated, it cannot be the basis for the insight that arises from the unconditioned. It would be like saying going really slow on a merry-go-round is the equivalent of not being on it.
I agree. But if you unpack that statement further, could not the differences be the result of fundamentally different practices? Meditation practices are by definition fabricated. If those practices are altered, is it not reasonable that the results of such a practice would also be different? If you take a look at Dharma Overground (which someone linked to) you will learn that the suttas are confused and that is why you need the commentaries, you cannot gain insight in the jhanas, stream entry is sort of a mind blip which you can learn to call up at will, and so on. If the practices and the result of those practices are redefined can we even compare them. Why would we expect them to have the same result?
I agree. But I am not talking about someone showing up on a forum and proclaiming their attainment. I am talking about well respected people that have a long history of practice and dedication. A fairly well known meditation teacher that I have a great deal of respect for once commented ‘if a person comes out and says they are awakened, they will be ripped to pieces’. Imagine if the Buddha were to go on a forum today and announce his awakening? Ripped to pieces.
1 Like
I don’t quite understand. Do you mean to say that there are different types of sotapannas? one would have faith, the other a nibbana-dip, the third an insight to the noble eightfold path, etc, and also their experiences would have little in common? It’s possible, but then the Buddha/suttas would have introduced an utterly confusing category. Again, possible, but just #notmybuddhism (which I admit is not an objective criterion)
This argument refers to social recognition. Why would someone practicing in solitude be less trustworthy than someone building a reputation by hanging around a monastery?
Which the Buddha did - ‘forum’ as you probably know is an open public space, and it seems from the suttas that the Buddha after awakening was not shy at all to tell that he was fully enlightened. If people after enlightenment are really more concerned about ‘their’ ‘peace of mind’ than the compassion to help others on the way, maybe there is not much to their enlightenment after all.
1 Like
Maybe they don’t owe an explanation or a ‘coming-out’ to anyone? If they taught others it’s only a bonus. Like ‘sound is a thorn to the first jhana’ some Ariyas might not like to engage students because of the vexation that would cause. In the East the student seek out teachers. It’s not the duty of teachers to advertise their existence, or experiences. This way, I think, those not seeking in earnest and the most likely to display troublesome behaviour stay at superficial levels of the Dhamma, as they simply may not be ready to fully commit to the practice, immediately.
With metta
1 Like
No, I am saying that if you don’t follow the recipe, you won’t get the same result. If I give you a recipe for sourdough whole grain rye bread but you decide to use yeast instead of sourdough, then you don’t have rye so you use white flour instead, and so on then you won’t end up with the correct result - it isn’t sourdough whole grain rye bread no matter how many times you say it is. This is my point. The ebt’s are like a specific recipe and a stream winner is an interim result of following it.
I meant more in the sense of familiarity. If you have a choice between working with someone who is widely considered as awakened or a particularly good teacher and someone who is unknown to you at all then there is a choice to make. The unknown solitary individual may be the Buddha himself - but it would take some investigation.
I agree with Mat’s response.
1 Like
Suttas and parallels, please.
Thanks for clarifying! But I think if there was a clear recipe in the suttas people would have followed it all along. It sounds you have a concrete recipe in mind?
Thanks, I understand, but don’t agree. There might be good and recognized meditation teachers out there who can show that “do x and y and as z you’ll get a temporary piece of mind, a certain understanding”. But with sotapatti or arahanthip it’s a different matter. As long as there is no teacher with arahant-mass-production, a solitary but unknown practitioner (with books and internet of course) is not necessarily worse than an established and ‘recognized’ one. Conduct and quality of teaching should be the criteria, no?
Maybe we can collect the sotapatti-maggas available to us these days?
Ven. Ananda said: "Friends, whoever — monk or nun — declares the attainment of arahantship in my presence, they all do it by means of one or another of four paths. Which four?
"There is the case where a monk has developed insight preceded by tranquillity. As he develops insight preceded by tranquillity, the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it — his fetters are abandoned, his obsessions destroyed.
"Then there is the case where a monk has developed tranquillity preceded by insight. As he develops tranquillity preceded by insight, the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it — his fetters are abandoned, his obsessions destroyed.
"Then there is the case where a monk has developed tranquillity in tandem with insight. As he develops tranquillity in tandem with insight, the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it — his fetters are abandoned, his obsessions destroyed.
"Then there is the case where a monk’s mind has its restlessness concerning the Dhamma [Comm: the corruptions of insight] well under control. There comes a time when his mind grows steady inwardly, settles down, and becomes unified & concentrated. In him the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it — his fetters are abandoned, his obsessions destroyed. AN4.170
This is the basic mechanism. The rest of the Noble Eightfold Path work together with the meditations, and contemplations. The outward manifestation might be different according to the teacher like their are different car manufacturers but all use the same internal combustion engine (if we set aside electrical engines for a moment). All the descriptions of stream entrants are qualities emerging from the same underlying process. These may vary from person to person to some degree but not massively I would think.
With metta
1 Like
Okay, but where is here sotapatti mentioned? yes, the fetters, but without further details an arahant could be meant or any other stage
Why is it a problem if other paths are workable?