Understanding enlightenment better

[dhammadharo]

@Mat

Sutavan, an arahant monk…, cannot possibly transgress these five principles. It is impossible for a monk whose mental fermentations are ended to intentionally deprive a living being of life, [etc]

Excellent, Matt. Thanks!

@Media

Nice. ‘Principles’ is a much better than ‘precepts’ here.

Which principles?

@Media

I think the idea of the precepts is to treat them like ‘training wheels’ (sometimes called ‘stabilisers’) which keep you upright when you are learning to ride a bike. Once you know how to ride a bike you no longer need the training wheels to keep you upright.

It sounds here like they could break a precept.

@Media

AN4.45 seems to indicate that the Buddha did not use that classical Western mind-body (now brain-body) split that we are used to using as a basis for understanding.

I wonder if there’s more evidence for monism in the texts than this…

[Media]

@dhammadharo

Which principles?

In the translation that @Mat gave, we have the word ‘principles’ used instead of ‘precepts’.

@dhammadharo

Sutavan, an arahant monk…, cannot possibly transgress these five principles. It is impossible for a monk whose mental fermentations are ended to intentionally deprive a living being of life, [etc]

Which works much better for me as a translation because if you use ‘precepts’ it sounds like Arahants have to exert some effort to follow some rules rather than this just being their default behaviour.

@dhammadharo

It sounds here like they could break a precept.

I guess there will always be those difficult ethical scenarios (like The Trolley Problem) where you need to pick the lesser of two evils even for a (living) Arahant??

[dhammadharo]

@Media

In the translation that @Mat gave, we have the word ‘principles’ used instead of ‘precepts’.

So he did, you’re right. And it’s interesting that the first five are the householder precepts…