What is a good person and what is a good friend?

[ERose]

@stu

what kalyāṇamitta means from an EBT perspectiv

I doubt the same understandng of it was had by EBT era worldlings, and EBT era sotapannas, and EBT era arahants; just as today.

i suppose an arahant’s understanding of kalyāṇamitta would be quite coherent with their understanding of the 5 khandas, and free from the gross and subtle exercise of craving and greed, ill will and hate, delusion and ignorance. Seeing as it was, perhaps their friendship would sound less like “having” friendship and more like “being”. I think that it would encourage diligence and development of skillful qualities; and it seems to me that the Buddha was generous, unstintingly.

Interesting topic. I may read but I think I have contributed all I have, for now.

[stu]

@SeriousFun136

Which discourse number is this?

It’s MN8. With lots of metta as the post needs to be over 20 characters

[Brahmali]

Thanks, Stu, for alerting me to this thread. I shall be most happy to comment.

I agree with you that sappurisa and kalyāṇamitta are effectively synonymous, both predominantly referring to noble people, that is, the ariyas. That sappurisa is synonymous with ariya is quite clear from the following standard passage, found for instance in MN 2:

Idha, bhikkhave, assutavā puthujjano ariyānaṃ adassāvī ariyadhammassa akovido ariyadhamme avinīto, sappurisānaṃ adassāvī sappurisadhammassa akovido sappurisadhamme avinīto

Take an uneducated ordinary person who has not seen the noble ones, and is neither skilled nor trained in the teaching of the noble ones. They’ve not seen good persons, and are neither skilled nor trained in the teaching of the good persons.

Kalyāṇamitta is a less technical word than sappurisa, that is, it is not normally used in a narrow and clearly defined sense. Kalyāṇamitta is used, for instance, in contrast to the pāpamitta, “a bad friend”. Here it seems likely that the meaning should be understood a bit more broadly than just ariyas. So it is probably not a good idea to pin it down too precisely.

On the other hand, whenever kalyāṇamitta does have a fairly precise meaning, such as in the passages you quote in the OP, it invariably refers to ariyas. This means that we should always strive to have ariyas as our kalyāṇamittas, with the Buddha foremost among them. A problem with this approach, however, is that we cannot be sure who the ariyas are. So from a practical perspective we may adopt the broader definition—while keeping the narrower meaning at the back of our minds—and take anyone who leads us onward, that is, helps us to reduce our defilements, as a “good friend”.

But you are quite right that in the end we need the ariyas, because only they have a full vision of the truth. This, then, must remain the fundamental meaning of kalyāṇamitta.

@stu

I don’t know. Maybe. But I’m beginning to think that the term kalyāṇamitta is a bit like the term Sangha. It generally means something different now to what it meant in the EBT world.

I agree. In fact there are quite a few such words, including karma, and even jhāna and sati. We need to be careful to distinguish contemporary use from the use in the suttas. Otherwise we might go astray!