Can A Sotāpanna Attain Fruition Consciousness More Than Once?

[bksubhuti]

I’m surprised that ven bodhi would mention this but not understand the missing logic or mention the controversy of this excerpt. I have asked @Ashinvajira to comment on this.

[RobertK]

@bksubhuti

The issue came up today during my teaching of Tipitaka Sayadaw […]

At first the sayadaw said that there was no phalasamāpatti because of this, but changed his mind by the time evening juice came around. He said, (in English). "There are two types of phalasamāpatti. One with jhāna and one without

Maybe this could be brought up again?

[RobertK]

@bksubhuti

I have asked @Ashinvajira to comment on this.

Looking forward to the comments by Venerable Vajira.@Ashinvajira

[Nikolay_Gnatyuk]

@bksubhuti

" This is because there are some meditators who fall into bhavaṅgha and say " i knew nothing " or "Both the objects and the mind noting them ceased ". They believe wrongly they have realised Nibbāna, but actually all they have done is to fall into bhavaṅgha.

It is because they do not have the ability to discern the bhavaṅgha mind and its object, they say that " I knew nothing " or " both the mind and the objects noting them ceased ".

However, if they go to really develop the Knowledge discerning cause and conditions, they will find that at that time there were still bhavaṅgha consciousness present which have the objects of near-death-impsion-consciousnees (maraṇāsanna javana citta) in the previous life. In other words, a meditator who has properly completed that insight knowledge can look back and directly see the bhavaṅgha consciousness and it’s object"

From mindfulness of breathing and four elements meditation, by most ven Pa Auk Sayadaw

These words: or “Both the objects and the mind noting them ceased” - a verbatim quote from the descriptions of attaining the fruit from the books of Mahasi Sayadaw, especially his Manual of Insight. And indeed, for some reason, some practitioners of his method had such an experience - a complete disconnection of awareness, which they began to call the attainment of the path and the fruit. It is noteworthy that those who experienced such a “fruit” very often did not notice any noticeable changes in their minds. Modern secular “arahants” even claim that the fruit of arahantship does not imply complete deliverance from the three poisons. But did Mahasi Sayadaw himself teach such a description of the Path and the Fruit? - Not at all. According to the teaching of Mahasi Sayadaw, at the moment of attaining nibbana, the object of vipassana and the vipassana mind noting it cease together. And their cessation or non-arising is nibbana, the dhamma of the cessation of everything conditioned, the dhamma empty of mind and object. This Dhamma is realized by the consciousness of the path and the fruit. After emerging from the attainment, the knowledge of review cognizes nibbana as the object, the consciousness of the path, the consciousness of the fruit, the defilements that remain and the defilements that are eradicated. From this it is clear that the attainment of the Path and the Fruit according to Mahasi Sayadaw does not presuppose the switching off of consciousness. For the consciousness of this attainment subsequently becomes the object of the knowledge of review. In another of his books (or collections of lectures), Mahasi Sayadaw describes the switching off of consciousness as one of the forms of wrong liberation. Thus the cessation of impermanent objects and the vipassana-minds of those who contemplated them, that is, nibbana, which is empty of everything conditioned, since it is their cessation, does not mean that consciousness is switched off, but only that they are no longer recognized and something appears to the mind that is completely beyond all description, full of peace and stability; empty of matter, mind, concepts. Why the venerable teacher decided to criticize the teachings of the venerable Mahasi Sayadaw is not entirely clear to me. In my opinion, their teachings are perfect, and only complement each other.