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.
1 Like
Maybe this could be brought up again?
1 Like
Looking forward to the comments by Venerable Vajira.@Ashinvajira
2 Likes
A post was merged into an existing topic: How can we know if we have various attainments?
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.
What is the difference between each fruition attainment(stream entry, once-return, non-return, arahantship)? Is it the same experience? Can the Noble Ones enter into their fruition attainment whenever they wish? Like when they are waiting in line, sitting in an airplane, walking, or lying down? Does the Fruition Attainment have Jhāna factors?
Pa Auk sayadaw (U Acinna) is a Sudhamma ordained monk who because of his strict adherence to vinaya became the abbot of a Shwekyin monastery. The former abbot of Pa Auk monastery asked the current Pa Auk Sayadaw (U Acinna) to look after his monastery when he was close to death because U Acinna was known to him personally and respected as a strictly vinaya observant monk. The former Pa Auk Sayadaw did not want his monastery taken over by monks who did not keep vinaya. So that is a pretty good reference for U Acinna.
I never confused the two. The conversation drifted. Look at the title of this thread.
It would be good if you had quotes rather than just trying to recall what was said. Otherwise, it cannot be taken seriously.
These topics are crosslinked.. so I need to clarify here too.
@RobertK Be careful. This is a super common litmus test. “Can you reach Nibbāna any time you want?” We get many people in the business who claim to be enlightened. This is a standard question we ask. There are many quotes too. You just have to use TPR ai Search.
tasmā sabbepi ariyā attano attano phalaṃ samāpajjantīti niṭṭhamettha gantabbaṃ.
Therefore, it should be concluded here that all noble ones attain their own respective fruit.
It is confused and a 1-off interpretation: I pasted the quote by Robert to gemini. It recognized this and confirmed that all ariya can attain. Below is what it said. It also knew it was from Sujin who was famous for this type of quote. In other words, you should be very careful to take a one-off interpretable tika quote that is interpreted to go against the upper level commentary.
- The Mahānāma Sutta Argument: The text cites the Aṅguttara Nikāya (AN 6.10), where Mahānāma (a stream-enterer) asks the Buddha how he should abide. The Buddha tells him to abide in the Six Recollections (Recollection of the Buddha, Dhamma, Saṅgha, etc.). The authors of the bulletin infer that if Mahānāma could simply enter Nibbāna via phala-samāpatti, the Buddha would have told him to do that. Because Mahānāma was a dry-insight worker, they argue he was limited to “access concentration” via recollections, rather than fruition.
- Reinterpreting the Visuddhimagga: To address the Visuddhimagga’s explicit statement that “all ariyans can enter,” this group argues that the passage is being taken out of context. They lean on sub-commentaries (like the Saddhammappakāsinī) to argue that “all” really meant “all those who have the prerequisite jhāna attainments,” strictly refuting the idea that phala-samāpatti is inherently available to everyone.
We have to be very careful when reading sub-commentary and not be a scholar.
Here is a long and actual quote from paṭisambhidāmaggaaṭṭhakathā ¶
paṭisambhidāmaggaaṭṭhakathā ¶
ke taṃ samāpajjanti?
Who attain it?ke na samāpajjantīti?
Who do not attain it?sabbepi puthujjanā na samāpajjanti.
All ordinary people do not attain it.kasmā?
Why?anadhigatattā.
Because it has not been realized.ariyā pana sabbepi samāpajjanti.
But all noble ones attain it.247kasmā?
Why?adhigatattā.
Because it has been realized.uparimā pana heṭṭhimaṃ na samāpajjanti puggalantarabhāvūpagamanena paṭippassaddhattā, heṭṭhimā ca uparimaṃ anadhigatattā.
However, those of higher stages do not attain the lower stages, as the lower stages have been appeased by their attainment of a different individual state; and those of lower stages do not attain the higher stages, as they have not yet realized them.attano attanoyeva pana phalaṃ sabbepi samāpajjantīti idamettha sanniṭṭhānaṃ.
Herein, the conclusion is that all noble ones attain their own respective fruit.keci pana ‘‘sotāpannasakadāgāminopi na samāpajjanti, uparimā dveyeva samāpajjantī’’ti vadanti.
Some say, however, that even stream-enterers and once-returners do not attain it; only the two higher ones attain it.idañca nesaṃ kāraṇaṃ – ete hi samādhismiṃ paripūrakārinoti.
And this is their reason: for these are fully accomplished in samādhi.taṃ puthujjanassāpi attanā paṭiladdhaṃ lokiyasamādhiṃ samāpajjanato akāraṇameva.
That is indeed no reason, for even an ordinary person attains the mundane samādhi that he has gained.kiñcettha kāraṇākāraṇacintāya.
What is the point of considering reasons and non-reasons here?nanu idheva pāḷiyaṃ ‘‘katame dasa saṅkhārupekkhā vipassanāvasena uppajjanti, katame dasa gotrabhudhammā vipassanāvasena uppajjantī’’ti (paṭi. ma. 1.60) imesaṃ pañhānaṃ vissajjane ‘‘sotāpattiphalasamāpattatthāya sakadāgāmiphalasamāpattatthāyā’’ti (paṭi. ma. 1.60) visuṃ visuṃ vuttā.
Are not the questions, “Which ten saṅkhārupekkhā arise by way of vipassanā, which ten gotrabhū-dhamma arise by way of vipassanā?” answered right here in the Pāḷi by stating separately “for the attainment of stream-entry fruit-attainment, for the attainment of once-returner fruit-attainment”?tasmā sabbepi ariyā attano attano phalaṃ samāpajjantīti niṭṭhamettha gantabbaṃ.
Therefore, it should be concluded here that all noble ones attain their own respective fruit.kasmā samāpajjantīti?
Why do they attain it?diṭṭhadhammasukhavihāratthaṃ.
For a happy abiding in this very life.yathā hi rājāno rajjasukhaṃ, devatā dibbasukhamanubhavanti, evaṃ ariyā ‘‘lokuttarasukhaṃ anubhavissāmā’’ti addhānaparicchedaṃ katvā icchiticchitakkhaṇe phalasamāpattiṃ samāpajjanti.
Just as kings experience the happiness of kingship, and devas experience divine happiness, so too, the noble ones, having determined a period of time, attain fruit-attainment at the desired moment, thinking, “We shall experience supramundane happiness.”
It is repeated in many commentaries.. of course the vsm itself.
So you can see below and the previous comment that this is a “Stock Quote”. It is very clear, and ehem…repeated.
visuddhimaggo (du) pp. 341-342
phalasamāpattīti yā ariyaphalassa nirodhe appanā.
859. In this regard, what is fruition-attainment? It is the absorption in Nibbāna, which is the cessation of the noble fruition. 859. tattha kā
860. ke taṃ samāpajjanti, ke na samāpajjantīti sabbepi puthujjanā na samāpajjanti.
860. Who attain it and who do not attain it? All ordinary individuals (puthujjana) do not attain it.
kasmā?
Why?
anadhigatattā.
Because it has not been realized.
ariyā pana sabbepi samāpajjanti.
All noble ones (ariyā), however, do attain it.
kasmā?
Why?
adhigatattā.
Because it has been realized.
uparimā pana heṭṭhimaṃ na samāpajjanti, puggalantarabhāvupagamanena paṭippassaddhattā.
But higher individuals do not attain the lower fruitions, because they have already pacified (their defilements) by progressing to the state of a higher individual.
heṭṭhimā ca uparimaṃ, anadhigatattā.
And lower individuals do not attain the higher fruitions, because they have not realized them.
attano attanoyeva pana phalaṃ samāpajjantīti idamettha sanniṭṭhānaṃ.
Therefore, the definitive conclusion here is that noble ones attain only their own respective fruitions.
samāpajjanti.
However, some say, “Even stream-winners and once-returners do not attain it.
uparimā dveyeva samāpajjantī’’ti vadanti.
Only the two higher (stages of noble ones) attain it.”
idañca tesaṃ kāraṇaṃ, ete hi samādhismiṃ paripūrakārinoti.
And their reason for this is that these two are perfected in concentration.
taṃ puthujjanassāpi attanā paṭiladdhalokiyasamādhisamāpajjanato akāraṇameva.
That (reason), however, is invalid, because even an ordinary individual can attain the worldly concentration he has gained.
kiñcettha kāraṇākāraṇacintāya.
Moreover, what is the point of deliberating on what is a valid or invalid reason here?
nanu pāḷiyaṃyeva vuttaṃ – ‘‘katame dasa gotrabhudhammā vipassanāvasena uppajjanti?
Was it not stated in the Pāḷi itself: “Which ten gotrabhū phenomena arise by way of vipassanā?
sotāpattimaggapaṭilābhatthāya uppādaṃ pavattaṃ…pe… upāyāsaṃ bahiddhā saṅkhāranimittaṃ abhibhuyyatīti gotrabhu.
‘Arising, continuance…suffering, the external sign of formations are overcome’—thus it is gotrabhū, for the attainment of the stream-entry path. keci pana ‘‘sotāpannasakadāgāminopi na
342sotāpattiphalasamāpattatthāya sakadāgāmimaggaṃ …pe… arahattaphalasamāpattatthāya… suññatavihārasamāpattatthāya… animittavihārasamāpattatthāya uppādaṃ…pe… bahiddhā saṅkhāranimittaṃ abhibhuyyatīti gotrabhū’’ti (paṭi. ma. 1.60).
For the attainment of stream-entry fruition-attainment, the once-returner path…for the attainment of Arahantship fruition-attainment…for the attainment of the empty dwelling…for the attainment of the signless dwelling: ‘arising…the external sign of formations are overcome’—thus it is gotrabhū” (Paṭi. Ma. 1.60).
tasmā sabbepi ariyā attano attano phalaṃ samāpajjantīti niṭṭhamettha gantabbaṃ.
Therefore, it should be concluded that all noble ones attain their own respective fruitions.
861. kasmā samāpajjantīti diṭṭhadhammasukhavihāratthaṃ.
861. Why do they attain it? For a pleasant abiding in this very life.
yathā hi rājā rajjasukhaṃ, devatā dibbasukhaṃ anubhavanti, evaṃ ariyā ‘‘ariyaṃ lokuttarasukhaṃ anubhavissāmā’’ti addhānapparicchedaṃ katvā icchiticchitakkhaṇe phalasamāpattiṃ samāpajjanti.
Just as a king experiences the bliss of kingship and devas experience divine bliss, so too, having made a determination of time, noble ones attain fruition-attainment at whatever moment they wish, thinking, “We shall experience the noble, supramundane bliss.”
I think the Saddhammappakāsinī is the Commentary to the Patisambhidhamagga. Gemini might be confused when it then says
It seems to be implying that the two are different.
Please do not think for a second that I would post Pāḷi and English line by line from AI. NO. This is from the Pāḷi Tipiṭaka Reader app. Please do not spoil my post, Robert. The name is what I copied. Find it in Tipiṭaka; do not quibble over the name of the commentary versus how it is referred to. The Pāḷi is real. Please use Tipiṭaka or any other app to search for the Pāḷi I gave you.