7[dhammastudygroup] Re: Why study?
- Jan 2, 2000
>From: Robert Kirkpatrick <robertkirkpatrick@...>Thank you for the precisions,
>Subject: [dhammastudygroup] Re: Why study?
>Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2000 17:42:40 -0800 (PST)
>I think you explained it very well, Amara.
>It is true that the monks life is different from a
>laypersons life. But the path - which is a path of
>understanding - is the same for all. In the
>commentaries, which were recorded by monks , it is
>said that far more laypeople than monks attained the
>stages of enlightenment including anagami, sakadagami
>and sotapanna. This is not because a laypersons life
>is more suitable for developing wisdom but because
>there were more laypeople. The main point to realize
>is that the path is an internal development. The
>outward life one leads is not a reliable indication of
>whether wisdom is developing.
>You said that "Only those he knew would
> > become the anagamis at the least or the arahantas
> > were ordained, as well as
> > those who have attained were permitted to at once. "
>This is a little incorrect. The order became very
>large later in the Buddha's life and many people
>became monks or nuns who never attained any of the
>paths . And even laypeople , such as his father,
>became arahants. Of cause, once becoming arahant if
>they were going to live longer than a week they would
>enter the order.
>There were numerous men and women anagamis who, even
>after reaching that stage, spent the rest of their ,
>sometimes long, lives as laypeople.
- << Previous post in topic