Understanding Ariya Levels Through Water Analogy

 "In a person's life, from waking up until going to bed, which is more numerous - wholesome or unwholesome states? If unwholesome states are more numerous in one day, aren't they even more numerous in a month? In a year, don't they multiply further? #When_calculated_across_lifetimes,_can_we_even_count_them?

Can such numerous unwholesome actions be repaid through giving (dāna)? Through morality (sīla)? Through concentration (samatha)? Could they be repaid with flesh? Could they be repaid with shoulder bones? #Only_wisdom_can_repay_them. Isn't this worth examining?

#These_unwholesome_actions_are_extremely_numerous. To repay these debts, the Buddha had to appear. Only with the Buddha's appearance could we understand the aggregates, sense bases, elements, and Noble Truths. This needs to be examined carefully.

Let's consider something unprecedented - Aṅgulimāla was a murderer. Isn't killing humans a greater offense than killing animals? None of you listening to this Dhamma now have committed crimes as severe as Aṅgulimāla, have you? Isn't this worth considering?

Aṅgulimāla's killing humans was a greater offense than killing animals. But when he met the Buddha and heard the teachings about Noble Truths, aggregates, and Dependent Origination, didn't he attain the first path and fruition? Did he continue killing? No, he stopped.

Continuing his practice, didn't he complete the tasks of Stream-entry, Once-returning, Non-returning, and Arahantship? Did his past unwholesome actions get a chance to give results? Think about it. Isn't this worth examining? #All_became_defunct_karma. Doesn't Aṅgulimāla stand as proof?

The famous drunkard Surāmukha, you see, hadn't regularly listened to the Buddha's teachings before. Then one day, #he_developed_a_desire_to_hear_the_Dhamma. Afraid to be seen by other listeners, he hid and listened from a corner where no one could see him.

When the Buddha directed his attention, he knew Surāmukha was listening. Didn't he teach about aggregates, sense bases, elements, Noble Truths, and Dependent Origination? At the end of the discourse, Surāmukha attained Stream-entry. Did he continue drinking? #When_one_understands,_doesn't_one_abandon?

Didn't the Buddha declare to his listeners that the Nibbāna attained by Surāmukha was the same as the Nibbāna attained by the Buddha? The monk was quite dissatisfied with this, you see!

He was dissatisfied that the Buddha equated Surāmukha's Nibbāna with his own. How could this be - someone who just heard and attained, compared to the Buddha who had fulfilled perfections for four incalculables and one hundred thousand aeons? Yet they were declared the same, you see! Isn't this worth contemplating?"

"Let's examine the examples given. Have you heard of royal feasts with hundreds of dishes? And in the forests and mountains, have you seen farmers eating with just one curry dish?

When eating with one curry dish, doesn't it satisfy hunger? When eating hundreds of dishes, doesn't it satisfy hunger? In terms of satisfaction, who has the advantage? It's equal, isn't it? Though in terms of dishes, the king has more.

Similarly, didn't the Buddha declare that Surāmukha's Nibbāna and his own Nibbāna were the same? #The_taste_of_Nibbāna_is_identical. Yes, the worldly qualities were abundant in the Buddha. Isn't this worth examining?

The Buddha's kamma is infinite. As a Bodhisatta, he performed countless acts of merit, even giving rice broth flowing like rivers. His power is infinite, his glory infinite, his honor infinite, his wisdom infinite. Did Surāmukha have these qualities? Aren't they different in this aspect? But isn't the taste of Nibbāna the same? How satisfying is this to contemplate!

#When_he_was_drinking,_he_was_just_another_ordinary_worthless_person. But when he encountered the Noble Truths, he attained path and fruition, you see. The Nibbāna seen by Stream-enterers, Once-returners, Non-returners, and Buddha and Arahants is the same. The difference lies in how many defilements remain.

Stream-enterers still have many defilements. Once-returners have fewer. Non-returners have very few remaining. Arahants have none. Isn't this worth studying? #When_one_attains_Stream-entry,_one_has_seen_Nibbāna, you see. Isn't the Buddha's teaching clear?"

"The renowned Dhamma teacher and scholar Ledi Sayadaw from Monywa gave a famous #example_of_how_Nibbāna_is_seen at different stages of enlightenment.

Imagine bathing in a river or stream at night. For a Stream-enterer (Sotāpanna), the water covers up to the shoulders, but the neck and head remain above water. Looking up at the night sky, can't they see the stars? Yes, they can.

For a Once-returner (Sakadāgāmi), the water comes up to the waist. When they look up, can't they still see the stars and constellations?

For a Non-returner (Anāgāmi), the water only covers below the ankles, with most of the body above water. When they look up, aren't the stars clearly visible?

For the Buddha and Arahants, the water is only beneath their feet. When they look up, don't they see the stars? Isn't the view of the stars (Nibbāna) the same for all? Yes, it's identical. But #aren't_there_differences_in_how_many_defilements_remain?

The Buddha and Arahants have eliminated all defilements. The Non-returner still has some remaining. The Once-returner has more, and the Stream-enterer has even more remaining. Isn't this worth examining? Isn't it worth investigating the taste of Nibbāna? You see, the vision of Nibbāna is the same, but they differ in how many defilements remain. Therefore, #personality_view_must_be_eliminated and #the_Noble_Truths_must_be_understood..."

This analogy beautifully illustrates how all noble ones (ariya) see Nibbāna equally clearly (like seeing the stars), but differ in the degree to which they remain "submerged" in defilements.