Past Lives?

[Neeranam]

Hi all,

I once was invited onto a tv program in scotland which was to be aired on one Halloween, a kind of spooky ghost thing.

Myself and my yoga teacher were hypnotically regressed. Well actually I wasn't, I was very nervous with all the cameras and spoke to the famous hypnotist, so famous I can't remember his name! After speaking to him I felt absolutely no stress or fear when sitting in front of a Grampian Tv camera.

He regressed me through my present life and it was qite a nice feeling, however when we got to 0, he asked my to name a date, which I did 1864 and I got this very weird feeling that I didn't want to go there. It was explained afterwards that this happens to many people, maybe something traumatic happened.

My friend however appeared on tv and she was transformed into an Indian woman.

Uri geller was also on this program and when he and my teacher were speaking, there was a very strange thing happened, they just stared at each other for what seemed like ages, kind of communicating without speaking.

Anyway,

What do Buddhists think of previous lifes?

Can karmas from past lives affect this one?

How about 2 lives ago?

Is it possible that I were a giraffe in a previous life?

Oops, sorry wrong forum, can a mod move it please.

Edited August 2, 2005 by Neeranam

[Kerryd]

Anyway,

What do Buddhists think of previous lifes?

Can karmas from past lives affect this one?

How about 2 lives ago?

Is it possible that I were a giraffe in a previous life?

Oops, sorry wrong forum, can a mod move it please.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm not an expert on all-things Buddhist, but I've read quite a few books about it.

My understanding is that Buddhists believe in previous lives and re-incarnation.

What you do in this life will affect you in the next life. If you do a lot of "evil" (build up too much bad Karma) in this life, your progression to enlightenment will be set back. If you do exceptionally good in this life, you may achieve enlightenment in the next.

I read in one of the books, that there are 5,000 stages of re-incarnation (for example, starting off as a dust-mite on the back of a cockroach). Assuming you didn't acquire a lot of bad karma as a dust-mite, your next incarnation would be to a higher life form (maybe the cockroach ?). You continue progressing until you achieve human form.

I think your karma "slate" is wiped clean with each new incarnation (regardless if you have regressed or progressed). Therefore, evil (or good) that you did 2 lifetimes ago would have no effect on your current incarnation.

I have not seen a definitive chart anywhere, that shows what life forms would be eligible for re-incarnation as a human. You may very well have been a giraffe in your previous existence (a good giraffe !).

Personally, I think I was a randy monkey in my last incarnation , but the next one will see me about as low as I can go down the scale !

Like many religions, there are lots of "generalities", but few specific details. That was fine for the populace 2-3000 years ago, but doesn't go over well with most of today's better educated, more inquisitive population. That is why you hear those cliche' catch phrases all the time ("You must have Faith. God moves in mysterious ways. Ours is not to know the mind of God. and so on, and on and on), every time religion gets cornered on questions it can't answer.

[Ariya]

Anyway,

What do Buddhists think of previous lifes?

Can karmas from past lives affect this one?

How about 2 lives ago?

Is it possible that I were a giraffe in a previous life?

Oops, sorry wrong forum, can a mod move it please.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm not an expert on all-things Buddhist, but I've read quite a few books about it.

My understanding is that Buddhists believe in previous lives and re-incarnation.

What you do in this life will affect you in the next life. If you do a lot of "evil" (build up too much bad Karma) in this life, your progression to enlightenment will be set back. If you do exceptionally good in this life, you may achieve enlightenment in the next.

I read in one of the books, that there are 5,000 stages of re-incarnation (for example, starting off as a dust-mite on the back of a cockroach). Assuming you didn't acquire a lot of bad karma as a dust-mite, your next incarnation would be to a higher life form (maybe the cockroach ?). You continue progressing until you achieve human form.

I think your karma "slate" is wiped clean with each new incarnation (regardless if you have regressed or progressed). Therefore, evil (or good) that you did 2 lifetimes ago would have no effect on your current incarnation.

I have not seen a definitive chart anywhere, that shows what life forms would be eligible for re-incarnation as a human. You may very well have been a giraffe in your previous existence (a good giraffe !).

Personally, I think I was a randy monkey in my last incarnation , but the next one will see me about as low as I can go down the scale !

Like many religions, there are lots of "generalities", but few specific details. That was fine for the populace 2-3000 years ago, but doesn't go over well with most of today's better educated, more inquisitive population. That is why you hear those cliche' catch phrases all the time ("You must have Faith. God moves in mysterious ways. Ours is not to know the mind of God. and so on, and on and on), every time religion gets cornered on questions it can't answer.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Rebirth does not come in stages, rather as a result of one's karma. Karma is never "wiped clean"and its fruit can be experienced in future lives.

[Nordlys]

I read in one of the books, that there are 5,000 stages of re-incarnation (for example, starting off as a dust-mite on the back of a cockroach). Assuming you didn't acquire a lot of bad karma as a dust-mite, your next incarnation would be to a higher life form (maybe the cockroach ?). You continue progressing until you achieve human form.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

But what is a good and bad deed for a dust-mite and cockroach? If you were incarnated into some kind of parasite or virus like HIV, how can you not acquire bad karma? How will you even know the difference between good and bad when you were reincarnated as a microorganism? Does Buddhism provide answers to those questions?

And can one attain nirvana just by building good karma? Or does it take more than that?

[Kerryd]

But what is a good and bad deed for a dust-mite and cockroach?  If you were incarnated into some kind of parasite or virus like HIV, how can you not acquire bad karma?  How will you even know the difference between good and bad when you were reincarnated as a microorganism?  Does Buddhism provide answers to those questions?

And can one attain nirvana just by building good karma?  Or does it take more than that?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thast was the point in my last paragraph "Like many religions, there are lots of "generalities", but few specific details."

Nobody knows for sure, because nobody has ever achieved enlightenment (or Nirvana) and come back to tell us about it (although the last incarnation of Buddha achieved enlightenment during his earthly existence, he was still a mortal, and still died, just like everybody else).

Just like the concepts of Heaven, ######, Paradise, and that spaceship the Scientologists believe is hiding behind Venus, nobody has been there and come back to tell the tale (funny thing about that eh, we're all supposed to believe in it, yet there's absolutely no proof what so ever that any of it exists).

[khunlungphudhu]

My past lives, and their associated karma(s) do not worry me.

What does is what I am doing now, and how it will affect my karma in the next moment!

[Sir Burr]

There are more people alive at this moment than have ever died. This sort of chucks a spanner in the works.

[sabaijai]

This topic has come up in a couple of earlier, longish threads, have a look:

Rebirth 1

Rebirth 2

Self of Not-Self

[sadman]

Myself and my yoga teacher were hypnotically regressed. Well actually I wasn't, I was very nervous with all the cameras and spoke to the famous hypnotist, so famous I can't remember his name! After speaking to him I felt absolutely no stress or fear when sitting in front of a Grampian Tv camera.

He regressed me through my present life and it was qite a nice feeling, however when we got to 0, he asked my to name a date, which I did 1864 and I got this very weird feeling that I didn't want to go there. It was explained afterwards that this happens to many people, maybe something traumatic happened.

My friend however appeared on tv and she was transformed into an Indian woman.

My partner is a hypnotherapist (not a hypnotist - there's a world of difference) and whilst she practices techniques including past-life regression (that's what's gone on in this life) she is of the view that regressing to past lives can involve a mixture of charlatanism by the hypnotist, wishful thinking and confabulation (not lying but the mind making something up in the absence of anything at all).

She has been regressed like this and believed herself to be someone in a previous life, even though when she came out of trance she knew it was cobblers. If you want to see how to play tricks with someone's mind, watch anything with a British guy called Derren Brown. His tricks - he acknowledges that is exactly what they are - are truly amazing.

[sadman]

Sorry, before anyone objects to it, I've just reread my last post and it didn't come out the way I meant it at all. I was commenting on stage hypnotists, not on Buddhism, and is not meant in any way as a criticism of Buddhism or of the concept of reincarnation.

I picked up the topic before it was moved from General Topics, and I was unaware that it was to be a discussion on reincarnation, rather than on stage hypnotists.

If I have inadvertently offended anyone, please accept my deepest apologies and put it down to ineptitude, rather than criticism of Buddhism.

[sabaijai]

Sorry, before anyone objects to it, I've just reread my last post and it didn't come out the way I meant it at all. I was commenting on stage hypnotists, not on Buddhism, and is not meant in any way as a criticism of Buddhism or of the concept of reincarnation.

I picked up the topic before it was moved from General Topics, and I was unaware that it was to be a discussion on reincarnation, rather than on stage hypnotists.

If I have inadvertently offended anyone, please accept my deepest apologies and put it down to ineptitude, rather than criticism of Buddhism.

I think your point was clear, sadman, I doubt anyone was offended.

Here's an interesting take on hypnosis from the Skeptic's Dictionary:

SkepDic

and one on Uri Geller:

Geller

[Totster]

There are more people alive at this moment than have ever died. This sort of chucks a spanner in the works.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not really..

People could have been other living creatures in past lives

totster

[Gohonzon]

My past lives, and their associated karma(s) do not worry me.

What does is what I am doing now, and how it will affect my karma in the next moment!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This is probably the best answer on any terms

Thing is that every action has its consequences (cause and effect). And some of the causes made in previous lifetimes have their effects in this one, and so on. This may be called immutable karma. That is, karmic tendencies that seem so ingrained as to be unchangable life tendencies. Although those karmic consequences are more difficult to alter than mutable karma (actions that have immediate effect) it is far from being impossible to do so.

''A man's present state is not entirely determined by the immense indefinite plexus of karmic causes inherited from the past. The efforts he has made after his present birth also plays a determining part...Although each human being inherits a karmic background from other existences, each is completely free to act in this world to alter it for better or worse,as he sees fit. In other words,in the Buddhist view man is innately free.'' Daisaku Ikeda

So basically, although we do inherit causes made in the past, and indeed are creating such in the very present ,that will have effects in the unspecified future....we have the free will to determine whether they be for good or ill.

[fxm88]

...and that spaceship the Scientologists believe is hiding behind Venus...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Just for the record it was Higher Source/Heaven's Gate who attached significance to the spaceship "companion" of the comet Hale-Bopp.

Scientology (Tom Cruise, Lisa Marie Presley, Greta Van Susteren, etc.) teaches that the spirits of ancient aliens (brought to this planet and blown up with nuclear bombs in a volcano) attach themselves to living humans and cause all kinds of problems. Also that humans evloved from clams.

I'm not sure if leaving a bottle of Fanta Red out for a statue's enjoyment makes any more or less sense.

[greenwanderer108]

This is probably the best answer on any terms

Thing is that every action has its consequences (cause and effect). And some of the causes made in previous lifetimes have their effects in this one, and so on. This may be called immutable karma. That is, karmic tendencies that seem so ingrained as to be unchangable life tendencies. Although those karmic consequences are more difficult to alter than mutable karma (actions that have immediate effect) it is far from being impossible to do so.

''A man's present state is not entirely determined by the immense indefinite plexus of karmic causes inherited from the past. The efforts he has made after his present birth also plays a determining part...Although each human being inherits a karmic background from other existences, each is completely free to act in this world to alter it for better or worse,as he sees fit. In other words,in the Buddhist view man is innately free.'' Daisaku Ikeda

So basically, although we do inherit causes made in the past, and indeed are creating such in the very present ,that will have effects in the unspecified future....we have the free will to determine whether they be for good or ill.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree mostly with what you said, except your (habitual, socialized) choice of pronouns in referring to human beings. Using 'he' and 'man' in reference to all humans is clearly an outdated effect from the last 5000 years of patriarchal dominance. Any accredited academic material post 1980 won't (shouldn't) refer to humans as man. Those who continue to unconciously refer to humans as 'man' show that they have not a deep study/understanding of the matriarchal/patriarchal ordeal of human evolution. No personal attack here, just saying that such articulate writing would hold more weight with those small adjustments.

Back on the subject of Karma

If I understand correctly, Karma as far as Theravadic Thai Buddhism is concerned is actually negative, translated to Thai as กรรม (as in Gum like chewing gum). So just to be PC, you can not acquire positive Gum or Karma to receive better opportunities next life or whatever. All Karma in this sense is negative.

The word I think you guys are shooting for would be merit, in Thai known as บุญ Boon which is the exact opposite of Gum as far as Thai Buddhism. The more Boon you do this life, the better the next life will be. The more Gum you acquire the worst off you 'could' be in the next life.

Though I agree with many aspects of Buddhism philosophy, I don't necessarily feel that the masses of the 90+ percent of Thai Buddhists truly understand Buddhism and the true essence of Gum (Karma) and Boon (Merit) as was preached by Sidartha 2500+ years ago.

For many Thais today, the faith was/is blindly accepted from birth with no true self inquiry/question as Sidartha says we should do. Acquiring boon for majority of Thais today most commonly comes down to making donations and giving money to the temples in some form or another (which for someone who truly understands the teachings of the Darma could be insulted by the current means) It can be pretty ridiculous, really. In many temples today, you'll have special donation boxes which you literally buy boon/merit. The higher the donation, the better boon you make, and thus better life you will have (bought) next .

Actually Sidartha's teachings preach of self enlightenment, not enlightenment by praying to a material statue as much of Buddhism appears today. The Dharma, much like Hindu, Brahmin, and Daoist teachings, insist that one can not obtain higher transcendental states via material means, which are classified as attachment, and thus suffering.

So anyway, the common denominator in much of these ancient respected philosophies regarding Karma and merit is that there is no higher score keeper as in a God/Goddess with some secretary keeping track of how much Jon Doe gave to the temple and how much Sue Doe ate pork, etc. etc. The true essence of Buddhism regarding Karma/merit all comes back to the sole of each and every individual. Whether the soul has memory capabilities from past/future lives, it is unsure and I don't have enough background to tell. However, the point is that our bodies and brains in this life are merely material vehicles for our soul, and the only entity that keeps any balance on karma/merit is one's own soul.

So then, a lot of question comes to what qualifies/comprises a soul. Can a cockroach or microorganism have a soul? As a true Buddhist would entertain the natural sciences via observation, one would have to observe (ponder) human evolution to understand this, I believe.

The way I see it is reincarnation and evolution are connected and in one the same thing. Perhaps are soul/karma/merit is encoded into our genetics.

Another way to look at it in this sense is what karma our we creating for our offspring two or three generations down the road? For it is our offspring who will carry our genes (and perhaps our souls) and will have to inherit the reality (future) that we are currently creating for them.

Does anyone agree/disagree with these points? Please share the wisdom and enlighten me.

[sabaijai]

This is probably the best answer on any terms

Thing is that every action has its consequences (cause and effect). And some of the causes made in previous lifetimes have their effects in this one, and so on. This may be called immutable karma. That is, karmic tendencies that seem so ingrained as to be unchangable life tendencies. Although those karmic consequences are more difficult to alter than mutable karma (actions that have immediate effect) it is far from being impossible to do so.

''A man's present state is not entirely determined by the immense indefinite plexus of karmic causes inherited from the past. The efforts he has made after his present birth also plays a determining part...Although each human being inherits a karmic background from other existences, each is completely free to act in this world to alter it for better or worse,as he sees fit. In other words,in the Buddhist view man is innately free.'' Daisaku Ikeda

So basically, although we do inherit causes made in the past, and indeed are creating such in the very present ,that will have effects in the unspecified future....we have the free will to determine whether they be for good or ill.

If I understand correctly, Karma as far as Theravadic Thai Buddhism is concerned is actually negative, translated to Thai as กรรม (as in Gum like chewing gum). So just to be PC, you can not acquire positive Gum or Karma to receive better opportunities next life or whatever. All Karma in this sense is negative.

The word I think you guys are shooting for would be merit, in Thai known as บุญ Boon which is the exact opposite of Gum as far as Thai Buddhism. The more Boon you do this life, the better the next life will be. The more Gum you acquire the worst off you 'could' be in the next life.

Though I agree with many aspects of Buddhism philosophy, I don't necessarily feel that the masses of the 90+ percent of Thai Buddhists truly understand Buddhism and the true essence of Gum (Karma) and Boon (Merit) as was preached by Sidartha 2500+ years ago.

For many Thais today, the faith was/is blindly accepted from birth with no true self inquiry/question as Sidartha says we should do. Acquiring boon for majority of Thais today most commonly comes down to making donations and giving money to the temples in some form or another (which for someone who truly understands the teachings of the Darma could be insulted by the current means) It can be pretty ridiculous, really. In many temples today, you'll have special donation boxes which you literally buy boon/merit. The higher the donation, the better boon you make, and thus better life you will have (bought) next .

Actually Sidartha's teachings preach of self enlightenment, not enlightenment by praying to a material statue as much of Buddhism appears today. The Dharma, much like Hindu, Brahmin, and Daoist teachings, insist that one can not obtain higher transcendental states via material means, which are classified as attachment, and thus suffering.

So anyway, the common denominator in much of these ancient respected philosophies regarding Karma and merit is that there is no higher score keeper as in a God/Goddess with some secretary keeping track of how much Jon Doe gave to the temple and how much Sue Doe ate pork, etc. etc. The true essence of Buddhism regarding Karma/merit all comes back to the sole of each and every individual. Whether the soul has memory capabilities from past/future lives, it is unsure and I don't have enough background to tell. However, the point is that our bodies and brains in this life are merely material vehicles for our soul, and the only entity that keeps any balance on karma/merit is one's own soul.

So then, a lot of question comes to what qualifies/comprises a soul. Can a cockroach or microorganism have a soul? As a true Buddhist would entertain the natural sciences via observation, one would have to observe (ponder) human evolution to understand this, I believe.

The way I see it is reincarnation and evolution are connected and in one the same thing. Perhaps are soul/karma/merit is encoded into our genetics.

Another way to look at it in this sense is what karma our we creating for our offspring two or three generations down the road? For it is our offspring who will carry our genes (and perhaps our souls) and will have to inherit the reality (future) that we are currently creating for them.

Does anyone agree/disagree with these points? Please share the wisdom and enlighten me.

What you've written more or less sums up the Thai viewpoint on karma but not the canonical Theravada Buddhist notion. 'Karma' (Sanskrit; in Pali it's kamma) is neutral in its original Pali meaning, which is literally 'action'. Karma/action can be either kusala (wholesome or skilful, in other words leading towards liberation) or akusala (unwholesome or unskilful, keeping the samsaric cycle in motion). The result of karma is vipaka (often lumped under the single term 'karma' by Westerners). Kusala kamma brings kusala vipaka, akusala kamma results in akusala vipaka.

If you search for 'karma' in this Buddhism of the forum, you'll find a few discussions of the notion of karma from various Buddhist perspectives.

Of course in Thai, as you say, the term กรรม has a negative connotation, in fact it's often used synonymously with 'death'. Not so in the actual Tipitaka.

Puñña (Thai บุญ ) is a Pali word that is basically synonymous with certain kinds of kusala kamma. It's antonym is apuñña (demerit) or pápa (Thai ปาป - bad, evil, sinful). Discussions on merit in the Tipitaka suggest that merit in of itself is not sufficient to bring stream entry, the first step to liberation (for that, 'right view' is necessary). Arahats, or fully enlightened ones, who have transcended all life-affirming and rebirth-producing actions, are said to be "beyond merit and demerit".

Some references:

The Buddha's Words on Kamma

Merit

[greenwanderer108]

Sabaijai

Thank you for distinguishing the modern views of Thai Buddhism and the original Pali/Sanskrit interpretations of kasula and akusla types of karma.

So I have started reading from the first link you provided, particularly the story of Kukkuravatika Sutta, and have a few questions regarding this. Perhaps you have an in-depth back ground on the subject to clarify some things.

The blessed-one, which I assume is the enlightened one, or Sidartha after enlightenment (though he was referred with a different name in this particular text) told Paana and Seniya about the four different types of Kamma (karma). I'm having trouble understanding the fourth one which implies karma that is neither negative nor positive, and cancels out karma altogether, something to this extent.

Can you clarify this, preferably in Pali/Sanskrit terms, elaborating on its implications and meaning. Some examples would be great.

BTW, whatever happened of Panna in this/after this story? Seniya appears to have indulged in the darma/disciplines and become enlightened, while it is unstated what Panna did.

So my last question is regarding the current Thai Buddhism and its Pali/Sanksrit roots. Is the Thai language translation/interpretation of the Dhamma (Tipitaka) close in essence to the original scripts, particularly regarding Karma/kamma? Meaning, if I were to ordain as a monk in Thailand, and truly indulge in the dharma and teachings, would the Thai texts be sufficient, or have so many years of war/cross-cultural influence (i.e. Chinese matieral beliefs) exploited the true essence--even in these current temple texts/teachings? I'm not so sure anymore since I have seen in most temples here some form of 'Good Karma' for sell via donations in a box, etc., which is quite a contridiction in my understanding of the concept of 'kusala' kaama.

I realize that this slightly off the topic of this particular thread (though still relevant), so apologies for bringing it any more off track.

[greenwanderer108]

So on the subject of past/future lives keeping to the purpose of this thread.

In traditional Thai literature, as well as popular contemporary literature (films, etc.), there is much content referring to the concept that seems to have common appeal.

What comes to mind for me is two examples. One is the story of 'two love birds'. I'm not sure exactly what it is referred to in Thai language as the English version I read was in M.L. Manich Jumsai's Thai Folktales. Anyhow, it appears to have Hindic roots but obviously romanticized for the Thais in this version to some extent.

Basically, the story regards a bird couple in love who have a small 'bird' family in their nest. One day, the male bird flies off to find food for his family, and ends up trapped in a lotus flower (which closes up in the hot sun). While he is trapped, his wife becomes jealous thinking he is out with another female bird, and a fire spreads in the forest, ending up killing the their children who are too young to fly. As soon as the male bird is free and discovers the disaster, the wife ends up commiting suicide vowing she will never talk to another male bird in her next lives. The husband ends up commiting suicide for such shame or whatever.

Anyhow in the next life, they are both born as humans in different kingdoms...and to make a long story short, the man journeys to the other kingdom after a Bhramin education of magic to try and win her love (as a princess who will not talk to any males). I'll leave out what proceeds and the ending for those interested in reading the full story.

The other example I had was from a recent movie, Chaya ชายา, which is more of a ghost-horror type movie. It has the story of two individuals born in the present being faced with misdeeds in their ancient past lives in a royal Thai/Khmer style kingdom, etc. etc. haunted by a spirit who had been locked in her crypt by a Bhramin spell. Kind of a small love triangle, and involves a lot of recollection by the present characters to their past lives, and what they need to fix everything with the freed ancient ghost hotty haunting them. It's a worthy watch for a semi-low-budget Thai film, more of an imagination invoking flick, for those of us with fantasies of being confronted and possibly seduced with a beautiful ghost princess dressed in traditional Thai/Khmer costume.

[sabaijai]

Sabaijai

Thank you for distinguishing the modern views of Thai Buddhism and the original Pali/Sanskrit interpretations of kasula and akusla types of karma.

So I have started reading from the first link you provided, particularly the story of Kukkuravatika Sutta, and have a few questions regarding this. Perhaps you have an in-depth back ground on the subject to clarify some things.

The blessed-one, which I assume is the enlightened one, or Sidartha after enlightenment (though he was referred with a different name in this particular text) told Paana and Seniya about the four different types of Kamma (karma). I'm having trouble understanding the fourth one which implies karma that is neither negative nor positive, and cancels out karma altogether, something to this extent.

Can you clarify this, preferably in Pali/Sanskrit terms, elaborating on its implications and meaning. Some examples would be great.

BTW, whatever happened of Panna in this/after this story? Seniya appears to have indulged in the darma/disciplines and become enlightened, while it is unstated what Panna did.

So my last question is regarding the current Thai Buddhism and its Pali/Sanksrit roots. Is the Thai language translation/interpretation of the Dhamma (Tipitaka) close in essence to the original scripts, particularly regarding Karma/kamma? Meaning, if I were to ordain as a monk in Thailand, and truly indulge in the dharma and teachings, would the Thai texts be sufficient, or have so many years of war/cross-cultural influence (i.e. Chinese matieral beliefs) exploited the true essence--even in these current temple texts/teachings? I'm not so sure anymore since I have seen in most temples here some form of 'Good Karma' for sell via donations in a box, etc., which is quite a contridiction in my understanding of the concept of 'kusala' kaama.

I realize that this slightly off the topic of this particular thread (though still relevant), so apologies for bringing it any more off track.

The first three kinds of karma cause the accumulation of more karma, while the fourth leads to the cessation of karma. Specifically it's karma that arises when one practices the Noble Eightfold Path perfectly, when moral discipline, mental discipline and wisdom are balanced, and intentions are free from greed, ignorance and hatred.

I'm not absolutely sure what happened to Punna except that it's clear he became a lay follower of the Buddha at the end of this sutta. In another famous sutta, there is a monk named Ven Punna who becomes fully enlightened, then dies. It's a very nice-reading sutta, though I don't know whether it's the same Punna! The Abhidhamma Pitaka took this sutta (among others) as central inspiration.

Punna Sutta