Page 1 of 1

Is every Buddha and Arahant omnibenevolent?

Posted: Tue Oct 06, 2009 2:13 pm
by smokey
In Dhammapada (Brahmans) verse 412 it says: "He has gone beyond attachment here for both merit & evil — sorrowless, dustless, & pure: he's what I call a brahman."
So my question is: Is every Buddha and Arahant omnibenevolent?

Re: Is every Buddha and Arahant omnibenevolent?

Posted: Tue Oct 06, 2009 2:39 pm
by DNS
smokey wrote: So my question is: Is every Buddha and Arahant omnibenevolent?
Yes. Even a sotapanna cannot purposely or intentionally violate a precept. The arahant all the more so only acts with metta, karuna, upekkha, and mudita.

Re: Is every Buddha and Arahant omnibenevolent?

Posted: Tue Oct 06, 2009 4:24 pm
by rowyourboat
I hesitate to answer 'yes' to that question. The point of the dhamma is not sila- it is vimutti/liberation (see the ratahavinita sutta). So if you ask me did the Buddha never say a harsh word- the answer is no- he did so, sometimes to get errant monks on to the right path. It was very pragmatic- with one aim in mind- the cessation of suffering. (not to say the end justified the means either) ..but catch-all phrases can be misleading..

Re: Is every Buddha and Arahant omnibenevolent?

Posted: Wed Oct 07, 2009 1:28 am
by retrofuturist
Greetings smokey,
smokey wrote:"He has gone beyond attachment here for both merit & evil — sorrowless, dustless, & pure: he's what I call a brahman."
So my question is: Is every Buddha and Arahant omnibenevolent?
Towards what... people or actions or something/everything else etc.?

Metta,
Retro. :)

Re: Is every Buddha and Arahant omnibenevolent?

Posted: Wed Oct 07, 2009 12:19 pm
by smokey
retrofuturist wrote:Greetings smokey,
smokey wrote:"He has gone beyond attachment here for both merit & evil — sorrowless, dustless, & pure: he's what I call a brahman."
So my question is: Is every Buddha and Arahant omnibenevolent?
Towards what... people or actions or something/everything else etc.?

Metta,
Retro. :)
Well, are Buddhas and Arahants perfectly good in both actions, towards people and in morality? That would be my question.

Re: Is every Buddha and Arahant omnibenevolent?

Posted: Wed Oct 07, 2009 12:30 pm
by smokey
I think I may have found an answer to my question in Dhammapada, Chapter IX, verse 122.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"Don't underestimate merit ('It won't amount to much'). A water jar fills, even with water falling in drops. With merit — even if bit by bit, habitually — the enlightened one fills himself full. "

Re: Is every Buddha and Arahant omnibenevolent?

Posted: Wed Oct 07, 2009 11:43 pm
by retrofuturist
Greetings Smokey,

I ask because the Buddha was often critical of wrong views and wrong actions because they were harmful, but not because they caused him any personal suffering.

Is that "omnibenevolent" in your book?

Metta,
Retro. :)

Re: Is every Buddha and Arahant omnibenevolent?

Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2009 2:56 am
by Individual
smokey wrote:In Dhammapada (Brahmans) verse 412 it says: "He has gone beyond attachment here for both merit & evil — sorrowless, dustless, & pure: he's what I call a brahman."
So my question is: Is every Buddha and Arahant omnibenevolent?
A better quote in the suttas, somewhere, it says that Buddhists cultivate boundless compassion. But compassion isn't always what we'd call "nice". For example, sometimes a compassionate parent needs to scream at or punish their child.

Boundless compassion might not be the same as what you mean by "omnibenevolence".

Re: Is every Buddha and Arahant omnibenevolent?

Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2009 10:05 am
by smokey
retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Smokey,

I ask because the Buddha was often critical of wrong views and wrong actions because they were harmful, but not because they caused him any personal suffering.

Is that "omnibenevolent" in your book?

Metta,
Retro. :)
Yes, I suppose it is.

Re: Is every Buddha and Arahant omnibenevolent?

Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2009 2:08 pm
by smokey
I am not enlightened so I have opinions, Buddhas have no opinions, so my opinion is that Buddhas and Arahants are omnibenevolent. They cannot purposely violate any of the precepts nor commit any wrong doing. If Buddha was often critical of wrong views that was of benevolent and good intention, so no harm was done.