DarwidHalim wrote:I think majority of Theravada will have a view that Buddha is equivalent to Arahant due to their realization of what is called boddhi.
The difference other than that realization, such as their skills, cannot be used to differentiate Buddha and Arahant.
their bodies different in power, qualities
brahmabull wrote:I've read here and elsewhere that the realization of Buddha and Arahant are the same. But are their bodies different in power, qualities, etc.? (According to Abhidamma)
tiltbillings wrote:This does not address the Abhidhamma, but it does address the issue of Buddha and the arahants from the stand point of the suttas:
viewtopic.php?f=16&t=9747&start=20#p149864
viewtopic.php?f=16&t=9747&start=20#p149866
But it should be kept in mind, this is not fully sutta stuff.Ñāṇa wrote:brahmabull wrote:I've read here and elsewhere that the realization of Buddha and Arahant are the same. But are their bodies different in power, qualities, etc.? (According to Abhidamma)
It's standard canonical Theravāda that a buddha has knowledge and abilities not shared by arahant disciples. The Paṭisambhidāmagga (a text contained in the Khuddakanikāya) lists the following:
- knowledge of the penetration of other beings' faculties
- knowledge of other beings' biases and underlying tendancies
- knowledge of the twin miracle*
- knowledge of the attainment of great compassion
- omniscience & unobstructed knowledge
*i.e. the ability to produce fire and water from various parts of the body, as well as walk amid an aura of colors while a created image of his body sits or lies down, etc.
Theoretically, probably not. Practically, probably not so easy, depending upon any number of conditions. The point is that the suttas preserves a very radical take on the Buddha vis a vis the arahants that we can see starts to change with the Buddha becoming valorized (even in the suttas), having more and distinct powers and whatnot. That seems to be a natural human tendency to want our guy to be mightier than their guy. Though not completely, the Theravadins did seem to resist that tendency.brahmabull wrote:tiltbillings wrote:This does not address the Abhidhamma, but it does address the issue of Buddha and the arahants from the stand point of the suttas:
viewtopic.php?f=16&t=9747&start=20#p149864
viewtopic.php?f=16&t=9747&start=20#p149866
Based on Bhikku Bodhi the only qualitative difference I can see is prowess with regard to instruction. But if I read your quotes correctly, there is nothing to stop an Arahant from developing this?
Ñāṇa wrote:brahmabull wrote:I've read here and elsewhere that the realization of Buddha and Arahant are the same. But are their bodies different in power, qualities, etc.? (According to Abhidamma)
It's standard canonical Theravāda that a buddha has knowledge and abilities not shared by arahant disciples. The Paṭisambhidāmagga (a text contained in the Khuddakanikāya) lists the following:
- knowledge of the penetration of other beings' faculties
- knowledge of other beings' biases and underlying tendancies
- knowledge of the twin miracle*
- knowledge of the attainment of great compassion
- omniscience & unobstructed knowledge
*i.e. the ability to produce fire and water from various parts of the body, as well as walk amid an aura of colors while a created image of his body sits or lies down, etc.
No fluffy sutta; rather, what I said: "But it should be kept in mind, this is not fully sutta stuff." The Paṭisambhidāmagga is in-between the suttas and the Abhidhamma, which is assuming the historical understanding that the Abhidhamma came after the Buddha's death, and it is also reasonable to argue that the Paṭisambhidāmagga came after the Buddha's death.brahmabull wrote:Hi Tilt,
I'm not following exactly the fluffy sutta and our guy their guy comment. Please clarify.
tiltbillings wrote:No fluffy sutta; rather, what I said: "But it should be kept in mind, this is not fully sutta stuff." The Paṭisambhidāmagga is in-between the suttas and the Abhidhamma, which is assuming the historical understanding that the Abhidhamma came after the Buddha's death, and it is also reasonable to argue that the Paṭisambhidāmagga came after the Buddha's death.brahmabull wrote:Hi Tilt,
I'm not following exactly the fluffy sutta and our guy their guy comment. Please clarify.
As for the "other guy" comment, it is pretty much what it says. My dad can beat up your dad. To put it in very broad and crude terms, if the Jains posited that their guy was this way and that, the Buddhists responded by saying our guy is even more so. We probably would like to think that the early Buddhists would not do stuff like that, but they did. They even argued over how the Buddha's poop smelled.
Since the Kosa, a Sarvastivadin text, is rather later, well after the Sarvasitvadin Adbhidharma was and commentaries were penned, it really has no bearing here in the "Discovering Theravada" sub-forum. See the guidelines:brahmabull wrote:Vasubhandu mentions in the Kosha that the Buddha's body is "Narayana" to house infinite knowledge. I'm wondering where this comes from.
Return to Discovering Theravāda
Registered users: Bing [Bot], diptych4, Feathers, Google [Bot], Lazy_eye, mettafuture, Mr Man, onaquest, purple planet, reflection, robertk, Sam Vara, Sekha, Valinion