Path to Buddhahood

[Nyana]

Bharadvaja was talking about a received tradition, same as you have been.

A noteworthy passage from the sutta:

• Lending ear, he hears the Dhamma. Hearing the Dhamma, he remembers it. Remembering it, he penetrates the meaning of those dhammas. Penetrating the meaning, he comes to an agreement through pondering those dhammas.

[ancientbuddhism]

The first part of the paricope from AN. 4.24, is likely punning on an epithet of the ātman in Upaniṣadic ontology, where we read:

• “The Brāhmaṇahood, the Kṣartiyahood, these worlds, these gods, these Vedas, these beings, this all – they are the self.” (idaṃ brahma, idaṃ kṣatram, ime lokāḥ, ime devāḥ, ime vedāḥ, imāni bhūtāni, idaṃ sarvam yad ayam ātmā.) – Bṛhad.U. IV, 5.7.

The second part of the AN. 4.24 paricope is also likely punning on another of Yājñavalkya’s views which posits:

• “It is not out of endearment (kāmāya) for the husband that the husband is dear (priya), but of the endearment of the self that the husband is dear.” (‘na vā are patyuḥ kāmāya patiḥ priyo bhavati, ātmanas tu kāmāya patiḥ priyo bhavati…’)

And the same for wife, sons, cattle and other things and stations the materialist would identify with in life, viewed that:

• “When the self is seen, heard, thought and cognized, then all this is known.” (ātmani khalv are dṛṣṭe, śrute, mate, vijñāte, idaṃ sarvaṃ viditaṃ)- BU. IV, 5.6.

Which is classic Upaniṣadic emanation theory.

The Buddha often used these, and for our purposes especially, the second phrase, to delineate the difference between one bound by concept (maññati) and the Liberated endowed with suchness (tādi).

[daverupa]

Bharadvaja was talking about a received tradition, same as you have been.

A noteworthy passage from the sutta:

• Lending ear, he hears the Dhamma. Hearing the Dhamma, he remembers it. Remembering it, he penetrates the meaning of those dhammas. Penetrating the meaning, he comes to an agreement through pondering those dhammas.

Yet according to you,

[The] premise that dhamma principles can be sufficiently analyzed by exclusively relying on sutta strata materials is faulty.

this was an impossible instruction, since the Psm. did not yet exist.

___

Are you sure? Do you yourself have direct knowledge of what the Buddha is referring to in this passage?

This question cuts both ways, and therefore nullifies both of our attempts at citation. Also, this equally applies to the author(s) of the Psm. It seems we both benefit from the teaching on the preservation of truth.

[mikenz66]

Hi Geoff, Tilt, etc,

Aren't you talking at cross purposes here?

I think I have gone some fair distance in showing that that claim is in line with what the suttas say, which is all I am claiming.

Okay, so what do you propose this knowledge described in AN 4.24 is the result of? AN 4.24:

• Whatever in the cosmos — with its devas, Maras, & Brahmas, its generations with their contemplatives & brahmans, their royalty & common people — is seen, heard, sensed, cognized, attained, sought after, pondered by the intellect: That I directly know.

...

My understanding, and the point that I thought Tilt was making, was that:

1. The Arahant's awakening/liberation from Samsara/whatever you want to call it/ is the same as a Buddha's. He is fully liberated.

2. A Buddha has some extra skills, as in the Suttas you quoted, because he had to develop them to become a Buddha.

I don't see any contradiction...


Mike

[daverupa]

1. and 2. are fine; the problem is that Nana has said

opinion that, "The "enlightenment" -- bodhi -- of the arahant is no different from that of the Buddha," [is] an example of modernist secular revisionism that has no precedent in the history of Theravāda Buddhism.

which means he disagrees with 1.

[Nyana]

Are you sure? Do you yourself have direct knowledge of what the Buddha is referring to in this passage?

This question cuts both ways, and therefore nullifies both of our attempts at citation. Also, this equally applies to the author(s) of the Psm. It seems we both benefit from the teaching on the preservation of truth.

Can I infer from your lack of a direct answer that you do not have direct knowledge of what the Buddha is referring to in that passage?

Yet according to you,

[The] premise that dhamma principles can be sufficiently analyzed by exclusively relying on sutta strata materials is faulty.

this was an impossible instruction, since the Psm. did not yet exist.

Are you suggesting that oral commentary which was not included in the sutta collections didn't exist at that time? I think that scenario is rather unlikely.

[Nyana]

My understanding, and the point that I thought Tilt was making, was that:

1. The Arahant's awakening/liberation from Samsara/whatever you want to call it/ is the same as a Buddha's. He is fully liberated.

2. A Buddha has some extra skills, as in the Suttas you quoted, because he had to develop them to become a Buddha.

I don't see any contradiction...

The distinction of your second point has been highlighted by the Theravāda (and most every other Buddhist tradition) as an important part of the Buddha's awakening. These qualities are specific knowledges unique to the Buddha. The Paṭisambhidāmagga describes six such knowledges:

• [1] What is the Perfect One's knowledge of penetration of others' faculties (indriyaparopariyatta ñāṇa)?
  
  Here the Perfect One (tathāgata) sees beings as with little dust on their eyes, as with much dust on their eyes, as with keen faculties, as with dull faculties, as of good parts, as of bad parts, as easy to instruct, as hard to instruct, and also some who see fear in the other world and in what is censurable, and also some who see no fear in the other world and in what is censurable....
  
  [2] What is the Perfect One's knowledge of beings' biasses and underlying tendencies (āsayānusaya ñāṇa)?
  
  Here the Perfect One knows beings' biasses, he knows their underlying tendencies, he knows their behaviour, he knows their resolutions, he knows beings as capable and incapable....
  
  [3] What is the Perfect One's knowledge of the Twin Metamorphosis (yamakapāṭihīra ñāṇa)?
  
  Here the Perfect One performs the Twin Metamorphosis, which is not shared by disciples. He produces a mass of fire from the upper part of his body and a shower of water from the lower part of his body: he produces a mass of fire from the lower part of his body and a shower of water from the upper part of his body....
  
  [4] What is the Perfect One's knowledge of the attainment of the Great Compassion (mahākaruṇāsamāpattiyā ñāṇa)?
  
  Upon the Enlightened Ones, the Blessed Ones, who see in many aspects, there descends the Great Compassion for beings.
  
  [5 & 6] What is the Perfect One's omniscient knowledge (sabbaññutaññāṇa [& anāvaraṇañāṇa])?
  
  It knows without exception all that is formed and unformed, thus it is omniscient knowledge: it is without obstruction there, thus it is unobstructed knowledge.

These are just short excerpts. The Psm. describes and explains all of the above in considerable detail. The Paṭisambhidāmagga continues:

• There are fourteen kinds of Enlightened One's knowledge... Of these fourteen kinds of Enlightened One's knowledge, eight are shared by disciples and six are not shared by disciples.

The first eight of these are knowledge of each if the four noble truths and knowledge of each of the four kinds of analytical understanding (paṭisambhidā). The latter six are those listed above.

[Nyana]

The first part of the paricope from AN. 4.24, is likely punning on an epithet of the ātman in Upaniṣadic ontology, where we read:

• “The Brāhmaṇahood, the Kṣartiyahood, these worlds, these gods, these Vedas, these beings, this all – they are the self.” (idaṃ brahma, idaṃ kṣatram, ime lokāḥ, ime devāḥ, ime vedāḥ, imāni bhūtāni, idaṃ sarvam yad ayam ātmā.) – Bṛhad.U. IV, 5.7.

The second part of the AN. 4.24 paricope is also likely punning on another of Yājñavalkya’s views which posits:

• “It is not out of endearment (kāmāya) for the husband that the husband is dear (priya), but of the endearment of the self that the husband is dear.” (‘na vā are patyuḥ kāmāya patiḥ priyo bhavati, ātmanas tu kāmāya patiḥ priyo bhavati…’)

And the same for wife, sons, cattle and other things and stations the materialist would identify with in life, viewed that:

• “When the self is seen, heard, thought and cognized, then all this is known.” (ātmani khalv are dṛṣṭe, śrute, mate, vijñāte, idaṃ sarvaṃ viditaṃ)- BU. IV, 5.6.

Which is classic Upaniṣadic emanation theory.

The Buddha often used these, and for our purposes especially, the second phrase, to delineate the difference between one bound by concept (maññati) and the Liberated endowed with suchness (tādi).

Interesting.

[tiltbillings]

I think I have gone some fair distance in showing that that claim is in line with what the suttas say, which is all I am claiming.

Okay, so what do you propose this knowledge described in AN 4.24 is the result of? AN 4.24:

• Whatever in the cosmos — with its devas, Maras, & Brahmas, its generations with their contemplatives & brahmans, their royalty & common people — is seen, heard, sensed, cognized, attained, sought after, pondered by the intellect: That I directly know.

What do you propose this ability to know others' faculties is the result of? SN 6.1:

• Then the Blessed One, having understood Brahma's invitation, out of compassion for beings, surveyed the world with the eye of an Awakened One. As he did so, he saw beings with little dust in their eyes and those with much, those with keen faculties and those with dull, those with good attributes and those with bad, those easy to teach and those hard, some of them seeing disgrace and danger in the other world.

Now, show us where the Buddha directly defined the above as aspects of bodhi?

[Nyana]

I think I have gone some fair distance in showing that that claim is in line with what the suttas say, which is all I am claiming.

Okay, so what do you propose this knowledge described in AN 4.24 is the result of? AN 4.24:

• Whatever in the cosmos — with its devas, Maras, & Brahmas, its generations with their contemplatives & brahmans, their royalty & common people — is seen, heard, sensed, cognized, attained, sought after, pondered by the intellect: That I directly know.

What do you propose this ability to know others' faculties is the result of? SN 6.1:

• Then the Blessed One, having understood Brahma's invitation, out of compassion for beings, surveyed the world with the eye of an Awakened One. As he did so, he saw beings with little dust in their eyes and those with much, those with keen faculties and those with dull, those with good attributes and those with bad, those easy to teach and those hard, some of them seeing disgrace and danger in the other world.

Now, show us where the Buddha directly defined the above as aspects of bodhi?

That isn't an answer. I'll ask again: What do you propose this knowledge described in AN 4.24 is the result of? AN 4.24:

• Whatever in the cosmos — with its devas, Maras, & Brahmas, its generations with their contemplatives & brahmans, their royalty & common people — is seen, heard, sensed, cognized, attained, sought after, pondered by the intellect: That I directly know.

What do you propose this ability to know others' faculties is the result of? SN 6.1:

• Then the Blessed One, having understood Brahma's invitation, out of compassion for beings, surveyed the world with the eye of an Awakened One. As he did so, he saw beings with little dust in their eyes and those with much, those with keen faculties and those with dull, those with good attributes and those with bad, those easy to teach and those hard, some of them seeing disgrace and danger in the other world.

[tiltbillings]

Now, show us where the Buddha directly defined the above [and now below] as aspects of bodhi?

That isn't an answer. I'll ask again: What do you propose this knowledge described in AN 4.24 is the result of? AN 4.24:

• Whatever in the cosmos — with its devas, Maras, & Brahmas, its generations with their contemplatives & brahmans, their royalty & common people — is seen, heard, sensed, cognized, attained, sought after, pondered by the intellect: That I directly know.

What do you propose this ability to know others' faculties is the result of? SN 6.1:

• Then the Blessed One, having understood Brahma's invitation, out of compassion for beings, surveyed the world with the eye of an Awakened One. As he did so, he saw beings with little dust in their eyes and those with much, those with keen faculties and those with dull, those with good attributes and those with bad, those easy to teach and those hard, some of them seeing disgrace and danger in the other world.

Given that the suttas are a very, very large collection of texts, it may be that the Buddha defined bodhi in terms of the contents of the above texts. If that is so, I would expect that it should be fairly easy to find such a definition.

Now, I have no problem with the idea of the Buddha's extraordinary powers, and certainly the extraordinary powers are what helped the Buddha attained bodhi, but as of yet I have not seen these extraordinary powers given as defining aspects of bodhi in the suttas, but what I have clearly shown is that the Buddha in the suttas repeatedly affirms in various ways is that here is the bodhi/sambodhi I have attained and you, too, can attain the same bodhi/sambodhi: http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f= ... 4&#p149864" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Nyana]

Given that the suttas are a very, very large collection of texts, it may be that the Buddha defined bodhi in terms of the contents of the above texts. If that is so, I would expect that it should be fairly easy to find such a definition.

There are some interesting points made about why he's called the Tathāgata with reference to the same passage from AN 4.24 in the sutta that precedes it. But I don't have a translation of it handy. And it doesn't explicitly spell out what you require.

With regard to AN 4.24 the commentary states that the three phrases: "That I know" (tamahaṃ jānāmi), "That I have fully understood" (tamahaṃ abbhaññāsiṃ), and "That has been realized by the Tathāgata" (taṃ tathāgatassa viditaṃ), were said with reference to the Buddha's omniscience (sabbaññutabhūmi).

The commentary on SN 6.1 states that the term buddhacakkhu refers to the knowledge of penetration of others' faculties (indriyaparopariyattañāṇa) and the knowledge of the biases and underlying tendencies of sentient beings (āsayānusayañāṇa).

Are these examples of commentators reading more into the suttas than what is meaningfully implied by the passages in question? Personally, I think they are reasonable extrapolations. And since I don't directly know buddhañāṇa, I think it's prudent to err on the side of caution and defer to to the tradition on this issue.

Now, I have no problem with the idea of the Buddha's extraordinary powers, and certainly the extraordinary powers are what helped the Buddha attained bodhi, but as of yet I have not seen these extraordinary powers given as defining aspects of bodhi in the suttas, but what I have clearly shown is that the Buddha in the suttas repeatedly affirms in various ways is that here is the bodhi/sambodhi I have attained and you, too, can attain the same bodhi/sambodhi: http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f= ... 4&#p149864" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

That message of liberation has always remained intact in the Theravāda teachings. Indeed, knowledge of each of the four noble truths results in elimination of the outflows (āsavakkhaya), but I think there's reason enough to tacitly accept the traditional understanding that the elimination of the outflows alone isn't sufficient to give rise to an entire dispensation of dhammavinaya. Thus, the Buddha's awakening required more prior development of the faculties and resulted in greater knowledge than just the knowledge of elimination (khayeñāṇa).

[tiltbillings]

Again, for all of that the Buddha clearly stated, as I have shown, that the (sam)bodhi he attained is the (sam)bodhi we can attain, which seems to very strongly preclude omniscience as being a defining characteristic of (sam)bodhi.

[Hanzze]

Sorry for disturbing even it is very fascinating to follow the shares. From the OP: "Path to Buddhahood. Is there a path to Buddhahood, rather than Arhatship outlined in Theravada?"

[tiltbillings]

Sorry for disturbing even it is very fascinating to follow the shares. From the OP: "Path to Buddhahood. Is there a path to Buddhahood, rather than Arhatship outlined in Theravada?"

Neatly outlined here:


http://ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-PHIL/jeffrey2.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

and discussed at length here:

http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... tva#p26121" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;