Dhamma Wheel Buddhist Forum

Do any of you really know? Well I can tell you one thing we certainly aren't devoid of arahants in this world and I don't think its even possible for that to occur. An Arahant is a perfectly balanced individual. A handsome man or beautiful woman with a strong digestive fire and unshakeable confidence, I'm aware of at least 2 Yuttadhammo Bhikku and Bhikku samahita these individuals have gone beyond death they will live forever. You'd be wise to heed their council and be generous in your dealings with them.

I don't know of any


well, except the Buddha

cappuccino wrote: ↑Wed Mar 20, 2019 3:16 pm I don't know of any

I just listed 2. If you yourself aren't an arahant then you cannot discern other arahants. Again you'd be wise heed thier council and follow them

I checked the 2 you mentioned

cappuccino wrote: ↑Wed Mar 20, 2019 3:22 pm I checked the 2 you mentioned

Good. Do so again and again until you reach the goal.

ihrjordan wrote: ↑Wed Mar 20, 2019 3:21 pm

cappuccino wrote: ↑Wed Mar 20, 2019 3:16 pm I don't know of any

I just listed 2. If you yourself aren't an arahant then you cannot discern other arahants. Again you'd be wise heed thier council and follow them

Hi!

You listed two.
Are you an arahant as well?

Kind regards!

According to your rule: If you're not an arahant, you can not know who is an arahant (but apparently you know who is an Arahant, which is odd)

According to the suttas: An arahant cannot even know who other arahants are (unless they declare it to them and confirmed by the Buddha)

One thing's for sure, Arahants don't suffer from alcoholism like Alan Watts did, the taoist and zen mahayanist. Nor are they addicted to sex like the tantra Buddhists and hindus are. Nor do they speak out against Jhanas like Yuttadhammo does, and they probably don't run a blog either. Nor do they speak out against the suttas like Buddhadasa does. Nor do they live a householder life like Daniel Ingram does.

So yeah.. what is an Arahant? Someone who has applied the dhamma-vinaya (the instructions manual of the Buddha) to the letter and til the end.

Some useful information from Dhamma Wiki:

Lay arahant

One of the misconceptions about Buddhism, especially early Buddhism / Theravada is that only monks and nuns can become Arahants, fully enlightened.

https://dhammawiki.com/index.php/Lay_arahant

The Milindapanha implies that lay people do/did attain enlightenment.

It is just that they all ordained or died within 7 days or less.

Aloka wrote: ↑Wed Mar 20, 2019 4:37 pm Some useful information from Dhamma Wiki:

One of the misconceptions about Buddhism, especially early Buddhism / Theravada is that only monks and nuns can become Arahants, fully enlightened.

https://dhammawiki.com/index.php/Lay_arahant

Good article, especially the part where all lay arahants die within 7 days.

Reminds me of the sutta of the Buddha telling a non-returner householder that if he were to go any further he'd have to ordain.

budo: which sutta is that

salayatananirodha wrote: ↑Wed Mar 20, 2019 5:08 pm budo: which sutta is that

Found it

Mahanama, that very mental quality[2] is what is unabandoned within you so that there are times when the mental quality of greed... the mental quality of aversion... the mental quality of delusion invades your mind and remains.[3] For if that mental quality were abandoned in you, you would not live the household life and would not partake of sensuality. It's because that mental quality is not abandoned in you that you live the household life and partake of sensuality.

-MN 14

So I don't know if Mahanama is a non-return path trying to attain non-return fruit, or a once-returner fruit trying to attian non-return path.

budo wrote: ↑Wed Mar 20, 2019 4:03 pm Nor do they speak out against the suttas like Buddhadasa does.

Hi budo!

I've not written in the thread against Buddhadasa, because everything has been said already.
But as this is a whole new thread, I feel the urge to state that I think your words are misleading.

Buddhadasa did not speak against the suttas.
He was doing the equivalent to Jesus criticizing the Pharisees for not understanding the spirit of their laws.

You may possess a thousand copies of the nikayas, you might have read them all, a thousand time each, but if the mind is not ready and the factor have not been cultivated enough, no knowledge is assured.

Think about scholars who may have read a lot suttas hundreds of times.
Can you assume they are all stream-winners?
I think you can't, because some of them may be reading suttas just as an archeological/historical/textual piece.

That's what I understood in the Buddhadasa's quote:
If put side to side, it is better to investigate suffering diligently by yourself than to have the suttas and getting nothing from them.

That means in no way that suttas are to be rejected.

Kind regards!

you might have read them all, a thousand time each

whoa!

that is an Arahant

Can an arahat be not under the label of buddhist?