I apologise for bringing up a topic that I am sure has been covered here before, but to save searching through the vast number of threads, I'm hoping I might post it again.
How do you defend the Theravadin ideal of striving to become an Arahant? The reason I ask is that I was reading a Mahayana book today which took a swipe at the "selfish" goal of becoming an Arahant as opposed to the "compassionate" Bodhisattva ideal. This is a rather tiresome chestnut, I know, but sometimes I find myself at a loss as to how to approach answering it. Off the top of my head I would start with four points (and I would love guidance if I'm off on any of these!):
1.) The Theravadin approach seems much closer to that one finds in the early Pali suttas. This is probably the most important consideration.
2.) Any tradition that emphasizes the Four Sublime Abodes of loving kindness, compassion, sympathetic joy and equanimity like Theravada does can hardly be accused of being selfish, at least in its ideals.
3.) Such an attitude ignores the salutary effects of fully realised individuals on those around them. Surely even Paccekabuddhas have an important role to play in the spread of the Dhamma, even if it is a hidden one.
4.) One can always look the accusation straight in the face and ask if the histories or peoples of Mahayana countries have done much better in the realm of compassion than those that are of the Theravada persuasion. History and life are a messy business, and all have fallen far short of the teachings of the Buddha. If this is true, then the criticism is an empty one.
As I look over these attempted answers I find they might be rather weak or poorly put. Is there a good piece somewhere that defends our approach to the Dhamma? Do any of you have suggestions, or corrections? I am a beginner.
Any guidance would be greatly appreciated!
How Do You Defend the Arahant Ideal?
- retrofuturist
- Posts: 27848
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: How Do You Defend the Arahant Ideal?
Greetings,
Mahayanists might think they're "maha" for inventing and following something they consider more "maha", but as they do, they succeed only in denigrating the arahants, the Buddha and what he actually taught. Collectively you may know those as the Triple Gem.
Someone might be able to give a more politically correct ecumenical account, but this being a Theravada forum, I feel no compulsion to do that.
Metta,
Paul.
Because it is what the Buddha taught. The Buddha did not teach the Bodhisattva ideal. When he referred to himself as a Bodhisatta, it is only in the context of one who was to become a Buddha... not that it was a path to be taught or followed.
Mahayanists might think they're "maha" for inventing and following something they consider more "maha", but as they do, they succeed only in denigrating the arahants, the Buddha and what he actually taught. Collectively you may know those as the Triple Gem.
Someone might be able to give a more politically correct ecumenical account, but this being a Theravada forum, I feel no compulsion to do that.
Metta,
Paul.
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
-
- Posts: 714
- Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2021 4:40 am
Re: How Do You Defend the Arahant Ideal?
Buddha said arahantship to be our goal, an arahant is said to be 'All task done'.
even Mahayana school never dispute this statement.
There is really nothing else to be added.
even Mahayana school never dispute this statement.
There is really nothing else to be added.
Re: How Do You Defend the Arahant Ideal?
The way I understand Mahayana does not accept Arahant as the final attainment.
According to them Arahant still have residue of ignorance.
How many beings are there in the world?
Is it possible that new beings are always created?
According to them Arahant still have residue of ignorance.
How many beings are there in the world?
Is it possible that new beings are always created?
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
Re: How Do You Defend the Arahant Ideal?
If you accept the anatta (without self) doctrine - being "selfish" or "compassionate" doesn't apply.How do you defend the Theravadin ideal of striving to become an Arahant? The reason I ask is that I was reading a Mahayana book today which took a swipe at the "selfish" goal of becoming an Arahant as opposed to the "compassionate" Bodhisattva ideal.
The author doesn't know or fully understand the core teachings of Buddhism.
"Good Subhuti," answered the Buddha, "whenever someone announces, 'I want to follow the Bodhisattva Path because I want to save all sentient beings; and it does not matter whether they are creatures which are formed in a womb or hatched from an egg; whether their life cycles are as observable as those of garden worms, insects and butterflies; or whether they appear as miraculously as mushrooms or gods; or whether they are capable of profound thoughts or of no thoughts at all, for I vow to lead every individual being to Nirvana; and not until they are all safely there will I reap my reward and enter Nirvana!' then, Subhuti, you should remind such a vow-taker that even if such uncountable numbers of beings were so liberated, in reality no beings would have been liberated. A Bodhisattva does not cling to the illusion of separate individuality or ego-entity or personal identification. In reality, there is no "I" who liberates and no "they" who are liberated.
https://zbohy.zatma.org/Dharma/zbohy/Sr ... sutra.html
And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called right speech.
- retrofuturist
- Posts: 27848
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: How Do You Defend the Arahant Ideal?
Greetings,
Just for clarity, the above quotation is a Mahayana Sutra... not recognised by Theravada, although I can understand why it was shared.
Metta,
Paul.
Just for clarity, the above quotation is a Mahayana Sutra... not recognised by Theravada, although I can understand why it was shared.
Metta,
Paul.
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
-
- Posts: 1783
- Joined: Thu May 12, 2016 5:29 pm
- Location: United States
Re: How Do You Defend the Arahant Ideal?
I think its a little bit different. if you study a lot of what Mahayana sutras teach, they consider the bodhisattva ideal not just ideal but the final path. Even in some sutras like the Lotus Sutra, Sariputra was predicted to be a future Buddha, even though he was an arahant already. This is anecdotal but even talking to some of my mahayana Buddhist friends they also seem to think that Buddhahood is the only "final" goal, without really considering that arahanthood is completely possible as well. So you have to consider the fact that many, if not most run of the mill mahayana Buddhists (meaning not ones who can sit there and cite every other sutra) probably dont even know that the arahant path is viable or even what kind of sacrifices being a Sammasambuddha really takes, just as many, if not most, run of the mill Theravada Buddhists are not really looking to attain nibbana in this life and are just looking to make merit to improve thier next one (much to the dismay of Suttavadists who spend hours a day reading and arguing about suttas and the quickest way to enlightenment in this life but hardly ever have any attainments or feasible regiment for enlightenment themselves).
I would also take into consideration that many Mahayana buddhists define the bodhisattva path differently than Theravada. In Theravada, bodhisattvas are considered anybody who wants to be a Sammasambuddha in the future, whereas many Mahayananists consider the bodhisattva path staying in samsara to assist other beings enlightening before you do.
I would also say its inaccurate to say that Theravada considers the arahant path, an "ideal". I think Theravada still considers the path of Sammasambuddhas to be the ideal and the arahant path simply the final goal, it is just not pushed toward or deemed necessary to be a full fledged Sammasambuddha because it is a grueling and difficult path that only extraordinary beings can realistically accomplish. Even the Lord Gotama Buddha was extraordinary in the first life he decided to pursue the bodhisattva path, according to legend he got the inspiration in a previous life when he was trying to save his mother during a shipwreck, a man of impeccable character already. There were even some Theravada figures who have taken the Bodhisattva vow to become a Sammasambuddha in the future (i think there was an ancient Thai prince who took it), so i would largely disagree that Theravada does not consider the path ideal. Theravada considers arahantship viable, not ideal, but there is this misconception that Theravada considers the arahant path ideal, partially due to how mahayana portrays Theravada, and also partially due to how some Suttavadists and Forest Theravadists maniacally emphasize the Buddha's teachings on spiritual attainments/progress, often in a manner that vilifies Buddhists who use the Dhamma for goals that go against the Nibbana or bust line of thinking.
I would also take into consideration that many Mahayana buddhists define the bodhisattva path differently than Theravada. In Theravada, bodhisattvas are considered anybody who wants to be a Sammasambuddha in the future, whereas many Mahayananists consider the bodhisattva path staying in samsara to assist other beings enlightening before you do.
I would also say its inaccurate to say that Theravada considers the arahant path, an "ideal". I think Theravada still considers the path of Sammasambuddhas to be the ideal and the arahant path simply the final goal, it is just not pushed toward or deemed necessary to be a full fledged Sammasambuddha because it is a grueling and difficult path that only extraordinary beings can realistically accomplish. Even the Lord Gotama Buddha was extraordinary in the first life he decided to pursue the bodhisattva path, according to legend he got the inspiration in a previous life when he was trying to save his mother during a shipwreck, a man of impeccable character already. There were even some Theravada figures who have taken the Bodhisattva vow to become a Sammasambuddha in the future (i think there was an ancient Thai prince who took it), so i would largely disagree that Theravada does not consider the path ideal. Theravada considers arahantship viable, not ideal, but there is this misconception that Theravada considers the arahant path ideal, partially due to how mahayana portrays Theravada, and also partially due to how some Suttavadists and Forest Theravadists maniacally emphasize the Buddha's teachings on spiritual attainments/progress, often in a manner that vilifies Buddhists who use the Dhamma for goals that go against the Nibbana or bust line of thinking.
"Do not have blind faith, but also no blind criticism" - the 14th Dalai Lama
"The Blessed One has set in motion the unexcelled Wheel of Dhamma that cannot be stopped by brahmins, devas, Maras, Brahmas or anyone in the cosmos." -Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta
"The Blessed One has set in motion the unexcelled Wheel of Dhamma that cannot be stopped by brahmins, devas, Maras, Brahmas or anyone in the cosmos." -Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta
Re: How Do You Defend the Arahant Ideal?
The underlined and bolded is a perfect example of what non-sense the whole Prajnaparamita tradition embodies.pegembara wrote: ↑Wed Dec 01, 2021 3:57 amIf you accept the anatta (without self) doctrine - being "selfish" or "compassionate" doesn't apply.How do you defend the Theravadin ideal of striving to become an Arahant? The reason I ask is that I was reading a Mahayana book today which took a swipe at the "selfish" goal of becoming an Arahant as opposed to the "compassionate" Bodhisattva ideal.
The author doesn't know or fully understand the core teachings of Buddhism.
"Good Subhuti," answered the Buddha, "whenever someone announces, 'I want to follow the Bodhisattva Path because I want to save all sentient beings; and it does not matter whether they are creatures which are formed in a womb or hatched from an egg; whether their life cycles are as observable as those of garden worms, insects and butterflies; or whether they appear as miraculously as mushrooms or gods; or whether they are capable of profound thoughts or of no thoughts at all, for I vow to lead every individual being to Nirvana; and not until they are all safely there will I reap my reward and enter Nirvana!' then, Subhuti, you should remind such a vow-taker that even if such uncountable numbers of beings were so liberated, in reality no beings would have been liberated. A Bodhisattva does not cling to the illusion of separate individuality or ego-entity or personal identification. In reality, there is no "I" who liberates and no "they" who are liberated.
https://zbohy.zatma.org/Dharma/zbohy/Sr ... sutra.html
“Liberation is not liberation” vs. “Liberation is liberation”. Which should we prefer?
Like the three marks of conditioned existence, this world in itself is filthy, hostile, and crowded
-
- Posts: 714
- Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2021 4:40 am
Re: How Do You Defend the Arahant Ideal?
I don't know enough about Mahayana. For little i know that they agree Buddha once said 'arahant is our goal' or alike.
The dispute is about the target audience when Buddha made that statement.
According to the argument is that Buddha was talking to followers with lesser caliber.
I am not sure how they identify their caliber tho. Must be hard.
Having a bigger caliber than those Forest Arahants, it is pretty big.
Re: How Do You Defend the Arahant Ideal?
Be it Sammasambuddhahood, Arahanthood, or Paccekabuddhahood, all are attaining the very same goal, Nibbana. The only difference is the capacity to teach Dhamma, the attainment of certain supernatural spiritual powers such as Yamaka Patihariya, and the presence of direct knowledge that only a Sammasambuddha can acquire. Different people with different aspirations with different paramitas, some wanted to be Sammasambuddha, some wanted to be Paccekabuddha, while some just want to be Arahant. But the goal is same.
Last edited by Ontheway on Wed Dec 01, 2021 10:23 am, edited 1 time in total.
Hiriottappasampannā,
sukkadhammasamāhitā;
Santo sappurisā loke,
devadhammāti vuccare.
https://suttacentral.net/ja6/en/chalmer ... ight=false
sukkadhammasamāhitā;
Santo sappurisā loke,
devadhammāti vuccare.
https://suttacentral.net/ja6/en/chalmer ... ight=false
Re: How Do You Defend the Arahant Ideal?
I've just done a first read through of all your posts and have much to ponder. All of the answers above will help me to frame an answer to this perception if it should come up again, whether in reading or with personal contact. Thank you all very much! I'm learning to really love this site!
Re: How Do You Defend the Arahant Ideal?
And some are arguing that these justify going for Buddhahood.The only difference is the capacity to teach Dhamma, the attainment of certain supernatural spiritual powers such as Yamaka Patihariya, and the presence of direct knowledge that only a Sammasambuddha can acquire.
Another point is whether it's even possible to become a Buddha through aspiration at all. If arhatship is quite a challenge, how much more so Buddhahood.
- Bhikkhu Pesala
- Posts: 4646
- Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:17 pm
Re: How Do You Defend the Arahant Ideal?
There are Many and Various Doctrines. Make a thorough investigation to ensure that you find the right path amidst the various doctrines, sects, and cults.
Blog • Pāli Fonts • In This Very Life • Buddhist Chronicles • Software (Upasampadā: 24th June, 1979)
Re: How Do You Defend the Arahant Ideal?
When the firefighters show up at a burning building, they don't yell at the people in the parking lot for getting out of the building. They ask how many people are still inside. They don't want people staying in there looking for other people to rescue.
Re: How Do You Defend the Arahant Ideal?
Sadhu Sadhu SadhuBhikkhu Pesala wrote: ↑Thu Dec 02, 2021 12:09 am There are Many and Various Doctrines. Make a thorough investigation to ensure that you find the right path amidst the various doctrines, sects, and cults.
Thank you for the link.
Hiriottappasampannā,
sukkadhammasamāhitā;
Santo sappurisā loke,
devadhammāti vuccare.
https://suttacentral.net/ja6/en/chalmer ... ight=false
sukkadhammasamāhitā;
Santo sappurisā loke,
devadhammāti vuccare.
https://suttacentral.net/ja6/en/chalmer ... ight=false