A question about Arahats

[Birch]

Why aren't arahats bodhisattavs? Question of degree or choice?

 

I was wondering about it.

[Sunya]

Why aren't arahats bodhisattavs? Question of degree or choice?

 

I was wondering about it.

 

why don't you ask one?

[Birch]

I don't think I know any!

[Vajrahridaya]

Why aren't arahats bodhisattavs? Question of degree or choice?

 

I was wondering about it.

 

They become awakened by Buddhas to become Bodhisattvas. They just haven't been exposed to teachings declaring the way of accumulating the type of merit that allows for Bodhisattva application.

 

It's like they feel, oh I have liberation, I'll just live my life out like this. People are inspired by them, but they don't have the same measure of powers and cognitive skills as someone who undergoes the Bodhisattva accumulations.

 

arahats - totally severed the fine remains of greed/attachment mind. So are not reborn in lower realms and have no desire to strive for the type of omniscience that makes one a teaching Buddha.

bodhisattvas - totally severed the fine remains of hatred/dualism/discriminating mind. Can take rebirth to accumulate more perfections of expression for the sake of others.

Buddha - totally severed the fine remains of ignorance/folly/wandering mind. Is fully omniscient and takes up the role of a teaching Buddha forever. Thus can manifest through bodies in multiple realms to teach the dharma. This type of bliss is generally considered higher and also more active than the Arhat bliss which is generally just a sit in meditation bliss for a long period of time until they are ready to undertake the bodhisattva path.

 

p.s. This is a Mahayana view. In the Pali Suttas, or the Nikaya which is the Theravada view, there is the mention of Bodhisatta and it just means one that is striving for enlightenment.

Edited August 5, 2009 by Vajrahridaya

[Sunya]

well Arhat is the goal of Theravada school of Buddhism, Buddhahood is the goal of Mahayana school of Buddhism, including Vajrayana or Tantric Buddhism.

 

Arhat is something like a 1st or 2nd level Bodhisattva, there are different levels or bhumis of Bodhisattvas.

 

As I was taught by a Tibetan teacher, "Liberation" is what an Arhat strives for, this being the removal of obscurations and defilements. Karma and Delusion being the primary ones. the 3 higher trainings are used which are ethics, concentration, and wisdom. basically, realizing no-self and emptiness.

 

Enlightenment or Buddhahood is different than Liberation but it includes it. This is removal of obscurations and defilements PLUS knowledge of obscurations (Omniscience) which comes from having Bodhicitta (wish to get enlightened for all Beings)

 

Theravada acknowledges that Arhat is a lesser goal but views it as more realistic. Buddhahood is seen as a goal that is beyond the reach of ordinary men. so they are going towards the more realistic goal of Arhat.

[Birch]

Thanks for telling me. I'm still wondering what, if they are liberated, do they do all day those arahats? Same stuff as other people, just in a liberated way? Are there things they won't do for work for example? I'm assuming they have to make a living. Or do they gravitate towards specific professions?

[Sunya]

Thanks for telling me. I'm still wondering what, if they are liberated, do they do all day those arahats? Same stuff as other people, just in a liberated way? Are there things they won't do for work for example? I'm assuming they have to make a living. Or do they gravitate towards specific professions?

 

my opinion is that great compassion comes with Arhat realization and that when one becomes an Arhat, one essentially becomes a Bodhisattva. this actually isn't just my opinion but also how some Mahayana teachers say it. Its also obvious from people who are on the spiritual path that compassion is a natural by product of releasing negativities and obscurations. so I think that the Bodhisattva is a natural progress of the Arhat.

[Birch]

So not an actual decision?

 

What about weighing up the rebirth vs non rebirth option? Because they are both enlightened, right? Wouldn't not wanting to hang around to help be considered a bit selfish? I'm not being ironic (hope it doesn't come across that way!)

 

Edit: and if they all decided not to come back, wouldn't that just end the suffering right there?

 

I'm not very up on the texts and I can get easily confused by some of the terminology so would appreciate some simple terms (as much as that is possible!)

Edited August 5, 2009 by Kate

[Vajrahridaya]

So not an actual decision?

 

What about weighing up the rebirth vs non rebirth option? Because they are both enlightened, right? Wouldn't not wanting to hang around to help be considered a bit selfish? I'm not being ironic (hope it doesn't come across that way!)

 

Edit: and if they all decided not to come back, wouldn't that just end the suffering right there?

 

I'm not very up on the texts and I can get easily confused by some of the terminology so would appreciate some simple terms (as much as that is possible!)

 

Hi Kate,

 

That's the Mahayana view on Arhat generally, is that its a solitary enlightenment that doesn't include the vast scope of omniscience required to be a Buddhahood so in a certain case sure, it would be considered selfish. But, an Arhat naturally moves along the Bodhisattva path eventually as a result of even attaining Arhatship.

 

If they decided not to come back, that wouldn't help us very much would it? We'd be pretty lost fishies at sea with no one to guide us.

[Birch]

Right, but what of the "they ARE us" idea?

 

If they didn't come back, we wouldn't have to either and "poof"

 

And if they're not us, who are we? We eventually turn out to be them, apparently...if we're doing it right

 

What if there is no them because there's no us either?

[Vajrahridaya]

Right, but what of the "they ARE us" idea?

 

If they didn't come back, we wouldn't have to either and "poof"

 

And if they're not us, who are we? We eventually turn out to be them, apparently...if we're doing it right

 

What if there is no them because there's no us either?

 

No, the Buddhas are not us. They are individual mind streams since beginningless time.

 

We are all individuals and not one big mind. It's a nice poetic metaphor to describe the unitive experience, but is not true upon analysis.

[Birch]

OK, thanks, I'll have to go away and mull that one over. Don't yet see what's unitive about it - except maybe the compassion that the content is similar or just beautifully different in its nuances or the idea that we're all in this duality together or the fact that we are all in this duality together and can't get out;-)

 

Oh well, time for a salt bath and a change of station;-)

[Vajrahridaya]

OK, thanks, I'll have to go away and mull that one over. Don't yet see what's unitive about it - except maybe the compassion that the content is similar or just beautifully different in its nuances or the idea that we're all in this duality together or the fact that we are all in this duality together and can't get out;-)

 

Oh well, time for a salt bath and a change of station;-)

 

LOL! That's funny...

 

We never get out, it's just seeing through it and understanding that we are interconnected is what I mean about unitive. That we are all co-creating this experience on Earth.

 

There is only experience, it's just making it a psychologically liberated experience instead of a mentally bound one.

 

Ahhhh, a salt bath. I still haven't been to the beach since I've moved to Florida. My whole state of mind has really changed though since I left NY and quit my Bicycle Rickshaw job. Whew.... thank goodness that's over with.

[xabir2005]

my opinion is that great compassion comes with Arhat realization and that when one becomes an Arhat, one essentially becomes a Bodhisattva. this actually isn't just my opinion but also how some Mahayana teachers say it. Its also obvious from people who are on the spiritual path that compassion is a natural by product of releasing negativities and obscurations. so I think that the Bodhisattva is a natural progress of the Arhat.

It's a natural progression, but may not come until after aeons of staying in nirvana.

 

Arhat is something like a 1st or 2nd level Bodhisattva, there are different levels or bhumis of Bodhisattvas.

Different teachers may put it differently.

 

Lankavatara Sutra, and many Buddhist teachers, state that Arhat is equivalent to 6th - 8th bhumi in experience.

So not an actual decision?

 

What about weighing up the rebirth vs non rebirth option? Because they are both enlightened, right? Wouldn't not wanting to hang around to help be considered a bit selfish? I'm not being ironic (hope it doesn't come across that way!)

 

Edit: and if they all decided not to come back, wouldn't that just end the suffering right there?

 

I'm not very up on the texts and I can get easily confused by some of the terminology so would appreciate some simple terms (as much as that is possible!)

That's why Mahayana considers those Arhats who do not aspire to return and help sentient beings and attain Buddhahood for the sake of everyone as being selfish.

 

We nevertheless still pay great respect to Arhats.

Edited August 6, 2009 by xabir2005

[Birch]

 

We nevertheless still pay great respect to Arhats.

 

 

Ok thanks for the ideas. WHO pays respect to Arhats? And what do you mean by respect? As in "we tolerate them but pretty much leave them to hang around in solitary enlightenment until they join a religion,"? This is not meant to offend. Apologies in advance if it does.

 

And what happens if they aren't Buddhists? Or do they have to be to be Arhats?

 

It seems to me we've got lots of flavours of enlightened folks here (I won't get into the other beings stuff) and I think that's why hanging at TTB's is so interesting.

 

I'm sort of surprised at the lack of North American practices, have none of them survived into contemporary culture or are they just elsewhere? There some interesting science going on out there too!

[Vajrahridaya]

Ok thanks for the ideas. WHO pays respect to Arhats? And what do you mean by respect? As in "we tolerate them but pretty much leave them to hang around in solitary enlightenment until they join a religion,"? This is not meant to offend. Apologies in advance if it does.

 

And what happens if they aren't Buddhists? Or do they have to be to be Arhats?

 

It seems to me we've got lots of flavours of enlightened folks here (I won't get into the other beings stuff) and I think that's why hanging at TTB's is so interesting.

 

I'm sort of surprised at the lack of North American practices, have none of them survived into contemporary culture or are they just elsewhere? There some interesting science going on out there too!

 

Beings can attain different stages of realization in different spiritual traditions and get influenced in other realms, it's all not so black and white. Anything can happen to anyone depending upon endless things.

 

But yeah, Buddhas teachings, the teachings of awakendness has certain marks. The 4 noble truths, emptiness, which basically means impermanence, dependent origination, 8 fold noble path. If something from another planet teaches these things in the language, "zajebod", it's Buddhism.

[Inedible]

Anyone who says a Refuge prayer is paying respect to the Arhats as they are included in the Dharma Gem and the Sangha Gem.

 

The key difference between an Arhat and a Bodhisattva is the motivation which is present when they first perceive emptiness of inherent existence directly. The Theravada refers to this as the three marks of existence.

[xabir2005]

An Arhat, who has attained enlightenment and liberation from birth and death, is worthy of refuge [as an Arya Sangha], offerings, respect and reverence by all Buddhists.

[Vajrahridaya]

Ok thanks for the ideas. WHO pays respect to Arhats? And what do you mean by respect? As in "we tolerate them but pretty much leave them to hang around in solitary enlightenment until they join a religion,"? This is not meant to offend. Apologies in advance if it does.

 

That's funny.

 

Yeah, we basically tolerate them and kick them out of their meditative bliss state when the conditions are ripe for them to hear some Mahayana.

I'm sort of surprised at the lack of North American practices, have none of them survived into contemporary culture or are they just elsewhere? There some interesting science going on out there too!

 

What do you mean North American? Native American? Science going on out there? You mean modern physics? Yeah, it's intriguing.

[Birch]

I meant anything North American. The "Native American" practices don't seem to get a lot of bandwidth on TTB and I wonder why that is.

 

Anglo-Saxon stuff doesn't seem to be showing up much either. Not very many Christian mystics, not much Sufism, I guess a bit of Kabbal,...

 

When so many of the people that have these practices in their culture live in North America and (one would maybe assume in error) have the freedom to practice and explore, I guess I'm just wondering out loud ;-)

 

Buddhism can sometimes come across quite well to me as culturally neutral and tending towards universal - but maybe that's more to do with the skills that the western teacher has than anything else. If that the case, has Buddhism in the "West" remained similar to Buddhism in the "East" ? And just how culturally acclimatized would one have to be to accept Buddhist teachings from a Western vs an Eastern teacher?

 

And back to topic;-) Why would one want to knock an arhat out of his bliss?

 

"That's funny. tongue.gif

 

Yeah, we basically tolerate them and kick them out of their meditative bliss state when the conditions are ripe for them to hear some Mahayana."

[Vajrahridaya]

I meant anything North American. The "Native American" practices don't seem to get a lot of bandwidth on TTB and I wonder why that is.

 

The Natives are very private about their already private practices that are mostly quite dead by this point sadly.

Or extremely secret in places like NM Navaho's and Pueblo Natives.

 

Anglo-Saxon stuff doesn't seem to be showing up much either. Not very many Christian mystics, not much Sufism, I guess a bit of Kabbal,...

 

It's not that easy to find much real Christian Mysticism in America I think.

 

Buddhism can sometimes come across quite well to me as culturally neutral and tending towards universal - but maybe that's more to do with the skills that the western teacher has than anything else. If that the case, has Buddhism in the "West" remained similar to Buddhism in the "East" ? And just how culturally acclimatized would one have to be to accept Buddhist teachings from a Western vs an Eastern teacher?

 

It's always personal. It was easy for me because I was raised Hindu in the West, so I was raised with Eastern views already.

And back to topic;-) Why would one want to knock an arhat out of his bliss?

 

"That's funny. tongue.gif

 

Yeah, we basically tolerate them and kick them out of their meditative bliss state when the conditions are ripe for them to hear some Mahayana."

 

Basically because their bliss is still an ignorance and not the omniscience of a Buddha, according to Mahayana of course and not Theravada.

[Birch]

Basically because their bliss is still an ignorance and not the omniscience of a Buddha, according to Mahayana of course and not Theravada.

 

Ignorance of what?

 

And why would the two schools be at odds on this?

[Vajrahridaya]

Ignorance of what?

 

And why would the two schools be at odds on this?

 

That question was answered in earlier posts. Re-read Kate, you'll get your answer.

 

Don't just skim either because it seems like you did the first time if you didn't catch your answers. Both Michael and Xabir as well as I left these answers already for you.

[Birch]

Thanks, I think I got the ignorance part.

 

I still don't get why the 2 schools at odds. I'll read again but given what I know about reading and what I don't know about Buddhism I may just not be able to "get it" without further input from people that do know. Sorry about that, I'd just rather not assume.

[Vajrahridaya]

Thanks, I think I got the ignorance part.

 

I still don't get why the 2 schools at odds. I'll read again but given what I know about reading and what I don't know about Buddhism I may just not be able to "get it" without further input from people that do know. Sorry about that, I'd just rather not assume.

 

Oh ok... An Arhat goes for solitary enlightenment, while a Buddha is a being who attained enlightenment through the Bodhisattva path for the sake of all beings, so gathered more powers of expression and compassion through his or her path to salvation during his or her carrier as a Bodhisattva. You can Wiki Bodhisattva if you wish.