Dhamma Wheel Buddhist Forum

Sāvakabuddhas (Pāli) is a rarely used term in Buddhism, identifying enlightened 'disciples of a Buddha' as Buddhas. These disciples are those enlightened individuals who gain Nirvāṇa by hearing the Dhamma as initially taught by a Sammasambuddha. They might also lead others to enlightenment, but cannot teach the Dhamma in a time or world where it has been forgotten, because they depend upon a tradition that stretches back to a Sammasambuddha.

When the term Sāvakabuddha is used, it refers to a third type of Buddha, other than the Sammasambuddha and Paccekabuddha. The term is not widely known. The term Savakabuddha is used in Theravadin commentaries,[1] and does not occur in the scriptures of the Pali Canon. Śrāvaka (Pāli: Sāvaka) literally means "one who hears", i.e. a Buddhist who follows the path to enlightenment by means of hearing the instructions of others.


so are these just arahanta?

Do you have any textual examples of this term being used?

nope just what it says there....

opps forgot the note

^ Udana Commentary, tr Peter Masefield, volume I, 1994, Pali Text Society, page 94; Theragatha commentary, PTS edition, volume I, page 10, not yet translated, cited by Pruitt in Journal of the Pali Text Society, volume XXIX, forthcoming

and i found this

Śrāvaka (Skt.; Pali: sāvaka; means "hearer" or "follower") is a disciple of a Sammasambuddha. An enlightened disciple is generally called an arahant (Noble One) or ariya-sāvaka (Noble Disciple). (These terms have slightly varied meanings but can both be used to describe the enlightened disciple.) The Theravadin commentary to the Udana uses the term sāvaka-buddha (Pali; Skt. śrāvakabuddha) to describe the enlightened disciple[2] This third types of Buddha is also acknowledged in Tibetan Buddhism.[1]

Enlightened disciples attain Nirvana as do the two aforementioned types of Buddhas. After attaining enlightenment, disciples may also lead others to enlightenment. One can not become a disciple of a Buddha in a time or world where the teaching of the Buddha has been forgotten or has not been taught before, because this type of enlightenment is dependent on a tradition that stretches back to a Samyaksambuddha.

A rarely used word, anubuddha, was a term used by the Buddha in the Khuddakapatha[3] for those who become buddhas after being given instruction.

1^ a b Nonconceptual Cognition of Voidness by Shravaka, Pratyekabuddha, and Bodhisattva Aryas According to the Four Tibetan Traditions, by Alexander Berzin
2^ Udana Commentary, tr Peter Masefield, volume I, 1994, Pali Text Society, page 94).
3^ Ratanasutta:56. Also see AN 4.1, entitled "Anubuddha Sutta" (Thanissaro, 1997).

Sāvakabuddha is a commentarial term. The arahant in suttas is referred as buddha and tathagata and sugata, and sambodhi of the arahant is no different from that of the Buddha.

Hi JC
I havent come across the term before. The Buddha's chief disciples were arahants, some of whom attained arahantship after listening to a discourse. With regards to Sariputta, he became a stream enterer after listening to a four-line verse from an arahant - before he met the Buddha. The chief disciples of the Buddha accumulated the merit to become chief disciples after making an aspiration at the foot of a previous Buddha. The Pali Canon indicates that the career of the Buddha-to-be and his chief disciples are closely intertwined until they reappear in their last life when the Bodhisatta gains sammasambodhi. At the point when the future chief disciples encounter the Dhamma or meet the Buddha, their paramitas are such that their progress on the path is incredibly rapid. According to Nyanaponika Thera, it is the result of aeons spent in perfecting the paramitas and developing merit.
As Tilt has said, the enlightenment of an arahant is no different to that of a Buddha.
Kind regards

Ben

jcsuperstar wrote:Sāvakabuddhas (Pāli) is a rarely used term in Buddhism, identifying enlightened 'disciples of a Buddha' as Buddhas.
...
so are these just arahanta?

Yes.

Is there any mention of which Sutta in the Udaana the Commentary is refering to?

Hi,

adeh wrote:Is there any mention of which Sutta in the Udaana the Commentary is refering to?

It's Brāhmaṇa-sutta (Ud 1.5).

Muchas gracias.......

jcsuperstar wrote:opps forgot the note

^ Udana Commentary, tr Peter Masefield, volume I, 1994, Pali Text Society, page 94; Theragatha commentary, PTS edition, volume I, page 10, not yet translated, cited by Pruitt in Journal of the Pali Text Society, volume XXIX, forthcoming

and i found this

Śrāvaka (Skt.; Pali: sāvaka; means "hearer" or "follower") is a disciple of a Sammasambuddha. An enlightened disciple is generally called an arahant (Noble One) or ariya-sāvaka (Noble Disciple). (These terms have slightly varied meanings but can both be used to describe the enlightened disciple.) The Theravadin commentary to the Udana uses the term sāvaka-buddha (Pali; Skt. śrāvakabuddha) to describe the enlightened disciple[2] This third types of Buddha is also acknowledged in Tibetan Buddhism.[1]

Enlightened disciples attain Nirvana as do the two aforementioned types of Buddhas. After attaining enlightenment, disciples may also lead others to enlightenment. One can not become a disciple of a Buddha in a time or world where the teaching of the Buddha has been forgotten or has not been taught before, because this type of enlightenment is dependent on a tradition that stretches back to a Samyaksambuddha.

A rarely used word, anubuddha, was a term used by the Buddha in the Khuddakapatha[3] for those who become buddhas after being given instruction.

1^ a b Nonconceptual Cognition of Voidness by Shravaka, Pratyekabuddha, and Bodhisattva Aryas According to the Four Tibetan Traditions, by Alexander Berzin
2^ Udana Commentary, tr Peter Masefield, volume I, 1994, Pali Text Society, page 94).
3^ Ratanasutta:56. Also see AN 4.1, entitled "Anubuddha Sutta" (Thanissaro, 1997).

A number of years ago, I was told that Anubuddha is the term used in the Suttas for the Savakabuddha. I have been unable to find any confirmation of this. I looked through all of the English translations and transliterated Pali versions I could find of the Khuddakapatha.

If the term is in the Ratana Sutta; I am not seeing it. See: http://www.bbt.org.sg/Articles/paritta_ ... ATANASUTTA

I did find the words ananunbodha, anuBuddham, anubuddho, and anubuddha in a transliteration of AN 4.1 the Aubuddha Sutta. It appears that Thanissaro Bhikkhu is translated ananubodhi as 'not understanding'; and the various forms of anubuddha as 'understanding'. I suppose one could infer that the Anubuddha is one who has understood the Samma Sambuddha's instruction?

Other sources:
The Digital Dictionary of Buddhism (ddb) has satori 悟 as the sino-japanese translation of anubodha / anubuddha and gives "to awaken to" as a translation. http://www.buddhism-dict.net/cgi-bin/xp ... =%E6%82%9F

Monier-Williams, linked from ddb, has "anubodha [ anubodha ]2[ anu-bodha ] m. recollection (1) an after-thought L. (2) reviving the scent of a faded perfume, replacing perfumes"

I've heard of the term, and as mentioned it's used to denote simply what we call 'Arahants' - i.e. enlightened disciples of a Sammā Sambuddha. I can see the usefulness of it - categorizing those who have attained nibbāna as Sammā Sambuddhas, Paccēka Buddhas, and Arahants can seem pointless since Sammā Sambuddhas and Paccēka Buddhas are Arahants too. So the Sammā Sambuddha, Paccēka Buddha, and Sāvaka Buddha would seem like a more proper terminology for the three bōdhis.

rohana wrote:I've heard of the term, and as mentioned it's used to denote simply what we call 'Arahants' - i.e. enlightened disciples of a Sammā Sambuddha. I can see the usefulness of it - categorizing those who have attained nibbāna as Sammā Sambuddhas, Paccēka Buddhas, and Arahants can seem pointless since Sammā Sambuddhas and Paccēka Buddhas are Arahants too. So the Sammā Sambuddha, Paccēka Buddha, and Sāvaka Buddha would seem like a more proper terminology for the three bōdhis.

That makes a lot of sense. How about Anubuddha as synonym for Savaka Buddha? According to the source cited above; the Buddha used the term Anubuddha in the Suttapitaka, and Savaka Buddha was used in a commentary. I looked at the suttas mentioned, but was unable to confirm that. AN 4.1 seems to use Anubuddha as term common to all three types of Buddhas; as the understanding attained by Arahants. Something like that. Can anyone can clear that up?

Anyway, my understanding is that Theravada views the awakening of three types of Buddhas as qualitatively the same. So, I gather that Samma Sambuddha, Paccekabuddha, and Savakabuddha and/or Anubuddha would only refer to the different paths taken to acquire Bodhi. All Arahants are Buddhas, and all Buddhas are Arahants?

(Note to moderator: If the below is deemed off topic for a Theravada board, please delete it and I'll understand.)

However, some early schools that no longer exist, such as Sarvastivada, viewed the awakening of the Arhat as incomplete and qualitatively inferior to that of the "completely enlightened" Samyak Sambodhi. That is confusing, since the Samyak Sambuddha is also an Arhat. One possible explanation is that they saw Arhat as a specific term for those who awaken via the Shravaka path; i.e. with Instruction from a Samyak Sambuddha, but it is also a general term applied to all 3 kinds of Buddhas. Another possible explanation is that they saw Arhatship as a sort of transitional stage; all Buddhas are Arhats, but not all Arhats are Buddhas.

The Sarvastivada view is the same as that of most Mahayana Schools. In fact, it may have been the original impetus for the founding of Mahayana -- some wanted to attain 'the complete awakening' instead of 'settling' for arhatship. The early Mahayana seems to have derived the Triyana (three vehicle) concept from the older concept of the three types of Buddhas. Some of the Discourses refer to Sammma Sambuddhas-to-be as Bodhisattas. The founders of what became Mahayana apparently conceived of a Bodhisattvayana as a vehicle to attain Samyak Sambodhi. According to some scholars, Mahayana was originally a synonym for the Bodhisattva-yana.

I see all kinds of logical problems with the view that complete or full Awakening is the exclusive attainment of Samyak Sambuddhas. For one, full enlightenment would not possible without common wordlings to teach. Moreover, taken to its logical conclusion, it would mean the Samyak Sambuddha, by providing Instruction leading to Arhatship, prevents his followers from ever becoming fully awakened Buddhas.

male_robin wrote: All Arahants are Buddhas, and all Buddhas are Arahants?

Here is an argumentative thread that covers much of this ground: http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... t=sambodhi" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; and this: http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... hi#p208512" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(Note to moderator: If the below is deemed off topic for a Theravada board, please delete it and I'll understand.)

It is appropriate to a Theravadin board.

bodhi
(from verbal root budhi, to awaken, to understand): awakenment, enlightenment, supreme knowledge. "(Through Bodhi) one awakens from the slumber or stupor (inflicted upon the mind) by the defilements (kilesa) and comprehends the Four Noble Truths (sacca)" (Com. to M. 10).

The enlightenment of a Buddha is called sammā-sambodhi, 'perfect enlightenment'. The faith (saddhā) of a lay follower of the Buddha is described as "he believes in the enlightenment of the Perfect One" (saddahati Tathāgatassa bodhim: M.53, A.III.2).

As components of the state of enlightenment and contributory factors to its achievement, are mentioned in the texts: the 7 factors of enlightenment (bojjhanga = bodhi-anga) and the 37 'things pertaining to enlightenment' (bodhipakkhiya-dhammā). In one of the later books of the Sutta-Pitaka, the Buddhavamsa, 10 bodhipācana-dhammā are mentioned, i.e. qualities that lead to the ripening of perfect enlightenment; these are the 10 perfections (pāramī).

There is a threefold classification of enlightenment:

1. that of a noble disciple (sāvaka-bodhi, q.v.). i.e. of an Arahat,
2. of an Independently Enlightened One (pacceka-bodhi, q.v.), and
3. of a Perfect Enlightened One (sammā-sambodhi).
This 3-fold division, however, is of later origin, and in this form it neither occurs in the canonical texts nor in the older Sutta commentaries. The closest approximation to it is found in a verse sutta which is probably of a comparatively later period, the Treasure Store Sutta (Nidhikkanda Sutta) of the Khuddakapātha, where the following 3 terms are mentioned in stanza 15: sāvaka-pāramī, pacceka-bodhi, buddha-bhūmi (see Khp. Tr., pp. 247f.).

The commentaries (e.g. to M., Buddhavamsa, Cariyapitaka) generally give a 4-fold explanation of the word bodhi:

1. the tree of enlightenment,
2. the holy path (ariya-magga),
3. Nibbāna,
4 omniscience (of the Buddha: sabbaññutā-ñāna).
As to (2), the commentaries quote Cula-Nidesa where bodhi is defined as the knowledge relating to the 4 paths (of Stream-entry, etc.; catūsu maggesu ñāna).

Neither in the canonical texts nor in the old commentaries is it stated that a follower of the Buddha may choose between the three kinds of enlightenment and aspire either to become a Buddha, a Pacceka-Buddha, or an Arahat-disciple. This conception of a choice between three aspirations is, however, frequently found in present-day Theravāda countries, e.g. in Sri Lanka. http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/b_f/bodhi.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thank you for the link tiltbillings. I'll enjoy reading that thread. It appears there is a diversity of views within Theravada. There is a lot of value in bouncing ideas off others in forums like this one. Every time I think I have sorted things out, I discover some error in my thinking. So i always fall back on non-attachment to fixed views.