What is the difference between the Theravada and Mahayana concepts of Buddhahood?

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths. What can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 16275
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: What is the difference between the Theravada and Mahayana concepts of Buddhahood?

Post by mikenz66 » Fri Jun 15, 2018 9:33 am

Grigoris wrote:
Fri Jun 15, 2018 9:10 am
1. It does not occur to you that the theory expounded in the Milindpanha is based on Pali Canon sources?
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .ntbb.html
Furthermore, the Milindpanha and the later commentaries are definitely part of the Theravada exegesis. One might of course validly argue that they are not an Early Buddhist Text. On the other hand, if one it to take an Early Buddhist Texts approach then there seems little reason to prioritize the Theravada Pali Cannon over the sutras preserved in Sanskrit and Chinese, such as the Sarvāstivādin...

:heart:
Mike

User avatar
Aloka
Posts: 5760
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 2:51 pm

Re: What is the difference between the Theravada and Mahayana concepts of Buddhahood?

Post by Aloka » Fri Jun 15, 2018 9:44 am

OK - but personally I don't believe in omniscience, or the 32 marks and other myths which appear to elevate the Buddha to a kind of Superman with a weird appearance.


:anjali:

auto
Posts: 311
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: What is the difference between the Theravada and Mahayana concepts of Buddhahood?

Post by auto » Fri Jun 15, 2018 11:25 am

Wizard in the Forest wrote:
Thu Jun 14, 2018 2:40 pm
@ Auto

A Bodhisatta is an unenlightened being. One who can become a Buddha, it is not a guarantee unless someone develops the parami to become one. To say it is anything other than an unenlightened being is doing yourself and many others a disservice.

We live in the dispensation of the Buddha, and we're met with a unique opportunity to know the Dhamma and be enlightened as a disciple of the Buddha failure to develop the path and the fruits because of slackened effort is to reject the gift he went through various unfathomable and incalculable eons to achieve. Being an enlightened disciple of a perfectly enlightened Buddha is good. If you put every effort to become enlightened in this life and do not achieve the path and the fruits of stream winning, something attained by having faith in the Buddha, Dhamma and the Sangha; morality incapable of sending you to hell; release of personality view; release of rites and rituals not connected to the path, then at least you tried and it grants you a chance at enough parami to make a pitch later for Buddhahood. That is acceptable. There is a lot of people who have ahetuka and dihetuka consciousness, and it's ok for them to put their all into achieve Buddhahood and fail. Their efforts are not in vain.

What I don't agree with and every realistic Mahayana teacher should agree with me on this, is that the path to Buddhahood is for those who slacken their efforts to avoid becoming a Disciple Buddha. That is not going to work. Becoming a fully enlightened Buddha takes incalculable eons to develop the right kind of parami, if anything it means one should double, triple, omniple, their efforts if becoming a fully self enlightened Buddha is their goal. Even if this development of parami were to go developed without a hitch, perhaps your next birth would be one where you are actually incapable of teaching others. The Universe is vast, and life is likely elsewhere. No one said your birth would be anywhere on Earth or even anywhere near it. Your fullest efforts may lead to you becoming a Pacceka Buddha, and even if this is true, it's OK. Your efforts were still not in vain if you become a Pacceka Buddha, the eons spent to become a Pacceka Buddha is also unfathomable and a Pacceka Buddha is a fully self-enlightened Buddha. Homage would rightly be yours. It should be reminded here that I'm not saying you shouldn't become a self-enlightened Buddha, I'm saying it's not for the lazy or those avoiding Disciplehood.

Should you come in Metteya's dispensation, and you have a tihetuka consciousness do not hesitate to become a Disciple Buddha either. Should you have and develop the immense amount of Parami to become a Sammasambuddha, then I will applaud your efforts, but I'm telling you it will never happen for anyone who does not contribute enough effort to do so.
You can hear a lot that there is no self etc.. I know for sure i have self, i come self aware, "one with the view".
Even if thousand no-selfers tell me there isn't, apparently real time experience show me otherwise. If i am lost in some activity and when that activity comes bore enough, i come aware spontaneously, then i can extend my stay on activity and then i see arising sensations. So yeah self-realization is a imporant thing to attain to see arsing and passing away of sensations but it is not yet the final waking up..

In short:
If there is waking up from a sleep with the body, samely you have to awake second time to be able to acknowledge that you are awake. And there is third time waking up too.

gross example.
*the third waking up is similar to banging head against the wall or sink(or any other object), but it is not you who does it with your head, its someone else. Outcome is that there rises a liberating sensation, liberation is included to that sensation.
So the idea is to get that sensation as wholesome way as possible.

santa100
Posts: 2956
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: What is the difference between the Theravada and Mahayana concepts of Buddhahood?

Post by santa100 » Fri Jun 15, 2018 1:09 pm

Grigoris wrote:Excuse me if I am wrong, but isn't omniscience a God-like attribute? And yet the Theravada acknowledges the omniscience of the historical Buddha, right?
You're only half wrong, because the Buddha of the Pali Canon defined pretty explicitly the exact scope and boundary of His omniscience in MN 71. Beside, you're ommitting the key point I mentioned, which is the TriKaya model, which is the central difference when compared to Theravada in trying to understand about the concept of Buddhahood.

User avatar
Grigoris
Posts: 281
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2018 10:43 am

Re: What is the difference between the Theravada and Mahayana concepts of Buddhahood?

Post by Grigoris » Fri Jun 15, 2018 1:18 pm

santa100 wrote:
Fri Jun 15, 2018 1:09 pm
Grigoris wrote:Excuse me if I am wrong, but isn't omniscience a God-like attribute? And yet the Theravada acknowledges the omniscience of the historical Buddha, right?
You're only half wrong, because the Buddha of the Pali Canon defined pretty explicitly the exact scope and boundary of His omniscience in MN 71. Beside, you're ommitting the key point I mentioned, which is the TriKaya model, which is the central difference when compared to Theravada in trying to understand about the concept of Buddhahood.
Again: the Buddha's omniscience (or not) is not my point, the point is that the Buddha is allotted God-like attributes in the Pali Canon too and thus the claim...

Do people even read previous posts before engaging in discussion? :shrug:
ye dhammā hetuppabhavā tesaṁ hetuṁ tathāgato āha,
tesaṃca yo nirodho - evaṁvādī mahāsamaṇo.

Of those phenomena which arise from causes:
Those causes have been taught by the Tathāgata,
And their cessation too - thus proclaims the Great Ascetic.

santa100
Posts: 2956
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: What is the difference between the Theravada and Mahayana concepts of Buddhahood?

Post by santa100 » Fri Jun 15, 2018 1:20 pm

Grigoris wrote:
Fri Jun 15, 2018 1:18 pm
Again: the Buddha's omniscience (or not) is not my point, the point is that the Buddha is allotted God-like attributes in the Pali Canon too and thus the claim...

Do people even read previous posts before engaging in discussion? :shrug:
And again, it is to address the exact question in the OP that I provided the info. about TriKaya.

User avatar
Grigoris
Posts: 281
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2018 10:43 am

Re: What is the difference between the Theravada and Mahayana concepts of Buddhahood?

Post by Grigoris » Fri Jun 15, 2018 1:29 pm

santa100 wrote:
Fri Jun 15, 2018 1:20 pm
Grigoris wrote:
Fri Jun 15, 2018 1:18 pm
Again: the Buddha's omniscience (or not) is not my point, the point is that the Buddha is allotted God-like attributes in the Pali Canon too and thus the claim...

Do people even read previous posts before engaging in discussion? :shrug:
And again, it is to address the exact question in the OP that I provided the info. about TriKaya.
And well you did!
ye dhammā hetuppabhavā tesaṁ hetuṁ tathāgato āha,
tesaṃca yo nirodho - evaṁvādī mahāsamaṇo.

Of those phenomena which arise from causes:
Those causes have been taught by the Tathāgata,
And their cessation too - thus proclaims the Great Ascetic.

User avatar
Pseudobabble
Posts: 666
Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2017 11:11 am
Location: London

Re: What is the difference between the Theravada and Mahayana concepts of Buddhahood?

Post by Pseudobabble » Fri Jun 15, 2018 2:08 pm

Aloka wrote:
Fri Jun 15, 2018 9:44 am
OK - but personally I don't believe in omniscience, or the 32 marks and other myths which appear to elevate the Buddha to a kind of Superman with a weird appearance.


:anjali:
That's because these things are ridiculous, and you are sane.
"Does Master Gotama have any position at all?"

"A 'position,' Vaccha, is something that a Tathagata has done away with. What a Tathagata sees is this: 'Such is form, such its origination, such its disappearance; such is feeling, such its origination, such its disappearance; such is perception...such are fabrications...such is consciousness, such its origination, such its disappearance.'" - Aggi-Vacchagotta Sutta


'Dust thou art, and unto dust thou shalt return.' - Genesis 3:19

'Some fart freely, some try to hide and silence it. Which one is correct?' - Saegnapha

Stillness
Posts: 42
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2015 9:54 am

Re: What is the difference between the Theravada and Mahayana concepts of Buddhahood?

Post by Stillness » Fri Jun 15, 2018 3:39 pm

WorldTraveller wrote:
Thu Jun 14, 2018 11:06 am
Mahayana Buddhas are celestial Buddhas who lives forever and ever and ever.
It might interest some of you to know that the Buddhāpadāna of Theravada Kuddaka-nikāya has an extremely elaborated description of a place called “Buddha-field” where all the Buddhas live. Scholars believe this to be an early Mahayana work, but preserved in Theravada Canon.

Here is Ven. Thanissaro’s translation (page 8).

User avatar
JMGinPDX
Posts: 101
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2016 5:07 pm

Re: What is the difference between the Theravada and Mahayana concepts of Buddhahood?

Post by JMGinPDX » Fri Jun 15, 2018 3:50 pm

Grigoris wrote:
Thu Jun 14, 2018 1:09 pm
"What is the difference between the Theravada and Mahayana concepts of Buddhahood?"

Nothing, they are both concepts and thus essentially empty of meaning.
:goodpost:
Right now, it's like this...

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: markandeya and 57 guests