Posted by khunusana (22.214.171.124) on January 28, 2001 at 13:34:35:
In Reply to: Re: The Bodhisattva path (I disagree) posted by Sergio on November 08, 2000 at 05:24:56:
: Very dear Zolla:
: I must disagree with you. I think as you think that an arhant and a Boddhisatva are very developed beings. I also think that there is none superior to other. But in terms of being closer to Buddhahood, a Boddhisatva is much closer, and in that sense he is superior. The reason is simple: the boddhisatva has cultivated boddhichita (altruistic mind), while an Arahant hasnít. Both are liberated from afflicted emotions, but due to a bddhisatva has Boddhicita, he can reach Dharmakaya Body quickly, while an Arahant canít. The cause of getting the Dharmakaya body of a Buddha is Boddhicitta. Without Boddhicitta none can get Buddhahood because none can obtain the Dharmakaya body. And without Dharmakaya body, you canít get Sambogakaya and Nirmanakaya bodies. An Arahant just has destroyed afflicted emotions (attachment and aversion), while a Boddhisatva also cultivates Boddhichita. This is a radical difference, and he has also destroyed afflicted emotions.
: In fact, it is said that when a person gets Arahantís state, Buddhas interrupt their meditations and they appear to them and they teach them the Boddhisatva path. Then they cultivate the altruistic mind for a long long time and then they get the Buddha state. In terms of a Buddha, an arahant is not enlightened, he is just resting, while a Boddhisatva is still in the path to Buddhahood.
: The mahayana family is superior to the hinayana family due to the cultivation of the altruistic mind, which allows practitioners to get enlightenment really faster than those in the hinayana family. A boddhisatva is an example for any Arahant, and any of them is an example for us. Be an Arahant is an incredible success, but is much better to be a Boddhisatva.
: Best Regards
You should read the history of the diversiion of Mahayana which occured hundreds of years after the Buddhs'a Prinibbana.
It is Mahayana's idea that Mahayana is superior to other forms of Buddhism.
The Buddha did not teach any 'ism. Whoever caused a schism in his Dhamma did not understand Dhamma at all.
The fight to be the winner is not in Buddha's teaching.
Hinayana is a degatory term that the Mahayana uses to call a branch of Buddhism, accepted by all learned and scholars to be "Theravada" and believed to be closest to what the Buddha taught.
Read comments from scholars like Albert Einstein, Rhys Davis, Carl Gustav Jung, and many more. These people studied Buddhism deeply and all of them agree that Buddhism in its early form (aka Theravada) is the gem.
I am not arguing with anyone. I want to clarify to readers that arhats are those who reach nirvana (nibbana), therefore they are perfect. Bidhisatva (Bodhisatta) are those who practice to be Buddha. They are still human beings. In the Tripitaka, when Buddha talked about his previous life, he had been born as animals. Are you saying that an elephant is superior than a human who knows Dhamma (Dharma)?
Sometimes it is difficult to know what is the true teaching of the Buddha. One must look how he had lived. Why did he encourage all his disciples to become arhats instead of Bodhisatta?
Do you know that Pali texts (Theravada) are complete and believed to be accumulated only 3 mo. after the Buddha's parinibbana? Sanskrit texts (Mahayana's texts) had been written much later?
Please study with wisdom.
Post a Followup