Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Why a bodhisattva?
Jerbear
Veteran
Hey guys,
One of the things that attracted me initially to Budhism is the Buddha generally saying that we need to work out our own salvation. No need for a "savior" or "mediator", just what we can do ourselves. Then in some of my readings, I've run into the idea of the Bodhisattva. From my understanding, it is one who forgoes enlightenment in order to help others reach it. It would seem to me that this would be unnecessary if everyone is responsible for their own path.
Though it would be awfully nice of the bodhisattva, why is it there? I've only run into this in the Zen readings I've done which is mainly what I've done. Any input would be great!
One of the things that attracted me initially to Budhism is the Buddha generally saying that we need to work out our own salvation. No need for a "savior" or "mediator", just what we can do ourselves. Then in some of my readings, I've run into the idea of the Bodhisattva. From my understanding, it is one who forgoes enlightenment in order to help others reach it. It would seem to me that this would be unnecessary if everyone is responsible for their own path.
Though it would be awfully nice of the bodhisattva, why is it there? I've only run into this in the Zen readings I've done which is mainly what I've done. Any input would be great!
0
Comments
I can't answer this one. My "opinion" of bodhisattvas goes against the grain regarding the stock that a lot of Buddhists put into them.
-bf
Like our Tara's Babies project - nobody would have lifted a finger to help save those poor dogs after Katrina except a few crazy bodhisattvas (not just from our temple, but a lot of places). Does it matter that they did? I mean, they're just dogs, right? But they're also sentient beings just like us with the exact same Buddhanature we have. What we believe is that by making this connection with these particular sentient beings, they will have the opportunity at some future date, most likely in some future life, to actually practice the Dharma and become enlightened. Maybe they wouldn't have had that chance without that connection.
Do you see what I'm talking about? It's nothing to do with hierarchies or any of that crap. It's about providing sentient beings with what they really need. A true bodhisattva would be reborn as a loaf of bread if that's what sentient beings needed at that time. Nobody ever knows most bodhisattvas. You could be sitting right next to one on the subway and never know it, or you could have walked right by one begging quarters on the sidewalk and never knew it. If you viewed everyone as a potential bodhisattva, how you ever be cruel or mean or petty to anyone ever again?
Palzang
Then please share. I am one trying to learn. Just because one has a differing opinion doesn't mean that it's wrong. I would love to hear it. Even PM it to me if you will. I'm sincerely interested.
"If God had a name
What would it be?
And would you call it to his face
If you were faced with him
In all his glory
What would you ask
If you had just one question?
Yeah yeah God is great
Yeah yeah God is good
Yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah
What if God was one of us?
Just a slob like one of us
Just a stranger on the bus
Trying to make his way home
If God had a face
What would it look like?
And would you want to see
If seeing meant that you would have to believe
In things like heaven and in Jesus and the saints and all the prophets
And yeah yeah God is great
Yeah yeah God is good
Yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah
What if God was one of us?
Just a slob like one of us
Just a stranger on the bus
Trying to make his way home
Trying to make his way home
Back up to heaven all alone
Nobody callin' on the phone
'cept for the Pope maybe in Rome
Yeah yeah God is great
Yeah yeah God is good
Yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah
What if God was one of us?
Just a slob like one of us
Just a stranger on the bus
Trying to make his way home
Just trying to make his way home
Like a holy rollin' stone
Back up to heaven all alone
Just trying to make his way home
Nobody callin' on the phone
'cept for the Pope maybe in Rome... "
Was that statement for me, my friend?
-bf
I think ZM put into words pretty much how I feel about Bodhisattvas.
I don't believe that Boddhisattvas are celestial/mystical beings that come back to Earth to do good deeds. I can see a Bodhisattva as someone who has become more in tune or in touch with their Buddhanature. These people, as ZM said, would find themselves performing deeds of help and compassion because it is just a part of them. Just like breathing or eating.
Even Palzang's example of the animals that were rescued fits into this thinking of mine just fine. Whether my thinking is right or wrong - I can't say. I don't want anyone to feel that my "thinking" is necessarily the right way. I could be as wrong as the next guy.
-bf
Martin.
The aim of the vow is, in part, to counter the rather insulated, individualist approach to salvation, where everyone is responsible for and ultimately concerned with his or her own salvation -- with getting off the wheel and getting the heck outta here. This is the Mahayana critique of the arhat ideal, at least. It appears to commit you forever to samsara for the sake of love; and yet paradoxically, it shows you that nirvana really is nowhere else.
Whether or not you believe there are really bodhisattvas, as enlightened living entities at work in the cosmos, depends in part on whether or not you believe in reincarnation and the continuation of the stream of consciousness after the death of the individual body. Not all schools of Buddhism believe that bodhisattvas put off enlightenment altogether; they are as enlightened as Shakyamuni was, in this view, but they consciously elect to keep reentering karmically generated realms of suffering for the benefit of others. According to the Tibetan Buddhist perspective, while there is no abiding, singular, atomic self that continues from moment to moment, there is a continuous stream of individual consciousness that continues, and has continued, from beginningless time. The Dalai Lama talks about this in a little book called Buddha Nature, and it is also discussed in Reginald Ray's Secret of the Vajra World.
Best wishes,
Balder
He reflected that the world was so lost that nobody would understand the deep truth of Nibbana, that he would give up the lifeforce then and there (Parinibbana). But the Brahma Sahampati appeared to him and implored him to teach the Dhamma so that those few with but a little dust covering their eyes may come to understanding and enlightenment, finally achieving the goal of the holy life. Without the Buddha's Mahakaruna decision to open the doors of the Deathless and teach in the remainder of his natural lifespan instead of Parinibbana immediately, we would not have Buddhism at all, much less the notion that the Buddha taught for individuals to work out their own salvation. In other words, his revelation of the Dhamma was a unique act of salvation (for those who can see it) for which we Buddhists have great gratitude. Compare it to the old expression "give a man a fish, he shall not be hungry for one day. Teach a man to fish, he shall not be hungry for a lifetime." Can we not accept that the act of teaching the man to support his own life is an act that saves him? We should not have to think of the Bodhisattva's assistance to beings as any different than this act of Mahakaruna, this "miracle of instruction". If the idea of the teaching of the Buddha is not so difficult to accept face to face with the necessity to work out your own salvation, the idea of the Bodhisattva helping beings can be seen the same way.
On a deeper level, in Zen tradition you can begin to think of Bodhisattva's "liberating beings" as cutting off of the thought of a living being, since the perspective of the Bodhisattva is from bodhi, from the "other shore," and the notion of a "living being" (the existing personality as being Self, ie capable of salvation on its own terms) is something of "this shore," which the Bodhisattva is in process of giving up. In my poor understanding, I am not sure if that is the best way to express it.
Palzang
Who is saying that "there are no separate individuals, we're all one, and so forth and so on, but then who's saying that?!"
I am. Which is just as theoretical as those who claim that these mystical beings do exist.
Again, until I have proof of this sort of belief - I neither claim or disclaim it. In fact, I have quite a bit to work on with just myself.
-bf
Palzang
Let me ask you this: What do you believe bodhisattvas are in their entirety?
Then I will answer.
-bf
Palzang
As for your comments on rebirth, reincarnation, and boddhisattvas - at this point, I could really care one way or the other. People can go on about rebirth this and reincarnation that and what boddhisattvas do, etc. - and it really doesn't matter to me.
So, I'm not following Buddha's teachings in a fashion that you condone - it works for me. I disagree with your statement of rebirth being demonstrably true - it's all hearsay. I find it very difficult to ponder and plan the unponderable when there is so much for me to do right now. I believe Buddha's teachings addressed the here and now - not what we're going to do on the second, third or fourth go-round.
So, I think we are good-good... no?
-bf
The teachings on the bodhisattva way of life are also fundamental to the Mahayana teachings. I mean, that is what differentiates Mahayana from Hinayana (where the focus is on self-liberation). So this is pretty basic stuff we're talking about here.
Not that this restricts you from believing what you want to believe or practice. If doing what you're doing makes you happy, great! And I'm not addressing this to bf specifically, just anyone who might be reading this. It's just that it's been my experience that a lot of people who call themselves Buddhist also claim not to believe in the most basic teachings of the Buddha. It's sort of like sitting at McDonald's chewing on a hamburger and calling yourself a vegetarian. You know what I mean?
Now, I know, a lot of people say you can be Buddhist without beliefs and so on. Well, speaking for myself, I really don't believe anything. I need to see proof of something before I can say I accept this or that to be fact. I've seen the proof of the Buddha's teachings proven beyond a shadow of a doubt to my satisfaction time and time again, both in my own experience and the teachings I have received. So if someone else doesn't want to believe it, that's cool. You can even call yourself a Buddhist. It's a free country, call yourself what you want (and again, I'm not addressing bf specifically, so please don't get defensive). Calling yourself a rose and smelling like one, however, are two completely different things. I'm not trying to beat anyone over the head, just pointing out a simple fact.
Anyway, that's my warped perspective.
Palzang
I guess my stance is; I have so much to do with many other things in my life that pondering issues like this are really quite alien to me. I don't know how to handle them. I feel that I'm worrying about things that really don't matter in the here and now.
Maybe once I get to the point of actually learning more about Buddha's teachings, I'll be able to start eating and digesting those teachings. But for me right now, using your ability to make analogies, worrying about those types of issues right now, to me, is like person planning on what their mansion in Heaven is going to be like when then haven't even become a Christian.
For me, it's like getting the horse before the cart. And since I feel this way, I don't feel like I'm saying I'm a Buddhist and then making up my own religion. I'm only dealing with what I can with my limited mind. Maybe I'm going to need a couple of cycles before I can get to the point of accepting and dealing with some of Buddha's teachings.
Thanks for the good posts.
-bf
Peace and love and all that sentimental crap :mullet:
Palzang
I know this has nothing to do with Bodhisattva's but it does have to do with how we regard the doctrine of rebirth.
_/\_
metta
Dear Jer and all who are having trouble with this Bodhisattva idea,
Please read this quote from our friend Palzang. I believe all you need to know about the roots of the Bodhsattva's nature can be found here...
A deep bow to our loving sangha,
Dave
This is where I ran into trouble at my local temple. I started studying and asking questions and the teacher told me I thought too much. LOL! Maybe I asked him something he didn't know about. It was in a book he recommended to me and I was trying to apply some of it as it seemed good to me.
Where would people suggest that I start in studying what the Buddha said and taught? I've only read mere basics which seem good to me. Meditation is a big part of my life.
Also, you all have given me a different way to look at bodhisattvas. I tend to be on the agnostic side of things. Question everything. That way I am sure of what I think and believe.
Jerbear - no reason to apologize. I think it's excellent to question and look into things before you accept them. I spent probably 10 years from when I first started studying Buddhism until I actually caught on - and even then I've had my ups and downs. I think it's only natural that you do.
As to your question of where to start, I'd recommend What the Buddha Taught by Walpole Rahula. That's the book we use a lot at our temple for the basics. I used to go buy them from the delightful Sri Lankan monks at the Buddhist Vihara on 16th St. in Washington, DC, when I lived out that way. That was a real treat, and the book is a very good intro to the basic teachings of the Buddha.
For me though, the words of my Perfect Teacher are often good enough. More than good enough! After all, Buddha is Buddha. The mind of my teacher is nondual with the mind of Guru Rinpoche, and Guru Rinpoche's mind is nondual with the mind of Lord Buddha Shakyamuni, so there is no difference.
And one more thing on Bodhisattvas - here' s what the 13th Dalai Lama had to say about them:
The Bodhisattva is the mightiest of warriors, but his enemies are not the common foes of flesh and bone.
His fight is with inner delusions, the afflictions of self-cherishing and ego grasping, those most terrible of demons that catch living beings in the snare of confusion and cause them forever to wander in pain, frustration, and sorrow.
His mission is to harm ignorance and delusion, never living beings; these he looks upon with kindness, patience, and empathy, cherishing them like a mother cherishes her only child.
He is the real hero, calmly facing any hardship in order to bring happiness and liberation to the world.
— The 13th Dalai Lama
Thank you for that moment with the sutra, a very nice bell indeed.
The original question about Bodhisattva. As I understand it, we all have a buddha nature that is touchable in this time. I see Bodhisattva, as describing that being action within inaction, fully participative yet detached from the "where do causes arrive from and where they are going to "(detached from the thought of some result, "the what am I going to get out of its"). Action arises and subsides, so do thoughts. Surf don't fight the current!! LOL
As far as, a bodhisattva denying the ultimate enlightenment, whatever that is, and staying to help others become enlightened, reminds me of the mind games of the Catholic authority regime. It isn't a choice. Living the EFP will result in one commiting actions of a Bodhisattva without the observer's registering the events to stored knowledge, thereby, silencing the moment of registering images to memory, an action which psychologically is itself the movement of time.
But that's IMO!! LOL
Ayya Khema's book " Being Nobody, Going Nowhere ", was very informative.
I like her analogy of the Eight Fold Path as a sort of "superhighway" that isn't mystical at all, attainable by anyone.
It is just brilliant....
Because I happen to know this forum is just bubbling with Boddhisattvas....
That's my opinion, but I know it to be True.
I was reminded of the words of Queen Elizabeth, the consort of King George VI (later called the Queen Mother) during the Blitz. She was asked whether the princesses (Elizabeth and Margaret) would be going to safety in Canada. She replied:
"They will not go without me. I shall not go without the King and the King is not going."
It was just before the Feast of the Ascension, I recall, and I got into trouble with my parish priest by asking him this:
Jesus may have left us to carry on the work but do you really think that he would go without us? Isn't that the meaning of "sending the Spirit" and "I shall be with you even to the ending of the worlds"?
In Jewish myth, there is the story of the Just, whose tears persuade the Almighty not to destroy the sinful world, but they don't know that this is the reason they suffer the pain of those around them. In the same way, the world may be turned, again and again, from ignorance to compassion by mahatmas who may not even know what they are, consciously.
After all, do you know who you are? Is not part of what we learn from our long practice that we have ever more to learn about ourselves, others and the world of samsara?
Additionally, I have come to realise that we, in the West, with our culture of 'rugged' individualism, have lost the understanding that spiritual learning is a process: like the song in The Sound of Music: we start with A-B-C. Until we have learned to read, we cannot read. Until we have learned what is there to be learned, we cannot understand it. No point in trying to crack quadratic equations if we only know addition.
Just because we live in a post-Enlightenment Pelagiansim does not invalidate the centuries of research and study by our predecessors on the Path. If I do not understand (and I don't), the lack lies in me, not in the teaching.
My doctor said something one day that was amazingly helpful to me. We were talking about "not Self" and my confusion surrounding it and he said "Think of yourself as a process." And now not a day goes by when I don't think about that.
A lot of your stories are very interesting. Not all, mind you
How is it that someone with a strong Jewish sense of self is Catholic?
-bf
Palzang
I'm Jewish enough to go to the gas chamber but not to the synagogue, Catholic enough to be excommunicate. I have absolutely no sense of whom am I. Non-self seems entirely obvious to me.
But... maybe this is so to allow you reach enlightenment sooner.
Or maybe not.
-bf
'...The kindest Kwan Yin is found in hell, or the bar, or the supermarket checkout or next to you on your bus journey. If being a prostitute would awaken others, a Bodhisattva would be a prostitute. .."
I wonder if this is where the saying "hooker with a heart of gold" comes from?
:rolleyes:
I look Nordic, was raised in a neighborhood with all Jewish concentration camp victims, and my parents were Catholic. I once asked a Syrian Arab friend of mine what culture I appear to have been from. He said, “You seem Jewish to me!”
It happens.
I like your electrified hair. Since you are a wonderful artist, keep it!
Half (of the Holy Life)
Translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu
I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was living among the Sakyans. Now there is a Sakyan town named Sakkara. There Ven. Ananda went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to the Blessed One, sat to one side. As he was sitting there, Ven. Ananda said to the Blessed One, "This is half of the holy life, lord: admirable friendship, admirable companionship, admirable camaraderie."1
"Don't say that, Ananda. Don't say that. Admirable friendship, admirable companionship, admirable camaraderie is actually the whole of the holy life. When a monk has admirable people as friends, companions, & comrades, he can be expected to develop & pursue the noble eightfold path.
"And how does a monk who has admirable people as friends, companions, & comrades, develop & pursue the noble eightfold path? There is the case where a monk develops right view dependent on seclusion, dependent on dispassion, dependent on cessation, resulting in relinquishment. He develops right resolve ... right speech ... right action ... right livelihood ... right effort ... right mindfulness ... right concentration dependent on seclusion, dependent on dispassion, dependent on cessation, resulting in relinquishment. This is how a monk who has admirable people as friends, companions, & colleagues, develops & pursues the noble eightfold path.
"And through this line of reasoning one may know how admirable friendship, admirable companionship, admirable camaraderie is actually the whole of the holy life: It is in dependence on me as an admirable friend that beings subject to birth have gained release from birth, that beings subject to aging have gained release from aging, that beings subject to death have gained release from death, that beings subject to sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair have gained release from sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair. It is through this line of reasoning that one may know how admirable friendship, admirable companionship, admirable camaraderie is actually the whole of the holy life."
My wife is a humble Japanese girl, who never ceases to surprise me with her Buddhist wisdom. I asked her this same question once, and her reasoning is that a Buddha, Bodhisattva, whomever would not have made it as far as they did without the help of others along the way. This can come in the form of compassion, wisdom, or even an enemy.
With that said, I imagine a person like a Bodhisattva, realizing all those have helped them along the way, would simply want to return the favor in a sense and help others as well.
The act of intentionally forgoing Nirvana seems a little contrived when you hear the academic interpretation of it, but when one ponders the simple act of helping to spread kindness, just as others were kind to you, doesn't sound so hokey.
Palzang
True, true. I don't think ol' Siddhartha was trying to gain enlightenment to win the latest reality TV show (they did have reality TV back then, didn't they?). He was motivated by a deep sense of compassion and need to help others, including himself. When he was afraid to teach the Dharma, he did it anyways to help all beings.
I don't think it's wrong to want to attain enlightenment for yourself. One must practice compassion for all beings, including one's self. One has to learn to be ok with one's selfish side, though not be attached or ruled by it. Our own fragility is a reason for being compassionate towards one's self. But, I think I you're right that as one advances along, the compassion extends not just to one self, but to people around you, and maybe after a while to everyone you. After that, perhaps all beings.
Palzang
There are other instances, also, in which the Buddha-to-be (the Bodhisattva) is not born in the usual way. In the Pali canon, the Bodhisattva is described as descending from Tusita entering the womb of his mother, appearing in "an unlimited and glorious radiance" (M.iii.120). The descriptions of the Bodhisattva are generally those of a luminescent being with a body made of mind (manomâyen rupena) (Mhv. ii.18-21).
Love ya'll
Bobby
Palzang
Shantideva bodhisattva was considered not only ordinary, but lazy & stupid, by his fellow bhikshus back in the 8th century. When he wrote his Guide for Bodhisattvas, it would not make much sense to write it for Manjushri or Samantabhadra or the others in the Arya Sangha. But aspiring and new physical bodhisattvas certainly have valued it over the last 1200 years.
Palzang
Sounds great .. I'll take one !
The Bodisattva is here and now. It's you and me.
Good Day ...
First time I read it I couldn't stop crying...don't ask me why...I still don;t know.
http://www.sanghatoday.org/