how common are arahants?

TheJourney

do you guys think. Is it a thing where there may not even be any in the world, where there's maybe a handful, where any given buddhist you meet theres the chance that they may be an arahant or what?

Jeffrey

What does an arahant mean to you? You could look it up. And think to yourself how many people you know have realized that. Look up what an arahant is defined as.

If I recall correctly it means they have no afflictions. But what exactly does that mean. I mean if they drop a hammer on their foot what happens?

Good question in the sense that it provokes thought, though I am not sure it will bring me closer to being an arhant

TheJourney

Jeffrey wrote: »

What does an arahant mean to you? You could look it up. And think to yourself how many people you know have realized that. Look up what an arahant is defined as.

If I recall correctly it means they have no afflictions. But what exactly does that mean. I mean if they drop a hammer on their foot what happens?

Good question in the sense that it provokes thought, though I am not sure it will bring me closer to being an arhant

It means, to my knowledge, an enlightened one. I'd like to think that there are more than people think, as it gives me more faith in humanity as well as hope

GuyC

My guess is that any Arahants alive today would be in robes. Even in the Buddha's time it was very rare for a lay person to achieve Arahantship (and when they did it seems that if they did not ordain within a few days they would pari-nibbana). There were many Stream-Enterers though in the Buddha's time. I suspect there may still be many Stream-Enterers today, both monastics and lay people.

I would like to believe that Arahantship is achievable in this lifetime for most (if not all) of us if we really are diligent in our practice.

This is based on absolutely no solid evidence whatsoever, just a hunch.

GuyC

TheJourney wrote: »

It means, to my knowledge, an enlightened one.

In Pali I believe the term Arahant translates as "Worthy One" in English.

I'd like to think that there are more than people think, as it gives me more faith in humanity as well as hope

Me too.

son_of_dhamma

In the Pali Canon and the Buddha's tradition, there are four stages to Enlightenment (not Bodhisatta path of a Buddha); stream-entry (few lives left), once-returning (one more earth-life next), non-returning, and Arahantship. There should be quite a substantial number of Arahants in our world. Most full-life monks become non-returners (meaning that there are reborn into the Suddhavasa planes, or Pure Abodes, where they live for many world-cycles until passing away into Parinibbana), but still a great number of these higher monks must be attaining Enlightenment here, or Arahantship.
Helpful?

Wednesday

I think there are arahants. Dont know how many or how common. Plus there are many levels of arahants so they have to be out there.

compassionate_warrior

There was a thread very similar to this recently, asking Have There Been Any Enlightened Beings in Modern Times?

I don't think arhants today would be wearing robes, necessarily. They can come in any form, any ethnicity, any socio-economic background. They're people who devote themselves to alleviating suffering in a variety of ways, a variety of professions. They can be disguised as very humble people of low-caste (just to see if we're awake and paying attention), as doctors or nurses, as entertainers who use their fortune to bring about positive social change, teachers, even laborers who are inspired to reach out to others as part of their job, or who devote their free time to working with youth-at-risk, or to tutor underprivileged kids, or whatever. They're everywhere, if you start looking with an unbiased eye.

Vangelis

A Buddhist monk here in Australia once talked about this in one of his dhamma talks during a meditation retreat. He asked if there were any Arahants alive today. He made the statement that of course there were and if he didn't think there were any, the Buddhist path would not be worth following. He didn't go into how many there were but when I spoke with him privately later, he told me that he knew of 3 stream enterers in Australia (all monks of course). That's it - 3. As for fully awakened Arahants, clearly the implication was that they ddin't exist in Australia. I would think that you would have to go deep into Thailand or Burma and maybe Sri Lanka to find Arahants. And even then, I don't think you would find too many. After all, it's not a trivial task.

skydancer

Yes, I think there are living Buddhist saints or arhats in the world today. I feel as though I have met a few.

Tulku Sang Ngag Rinpoche and Adzom Rinpoche come to mind.

Dazzle

I don't think arahants go around declaring themselves - and I think loyal students always like to think their own teachers are exceptional.

I'm sure there might be a few though- but I doubt we'll find them on the internet!

Nidish

Arahants are not arahats if they declare it... So the question would be whether Arahsnship is plausible or not.... For which the answer is yes.. So we can understand that this is the correct path.. So why care about examples????? Just follow the Dhamma...

fabianfred

...very rare actually..... but the Buddha said that as long as there were those who practiced the Four Foundations of Mindfulness (Vipassana) there would be Sotapannas....and thence within no more than seven lives Arahants.

"O bhikkhus, should any person maintain the Four Arousings of Mindfulness in this manner for seven years, then by him one of two fruitions is proper to be expected: Knowledge (arahantship) here and now; or, if some form of clinging is yet present, the state of non-returning (the Third Stage of Supramundane Fulfillment).

"O bhikkhus, let alone seven years. Should a person maintain these Four Arousings of Mindfulness, in this manner, for six years... for five years... four years... three years... two years... one year, then by him one of two fruitions is proper to be expected: knowledge here and now; or, if some form of clinging is yet present, the state of non-returning.

"O bhikkhus, let alone a year. Should any person maintain these Four Arousings of Mindfulness, in the manner, for seven months, then by him one of two fruitions is proper to be expected: Knowledge here and now; or, if some form of clinging is yet present, the state of non-returning.

"O bhikkhus, let alone seven months. Should any person maintain these Four Arousings of Mindfulness in this manner for six months... five months... four months... three months... two months... one month... half-a-month, then, by him one of two fruitions is proper to be expected: Knowledge here and now; or, if some form of clinging is yet present, the state of non-returning.

"O bhikkhus, let alone half-a-month. Should any person maintain these Four Arousings of Mindfulness in this manner for a week, then by him one of two fruitions is proper to be expected: Knowledge here and now; or, if some form of clinging is yet present, the state of non-returning.

"Because of this was it said: 'This is the only way, O bhikkhus, for the purification of beings, for the overcoming of sorrow and lamentation, for the destruction of suffering and grief, for reaching the right path, for the attainment of Nibbana, namely, the Four Arousings of Mindfulness." - MN 10

aim for stream-entry ....and Arahant will come later

Jeffrey

Its not necessary for arhats to declare themselves. But remember the buddha was recognized as awake. Curious.

Ch-an_noob

Arhants = worthy of offering

Arhants have not reached enlightenment. They managed to escape the cycle of birth and death and entered a lower level of Nirvana. Only Buddhas are enlightened.

Vincenzi

arhant = silent buddha

...honestly, more interested about samyak buddham

Cloud

Ch'an_noob, I hate to disagree. The Buddha stated the the Arahants had reached the same liberation as himself, and this is what is called enlightenment. The difference between him and them is that they depended upon his teachings to reach that place of full release; he didn't. He is the teacher, they the students (even if you have another teacher, even from another tradition, it was the Buddha who started all of this). This is the theme of his teachings, the complete and utter cessation of all craving, defilements, and thusly dukkha; he held nothing back, devising the means of all reaching equally the liberation he had found.

There is no higher level of Nirvana than Arahant (and Nirvana isn't a level but rather non-clinging, non-duality, the opposite of everything "worldly", "above the world"); the Buddha was an Arahant, but also the Buddha, the Tathagata, the one who discovered the path and expounded it that others would arrive at the same destination. An Arahant is the same as the Mahayana definition of a Buddha; one who has reached full liberation. This is because other than the fact there is a historical Buddha, this Buddha-Nature is the same for all humans... all who find this, stay with this 'one who knows', rise above the eight worldly dhammas and are untouched by the winds of change; by birth and death.

Not sure where you got the idea the Arahants and Buddhas are on a different "level" of Nirvana, but any tradition, even Ch'an/Zen, leads to this if taken to the end (this depends upon personal effort). It's all the same flavor, just served up in different ways.

upalabhava

Mahayana in general and Tibetan Buddhism in particular posit arhatship as on the way to Buddhahood. Arhats are not Buddhas in the Tibetan. Arhats have liberated themselves from samsara by a true stopping of the emotional obscurations, but their work is not done yet in the Mahayana systems. They can either remain in bliss in one of the pure realms, or they can become Bodhisattvas on the path to Buddhahood. Achieving Buddhahood both obscurations (emotional and cognitive) are truly and forever stopped.

http://bit.ly/hgi3Tp

Many mistakes can be made when you talk about Buddhism as if it was some coherent totality; it isn't. There are many schools differing on many topics including the most basic: Buddhahood, Nirvana, Arhat, etc.

Vangelis

Many mistakes can be made when you talk about Buddhism as if it was some coherent totality; it isn't. There are many schools differing on many topics including the most basic: Buddhahood, Nirvana, Arhat, etc.

True. Since the ancient Pali texts don't have anything of this type of "Buddhism" it is easy for a Theravada Buddhist to misunderstand. I don't know enough about the other "Buddhisms" to comment but from a Theravada point of view "in the great ocean there is but one taste — the taste of salt". Different levels of nibbana? Not in the Pali canon.

Ch-an_noob

Mahayana in general and Tibetan Buddhism in particular posit arhatship as on the way to Buddhahood. Arhats are not Buddhas in the Tibetan. Arhats have liberated themselves from samsara by a true stopping of the emotional obscurations, but their work is not done yet in the Mahayana systems. They can either remain in bliss in one of the pure realms, or they can become Bodhisattvas on the path to Buddhahood. Achieving Buddhahood both obscurations (emotional and cognitive) are truly and forever stopped.

^seconded

Ch-an_noob

*oops, delete please, kind of double posted*

newtech

Hello:

No idea,
But i heared from certain monks that Sotapannas and Sakadagamis are something they have seeing many times, even in laypeople, while Anagamis and Arahants are extremely weird cases..and i doubt if they have seeing Arahants

Joshua

Here's an elabouration on what Upala was explaining from the Berzin Archives:

So, as a liberated being, as an arhat, first of all there are two types. We're not talking here about the shravaka and pratyekabuddha types, so let's discount that for our consideration. But within arhats, there are two types. There's an arhat who becomes a liberated being or is aiming to become a liberated being and after becoming a liberated being, only then eventually develops bodhichitta and goes on to continue on the bodhisattva path.That's one type. Then there are those arhats, they're called "arhats with definite lineage," which means that way before becoming an arhat, they developed bodhichitta and they were aiming to become a Buddha and they achieved arhatship on the way to Buddhahood.

So if we look first at these – the first type, let's call them Hinayana-type arhats, after they die, then their mental continuum continues in a pure realm. And those who are of a definite lineage can continue either in a pure realm or they can manifest in our ordinary planes of existence.

Now, they have overcome samsaric existence, uncontrollably recurring rebirth – both. This word "uncontrollable," that doesn't apply in the opposite: that one can control it. So it's not the best choice of words. That word "control" is referring to the word "power." So it's rebirth under the power of disturbing emotions and karma. So, when one becomes a liberated being one no longer will have what's called "obtainer aggregates" – aggregates that have been obtained through the power of disturbing emotions and karma. This is referring to after they die – through the mechanism of the twelve links of dependent arising. But they will continue to have aggregates, body and mind, but not obtained from karmic disturbing emotions and so they won't be mixed with karma and disturbing emotions.

The body of an arhat will be made of subtle elements. "Elements" from the Buddhist point of view are earth, water, fire, and winds. So solid, liquid, gas and energy. These subtle elements in a pure realm will be something which is visible to the eyes of other arhats and to their own eyes, but won't be visible to us ordinary humans, for example. So, another name for this type of elements, this type of body, is called a "mental body." But not like in a dream or something like that. It's more similar to the type of body that beings on the plane of ethereal forms, the so-called “form realm” have. And then they would stay like that in a pure realm and there's no – it's not as though they were born there, they sort of appear there – and they would have no sickness, old age or death. Life can go on forever. In fact the continuum goes on forever. So they can either just stay there in what's called "the extreme of complacency," continuing to meditate on voidness – to meditate, etc. Or they can develop bodhichitta there and continue in a pure realm studying and practicing Mahayana, or manifest in our ordinary realms.

But for us following the lam-rim, the graded stages of Mahayana path, we don't want to hang out in a pure land. Now of course there are practices that we find in tantra for transference of consciousness to a pure land and so on. Because, as a bodhisattva, in a pure land, we have no distractions and so you – it's not that you hang out and have a good time in a pure land, but you spend twenty-four hours a day, forever, practicing, studying and practicing, in a pure land. This is bodhisattva. So we can either do that as an arhat, as a bodhisattva arhat, or one can manifest in this world and continue to try to help others. And of course there are... perhaps I suppose it's a personal disposition or temperament. You want to do intensive type of practice in a pure land or are you really more drawn to actually trying to help people as much as possible at our levels.

Cloud

Mu.

fabianfred

According to the Vissudimagga there are six types of Arahant...and they have all reached final freedom from rebirth in Samsara....continuing to exist in some way unknowable to those who have not yet achieved Arahant and passed on to Parinibbana.
To Theravadins the Mahayana concept that Arahants have achieved a lesser kind of freedom is objectionable....and just them trying to justify their own existence.
They do not hang out in any land....or state which we can know until we reach their state too.
It is not possible for one who has reached one of the four holy states to make the wish to become a future Buddha since the long journey perfecting himself requires a Boddhisattva to stay in Samsara and eventually reach enlightenment as a Buddha...whereas the lowest of the four will reach Arahant and enlightenment within no more than seven lives.