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 is enlightenment considered incompatible with lay life?
I am curious to understand, why is it said that those who see the way can no longer remain as Arahant householders?
0
Comments
Welcome btw
Thanks
Jeff:
You know, I'm trying to find the pages again. Wanted to put the link in the original thread. I was browsing a bunch of stuff last night and now I can't seem to find it again.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theravada
Here is the extract:
<i><b>Lay devotee</b>
... It is also possible for a lay disciple to become enlightened. As Bhikkhu Bodhi notes, "The Suttas and commentaries do record a few cases of lay disciples attaining the final goal of Nirvana. However, such disciples either attain Arahantship on the brink of death or enter the monastic order soon after their attainment. They do not continue to dwell at home as Arahant householders, for dwelling at home is incompatible with the state of one who has severed all craving."</i>
It is ascribed to this publication:
Bhikkhu Bodhi, In the Buddha's Words, Wisdom Publications 2005; page 376
It is possible to live the life of a lay person even if Fully Awakened though I understand Full Awakening is relatively rare.
That attitude did change a bit by the time Buddhism hit China, I think. There's plenty of stories about lay people being enlightened.
For myself, I've always thought insisting one can only follow the path of Enlightenment by shutting oneself up behind walls to eliminate distractions is like teaching someone how not to drown by telling them to stay out of the water. Learn to swim, instead.
Besides, some years ago in my own practice I realized there is no difference between being a monk and being a husband, father, and wage slave. None at all. I was contemplating the saying, "The dung in the fields and the Buddhas in the temple are equal" when it hit me.
It's not what's around you that is the problem. It's not your occupation, your family, or your busy life. People's attachments are inside their head, no matter where they go or what they do. If you move someone to a temple, their selfish desires and muddled thinking go with them. They become just as attached to their Teacher, their temple and teachings as a lay person does to their family and life.
So some schools of Buddhism came to see that lay people had just as much chance of enlightenment as monks. It is a teaching that makes sense, to me.
That does seem more sensible, and does help to put things in context, particularly in terms of a development timeline.
Concurrently, over the course of today, thinking about it has made me realise that there are some things that have to be taken as 'normal' in secular life which would not be an issue in monastic life - ie: celibacy (particularly if there is a spouse who's not fully sold on the celibacy side of things!) and other worldly things - ie: I've been invited to a friend's pre-nuptial celebration at which the theme will be alcohol and glamorous makeup... both things I will have to find a tactful way to opt out of without ruffling some feathers....
Thanks for the response
Buddhism is about true liberation, it is real, not some kind of fairy tales.
There is a difference.
I didn't mean there is no possibility of attachment in monastic life. I'm just saying it's easier as a lay person. You usually have more responsibilities towards others. Your partner, your children, your boss....You are also surrounded by people who might not understand your path (as opposed to monks that live with other monks with similar aspirations) and it probably makes it more difficult.
I was talking about getting to enlightenment. Not after being enlightened.
Didn't know there was a difference.
this quote is from dhammawiki and seem to indicate that the Arahant is enlighten so i took their words for it; would you mind to explain what the difference is?
Like I said, the actual differences may be non-existant but from the traditional records and interpretations a division is made between one who has reached nirvana and a/the Buddha.
This is of course interpreted differently in the Mahayana traditions.
Personally, I made the distinct and conscious decision to be a ngakpa because I knew it would be the best path for me as a practitioner.
It has been the right decision for me now and I am 100% confident that it will be into the future as well.
I think this might only be a difference in semantics. Whilst Theravada does view a Buddha and an Arahant differently, I believe it is only in a matter of degrees. The Buddha is firstly self-awakened, has more powers and greater compassion than any other being that awakens after or due to his teachings. However, in terms of awakening to the four noble truths, all Arahants do that, therefore they can also be called enlightened.
Also, more opportunity to get completely sunk into the quotidian. :-) It cuts both ways, but I agree with the consensus opinion here that it certainly is possible and I don't agree with the position that a lay person only can become enlightened at the point of death.
I think it is like they say in the Catholic Church: The priest does more than lay people. Hrm.... on second thought maybe they were talking about something else. :-)
If we teach by rote, this is not being a teacher but robbing a teacher's words of their beauty, spirit; and truth has no meaning but spirit even if the listener will make meaning of it.
Strange ideas there and I disagree. It is said in some texts that the "inner teacher" is always there, if that is the case then there's no escape!
Cheers, WK
I actually would really like to become a nun! But I'm so afraid I wouldn't cut it. They always say you have to be physically and mentally healthy, and I don't even know what that means. What if I have a disease or condition I don't know about, what if I panic? I get really anxious. Plus the food situation...I just think I'd completely panic at having low blood sugar. It doesn't seem fair that you have to do all these harsh things to get that kind of community. Now, if they opened a monastery that had an open kitchen with plenty of healthy food and snacks, I'd join right up.
In many ways, tradition is self. As with ourselves, there are skillful and unskillful courses of action. We depend upon these traditions to ensure transmission of the Buddha's doctrine and discipline. Now that we have such ways of preserving teachings, records, etc. on paper and electronically, perhaps we can have less fear about losing anything to change and can truly take the Buddha's advice.
What we can hope is that more new Buddhist traditions form and that modern concerns are reasonably evaluated and acted/decided upon from the get-go. That would be the most likely solution for solving many problems that stem from clinging.
The organisations runs their large temple branches in heavily populated urban areas catering to people from all walks of life rather than hiding away in secluded areas.
Women and Male monastic can achieve the same ranks and enjoys the same resources.
Book publishing chains and translation centers are run like companies to provide to all languages.
Art and Music are fully supported by the monasteries, which encourages and helps to make exposure for many non-buddhist artists and musicians.
Because of the large financial backings, these organisations are capable of creating large charity and out reach programs to the needy and disaster areas.
Universities are created to probagate non buddhist learn and buddhist learning.
technologies are fully utilised to make it convient for everyone to participate.
The goal is create a pure land for everyone on earth. Enlightenment maybe far away. But peace for everyone may not be...
well, the current sanghas are not that "middle path" friendly... I just need some rice and decent hospitalizations (like with italian nurses; then I just self heal... but in the meantime I need to be. f_ hospitalized. and that means, accepted at the hospital... there should be buddhist hospitals).
or merge the traditions in BodhiDharma. I'm tired of "verbalThinking" buddh'ism, every time...
If the inner teacher is always there, then it doesn't care how much of the brain has gone comatose. If we awaken the entire brain the inner teacher is the same as when less than a twentietrh of the brain is active?
Who enjoys describing stars and sunsets and cherry-blossoms to the born-blind? Someone socially desperate. Enlightenment méans the opposite, a fabulous wealth of friends; including any Buddhas.
And will any ego see this as a friendship, to love a person enough to stop kidding them along?
Who becomes the authority in a nunnery? What is power? How does one get any? Is the authority in a nunnery the most religious person? Or the least? Power is to use the truth as a weapon, a form of manipulation. It means the utmost insincerity.
The religious life is solitude. Meditation with support is not meditation.
A bit optimistic, isn't it? People cling to the familar, due to its familiarity. They are not hungry for truth but for familiarity. They will use the familar truth to refute the rational, the thing that can be directly perceived for oneself.
The conscious collects until it is stuffed, and then resents every new thing presented. The conscious can not itself make anything new of its content, except by making inferior things, things that are diminuations of its content, so discspace is the determining factor.
I wonder if making something more popular isn't always going on, and if it isn't in fact the progress of making it less spiritual.
(Sorry to have a whole lineup of replies here, but my email notification of activity on this thread just arrived.)
I mean there is one enlightened mind, yes. Reality, and its evolution. As opposed to progress, which is divided by its inherent insincerity. I say I want to change the world, elect me this leader, accept me as that savior, but I just want to line my pockets and improve my sex-life. The whole of progress is something as insincere as the image of Hamlet from an actor.
It's should not become the vehicle only for the "sagely" or "intellectuals".
So are you saying the leadership in the monasteries is insincere and mainly after power? If we're going to deny ordination to women because they may abuse their power, shouldn't we do the same for the men? Are you saying that the monastic system is invalid? Please clarify.
I can relate to what you're saying , Cristina. I haven't gone on any retreats because of the food/blood sugar issue. I think you should hold onto your vision, and maybe someday you'll be able to make it happen, somehow. And others will join, because it's a great vision. You sound like you're a person who has high expectations for herself, and so you panic at the thought that you can't live up to them, that something will go wrong. But believe me, reality isn't as exacting as we are of ourselves. (meaning: it's all in our minds!
I'm not in favor of monastic power structures, but I think there needs to be more ordination of women. That would help cut down on the number of sex scandals, I think, plus, diversity is always enriching. I've seen teachings on this site that students of female teachers have presented, and they're really interesting.
trilaksana. there's nothing to be liberated. nirvAna doesn't even mean liberation, it means cessation.
I don't like spoonfeding, just writting to avoid confussion among others.
I think the monastic system is broken.
I have being an urban buddhist monk, and it has worked.
the sangha is weak. the dharma has being misinterpreted.
either way, I'm preparing for Death by Water.
Yes, ordination of nuns in the Catholic Church has done wonders for reducing the number of sex scandals.
8 consciousness, that's the sense that one must access in between lifetimes. It is not related to the 4 arupa-dhatu's in a strict sense.
It is not what sense to give up, it is what senses NOT to give up.
The catholic church is another religion's problem.
There are some monks that are allowed to marry... I mean...
*2 hand most common italian mudra
I know with who to marry, but I don't want any flashy marriages... civil marriage I guess. But that will not change the fact that my main job is as an urban buddhist monk.
This was a good monk (bodhiSattva level, don't know what part of the stream):
Sounds like you don't have much respect for Tibetan nuns. The potential for abuse of power is no reason not to ordain nuns. If it were, following that logic we'd have to stop ordaining monks, and then nobody would get ordination.
How has it been misinterpreted? And what do you mean by, "What sense not to give up"? You don't sound like you've given up, if you're a monk. Please clarify your points, so we can better understand what you're referring to, and can discuss your ideas.
Huh? Your logic is what exactly? I didn't say nuns should not be ordained. I didn't express any disrespect for them whatsoever. I just happen to feel that women should take ordination out of a desire for liberation for oneself and all sentient beings *not* out of gender politics. Fortunately, the ones that I know have done so with very high aspirations.
Mind's ultimate nature, emptiness endowed with vividness,
I was told is the real Buddha.
Recognizing this should help me
Not to be stuck with thoughts of hierarchy.
Mind's ultimate nature, its emptiness aspect,
I was told is the real Dharma.
Recognizing this should help me
Not to be stuck with thoughts of political correctness.
Mind's ultimate nature, its vivid aspect,
I was told is the real Sangha
Recognizing this should help me
Not to be stuck with thoughts of equal rights.
One cannot disassociate emptiness from vividness.
This inseparability I was told is the Guru.
Recognizing this should help me
Not to be stuck with depending on chauvinist lamas.
This nature of mind has never been stained by duality,
This stainlessness I was told is the deity.
Recognizing this should help me
Not to be stuck with the categories of "gender" or "culture."
This nature of mind is spontaneously present.
That spontaneity I was told is the dakini aspect.
Recognizing this should help me
Not to be stuck with fear of being sued.
—Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche