Although on paper, the teaching of zen or any other direct method supposedly bring up a liberation from samsara and liberation for omniscience, in practice and probably in most cases, we will stuck somewhere for the liberation of omniscience. And that is the one, that differentiate the whole bodhisattva from bhumi and arhat.
Frankly, I do not see why this is orthodox view, because if we can see the whole system, there is a reason why we can stick somewhere for liberation of omniscience.
However, if all practitioners, when they do this direct method, can really liberate as well in omniscience, then we can accept that this ten bhumi and arhat is orthodox view.
By the way, in Theravada, they never accept arhat has lack of omniscience. The reason why arhat doesnt have similar power with Buddha can be something like a taboo subject to be discussed.
So, the arhat here should be seen from Mahayana perspective, where there is a reason for that.
Last edited by DarwidHalim
on Tue Sep 04, 2012 12:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I am not here nor there.
I am not right nor wrong.
I do not exist neither non-exist.
I am not I nor non-I.
I am not in samsara nor nirvana.
To All Buddhas, I bow down for the teaching of emptiness. Thank You!