Hmmmm..some very dim recollections here
I think perhaps that one may remove the attachments to self which remove for all intents and purposes suffering but suffering may be still reengaged if one retains a very subtle sense of self. This subtle sense of self being very very difficult to completely remove. Other means being necessary for complete eradicattion of that subtlest sense. But that subtleest sense removal being necessary for complete enlightenment. Arhats being considered in M in many respects to be a not complete enlightenment.
M's generally state that...the sutric path being possible for complete enlightenment but it takes very much longer.
Bodhicitta being considered to be absolutely necessary for the transition from arhat to buddha in that same way of thinking.
Asked what we believe in the initial, I will state that but with qualification.
I am not trolling or just stirring up trouble aiming at M's but I hold not that view. So this is another view but one I have thought about. If only M opinion was desired just disregard this. M is the forum but not stated is that only M's may reply so maybe I am OK to reply. I hold not that vow.
In any event.....a arhat I would assume would consider that the idea of bodhicitta is impossible. If for instance..... one is always rebirthing as human to help human and we are all doing that thing.....what then the result. Would not many then at times due to rebirth and circumstance perhaps forget or be unable to have result of compassion....then if all did that thing.... would not no person be saved from this suffering...all just coming back again and again to help another....all then saved from suffering and not saved do come back to suffering.
Things then eventually just as they are right now..some remembering some missing some attaining things but pretty much the same.
Could a arhat consider that samsara is perhaps a living thing as alive as sentient being within it alive. Thusly being such would samsara as living thing not abhore anything that could or would release from it and not be it....and then perhaps bodhicitta being the best of the best for that thing of enslavement....so they that are close.... would not seek release and devote ultimate energy to it, but instead aim at that other things adhering compassion to a thing that by nature needs no adherance? As result being.....coming back as opposed to leaving. Nice in theory but in the real....as with tulkus and such like as not they decide to pursue other path.
So noone is really saved from suffering. Some overtly suffering some suffering to bring others from suffering but still by constraints of samsara...suffering if nothing else the pain of birth and death. If samsara be living organism with design then that would be means for a end. The end being....that none escape.
So if that is considered ones view would then could a buddha arise from faulted view....a arhat I would suppose would say not. Eventually that may indeed produce buddhahood we could presume but in the interium is it not propogating and furthuring the suffering....I would suppose so.
So a arhat I would suppose would think compassion is naturally present in the real way things are themselves, and no working at, nor coming back, be necessary. Compassion being inherant to existance, if not...how could a first buddha teacher appear. If not present at times not the teaching...how then the first....no a arhat may say....they are always present in the real....as such they will appear, so we need not to work at it in that fashion.
So this in defense of arhats....perhaps they may think or say those things. Others may say or think things of arhats...but can one really say this thing of arhat?
A arhat perhaps then saying in final...bodhicitta being means for eradication of self it being very important to do that thing suchly of compassion and think of compassion in that fashion, but in the end.....it being not necessary in final things nor a compete thing...but means, necessary but still means not end.
Which would have bodhisttava as arhat to arhat in their way of thinking.
Not saying things are this way or that but that people will not intentionally do incomplete or stupid things. They think always in their heart these or those things be necessary...perhaps a arhat may not consider their enlightenment just a partial one.
"This order considers that progress can be achieved more rapidly during a single month of self-transformation through terrifying conditions in rough terrain and in "the abode of harmful forces" than through meditating for a period of three years in towns and monasteries"....Takpo Tashi Namgyal.