why is Vajrayana considered the fastest way to buddhahood?

[TRC]

...Or it maybe more the case, that what you don't see is what you get.

Well, that is certainly true when you get surprise rear-ended in an automobile collision and other places where things not seen really have an impact.

But it's old Buddhism 101, though. If you see Buddha as Buddha then that is what you get. If you see a path as full of hot air, then that is what you get, hot air. If you see it as something else, then you get something else. Depends on your capacity, causes and conditions and motivations. For instance, a balloonist would love a path of pure hot air on command. An ice sculptor, not so much.

Adi

... ah I see, what you fabricate for, is what you get. I'll give it a shot then

[Adi]

Quite frankly, time would be better spent practicing than pissing all over someone else's tradition.

Of course it would. But that is a lesson that has to be learned often over many lifetimes. Few get in just one.

If people get pissed over the triumphalist claims of various teachers, lineages, traditions, well, then......what does that say about anyone's equanimity?

That the eight worldy dharmas are a hard habit to break.

This is, after all, a Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhist board......so it should be clear to everyone where the allegiances lie.

Sure, but that would mean a greater adherence to the TOS and other observances here and right now that's not so much the case. Certain, though: that will change.

Adi

[Adi]

...Or it maybe more the case, that what you don't see is what you get.

Well, that is certainly true when you get surprise rear-ended in an automobile collision and other places where things not seen really have an impact.

But it's old Buddhism 101, though. If you see Buddha as Buddha then that is what you get. If you see a path as full of hot air, then that is what you get, hot air. If you see it as something else, then you get something else. Depends on your capacity, causes and conditions and motivations. For instance, a balloonist would love a path of pure hot air on command. An ice sculptor, not so much.

Adi

... ah I see, what you fabricate for, is what you get. I'll give it a shot then

All dharma is a fabrication. But the crucial difference is that it is not an untrue fabrication. We've spent inconceivable lifetimes building up strong habits and one can say that dharma practice is basically exchanging one habit for another. The old habits promise more suffering, the new one guarantees liberation from suffering. And fortunately there are many kinds and paths, over 84,000 I hear, to suit anyone. So if you don't like Vajrayana that's great. But there is no need to denigrate a path others find suitable.

Adi

[Admin_PC]

Why would the Buddha, the founder of the movement teach such a lowly level of awakening (I.E. the Arahant)? It just defies logic.

FWIW, I think Arahat = 8th stage Bodhisattva (of 10, so pretty high up there).
As far as your question, the Arahat doesn't have all of the powers of the Tathāgata according to the Pali Suttas, so this isn't such a crazy claim.
The Lotus Sutra offers an explanation for this in the parable of the Phantom City if you're really interested in the "why".

[TRC]

FWIW, I think Arahat = 8th stage Bodhisattva

You "think." And that is the crux of the problem. Speculating and making claims about things which cannot be determined. As these claims can never be determined, it is just irresponsible and provocative to make them. It creates disharmony and is divisive.

So speaking of equanimity, where is the equanimity in making specious and unverifiable claims?

[LastLegend]

One life time, according to my understanding, means no longer taking rebirth after this life. Therefore, will become Buddha. It does not necessarily mean become Buddha immediately in this lifetime.

[reddust]

I have a book that goes into Arhat and Bodhisattva/Bodhisatta that compares the systems and attainments. I think I remember reading about the differences of an Arhat and the Bhumis of a Bodhisattva. I think the books by Dutt, but I have to go find it. Would you be interested in the data if I can find it? I won't go look for the quotes if no one really cares.

[TRC]

All dharma is a fabrication. But the crucial difference is that it is not an untrue fabrication.

Perhaps skilful would be a better description.

[TRC]

I have a book that goes into Arhat and Bodhisattva/Bodhisatta that compares the systems and attainments. I think I remember reading about the differences of an Arhat and the Bhumis of a Bodhisattva. I think the books by Dutt, but I have to go find it. Would you be interested in the data if I can find it? I won't go look for the quotes if no one really cares.

Thanks for the offer reddust. Others may find it useful, but these things are not verifiable. They are in reality just sectarian claims, which is all they can ever be.

[Schrödinger’s Yidam]

You'd have a hard time finding a Tibetan Buddhist who identifies as a follower of Yogacara (or Cittamatra).

Actually most Karma Kagyus and Nyingmapas adhere to "empty of other" view, variously called Shentong, Great Madhyamaka, or sometimes Yogacara (but not Cittamatra), depending on who you talk to.

[Admin_PC]

FWIW, I think Arahat = 8th stage Bodhisattva

You "think." And that is the crux of the problem. Speculating and making claims about things which cannot be determined. As these claims can never be determined, it is just irresponsible and provocative to make them. It creates disharmony and is divisive.

Sorry, it's late and I wasn't feeling up to searching sutra references (because apparently commentaries have been ruled out as unacceptable), but since you seem to be losing your cool over it, here it is:

"Thus establishing himself at the eighth stage of No-recession, the Bodhisattva enters into the bliss of the ten Samadhis, but avoiding the path of the disciples and masters who yielded themselves up to their entrancing bliss and who passed to their nirvanas, and supported by his vows and the Transcendental Intelligence which now is his and being sustained by the power of the Buddhas, he enters upon the higher paths that lead to Tathagatahood."

This is where the paths diverge. It's not empty rhetoric as there's an actual training method being described. It's also described in Chapter 26th of the Avatamsaka, known as the Chapter on the Ten Grounds, but I don't have a complete translation to work with. Nagarjuna talks about the equivalency (of Arhats, Pratekyabuddhas, and 8th Bhumi Bodhisattvas) a lot in his commentaries.

So speaking of equanimity, where is the equanimity in making specious and unverifiable claims?

I'm not making unverifiable claims as they're documented in Mahayana sutras, so not quite sure what you're getting at. Sure seems like it's making you upset. I really have to wonder what you're doing on a Mahayana board if standard Mahayana doctrines make you so upset.

[JKhedrup]

Others may find it useful, but these things are not verifiable.

Ultimately, I don't think any scripture in either the Pali or Sanskrit canon is verifiable according to modern methods. None of us were there when the Buddha taught, and there is no one left alive today who was there. So "verifiable" is impossible in all cases. The authenticity of the modern Theravada Pali Canon is also being questioned by several archaeologists and academics.

[Sönam]

This is the attainment of an Arhat, not even that of a first stage bodhisattva. It is completely different.
And no, King Indrabhuti and many other siddhas attained buddhahood merely through receiving empowerments.

Then prove it by providing the Buddha's own words, not your interpretation nor some comy. Anyway, your mind is also made up. You've made claim about Vajrayana being the "fastest" vehicle above all other schools of Buddhism. I'd simply say that you're entitled to your own interpretation and also wish you all the best of luck.

I found you nearly insulting ... and it seems you do not try to understand (kind) answers provided to you. Never Malcolm has made "claim" ... only reporting what's in the scriptures.

And FYI there is not such thing as "Buddha's own words" ...

Sönam

[Punya]

They seem to be having a bad day....

[Malcolm]

Why would the Buddha, the founder of the movement teach such a lowly level of awakening (I.E. the Arahant)?

First of all, Buddha differentiates the bodhi of a buddha and the bodhi of an arhat.

Secondly, Buddha taught according to the needs of the disciples he had in front of him. They compiled a canon. He taught other things to devas, brahmans, kṣatriyas, etc. He even says so himself in the Mainstream sūtras, but he does not state what he taught them.

And Buddha was not the founder of Buddhadharma. Buddhadharma has existed for eons and eons in many different expressions. Sometimes there is a monastic Sangha, sometimes there isn't a monastic Sangha and so on.

Moreover, the Buddha explains in the Lankāvatara sūtra that he is not even the definitive buddha.

In any case, if you want to understand the difference between the bodhi of an Arhat and a Bodhisattva, you should read Maitreya's Abhisamayālaṃkara, which explains the Prajñāpāramitasūtras treatment of the bodhi of arhats and so on.

[Malcolm]

You "think." And that is the crux of the problem. Speculating and making claims about things which cannot be determined. As these claims can never be determined, it is just irresponsible and provocative to make them. It creates disharmony and is divisive.

It all depends on what one accepts as authoritative.

In general, here, we accept Mahāyāna sūtras as authoritative. Therefore, when someone comes along and complains that common ideas found in Mahāyāna are "speculative" and "cannot be determined", when in fact they can by recourse to examining the foundational texts of our tradition, this itself "creates disharmony and is divisive".

In fact, the person disrupting this thread, clearly out of a sense of self-righteous indignation, is none other than you. Your comments are clearly out of place since I was merely responding to a person's question. The claims made in the Mahāyāna and Vajrayāna traditions may enrage you, as they clearly do, but you should go be enraged somewhere where people will be sympathetic to you.. Because certainly, your comments are not welcome here, they add nothing to the conversation.

[Norwegian]

Agreed.

It is mere noise.

[Malcolm]

This is where the paths diverge. It's not empty rhetoric as there's an actual training method being described. It's also described in Chapter 26th of the Avatamsaka, known as the Chapter on the Ten Grounds, but I don't have a complete translation to work with. Nagarjuna talks about the equivalency (of Arhats, Pratekyabuddhas, and 8th Bhumi Bodhisattvas) a lot in his commentaries.

No, this is not right; the paths diverge in the generation of bodhicitta. Arhats do not form the bodhicitta to attain full buddhahood. While there is also a Bodhisattva path in Mainstream Buddhism, which as I mention before, it is not detailed in Mainstream Buddhist sūtras. As Nāgārjuna points out in the Ratnavali:

• Ignorant blind people cannot bear
  this Mahāyāna the Buddha taught;
  the great path of awakening
  that has the nature of merit and wisdom.

[Admin_PC]

This is where the paths diverge. It's not empty rhetoric as there's an actual training method being described. It's also described in Chapter 26th of the Avatamsaka, known as the Chapter on the Ten Grounds, but I don't have a complete translation to work with. Nagarjuna talks about the equivalency (of Arhats, Pratekyabuddhas, and 8th Bhumi Bodhisattvas) a lot in his commentaries.

No, this is not right; the paths diverge in the generation of bodhicitta. Arhats do not form the bodhicitta to attain full buddhahood. While there is also a Bodhisattva path in Mainstream Buddhism, which as I mention before, it is not detailed in Mainstream Buddhist sūtras. As Nāgārjuna points out in the Ratnavali:

• Ignorant blind people cannot bear
  this Mahāyāna the Buddha taught;
  the great path of awakening
  that has the nature of merit and wisdom.

Sorry for providing bad info.
I really should've known better that bodhicitta is the defining point of the path.
Thanks for clearing that up for me.

[JKhedrup]

There is a whole thrust of literature that the Tibetans call ཐེག་ཆེན་ བཀའ་སྒྲུབས་ or "Proving Mahayana as the Buddha's Word". The philosophy is worth looking at for those interested in the basis and defense of Mahayana philosophy. I once had a list of works and passages of this genre but have now lost it, which is a shame.