- This topic has 8 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 2 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
-
Greetings! @TripleGemStudent,
It’s mentioned that any lay person who attained Arahanthood must ordain as a bhikkhu within 7 days.
The below text is in a book:
In the fifth year after Enlightenment, when the Buddha was residing in the (kutagara) Pinnacle Hall near Vesali, he heard that king Suddhodana was nearing death. He went to the death chamber and delivered a sermon. Having listened to it the king attained Arahantship. As he was too old, he did not join the order but enjoyed the bliss of Emancipation for seven days and passed away, (if a person attains the final stage of Sainthood that person cannot remain a lay person but either pass away or join the order).
This maybe the text which gives the idea that any lay person who attained Arahanthood must ordain as a bhikkhu within 7 days.
With mettā, Seng Kiat
-
Yes. Waharaka Thero has explained it the following way:
A householder or a layperson cannot bear “the Arahanthood.” One must become a bhikkhu and wear the yellow robe within 7 days of attaining Arahanthood.
– The following is an analogy: A heated heater coil will be fine as long as it is submerged in water. If that heater coil is taken out of the water, it will burn.
-
Thank you SengKiat and Lal,
Just wondering what book is SengKiat quoting from?
The reason for asking what I did is because I’m coming across “Youtubers” claiming that they have attained Arahanthood when according to the Buddha Dhamma that I have come to understand/know, they clearly have not.
I was thinking that it would be a compassionate thing for me to at least attempt one time to try to get them to really question themselves if they really have attained Arahanthood. To me, it’s never too late for one to admit their mistakes and possibly walk on the noble 8 fold path in the future.
But after observing the P.S. of these people, I feel they might have gone too deep into their delusions or the anatta nature. Even though I haven’t attempted to reach out to these people yet, but for some reason I feel that no matter what I say or try to tell them, it won’t reach them. If I’m not careful, they might even end up hating me. Instead of trying to do good, I end up doing harm . . . One of these teachers says/teaches Nibbana is Sansara . . .
The worse part is these people also have followers. I was planning on warning them, but after seeing their comments praising these claimed Arahants. If I did such a thing, they might end up hating me as well.
In mundane terms, it’s sad to see such things happening while feeling anatta (helpless) to do anything for these people, besides metta bhavana.
In supramundane terms, to me this seems like an example of the meaning of Dhamma. What one must bear. Seems like the way it is. . .
From what I have understood so far, the most practical thing that I can do for others is to contemplate on the Dhamma and do metta bhavana.
with Metta, Theruwan Saranai.
-
Greetings! @TripleGemStudent,
Just wondering what book is SengKiat quoting from?
The book’s title is Guide to the study of Theravada Buddhism – Book 2 on page 38.
With mettā, Seng Kiat
-
-
-
Buddha didn’t say what he WANTED TO SAY.
He said what was. He used what is termed as “scientific method”. Except he had unfathomable microscope (most powerful mind) to observe evrything he talked about. He also, never usually talked about something he could see, but noone else could.He analysed what was out there.
Explained to us how it is, as it is.There is no arguments about what buddha said more than there is arguments on boiling temperature of water.
-
It is good to look for “deeper explanations.” So, I am not trying to discourage such questions as the one from Jorg.
– But in some cases, there are no such explanations, like the one I mentioned above for 17 cittas in a citta vithi.
– Of course, I could be wrong in this particular case. If there is such an explanation, I would like to know too. If I come across one, I will post it.
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.