[ethigSmimbine]

Quote Originally Posted by Yuan View Post
My guess is that most if not all of us here are not enlightened. But I think this forum is helping some people walk or starting on their path to enlightenment. Isn't that what it means to help others reach enlightenment?

Is your teacher enlightened? If not, why is she/he teaching you, helping you to reach your enlightenment?

Why do we have to wait until we are enlightened before we help others? Hi Yuan,

Can I just point out that I was refering to the Mahayana phrase ''liberating /saving all sentient beings" which in my opinion is an unrealistic and entirely different aim for anyone to uphold .

Helping another person in some way, or running/posting in a Buddhist internet forum, or someone being a Dhamma teacher, is a natural outcome of exposure to the Dharma, but is hardly part of an expectation of 'saving all sentient beings.' This isn't something the Buddha told people to do, its a later add-on.

I also pointed out that the Beginners forum isn't really the place for discussions about specific Mahayana teachings.

Thanks I hope this is the right forum to pursue this inquiry a bit further.

First of all, I don't think the Bodhisattva vow is about "saving" anyone. As you are well aware, there is no omnipotent God in Buddhism that can save anyone, and Buddhism doesn't really think anyone need to be "saved." They just need to be "awoken." I am objecting to the word "save" because in English's religious context, "save" has a connotation of salvation, with its implication of "original sin" which is totally incompatible with Buddhism.

Second, it is also commonly understood that in Buddhism, no one can liberate anyone else. People must liberate themselves. So at best, Bodhisattva or Buddhists can only help others toward enlightenment, maybe with words, maybe with actions, maybe with answering questions, maybe with pointing out available resources. Whether you admit it or not, the "Right view" and "Right speech" presented on this forum or by various teachers, are all helping accomplishing this vow.

So if your view is that "helping all sentient beings" reach enlightenment is the goal of one single Bodhisattva and can only be done by one Bodhisattva, then maybe you have a point that it is an unrealistic goal. But this is not the case. It is the vow of all Bodhisattvas and many Buddhists, and with a group effort, the goal might be difficult, but not unrealistic. Many seeming impossible tasks become possible because of collective and focused group efforts, helping all sentient beings is no different.

You are probably right that this is an unrealistic goal in your life time. But for many Buddhists, this vow does not have a time frame.

Maybe you are right that this is not what Buddha personally instructed. I felt that it is immaterial. Why? Because I cannot accept that there are no "advancement" in the teaching and concepts of Buddhism after Buddha, and that this vow does not negate any of Buddha's original teachings. This vow is really about Dāna pāramitā (generosity). Generosity is not just about charity with money, but also about helping others toward enlightenment by been generous about your understanding of Dharma. As I noted in another post, by helping others toward enlightenment, you also help yourself toward enlightenment. What is not to like about doing something that helps both others and self at the same time?

Wiki/ actually has a good entry on Bodhisattva vow:

In the various Bodhisattva vows (sometimes called the Bodhisattva Precepts) of Mahayana Buddhism, the bodhisattvas take a vow stating that they will strive for as long as samsara endures to liberate all sentient beings from samsara and lead them to enlightenment. The Bodhisattva does not seek bodhi (Awakening) solely for him/herself, but chiefly for the sake of freeing all other beings and aiding them into the bliss of Nirvana. Anyway, just my two cents.

[CitsMoise17]

First of all, I don't think the Bodhisattva vow is about "saving" anyone

'Saving all sentient beings" was an expression I heard being used when I was a Tibetan Buddhist practitioner.

I maintain my opinion which I expressed previously. - that the notion of 'saving' or 'liberating all beings' is unrealistic and can give one a false idea that one is on some kind of a mission.

What's the point in having the desire to liberate the rest of the world if we're still deluded ourselves and don't really have any clear idea of what that actually means

As far as plans for other lifetimes are concerned, that to me is just speculative mental proliferation.

I once took the Bodhisattva vow myself a long time ago - and had no real understanding of what it meant (see Berzin archives -there are secondary vows included too) because the ceremony was done in Tibetan and I thought it was something that was necessary, like taking Refuge.

...... and with a group effort, the goal might be difficult, but not unrealistic. Many seeming impossible tasks become possible because of collective and focused group efforts, helping all sentient beings is no different

Sounds too much like Evangelism to me, why not go round in a group ringing peoples door bells too?

Many non-Buddhists help others on a daily basis above and beyond ''the call of duty" of their occupations and don't need to take feel-good vows or have ''beliefs'' in order to do so.

May all beings have peace and happiness.

[pimbertiemoft]

Whenever this question arises, I find it helpful to reflect on the Buddha's words in the Chavalata Sutta (AN 4.95).

Chavalata Sutta: Wood from a Pyre

"Monks, these four kinds of persons are to be found existing in the world. Which four? One who is engaged in promoting neither his own good nor in promoting the good of another; one who is engaged in promoting another's good but not in promoting his own good; one who is engaged in promoting his own good but not in promoting the good of another; and one who is engaged in promoting his own good and also in promoting the good of another.

"Just as, monks, a piece of wood from a pyre, burnt at both ends and in the middle fouled with dung, serves neither for fuel in the village nor for timber in the forest, so in the same way, monks, is such a person, I say, who is engaged in promoting neither his own good nor in promoting the good of another.

"Monks, there is the person who is engaged in promoting the good of another but not in promoting his own good. Of these two individuals the latter is superior. Monks, there is the person who is engaged in promoting his own good but not in promoting the good of another. Of these three individuals he is superior. Monks, there is the person who is engaged in promoting his own good and also in promoting another's good. Of these four individuals he is the foremost, the chief, the principal, the best and the supreme.

"Just as, monks, from a cow comes milk; from milk, curd; from curd, butter; from butter, ghee; from ghee, the skimmings of ghee, and that is reckoned the best; even so, monks, among these four individuals the person who is engaged in promoting his own good and also the good of another is the foremost, the chief, the principal, the best and the supreme. Monks, these are the four individuals who are to be found existing in the world."

(emphasis mine)

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipit....095.budd.html Here the Buddha suggests the best course of action is to strive for one's own development without neglecting the betterment of others. The two can be done simultaneously. Applying this advice to Mahayana practice, the Bodhisattva path need not be one of "saving" others with efforts that could otherwise be channeled into one's own practice, but rather of helping them along the way, as a good kalyanamitta would do.

[Buyingtime]

In "The Sound of Silence" Ajahn Sumedho wisely observes :



The refuge is in Buddha, not in these yanas. The Buddha knows that every thought is changing and not-self. So trust in that, in the simplicity of that. Because if you don't, then its going to arouse your old compulsive habits of thinking : " I've got to do more. I've got to develop this. I've got to become a bodhisattva. I've got to get the higher practice going." And on and on like that.

When you're caught in the conventional realm and that's all you know, you're easily intimidated and blinded by all the dazzling positions and attitudes and ideas that people throw at you.

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=T...umedho&f=false

(bold font is my own emphasis)

[flowersnewaho]

Whenever this question arises, I find it helpful to reflect on the Buddha's words in the Chavalata Sutta (AN 4.95).



Here the Buddha suggests the best course of action is to strive for one's own development without neglecting the betterment of others. The two can be done simultaneously. Applying this advice to Mahayana practice, the Bodhisattva path need not be one of "saving" others with efforts that could otherwise be channeled into one's own practice, but rather of helping them along the way, as a good kalyanamitta would do.

My instruction and how I continue to understand the vow is less emphasis on the saving others aspect and more on the need for committed diligence to practice.

[Gremlinn]

First of all, I don't think the Bodhisattva vow is about "saving" anyone.

The idea of 'saving' is fundamental to the idea of the Bodhisattva.

And now as long as space endures,
As long as there are beings to be found,
May I continue likewise to remain
To drive away the sorrows of the world

The Way of The Bodhisattva 10:55 by Shantideva.

As you are well aware, there is no omnipotent God in Buddhism that can save anyone You can 'save' yourself.

and Buddhism doesn't really think anyone need to be "saved." They just need to be "awoken." Awoken, saved, enlightened, encouraged, helped ...

I am objecting to the word "save" because in English's religious context, "save" has a connotation of salvation, with its implication of "original sin" which is totally incompatible with Buddhism. Perhaps that is something you need to deal with.

The point you miss is 'motivation'. The motivation for a Bodhisattva is that others need to some assistance towards enlightenment and to that end Bodhisattvas elect to remain in samsara to further than end.

Second, there are 16 Bodhisattva vows within the Tibetan Tradition and 46 secondary vows - none of which could be associated with the word 'evangelism'.

Please don't fall for the American version of Buddhism.

[neerewed]

Please don't fall for the American version of Buddhism

I am not American and have never been to America.

[jhkjurter]

A sense of mission is not necessarily a bad thing. Buddhism encourages chanda, usually translated as "zeal" or "wholesome desire".

In Buddhism, this desire for true well-being is called dhammachanda (desire for that which is right), kusalachanda (desire for that which is skillful), or in short, chanda.

The objective of chanda is dhamma or kusaladhamma, truth and goodness. Truth and goodness must be obtained through effort, and so chanda leads to action, as opposed to tanha, which leads to seeking. Chanda arises from intelligent reflection (yoniso-manasikara), as opposed to tanha, which is part of the habitual stream of ignorant reactions.

However, zeal can turn into zealotry or fanaticism, so there is room for caution:

Zeal (chanda) is a feeling of great energy and enthusiasm. It can be activated by several things – a sense of certainty as a result of studying and practising the Dhamma, by being inspired by a particularly virtuous or wise person, by experiencing the benefits of meditation, even by contemplating the inevitability of death. The Buddha says that the value of zeal is that it animates the will and gives us energy, confidence and determination (M.II,175). However, if not held in check, zeal can deteriorate into agitation, the mistaken belief that anything can be achieved by sheer will-power, and even fanaticism. We should, the Buddha said, use our energy the way we would catch a quail. If we were to grasp the quail too tight, we might squeeze it to death. If we did not hold it tight enough, it might fly through our fingers (M.III,159). There needs to be a balance between zeal on the one hand and patience, relaxation and mental calm on the other.

It might be worth considering this distinction when considering how the Bodhisattva Vows can be applied in practice. If we are not enlightened ourselves, there is always the risk of slipping into egotism or fantasy, at which point we have exchanged chanda for tanha. To avoid this problem, we can use the paramitas as a reference, and more generally ask ourselves if our actions and thoughts are kusala (wholesome) or akusala (unwholesome). Perhaps for some it could be useful to think of Guan Yin or Manjushri and the values they symbolize. How would they advise us in a given situation?

[RicardoHun]

Perhaps for some it could be useful to think of Guan Yin or Manjushri and the values they symbolize. How would they advise us in a given situation?

How would imaginary beings be able to advise me in a given situation ?

Umm......no thanks, I'd rather think of Buddha in this 'given situation'.... that is if I absolutely had to ''think'' about anything else at all !

[Kliopeion]

On a somewhat different note (hence the separate post), my understanding is that the bodhisattva aspiration is interconnected with the cultivation of prajnaparamita. It's the attainment of prajna -- the insight into emptiness -- which makes the vows realizable. Otherwise, as Aloka mentioned above, they appear to be unrealistic or even impossible.

Red Pine, in his book on the Heart Sutra, discusses this at some length.

The liberation of all beings revolves around the liberation of bodhisattvas from the concept of being. Only when bodhisattvas find no beings to liberate are they ready to complete the bodhisattva's path to buddhahood. And later:

The only qualification to walk (the bodhisattva path) is the twofold vow to attain enlightenment and liberate all beings. Of course, no one would or could make such a vow if they did not practice the Prajnaparamita. For without the Prajnaparamita, the vow is simply too overwhelming to attempt, much less fulfill. But once it is seen in the light of the Prajnaparamita, this vow is open to all, regardless of their capability or preferred form of practice. This is because the limiting categories of time and space disappear. Though it takes countless aeons to liberate all beings, the bodhisattva asks 'What aeons? What beings? What liberation?"

[WeestDype]

How would imaginary beings be able to advise me in a given situation ?

Umm......no thanks, I'd rather think of Buddha in this 'given situation'.... that is if I absolutely had to ''think'' about anything else at all !

They can be regarded as paradigms or archetypes, rather than "imaginary beings".

[Hrennilasi]

To understand the true nature of everything one needs pure motivation and the regular practice of meditation.

Reading books and talking intellectual blib-blab won't get one very far, one needs to relax and let go...

Just my own opinion, of course !

[zlopikanikanz]

My motivation for originating this post was simple. I found that many Mahayana (specifically Chinese) Buddhism concepts and ideals that I (and many other Mahayana Buddhists) have take for granted are considered to be 'incorrect' or 'irrelevant' by some other Buddhists. So I want to see if I can develop these concepts from the basic teachings of Buddhism and find a rationale for them, without relying on specific quotes from Buddhist Texts as an authority, and present them to the opposition so that I can see if my line of thoughts has any merit.

So I thank everyone who have responded. Some responses to specific points raised.

Sounds too much like Evangelism to me, why not go round in a group ringing peoples door bells too? I was merely addressing the "unrealistic" aspect of the vow and showing how it might be possible. Not suggesting that Buddhists should go around converting people.

Many non-Buddhists help others on a daily basis above and beyond ''the call of duty" of their occupations and don't need to take feel-good vows or have ''beliefs'' in order to do so. I don't think (or not aware) that this vow is required, at least not in the Mahayana Chinese Buddhism. And I am not sure where the concept of the "feel-good" vow came from. Not many Buddhists, that I aware of, have actually taken this vow. The ones that did understand the gravity of the vow. My understanding is that this vow came about once a Bodhisattva truly understood the suffering that is samsara, he was overwhelmed by his compassion for all sentient beings and made the vow.

To take this vow means that once you are a step from enlightenment and does not have to come back to samsara, you voluntarily forgo enlightenment so that you can come back to samsara to help others. This vow is not taken lightly. For most Mahayana Buddhists, this does not mean just this life time, but for all subsequent life times. Of course if you do not believe in "rebirth/reincarnation," the gravity of this vow is probably not as serious.

Here the Buddha suggests the best course of action is to strive for one's own development without neglecting the betterment of others. The two can be done simultaneously. Applying this advice to Mahayana practice, the Bodhisattva path need not be one of "saving" others with efforts that could otherwise be channeled into one's own practice, but rather of helping them along the way, as a good kalyanamitta would do. Yes, it is taught that Bodhisattva does things that benefits others and self at the same time, and this is what I was trying to communicate as a rationale for this vow.

To understand the true nature of everything one needs pure motivation and the regular practice of meditation.
Reading books and talking intellectual blib-blab won't get one very far, one needs to relax and let go... Buddhism taught that different people have different dispositions, and might follow different paths toward enlightenment. While I agree that meditation (jhana) is important, it is only one of 6 paramitas and for some of us, there are more to Buddhism than jhana.

I am not trying to convert or convince anyone of my view. I am just striving for the "right view" for myself and the best way that I know how to do that is to present it and let others attack my view. I apology if you think my presentation is "intellectual blib-blab", I just want to know why it might be "intellectual blib-blab."

[fygESytT]

Buddhism taught that different people have different dispositions, and might follow different paths toward enlightenment. While I agree that meditation (jhana) is important, it is only one of 6 paramitas and for some of us, there are more to Buddhism than jhana.

I am not trying to convert or convince anyone of my view. I am just striving for the "right view" for myself and the best way that I know how to do that is to present it and let others attack my view. I apology if you think my presentation is "intellectual blib-blab", I just want to know why it might be "intellectual blib-blab

It is not my intention to 'attack' your personal view, Yuan, or anyone elses. As I mentioned before, I practised Vajrayana offline for a long time and was given various different practises to do, including the practice of meditation (Mahamudra). I am also familiar with the concept of the 6 paramitas as well as that of the Bodhisattva vows and the 10 Bodhisattva levels.

My post mentioning intellectual blib-blab had absolutely nothing to do with your own 'presentation', it was a very light-hearted comment to Lazy-Eye as part of a conversation with him - and my intention was certainly not to stimulate negative reactions in anyone.

I think its a good idea to maybe relax a little and lighten up. Views and opinions aren't solid 'things' they're impermanent like everything else.

Be well and happy - and enjoy your life while you have it.

The sun is shining here this morning.......

[shihoodiacarf]

To take this vow means that once you are a step from enlightenment and does not have to come back to samsara, you voluntarily forgo enlightenment so that you can come back to samsara to help others. This vow is not taken lightly. For most Mahayana Buddhists, this does not mean just this life time, but for all subsequent life times. Of course if you do not believe in "rebirth/reincarnation," the gravity of this vow is probably not as serious.

As I have indicated - there is no vow. One may elect to become a Bodhisattva and once one has elected to become a Bodhisattva there are any number of vows involved. But one does not take a vow to become a Bodhisattva.

[JasminBerkova]

Bodhicitta, or the activity of a Bodhisattva, is very much founded on love. Many people, me included, have had problems when trying to define love - well, at least logically. Bodhicitta is a special kind of love - unlimited love aimed at an unlimited number of beings - may all beings be happy and have the causes of happiness. Notions such as to save or to awaken have to be looked at with regards to this unlimited love. The Bodhisattva vows are taken within the context of this unlimited love for an unlimited number of beings or at least with the aspiration of generating such a love. The Bodhisattva vows are, I think, simply an expression of deep, deep metta.

[altosburg]

It is easier for a mother to understand what is meant by the Bodhisattva Vows. A mother naturally wishes her child all the best in life and actually when that child's life is threatened will do anything in her power to save her child even when she must surely know it is not within her power to do so - and that mother does not stop to review her karmic connections with her child or attachment to him - she does so out of love. Likewise the Bodhisattva will do all in his/her power to save sentient beings even if he/she must surely know it is not within his/her power to do so - he/she does so out of love.