Three Types of Buddhas
The Anutarra Samma Sambuddha (Sanskrit: Anutarra Samyak Sambuddha) and the Bodisatta Magga or Bodhisattvayana
- Anutarra 無上 = unprecedented, unparalleled, peerless, unsurpassed, supreme.
- Samma / Samyak 正等 or 三藐 = correct, right, complete, perfect, summa
- -sam = prefix meaning with, together, together with; cum, com / con / co
- Buddha 仏 = Awakened one.
- Bodhi 覺 or 菩提 = Awake, illuminated.
- Sambodhi 正等覺 or 三菩提 = Awakening, Enlightenment, Illumination.
My understanding is that the early strata of Suttas would not have teachings for those who wish to be Samma Sambuddhas. That would actually since contradictory, since in that model, the Samma Sambuddhas do not receive Dhamma Instruction. One who receives Dhamma Instruction and thereby attains Stream Entry is, by definition, according to some Savaka, and the Savaka can not be Samma Sambuddhas. That said, the Theravada tradition does include teachings about the Samma Sambuddhas. Also, some Theravada Buddhists believe the Buddha taught a Bosdhisatta Magga for Samma Sambuddhas in the form of the Ten Paramis.
Theravadin sources; suttas, commentaries, and the Jakata Tales, indicate that the Samma Sambuddha must be self taught; must enter the Dhamma Stream and eventually attain the level of arahant, without any Dharma Instruction. Also, at some point, after completing the requirements, the Sammsambuddha-to-be is reborn in the Tushita Heaven, and remains there, until conditions are favorable for a Sammsambuddha to appear in the world.
There can only be one Samma Sambuddha at a time. Another one can not appear until all traces of the previous Buddha’s Dispensation (Buddha-Sasana) have been lost. In the Suttas, Shakyamuni / Gotama refers to himself as a Samma SamBuddha, and predicts that Metteya (Maitreya) will be the next Samma SamBuddha, in the far distant future.
The Buddhavamsa, lays out requirements for one who wishes to be the Samma Sam Buddha:
- Must be human.
- Must be male.
- Must possess the cause to become an arahant.
- Must encounter a living Samma Sambuddha, make a vow to become a Samma Sambuddha in his presence, and receive a prediction of future sammasambodhi.
- Must renounce householder life, take up homelessness.
- Prior attainment of virtues (guna), such as higher knowledge.
- Aptitude to be a Samma Sambuddha.
- Burning desire to be a Samma Sambuddha; must overcome major obstacles.
The Buddhavamsa and other sources indicate that Shakyamuni made his vow to Dipankara Buddha. Since then, there have been 24 Samma Sambuddhas. There were also three before Dipankara. So, counting Shakyamuni, there have been 28. Metteya (Maitreya) shall be the 29th. In the Lion’s Roar on the Turning of the Wheel Discourse, the Buddha says that Metteya will be the Anutarra Samma Sambuddha in the distant future, just as he, Gotama Buddha, is now. Note that he also mentions that Metteya will be an arhat:
And in the time of the people with eighty thousand-year life-span, there will arise in the world a Blessed Lord, an Arahant and fully-enlightened (anutarra samma sam) Buddha named Metteyya, endowed with wisdom and conduct, a Well-Farer, Knower of the worlds, an incomparable Trainer of men to be tamed, Teacher of gods and humans, enlightened and blessed, just as I am now. [/b] ~~(DN 26: Cakkavatti-Sihanada Sutta)
In the Discourse on Many Elements, the Buddha said that there can only be one Samma Sambuddha in a world system at one time. Also, the Samma Sambuddha must be male:
It is impossible that two rightfully Enlightened Ones [Samma Sambuddhas] should be born in the same world element at one and same time. It is possible that a single rightfully Enlightened One should be born in the world element at one time. It is impossible that two Universal Monarches. should be born in the same world element at one and same time. It is possible that a single Universal Monarch should be born in the world element at one time. It is impossible that a woman should be the perfect rightfully Enlightened One [Samma Sambuddha]. It is possible that a man should be the perfect rightfully Enlightened One ~~ MN 115: Bahudhatuka Sutta
The early Mahayana take on the Samma Sambuddha was a bit different than that of most modern western converts Theravada, in several significant ways. For one, while the view of Theravada on the succession of the 29 Samma Sambuddhas is a bit vague; the early Mahayanists apparently believed that Samyak Sambuddhas can and do appear in countless other world systems. So there have been a countless number in the past, on other worlds, not just 27. Moreover, while Shakyamuni is the current Samyak Sambuddha for this world, and the next one can not appear here until all traces of his Dharma have vanished; there could be and likely are other Buddha Sasanas going in the other world systems, more future Samyak Sambuddhas other than Maitreya, and so on.
Also, the meaning of Self awakened, without Dhamma Instruction, appears to be different. My previous understanding of the Theravada interpretation is that all Samma Sambuddhas seek Awakening, and discover the Dhamma — attain Stream Entry - by themselves, with no Dhamma Instruction at all. They also and do so with the altruistic intention of saving others. Therefore, one who enters the Dhamma Stream as a Savakin, with Instruction, can not be a Samma Sambuddha.
However, I have had to adjust that view. My current reading indicate many similarities between the views of traditional or classical Theravada and early Mahayana. Still, the early Mahayanists rather clearly believed that a Shravakin can be a Samyak Sambuddha, provided they postpone Nirvana / do not attain Arhatship, until a future existence as the Samyak Sambuddha.
“Given this scenario, the possibility of arhatship becomes, ironically, a threat.” ~~ Nattier
We have already mentioned a third significance difference in previous entries. Modern Theravadins, such as Bhikkhu Bodhi, generally view the awakening of the Arahant and the Samma Sambuddha as qualitatively equal; all Buddhas are Arahants, and all Arahants are Buddhas. There are three types of Buddhas; Samma Sambuddhas, Paccekabuddhas, and Anubuddhas. All three attain the same awakening. However, the early Mahayanists viewed the awakening of the Arhat as inferior to the Samyak Sambodhi of the Samyak Sambuddha. (Many traditional Theravadins share this view). There is actually sort of some support for that view in the Root Sequence Sutta:
“[the] uninstructed run-of-the-mill person … perceives Unbinding as Unbinding. Perceiving Unbinding as Unbinding, he conceives things about Unbinding, he conceives things in Unbinding, he conceives things coming out of Unbinding, he conceives Unbinding as ‘mine,’ he delights in Unbinding. Why is that? Because he has not comprehended it, I tell you.
…
“A monk who is a trainee — yearning for the unexcelled relief from bondage, his aspirations as yet unfulfilled … directly knows Unbinding as Unbinding. Directly knowing Unbinding as Unbinding, let him not conceive things about Unbinding, let him not conceive things in Unbinding, let him not conceive things coming out of Unbinding, let him not conceive Unbinding as ‘mine,’ let him not delight in Unbinding. Why is that? So that he may comprehend it, I tell you.
…
A monk who is a Worthy One (Arahant), devoid of mental fermentations — who has attained completion, finished the task, laid down the burden, attained the true goal, destroyed the fetters of becoming, and is released through right knowledge … directly knows Unbinding (nibbana) as Unbinding. Directly knowing Unbinding as Unbinding, he does not conceive things about Unbinding, does not conceive things in Unbinding, does not conceive things coming out of Unbinding, does not conceive Unbinding as ‘mine,’ does not delight in Unbinding. Why is that? Because, with the ending of delusion, he is devoid of delusion, I tell you.”
This Sutta is commonly seen as refutation of a dualistic Samkhya notion that there is a root existence, from which all things emerge. It is thought that the audience consisted of converted Brahmins would held to a proto-Samkhya view, and saw Nibbana, the unbinding, as the ultimate root of existence. This would explain why the monks were displeased
” … That is what the Blessed One said. Displeased, the monks did not delight in the Blessed One’s words.”
That would make sense; had the Buddha stopped with the passages about the Arahant. However, before that final line, there is the passage about the Tathagata. The Buddha says in part:
“The Tathagata — a worthy one (arahant) , rightly self-awakened (samma sambuddha) — directly knows Unbinding as Unbinding. Directly knowing Unbinding as Unbinding, he does not conceive things about Unbinding, does not conceive things in Unbinding, does not conceive things coming out of Unbinding, does not conceive Unbinding as ‘mine,’ does not delight in Unbinding. Why is that? Because he has known that delight is the root of suffering & stress, that from coming-into-being there is birth, and that for what has come into being there is aging & death. Therefore, with the total ending, fading away, cessation, letting go, relinquishment of craving, the Tathagata has totally awakened to the unexcelled right self-awakening (anutarra samyaksambodhi), I tell you.”
Then:
“That is what the Blessed One said. Displeased, the monks did not delight in the Blessed One’s words.” ~~ MN 1: Mulapariyaya Sutta: The Root Sequence
That seems to be suggesting that the Samyak Sambuddha and the Shravaka Arahant share one thing in common. They both attain nirvana, both are Arahants. However, it appears that the Tathagata has awakened to something — Samyak Sambodhi — the Shravaka Arahant has not.
A fourth significant difference is that the early Mahayanists identified the path of the Bodhisattva as the vehicle for the attainment of Samyak Sambodhi. (Many traditional Theravadins share this view). They conceived of the Triyana or three Vehicles, each distinct, and only one of which; the Bodhisattvayana, leads to complete Awakening. I plan to look at that in a future entry.
update: the Classical Theravadin view appears to be similar in some respects to early Mahayana. The terminology may not have been the same. However, both envisioned Three Paths or Vehicles leading to Three kinds of Awakening. Arahant / Arhat was specifically a term for 4th stage Savakas / Shravakas, but also a general term for anyone who attained, or perhaps was ready to attain, Nibbana / Nirvana, regardless of the path or vehicle. However, the Awakening (Bodhi) was not the same for all Arahants / Arhats.
The Samma Sambuddha, besides meeting the conditions I listed in the other thread, such as self awakening, fully develops the 10 Paramis and attains Omniscience. This enables them to Turn the Wheel of the Dharma and start a Buddha Sasana at a time and place when none exist. Many traditional Theravadins say the Boshisatta Path (Magga) is for Samma Sambuddhas; but I do not think they use the term Vehicle (yana). Thery also say it is something one can choose. Bhikkhu Bodhi and some others seem to reject the idea that the Suttas teach a Bodhisatta path that one could chose.
Anyway, the Classical Theravadin view appears to be similar in some respects to early Mahayana. The terminology may not have been the same. However, both envisioned Three Paths or Vehicles leading to Three kinds of Awakening. Arhat was specifically a term for 4th stage Savakas / shravakas, but also a general term for anyone who attained, or perhaps was ready to attain, Nibbana / Nirvana, regardless of the path or vehicle. On the other hand, the Awakening (Bodhi) was not the same for all Arhats.
The Bodhisatta of Theravada and the Bodhisattvayana of Mahayana
菩薩
I, too, monks, before my Awakening, when I was an unawakened bodhisatta, being subject myself to birth, sought what was likewise subject to birth. Being subject myself to aging… illness… death… sorrow… defilement, I sought [happiness in] what was likewise subject to illness… death… sorrow… defilement. ~~ MN 26 Ariyapariyesana Sutta: The Noble Search http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.026.than.html
The Suttas and the Jakata Tales refer to Gotama Buudha, before his awakening, as the Bodhissatta. Metteya is mentioned as a future Samma Sammbuddha, however, he is not referred to as a Bodhisatta. On the other hand, I just came across a translation of DN 14, the Mahapadana Sutta.
And so, monks, the Bodhisattva Vipassi descended from the Tushita heaven, mindful and clearly aware, into his mothers womb. This, monks, is the rule. ~ ~ Mahapadana Sutta
Contrary to what I had previously read, this indicates that other Samma Sambuddhas were Bodhisattas. This supports the concept of a Bodhisatta Path in the Theravada tradition.
Update: Further reading is causing me to rethink my understanding of Theravada. There appears to a wide variety of views on this topic. Some do see the Awakening of the Samma Sambodhi as superior, and regard Bosdhisatta as the path to Samma Sambodhi. Some Theravada commentaries, dating to the 5th Century CE or later, infer specific teachings for Bodhisattas; such as the Ten Paramis. For more information:
http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/b_f/bodhi.htm