University of Virginia Library

THE BUDDHA, `BODHISATTVA' AND `ARAHAT'

Those who have broken through the various orders of sentient existence
and have reached (or are about to reach) the liberated state are the Buddhas
and certain lesser others who have entered the path to nirvana.

Three kinds of persons who have attained a supreme religious state
appear significantly in ritual and worship. They are the Buddha, who has
reached nirvana, the bodhisattva who is an embryo Buddha or a Buddha-to-be,
and the arahat, an ascetic who has entered the path and is credited
with miraculous powers.

The Buddha

The achievement of Buddha-hood was not unique to the historical
Gotama. According to Buddhist tradition there have been several Buddhas
in the past, and some twenty-four have appeared in the preceding cycles
of time. In the present aeon or kala, Gotama was the fourth to appear.
He was preceded by Kakusandha, Konagamana and Kassapa.

In the Mahapadana Suttanta (Rhys Davids, Vol. III, Part II, 1910,
Ch. 14) Gotama Buddha is said to have related the histories of the last
seven Buddhas, starting with Vipassi and taking in the four Buddhas of
this aeon including himself. In this account the following features are of

particular interest because they are reflected in one way or another in
the religious life of Thai villagers:

the Buddha manifests the remarkable faculty of remembering past
births, which is attributed to his clear discernment of truth through
personal effort and is also a revelation from the gods;

a Buddha, before he makes his appearance in human form, exists as
a bodhisattva in the heaven of delight and at the proper time descends into
his mother's womb mindful and self-possessed;

in the biography of Vipassi—which was later transferred to the Buddha
himself—it is stated that he was born of royal status, endowed with the thirty-two
marks of the Great Man, and that there were two careers open to him:

Thus it is stated that a world conqueror and a world renouncer are two
sides of the same coin;

the biographies also state, in terms of a time scale, the progressive
shortening of human life and by implication also its degradation. Thus
while the length of life at the epoch in which Vipassi was born was
8,000 years, in this aeon the length of life diminishes successively from
4,000 years at the time of Kakusandha to 100 at the time of Gotama.

This fateful decline, however, is counteracted by the idea that a Buddha
appears from aeon to aeon under similar circumstances to preach a similar
faith, which hopeful message is represented most importantly for contemporary
villagers in the beliefs centring around Maitreya, the next
Buddha to come.

The most important Buddha is, of course, the historical Gotama who
embodies the idea of all Buddhas. And the orientations to this Buddha
in popular Buddhism are complex and paradoxical.

One puzzle is the relation between the Buddha and the gods in the
Buddhist pantheon. The Pitaka (Pali Canon) characterize the Buddha
as omniscient and pure but do not suggest that he is a god; however, they
do represent him as instructing the devas and receiving their homage.
Two transformations took place in institutionalized Buddhism which
can be expressed in terms of the pantheon.

A parallel change took place in respect to the gods. The Canonical
doctrine of the Dhamma had very little to do with the devas, in the sense
that the truths of religion did not depend on them although their existence
was granted; for example, when the Buddha preached in Magadha the
local deities were not considered the personifications of cosmic forces
or the revealers of truth. (In the Kevaddha Sutta, for instance, the Buddha
belittles Brahma and the gods as being ignorant of the answers to certain
basic metaphysical problems; the Digha Nikaya also contains the ironical
account of the origin of gods as being a progressive descent from superior
worlds, while the gods (especially Brahma) have illusions of being the
creators.) The critical change incorporated in the cosmological scheme is
the conversion of deities into protectors of the faith, who take their
place in the karmic scheme. In the Jatakas, for instance, Indra (who, in
the Hindu Vedas, is a demon slayer) is depicted as the heavenly counterpart
of a pious Buddhist king, protector of the religion whose throne grows
hot when a good man is in trouble. From being autonomous powers
gods had now become mediators.

Another puzzle—which is probably of more direct concern to us—is
the dual orientation to the Buddha. On the one hand, the Buddha, a
human being, is dead and has reached nirvana. This being so he cannot
directly affect human beings or influence their future status, because
salvation is a personal quest. On the other hand, the Buddha has been
credited with supernatural powers—when alive he had extraordinary
markings and qualities, and after his death his relics, mahadhatu (which
significantly include jewels, ornaments and the holy texts) have spiritual
power; so do consecrated images. Thus these objects are conceived as
`magical power stations' and have been associated with rain-making
ceremonies in Ceylon (Geiger 1960) and Thailand (Wales 1931).

The following facts drawn from the literature on Buddhist traditions
might help in the solution of this problem. A passage written by Hardy
(1860) vividly describes the worshipper's relation to the Buddha; the
description is as valid today as it was for the last century; it could apply
equally well to Ceylon, Burma, or Thailand.

The problem of the inconsistency of worshipping an extinct being and
of soliciting the aid of an external agent in a religion which doctrinally
maintains that salvation is the product of a personal quest and striving
is a classical one. It was one of the dilemmas dealt with in The Questions
of King Milinda, written at the beginning of the Christian era.

The question posed by King Milinda to Nagasena was that if the
Buddha accepts gifts he cannot have passed entirely away, he must be
still in union with the world. On the other hand, if he has escaped from
all existence and is unattached to the world, then honours could not be
offered to him.

Nagasena's answer, if sophistic, is yet fascinating, for it invokes some
incisive analogues. The Blessed One is set entirely free and therefore
accepts no gift. Nevertheless, acts done to him, notwithstanding his having
passed away and not accepting them, are of value and bear fruit. If gods
or men put up a building to contain the jewel treasure of the Buddha's
relics, the devotee attains to one or another of the three glorious states by
virtue of the supreme good which resides in the jewel treasure of the
Buddha's wisdom.

A great and glorious fire that has died out would not accept any supply
of dried grass or sticks; but men by their own effort can produce fire.
A great and mighty wind, were it to die away, cannot be produced again;
but men, oppressed by heat or tormented by fever, can produce wind
by means of fans and punkahs. The broad earth does not acquiesce in all
kinds of seeds being planted all over it; yet it acts as a site for these seeds
and as a means of their development.

The message conveyed by this argument is that the Buddha's attainment
is symbolized by the relics, that when men pay homage and give gifts
to the Buddha, goodness is caused to arise within them, that in fact the
symbols of the Buddha act as a field of merit and men by their own
ethical efforts can plough, plant and produce fruits in it.

What is lacking in Nagasena's argument is any statement of the spiritual
power emanating per se from the sacred objects which commemorate the
Buddha. According to popular tradition, the Buddha told his disciple
Ananda that the objects that may be properly worshipped are relics of
his body, things erected in commemoration of him (e.g. images), and
articles he possessed, such as the alms bowl, girdle, bathing robe, etc.
The sacred bo tree under which he attained understanding has come to
be an object of reverence. So have the sacred books which contain the
doctrines that the Buddha taught.

All these objects are called cetiya on account of the satisfaction they
produce in the mind.

The religious monument that has attracted special comment by writers
(e.g. Leach 1958, 1962; yalman 1964) is the dagoba (dhatu garba = relic
womb), which brings together and transcends the polarities of death and
life, impurity and purity, dissolution and fertile creation.

Similarly, it could be argued that certain religious objects and persons
bring together and synthesize the notions of spiritual and political
sovereignty. These notions are eminently symbolized in the person of the
king as chakravartin (universal ruler) and as bodhisattva (Buddha-to-be).
The relation of the sacred tooth relic in Ceylon and the Emerald Buddha
image in Thailand to the institution of kingship (and statehood) under
the umbrella of Buddhism is well known. Perhaps less well understood
is the symbolism of Buddha's footprint on the top of the mountain (e.g.
Adam's Peak in Ceylon, Phrabat in Thailand, and Mt Popa in Burma).
Just as the cult of the spirit of the mountain was traditionally associated
with political unification and centralization under a king, so does the
footprint on the mountain top declare that the people and the territory
in question are the inheritance of the Buddha. These associations lead
us back to the sacred mountain of Meru at the centre of the universe,
often artificially reproduced in the centre of the royal cities of South-east
Asian kingdoms.

So we return to the puzzle: What is the ordinary Buddhist's orientation
to the Buddha and his material embodiments and symbols? It is unconvincing
to say that what has been described are aspects of `magical
Buddhism' which are `meaning-raising devices' (Ames 1964). This interpretation
is that of a theologian and not of an anthropologist. More
convincing are interpretations which see the resolution of the polarities
of pure-impure, death-fertility in the relics of the Buddha. This is for
me a starting point for unravelling the problem of conversion and transfer.
If by one criterion the pure entities are remote and inaccessible, and if by
another, relics and texts (and jewels and gold) are invested with power, it
is the final bringing together of power plus purity, the inaccessible and
the accessible, as constituting a primary problem in religious technology,
that has to be explained.

The `bodhisattva'

The traditions relating to bodhisattva, those who are on the threshold of
becoming Buddhas, are manifold. One destined to be a Buddha must
finally be born as a man, so the bodhisatva does not tarry for long in the
heavens of delight.

The bodhisattva who stirs the imagination and holds the greatest
promises for the Thai villagers is Maitreya, the next Buddha who will

arrive to bring salvation to the world. Maitreya is revered by all Buddhist
sects as the coming saviour, and his name signifies one who is full of love
toward all beings.

It is believed that the Buddha himself elected Maitreya as his successor
and that Maitreya now resides in the Tusita Heaven (Dusit in Thai), the
heaven of contented beings, from where he watches over and promotes
the interests of Buddhism. He awaits the time when he will appear on
earth as Maitreya Buddha.[4] Tradition has it that the Buddha predicted
that his teachings will last for 5,000 years, at the end of which they will
no more be respected or even remembered because of the world's corruption
and degeneracy.

According to the Vinaya, the Buddha had fixed a time limit of 500 years
starting from his death during which the Law would last. The same period
is confirmed by Nagasena in his dialogues with King Milinda. It appears
that Buddhagosa in the fifth century A.D. extended the duration of the
message in this world to 5,000 years. He foresaw five successive steps of
retrogression, at intervals of one thousand years: first, the disappearance
of the acquisition of the degrees of sanctity, then of the observance of the
precepts, of the knowledge of the Scriptures, of the exterior signs of
religion, and lastly of the corporeal relics of the Master which would be
gathered together and cremated at Bodhgaya (Coedès 1964). Apparently
this prophecy motivated, at various critical dates in the reigns of famous
kings, the holding of convocations, writing of Scriptures and revival of
religious enthusiasm. The most recent manifestation in our time was the
2,500th year (Buddha Jayanthi). The Siamese cosmological treatise, the
Traibhumikatha, was produced long ago under similar inspiration.

To this pessimistic prophecy, however, Buddhist tradition has joined
an optimistic messianic one. Maitreya, the next Buddha, will descend at
the end of this decline. Religion will wax again, arahats will arise, men
will be freed from toil and care, hunger, old age, and sickness. We shall
see later that Buddhist ritual in the village dramatizes with great expectations
the coming of the next saviour. It is therefore relevant to compare
Maitreya with the Buddha. The Buddha belongs to the past; his teachings
exist but he is extinct; it is possible that he is not in direct contact with
this world. Maitreya lives in heaven, is interested in the present order
of things as well as in the future, and his descent into the world from
heaven is imagined to bring collective salvation and benefits to those

who will be fortunate enough to see him at that time in the status of
human being.

However, it is not in the countries of Theravada Buddhism but in those
in which the Mahayana form prevails that the concept and cult of the
bodhisattva has been greatly elaborated. There bodhisattvas abound—the
most glorious of whom are Manjusri, Avalokitesvara and Vajra-pani.
They are imagined to be permanently in the celestial worlds in benevolent
relationship with humanity. Mahayana Buddhism, it would seem, has
systematically incorporated the existing gods into its pantheon and transformed
them into benevolent mediators and future Buddhas who will not
necessarily descend to earth as human Buddhas.

These Mahayanist developments are echoed in the so-called Hinayana
countries, which have at various times been fertilized by Mahayana
influences. We have already noted that Sinhalese, Burmese and Thai
kings were elevated to the status of bodhisattva. In certain situations,
messianic Maitreya status may be claimed by charismatic leaders of
popular rebellions against established kingship (Mendelson 1963). In
Ceylon the protective guardian god Natha has been identified with
Maitreya, and others like Saman and Skanda are regarded as bodhisattva
whose role is to guard and protect both the Buddhist religion and the
secular kingdom. Parallels can be found in other societies; but insofar
as we are concerned with religion in the Thai village of Phraan Muan it is
sufficient to remember that it is Maitreya alone who enjoys the adulation
and the anticipations of a bodhisattva.

The `arahat' and his miraculous powers

While the Buddha is a personage of the past who has reached nirvana,
and Maitreya is the coming Buddha, the arahat is a lesser personage of
both the past and the present,[5] who is inferior to the other two but is
nevertheless on the path to salvation. The attributes of an arahat are of
interest to us because they have relevance for understanding certain
village rituals, especially those connected with healing and exorcism.
Their bearing on these rituals nevertheless is not readily apparent.

Buddhism poured new content into an old word. The term arahat
was previously applied to persons with honorary titles and of worldly
position who were entitled to receive gifts, and also to ascetics who
subjected themselves to self-mortification (tapas). The Buddhist conception
applied more narrowly to the ascetic man of religion who has entered the

Ariyan path and has reached its end, and consequently possesses the
knowledge of emancipation. By the exercise of meditation (dhyana), the
performance of certain ceremonies, and the observance of the prescribed
course of moral action, the arahat has entered the path of salvation and
his mind is therefore free of desire for, and cleaving to, sensuous objects,
and free of the accompaniments of sorrow and pain. At his death he
reaches the state of nirvana.

Now the notion of iddhi (or siddhi) is ancient in India, and Buddhism
accepted and confirmed its existence and reality. The mystic powers of
iddhi are not miraculous in the Western sense of interference by an outside
power to contravene known laws of nature, but are special powers in
conformity with nature possessed by certain people who are able to
accomplish acts beyond the powers of ordinary men. Typically they are
gained by ascetics.

The Buddhist suttas enumerate the iddhi powers in several places. For
instance in the Samanna-Phala Sutta the Buddha enumerates the five
modes of mystical insight that an arahat possesses:

the practice of iddhi—`being one he becomes many, or having become
many becomes one again; he becomes visible or invisible; he goes, feeling
no obstruction, to the further side of a wall or rampart or hill, as if through
air...he walks on water without breaking through, as if on solid ground;
he travels cross-legged in the sky...even the moon and the sun, so
potent...does he touch with his hand...' (Rhys Davids, Vol. II, 1899,
pp. 88-9);

the heavenly ear—the ability to hear sounds, both human and celestial,
whether far or near;

knowledge of others' thoughts;

memory of his own previous births;

the heavenly eye—the knowledge of other people's previous births.

What is of special interest in respect of the concerns of this book is
the relation between the achievement of arahatship and the possession
and employment of these mystic powers. In the Samanna-Phala Sutta
the Buddha has listed `The Fruits of the Life of a Recluse' and in this
list the mystic powers of iddhi rank high, superseded only by the higher
achievement of the destruction of ignorance, rebirth and the sure knowledge
of emancipation.

Thus a remarkable feature of the arahat is that in the course of his
mental and spiritual progress he naturally attains extraordinary powers.
But in the Kevaddha Suttanta (Rhys Davids, Vol. II, 1899, Ch. II) the
Buddha is said to have taken a definite stand regarding their exercise.
On being urged by Kevaddha, a young householder, to perform mystic

wonders so as to make the people of Nalanda more devoted to the Exalted
One, the Buddha, while conceding that he has himself realized the powers
of iddhi (the `mystic wonder' and the `wonder of manifestation') asserted
strongly that he loathed their practice, and that a greater and better
wonder, which he had realized and recommended, was the wonder of
education, that is, the system of self-training which culminated in arahatship.

The doctrinal position thus is that while it is inevitable that, at an
advanced stage in his progress, the searcher attains mystic powers—
which are in fact a mark of his progress—the exercise of these powers
is dangerous both for the monk, who may be seduced into a vain magical
mastery of the world, and for the laymen, because it may cause confusion
in their minds and give opportunity for unbelievers to degrade the mystic
powers of the recluse and equate them with the efficacy of base charms.
The Buddha therefore forbade the monk to exhibit his powers before
non-initiates, and the following stricture is embedded in the Canonical
Law of the Vinaya: `You are not, O Bhikkus, to display before the laity
the wonders of iddhi, surpassing the power of ordinary men. Whosoever
does so shall be guilty of a wrong act' (dukkata).

While Buddhist commentators and expositors state the above as the
Buddha's position on this issue, a measure of ambiguity and contradiction
is introduced in the Patika Suttanta (Rhys Davids, Vol. IV, Part III, 1957,
Ch. 24), which belongs to the same historical period as the suttas already
cited. In this dialogue the Buddha claimed to have worked wonders of an
amusing and magical nature to vindicate his superiority over other ascetics.

I am not concerned here with sifting out the true doctrine but to
pinpoint a phenomenon dealt with in classical Buddhist doctrine and
which serves as a point of reference for certain kinds of cults and practitioners
one meets in the field today.

The powers of iddhi (itthibat in Siamese) as set out above are not
peculiar to Buddhism alone; they are for the most part stereotyped and
occur in all the ascetic and mystical literatures of India (Eliade 1958).

The supra-normal powers of the arahat thus have an indirect bearing
on contemporary religion in so-called Buddhist countries. Strictly speaking,
in the Buddhist discussion of the problem, it is by virtue of mental
discipline and by undergoing an inner transformation that the monk
gains the mystic powers, and it is because their indulgence and exercise
would stall his progress to the final goal that Buddha forbade their display
as dukkata (evil deed). To make false profession of the attainment of
arahatship is one of the four crimes that result in permanent exclusion
from the priesthood.

But the possibility of acquiring mystic powers is not denied. And the

way is therefore open for someone to take to the ascetic and meditative
discipline in order to acquire them. An example that springs to mind is
the Burmese weikza, who is regarded as possessed of supernatural powers,
long-lived and on the path to nirvana (Mendelson 1963). The possibility
is also there for someone to use the vehicles of inner transformation—
chants and spells—without actually undergoing the mental transformation
in the Buddhist meditative sense. Thus come about hierarchical distinctions
between ritual specialists and practitioners in respect of their ethical
status and endowment with spiritual power (rit in Siamese). The actual
results of these possible developments we shall see later in Chapter 18,
which deals with exorcism.