Menurut Paul Williams (sebelum ia pindah menjadi kr****n) dalam bukunya Mahayana Buddhism, The Doctrinal Foundation:
It is frequently said in textbooks that the compassion of the Bodhisattva is so great that he postpones nirvana, or turns back from nirvana, in order to place all other sentient beings in nirvana first. Such a teaching, however, appears prima facie to be incoherent, and contains a claim that somehow a Buddha must be deficient in compassion when compared with a Bodhisattva. Viewed logically, if all other beings must be placed in nirvana before a particular Bodhisattva attains nirvana himself there could obviously be only one Bodhisattva. Alternatively, we have the absurd spectacle of a series of Bodhisattvas each trying to hurry the others into nirvana in order to preserve his or her vow. Moreover if sentient beings are infinite, a widely-held view in the Mahayana, then the Bodhisattva is setting himself an impossible task, and no Bodhisattva could ever attain Buddhahood. I asked the late Kensur Pema Gyaltsen, a former head abbot of Drepung Monastery and one of the most learned Tibetan scholars, about this while he was on a visit to Britain. I explained that it was widely asserted in books available in the West that the Bodhisattva does not become enlightened until he has helped all other sentient beings to enlightenment. The eminent Lama seemed to find this most amusing since, as he put it, all those who had become Bodhisattvas would not become enlightened, while those who had not become Bodhisattvas would. He stated quite categorically that the final view is that this is not how Bodhisattvas behave. In Tibetan practice the merit from virtuous deeds is always directed towards obtaining full Buddhahood in order to be able to help beings most effectively. There is never any mention of really postponing or turning back from Buddhahood. Otherwise any Bodhisattva who did become a Buddha would be presumably either deficient in compassion or have broken his vow.
In fact it should be clear that the concept of nirvana in a Mahayana context is a complex one. There are a number of different types of nirvana – the nirvana of the Arhat, of the Pratyekabuddha, the supreme and compassionate ‘nonabiding’ nirvaua of the Buddha, for example, not to mention the separate issue of whether a Buddha ever finally ‘goes beyond’ beings and enters some kind of final nirvana (see Chapter 8 below). Generally, certainly once the Bodhisattva doctrine had reached its developed form, the Mahayana Bodhisattva does not postpone or turn back from nirvana. Rather he or she rejects the nirvanas of the Arhat and Pratyekabuddhas, at least as final goals, and aims for the full nirvana of the Buddha. According to Kensur Pema Gyaltsen, if a text states or implies that a Bodhisattva postpones nirvana, it is not to be taken literally. It does not embody the final truth. It may be that it embodies a form of exhortatory writing – the Bodhisattva adopts a position of complete renunciation. In renouncing even Buddhahood the Bodhisattva precisely attains Buddhahood.
In terms of the Prajñaparamita, Nancy Lethcoe claims to detect a difference between the Asta [Astasahasrika Prajñaparamita Sutra/8.000 verses Perfect Wisdom Sutra] and the Pañcavimsatisahasrika (25.000 verses) sutras on this issue. The Asta clearly teaches that the Bodhisattva first attains Buddhahood, and only then can he fully help others. The Pañcavimsatisahasrika, on the other hand, teaches that some Bodhisattvas will postpone their enlightenment until all beings have become enlightened (Lethcoe 1977: 264). She gives three references to the Pañcavimsatisahasrika, but although in the first two sections there are many references to types of Bodhisattvas, some of whom it is stated will attain full enlightenment and help others, I fail to find any obvious reference to compassionate Bodhisattvas postponing Buddhahood. Pañcavimsatisahasrika 170, however, is different. In Conze’s translation (used by Lethcoe) it reads (1979: 124): ‘Through this skill in means will I, for the sake of all beings, experience that pain of the hells . . . until these beings have won Nirvana. . . . Afterwards I will, for the sake of my own self, know full enlightenment . . .’. Clearly, the key word here is ‘afterwards’. The Sanskrit and Tibetan, however, do not necessarily carry the temporal sense of the English ‘afterwards’. They can mean ‘thereupon’, ‘because of that’, or ‘thereby’, all of which convey a very different meaning.
I do not want to emphasize the linguistic point here, however. My purpose is simply to suggest sensitivity to the initial incoherence and textual uncertainty concerning the Bodhisattva’s claimed postponement of nirvana, an assertion which at one time appeared to have become part of the lore of textbooks on Buddhism. In the first edition of this book I suggested that the textual situation regarding the ‘postponement model’ of nirvana in Mahayana really requires further research. There certainly are passages that do appear to speak of the Bodhisattva seeming to postpone or turn back from some enlightenment. Since that first edition two extended treatments have come to my attention (Makransky 1997: esp. 336–45; Jenkins 1999: Chs 2 and 3, esp. 83–112), together with a lengthy internet discussion of the topic. It is clear that once the idea of the apratisthita nirvana (the socalled ‘nonabiding’ or ‘unrestricted’, or ‘not-fixed’ nirvana) had become widely accepted in Mahayana, it made no sense to talk of a Bodhisattva wanting to postpone it. The apratisthita nirvana can be used to refer particularly to the Buddha’s nirvana. It is the state possessed by a Buddha wherein he remains, according to developed Mahayana Buddhology, forever engaged with the world in order to help in the most effective way possible all sentient beings. As such, this is a state that the Bodhisattva dearly wants, since it is the fulfilment of all his or her vows and aspirations. The Bodhisattva simply rejects the enlightenment of an Arhat, and aims for the apratisthita nirvana of a Buddha as quickly as possible. But Makransky suggests that once we view the topic historically in this way we can surmise that it may have taken some time for the idea of a Buddha remaining in a state known as ‘apratisthita nirvana’ to develop. This ‘not-fixed’ nirvana is a response to the earlier suggestion that a Buddha (like an Arhat) at his death does indeed (in accordance with the third Noble Truth) attain a final nirvana, a cessation, and hence finally the Buddha too abandons the world of suffering sentient beings. In the light of that earlier view a Bodhisattva may indeed aspire to postpone that sort of nirvana out of compassion. Since on this model Buddhas too, at death, eventually attain the same state as an Arhat possesses at death, the Bodhisattva will postpone nirvana in two senses: (i) They do not want to become Arhats, and abandon sentient beings soon, perhaps even in this very lifetime; (ii) They presumably do indeed want to become Buddhas (that is, after all, what makes them Bodhisattvas). Buddhas are very helpful towards others. But, perhaps even more important, they very much want to spend the long time it takes to become a Buddha in helping others in all the ways Sakyamuni helped others while a Bodhisattva (as we know from, e.g., the Jataka tales). Hence from compassion the Bodhisattva may even wish not to become a Buddha quickly, and certainly wishes to postpone to the indefinite future attaining the final cessation of the Buddha (which on this older model, remember, is eventually the same as that of the Arhat).
This is clearly an unstable position, for reasons noted earlier. It makes it look as if any Buddha is in some sense defective in compassion when compared with a Bodhisattva. It is difficult to explain why anyone would ever want to succeed in actually becoming a Buddha. Why not simply be reborn again and again throughout all eternity, helping others? With the development of the apratisthita nirvana in a strong sense which entails that the Buddha always remains helping sentient beings, and never abandons them, the issue of postponement ceases. But (Makransky points out) a clearly articulated notion of the Buddha’s apratisthita nirvana in that sense seems to have taken quite some time to develop. It is far from obvious that we have it, for example, in the early Perfection of Wisdom literature.
One of the issues that seems particularly to have concerned the authors of relatively early Mahayana sutras (like some of the Perfection of Wisdom sutras) is not so much any final abandonment of sentient beings by a Buddha, but rather what the actual technology might be whereby a Bodhisattva can avoid falling into the state of an Arhat, and thereby prematurely abandoning sentient beings. Given that the direction of Buddhist practices is towards enlightenment, how can a Bodhisattva avoid becoming an Arhat? How can he or she avoid ‘attaining the reality-limit’ (bhutakoti)? Do Bodhisattvas, for example, need to retain an element of moral taint, of defilement, a smear of passion (klesa) or perhaps some appropriate sort of karma that will keep them in transmigratory circulation? Should they with the best of motives remain saTsAric, imperfect, or maybe even in some way immoral?
One source that tries to respond to such difficulties is the Asta (Ch. 20; Conze 1973a: 222–9). The key to the difficulty lies in not setting up emptiness – the full cognition of which in its deepest possible liberating way would entail the ‘opting-out’ liberation of an Arhat – as a reified reality standing in opposition to the illusion-like empty things of samsara. Thus, the Buddha states in the Asta, if emptiness itself is not set up as some sort of true reality in opposition to things (that is, if emptiness too is seen as in some way illusion-like) the Bodhisattva cannot ‘attain the reality-limit’, that is, achieve the nirvana of an Arhat. But how does the Bodhisattva avoid setting up emptiness as a reality and falling into the state of an Arhat? The answer is complicated and it is by no means fully clear what it entails in the actual practice of a Bodhisattva’s meditation. The Bodhisattva enters a set of three meditative absorptions well-known from mainstream Buddhism and referred to as the ‘three doors to deliverance’. These are the absorptions on emptiness, on the signless, and on the wishless. When developed fully and properly these can lead to the nirvana of an Arhat. But in doing so the Bodhisattva is also inspired by pity for those who suffer, and also by another set of meditations familiar from mainstream Buddhism, the four brahmaviharas (‘divine abidings’) of immeasurable friendliness, compassion, sympathetic joy, and equanimity (or ‘impartiality’). He combines the Perfection of Wisdom with his use of clever means and stratagems (upaya) to prevent himself from becoming an Arhat (ibid.: 224). He practises not to destroy but actually to keep (albeit under his own control) those factors that would lead to further rebirths. Through such clever means and stratagems he fires and projects his spiritual career onwards to Buddhahood.
What this appears to amount to is that the Bodhisattva in cognizing emptiness also (as the Asta puts it) ‘ties his thought to an objective support’, that is, he remains with an awareness of suffering sentient beings as the objects of his compassion. In possessing the Perfection of Wisdom he does not abandon others. In some manner the Bodhisattva is able to combine simultaneously his direct meditative awareness of emptiness with awareness of others, and of his project of helping them. Hence, we are told, he does not actually ‘directly realize’ or ‘fall into’ emptiness, but rather in an appropriate way for his salvific career he ‘conquers’ emptiness instead. His clever means and stratagems are thus said to protect the Bodhisattva from realizing the reality-limit prematurely (‘midway’, before achieving all the factors for Buddhahood; Conze 1973a: 225). This is well illustrated, albeit with a slight variant, in the Upayakausalya Sutra. It is said there that both Bodhisattvas and Sravakas enter a deep (and, it is suggested, empty) meditation state. But the Sravaka becomes quietistically paralysed by it, and is completely inactive, considering that he has reached nirvana. The Bodhisattva, on the other hand, is driven by his wish to benefit sentient beings and is in such a meditation state because of that compassionate wish, as part of his path to Buddhahood. Hence he does not – indeed cannot – simply stay there immobile, doing nothing. He has much further to go, and a great deal more to do.
Kutipan di atas membahas ttg kemungkinan seorang Bodhisattva menunda atau meninggalkan Nirvana menurut Mahayana:
1. Seorang Bodhisattva dikatakan menunda/meninggalkan Nirvana jika Nirvana yg dimaksud adalah Nirvana spt yg dicapai para Arhat dan Pratyeka Buddha. Mereka berusaha utk tdk jatuh ke dalam jenis Nirvana ini dlm jenis meditasi tertentu di mana mereka mempertahankan faktor-faktor yg menyebabkan mereka tetap terlahir kembali di samsara (yg hrs dilenyapkan jika ingin mencapai Nirvana para Arhat).
2. Seorang Bodhisattva dikatakan mencapai Nirvana jika Nirvana yg dimaksud adalah Apratistha Nirvana (non-abiding Nirvana) yg dicapai para Buddha. Di bagian lain dr buku ini dikatakan bahwa Apratistha Nirvana bukan hanya pelenyapan keserakahan, kebencian dan kebodohan batin (seperti Nirvana para Arhat), tetapi juga tidak meninggalkan belas kasih thd mereka yg menderita di samsara:
The expression apratisthita nirvana was probably introduced as a term, although not necessarily as a concept, by the Yogacara tradition. It is best understood initially from the side not of a Buddha but of a Bodhisattva, an aspirant on the path to Buddhahood. It is crucial in his or her practice that the Bodhisattva renounces samsara, the round of ignorant misapprehension and false behaviour, and also any idea of nirvana as not just the negation of greed, hatred and delusion but also a transcendence and neglectful abandonment of the institutions and persons of samsara. That is, the Bodhisattva in going beyond duality abandons greed, hatred and delusion, but does not abandon suffering sentient beings. He or she attains wisdom but preserves compassion. If nirvana is understood as not just abandoning greed, hatred and delusion, but also abandoning in this life all concern for the institutions and persons of ‘the world’, and after death returning no more to help those institutions and persons (i.e. becoming an Arhat), then the Bodhisattva renounces also nirvana. Thus the nirvana that is attained by the Bodhisattva when he or she attains Buddhahood is not that type of nirvana. Rather, it is a nonabiding nirvana, an unrestricted, or not-fixed nirvana, which is to say that it is a nirvana which embodies two dimensions – the upward movement away from samsara, away from greed, hatred and delusion, and a downward movement returning out of compassion to the maelstrom of samsaric institutions and persons (see Nagao 1981: 61 ff.). The Buddha abides neither in samsara, for he is a Buddha, nor in nirvana in the sense that he has abandoned suffering sentient beings. In a sense he has a foot (or a lotus) in both camps, while in another sense he is in neither. He has gone beyond all duality and all clinging. He clings neither to the world nor to transcendence.
Sedangkan para Arhat menurut Mahayana memang tidak terlahir kembali di samsara, melainkan di tanah Buddha murni yang bebas dr kekotoran batin (jadi bukan samsara dan istilah tepatnya bukan "terlahir kembali" dlm pengertian terlahir di samsara). Sumber tidak resmi dikutipkan di bawah ini:
...the following passage from the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-śāstra attributed to Nāgārjuna.
問曰：
阿羅漢先世因緣所受身必應當滅，住在何處而具足佛道？
答曰：
得阿羅漢時，三界諸漏因緣盡，更不復生三界。有淨佛土，出於三界，乃至無煩惱之名，於是國土佛所，聞《法華經》，具足佛道。如《法華經》說：「有羅漢，若不聞《法華經》，自謂得滅度；我於餘國為說是事，汝皆當作佛。
(CBETA, T25, no. 1509, p. 714, a9-15)
Question -- Arhats in their past lives must have extinguished all the conditions and conditions to be reborn into a new body. Where do they abide and perfect the Buddha's path?
Answer -- When one attains Arhatship, all contaminated causes and conditions of the three realms are extinguished and one is no longer reborn in the three realms. There is a pure Buddha-land beyond the three realms even being without the word 'defilements'. In this realm, the place of the Buddha, they hear the Lotus Sūtra, and perfect the Buddha's path. As the Lotus Sūtra says, "There are Arhats who think of themselves as having attained cessation if they have not heard the Lotus Sūtra. In another realm I explain this - you all will become Buddhas."
Other texts in East Asia explain that Arhats and Pratyekabuddhas receive a "transformation body" (變易身) when they are reborn outside the three realms in the aforementioned pure land.
Other Mahāyāna lines of thought suggest Arhats and Pratyekabuddhas are forever unable to attain Buddhahood. Bodhisattvas also run the risk of attaining Arhatship if they're not careful. One can realize liberation prematurely.
I've also heard some ideas that Arhats remain in a 'samadhi of non-abiding' until they are reborn as bodhisattvas. Does anyone know the source of this?
Answer: The general Tibetan Buddhist view is that Arhats and Praetyakabuddhas are reborn in a kind of Pure Realm and are intoxicated by samadhi. They remain in this state until roused by a Buddha after a very long period of time. They are then reborn as Bodhisattvas on a higher bhumi and get going again.
However I don't know the sutra or tantric source for this.
Sumber: http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=66&t=4609
Namun demikian, apa pun pandangan tentang Arhat dlm Mahayana berdasarkan sumber2 di atas, semuanya setuju bahwa seorang Arhat memang sudah bebas dari samsara, sudah mencapai Pembebasan (Nirvana). Setelah kematiannya, Arhat tidak terlahir kembali di samsara, tetapi "bermanifestasi" di tanah Buddha yg murni di luar samsara. Di sana mereka bisa mengembangkan diri menjadi Bodhisattva atau tetap seperti itu.
Saya ini tidak akan habis diperdebatkan. Jadi cukup sebagai pengetahuan kita saja (btw saya jg bukan Mahayanis, mungkin teman2 Mahayanis bisa menjelaskan lebih baik). Soal kebenarannya kita tidak mengetahuinya kecuali telah mencapai tingkat Arhat itu sendiri (yaitu melalui praktek yg benar)....
Semoga bermanfaat
Topic: Pencapaian Nibbana dan Terlahir kembali (Read 203790 times)