[ASK]Surga Sukhavati n Buddha Amitabha?

[tunky]

Dear Lim.
Yes, Sakyamuni Buddha did talk about the Amitabha Buddha, malah sangat mendetil mendeskripsikan Pureland (Sukkhavatti).
Ini salah satu referensi nya:
http://online.sfsu.edu/~rone/Buddhism/amitabha.htm

Seperti yg bisa kita baca di bagian awalnya:

Thus I have heard, at one time time Buddha dwelt at Sravasti in the Jeta grove in the garden of the Bene-factor of Orphans and the Solitary  together with a gathering of great Bhiksus, 1250 in all, all great Ar-hats whom the assembly knew and recognized:  Elders Sari-putra, Mahamaudgalyayana, Mahakasyapa, Mahakatyayana, Mahakausthila, Revata, Suddhipanthaka, Nanda, Ananda, Rahula, Gavampati, Pindola-bharadvaja, Kalodayin, Mahakaphina, Vakkula, Aniruddha, and others such as these, all great disciples; together with all the Bodhisattvas, Mahasattvas: Dharma Prince Manjusri, Ajita Bodhisattva, Gandhastin Bodhisattva, Nityodyukta  Bodhisattva, and others such as these, all great Bodhisattvas; and to-gether with Sakra, chief among gods, and the numberless great multitudes from all the heavens.

At that time the Buddha told the Elder Sariputra, "Passing from here through hundreds of thousands of millions of Buddhalands to the West, there is a world called Ultimate Bliss.  In this land a Buddha called Amitabha right now teaches the Dharma. Sariputra, for what reason is this land called Ultimate Bliss? All living beings  of this country endure none of the suf-ferings, but enjoy every bliss.  Therefore, it is called 'Ultimate Bliss'.
....

Disini jelas2 tertulis bahwa Sakyamuni Buddha membabarkan ttg Amitabha Buddha kepada Sariputra, Ananda, Rahula, dll.
Apa ini masih berarti bahwa sutra ini cuma exist di mahayana?
Bukankah theravada juga mengenal para siswa2 sang Buddha tersebut?

Saya ngga ngerti kenapa semua yg me-respons pertanyaan ini begitu mudah dan cepat menyangkal kebenaran Amitabha Buddha, hanya karena dia lebih identik dengan Mahayana school of Buddhism.
haha..

[at] Lim
gk ada..Buddha Gotama gk pernah menyingung tentang Amithaba Buddha or Surga Sukhavati..I'm just so sure bout it..I dun know why ^^

For El Sol, You can't be too sure about something you don't know much about.
Next time, do some research and learn some more before you answer.
Giving wrong answer is worse than not answering. You can mislead people and take away people's opportunity to learn by doing that.

Metta,
Tung.

[Predator]

Nah kembali kita ulang yg terdapat di penjelasan buddha gautama kepada bhante ananda pada point pertama    nah jika penjelasan itu tidak ada di versi yg lain apakah kita harus bisa langsung menerima??  mari kita lakukan reset bersama-sama 

The Four Great References

Passing thence from village to village, the Buddha arrived at Bhoganagara and there taught the Four Great Citations or References (Mah?padesa) by means of which the Word of the Buddha could be tested and clarified in the following discourse:

(1) A Bhikkhu may say thus:-- From the mouth of the Buddha Himself have I heard, have I received thus: 'This is the Doctrine, this is the Discipline, this is the teaching of the Master?' His words should neither be accepted nor rejected. Without either accepting or rejecting such words, study thoroughly every word and syllable and then put them beside the Discourses (Sutta) and compare them with the Disciplinary Rules (Vinaya). If, when so compared, they do not harmonise with the Discourses and do not agree with the Disciplinary Rules, then you may come to the conclusion. "Certainly this is not the word of the Exalted One, this has been wrongly grasped by the Bhikkhu."

Therefore you should reject it.

If, when compared and contrasted, they harmonise with the Discourses and agree with the Disciplinary Rules, you may come to the conclusion: "Certainly this is the word of the Exalted One, this has correctly been grasped by the Bhikkhu".

Let this be regarded as the First Great Reference.

(2) Again a Bhikkhu may say thus:? 'In such a monastery lives the Sangha together with leading Theras. From the mouth of that Sangha have I heard, have I received thus: 'This is the Doctrine, this is the Discipline, this is the Master's Teaching.' His words should neither be accepted nor rejected. Without either accepting or rejecting such words, study thoroughly every word and syllable and then put them beside the Discourses (Sutta) and compare them with the Disciplinary Rules (Vinaya). If, when so compared, they do not harmonise with the Discourses and do not agree with the Disciplinary Rules, then you may come to the conclusion: 'Certainly this is not the word of the Exalted One, this has been wrongly grasped by the Bhikkhu."

Therefore you should reject it.

If, when compared and contrasted, they harmonise with the Discourses and agree with the Disciplinary Rules, you may come to the conclusion: "Certainly this is the word of the Exalted One, this has correctly been grasped by the Bhikkhu."

Let this be regarded as the second Great Reference.

(3) Again a Bhikkhu may say thus:-- 'In such a monastery dwell many Theras and Bhikkhus of great learning, versed in the teachings, proficient in the Doctrine, Vinaya, Discipline, and Matrices (M?tik?). From the mouth of those Theras have I heard, have I received thus: 'This is the Dhamma, this is the Vinaya, this is the Teaching of the Master. His words should neither be accepted nor rejected. Without either accepting or rejecting such words, study thoroughly every word and syllable and then put them beside the Discourses (Sutta) and compare them with the Disciplinary Rules (Vinaya). If, when so compared, they do not harmonise with the Discourses and do not agree with the Disciplinary Rules, then you may come to the conclusion: "Certainly this is not the word of the Exalted One, this has been wrongly grasped by the Bhikkhu."

Therefore you should reject it.

If, when compared and contrasted, they harmonise with the Suttas and agree with the Vinaya, then you may come to the conclusion: "Certainly this is the word of the Exalted One, this has been correctly grasped by the Bhikkhu."

Let this be regarded as the Third Great Reference.

(4) Again a Bhikkhu may say thus:? 'In such a monastery lives an elderly Bhikkhu of great learning, versed in the teachings, proficient in the Dhamma, Vinaya, and Matrices. From the mouth of that Thera have I heard, have I received thus: 'This is the Dhamma, this is the Vinaya, this is the Master's Teaching.' His words should neither be accepted nor rejected. Without either accepting or rejecting such words, study thoroughly every word and syllable and then put them beside the Discourses (Sutta) and compare them with the Disciplinary Rules (Vinaya). If, when so compared, they do not harmonise with the Discourses and do not agree with the Disciplinary Rules, then you may come to the conclusion: "Certainly this is not the word of the Exalted One, this has been wrongly grasped by the Bhikkhu."

Therefore you should reject it.

If, when compared and contrasted, they harmonise with the Suttas and agree with the Vinaya, then you may come to the conclusion: "Certainly this is the Dhamma, this is the Vinaya, this is the Master's Teachings."

Let this be regarded as the Fourth Great Reference.

These, Bhikkhus, are the Four Great References.

[Muten Roshi]

keberadaan sukhavati dan Buddha Amitabha sama sekali tidak bertentangan dengan four great references...

Nah kembali kita ulang yg terdapat di penjelasan buddha gautama kepada bhante ananda pada point pertama    nah jika penjelasan itu tidak ada di versi yg lain apakah kita harus bisa langsung menerima??  mari kita lakukan reset bersama-sama 

The Four Great References

Passing thence from village to village, the Buddha arrived at Bhoganagara and there taught the Four Great Citations or References (Mah?padesa) by means of which the Word of the Buddha could be tested and clarified in the following discourse:

(1) A Bhikkhu may say thus:-- From the mouth of the Buddha Himself have I heard, have I received thus: 'This is the Doctrine, this is the Discipline, this is the teaching of the Master?' His words should neither be accepted nor rejected. Without either accepting or rejecting such words, study thoroughly every word and syllable and then put them beside the Discourses (Sutta) and compare them with the Disciplinary Rules (Vinaya). If, when so compared, they do not harmonise with the Discourses and do not agree with the Disciplinary Rules, then you may come to the conclusion. "Certainly this is not the word of the Exalted One, this has been wrongly grasped by the Bhikkhu."

Therefore you should reject it.

If, when compared and contrasted, they harmonise with the Discourses and agree with the Disciplinary Rules, you may come to the conclusion: "Certainly this is the word of the Exalted One, this has correctly been grasped by the Bhikkhu".

Let this be regarded as the First Great Reference.

(2) Again a Bhikkhu may say thus:? 'In such a monastery lives the Sangha together with leading Theras. From the mouth of that Sangha have I heard, have I received thus: 'This is the Doctrine, this is the Discipline, this is the Master's Teaching.' His words should neither be accepted nor rejected. Without either accepting or rejecting such words, study thoroughly every word and syllable and then put them beside the Discourses (Sutta) and compare them with the Disciplinary Rules (Vinaya). If, when so compared, they do not harmonise with the Discourses and do not agree with the Disciplinary Rules, then you may come to the conclusion: 'Certainly this is not the word of the Exalted One, this has been wrongly grasped by the Bhikkhu."

Therefore you should reject it.

If, when compared and contrasted, they harmonise with the Discourses and agree with the Disciplinary Rules, you may come to the conclusion: "Certainly this is the word of the Exalted One, this has correctly been grasped by the Bhikkhu."

Let this be regarded as the second Great Reference.

(3) Again a Bhikkhu may say thus:-- 'In such a monastery dwell many Theras and Bhikkhus of great learning, versed in the teachings, proficient in the Doctrine, Vinaya, Discipline, and Matrices (M?tik?). From the mouth of those Theras have I heard, have I received thus: 'This is the Dhamma, this is the Vinaya, this is the Teaching of the Master. His words should neither be accepted nor rejected. Without either accepting or rejecting such words, study thoroughly every word and syllable and then put them beside the Discourses (Sutta) and compare them with the Disciplinary Rules (Vinaya). If, when so compared, they do not harmonise with the Discourses and do not agree with the Disciplinary Rules, then you may come to the conclusion: "Certainly this is not the word of the Exalted One, this has been wrongly grasped by the Bhikkhu."

Therefore you should reject it.

If, when compared and contrasted, they harmonise with the Suttas and agree with the Vinaya, then you may come to the conclusion: "Certainly this is the word of the Exalted One, this has been correctly grasped by the Bhikkhu."

Let this be regarded as the Third Great Reference.

(4) Again a Bhikkhu may say thus:? 'In such a monastery lives an elderly Bhikkhu of great learning, versed in the teachings, proficient in the Dhamma, Vinaya, and Matrices. From the mouth of that Thera have I heard, have I received thus: 'This is the Dhamma, this is the Vinaya, this is the Master's Teaching.' His words should neither be accepted nor rejected. Without either accepting or rejecting such words, study thoroughly every word and syllable and then put them beside the Discourses (Sutta) and compare them with the Disciplinary Rules (Vinaya). If, when so compared, they do not harmonise with the Discourses and do not agree with the Disciplinary Rules, then you may come to the conclusion: "Certainly this is not the word of the Exalted One, this has been wrongly grasped by the Bhikkhu."

Therefore you should reject it.

If, when compared and contrasted, they harmonise with the Suttas and agree with the Vinaya, then you may come to the conclusion: "Certainly this is the Dhamma, this is the Vinaya, this is the Master's Teachings."

Let this be regarded as the Fourth Great Reference.

These, Bhikkhus, are the Four Great References.

[Muten Roshi]

referensi tentang Buddha Amitabha dan Sukhawati
http://www.dhammacitta.org/forum/index.php/topic,204.0.html

[markosprawira]

cuma mo tanya iseng2 nih... setau gw sih, Buddha cuma ngajarin dalam 1x kehidupan doang.... karena setelah fisiknya (yang sankhata atau berkondisi) tidak ada lagi, maka akan menjadi asankhata atau tidak berkondisi.....

nah kalau buddha amitabha sedang mengajar di sukhavati, seharusnya dia ga akan ngajar lagi di bumi ini dong???

mungkin itu hal esensi yang perlu dipertanyakan dulu yah..

maaf jika ada kata2 yang salah.......

[Muten Roshi]

setau saya, Sang Buddha pun sekarang sedang mengajar di alam yang lain.... 
memangnya ada yang mengajarkan setelah mencapai asankhata, lantas tidak bisa mengajar lagi?

[Upaseno]

Everyone is Buddha...Saddhu!!!

[Predator]

referensi tentang Buddha Amitabha dan Sukhawati
http://www.dhammacitta.org/forum/index.php/topic,204.0.html

referensi tentang Buddha Amitabha dan Sukhawati
http://www.dhammacitta.org/forum/index.php/topic,204.0.html

Ow.. saya butuh referensi langsung dari sutra-nya    lantas kita studi banding, karena saya berusaha ber-diskusi bukan ber-argumen 

[Predator]

setau saya, Sang Buddha pun sekarang sedang mengajar di alam yang lain.... 
memangnya ada yang mengajarkan setelah mencapai asankhata, lantas tidak bisa mengajar lagi?

Nah kalo saya balik pertanyaan.. ketika sang buddha mengajar apakah sang buddha disini masih memiliki nama dan rupa / pancaindra / pancaskanda ??

[Predator]

Everyone is Buddha...Saddhu!!!

Calon buddha kali bhante ya    .. kalo semua buddha.. jadi ga ada diskusi lagi donk atu mungkin itu yg terbaik ya??     

[Kelana]

Disini jelas2 tertulis bahwa Sakyamuni Buddha membabarkan ttg Amitabha Buddha kepada Sariputra, Ananda, Rahula, dll.
Apa ini masih berarti bahwa sutra ini cuma exist di mahayana?
Bukankah theravada juga mengenal para siswa2 sang Buddha tersebut?

Sdr. Tungky, jika hanya menggunakan alasan ini, saya rasa terlalu lemah. Alasan hanya menggunakan nama para siswa, adalah alasan sangat lemah karena semua orang dengan mudah bisa mencantumkan nama-nama itu dalam tulisan yang baru ia buat, semudah memasukan nama Tini, Tono dan Budi dalam sebuah novel dan memasukan novel tersebut dalam jajaran sastra Indonesia di rak perpustakaan. 
Menggunakan alasan karena adanya nama para siswa dan kalimat “Demikianlah yang saya dengar:” sebagai alasan sutta/sutra tersebut merupakan sabda Sang Buddha, merupakan alasan yang lemah.
Saya rasa ada alasan yang lebih baik dari ini, mungkin rekan yang lain bisa menjelaskan atau anda bisa menyimak diskusi http://www.dhammacitta.org/forum/index.php/topic,130.0.html

[Muten Roshi]

seseorang yang belum mencapai ke-arahatan namun bisa mengkritik isi sebuah sutta... apa dasarnya.

Disini jelas2 tertulis bahwa Sakyamuni Buddha membabarkan ttg Amitabha Buddha kepada Sariputra, Ananda, Rahula, dll.
Apa ini masih berarti bahwa sutra ini cuma exist di mahayana?
Bukankah theravada juga mengenal para siswa2 sang Buddha tersebut?

Sdr. Tungky, jika hanya menggunakan alasan ini, saya rasa terlalu lemah. Alasan hanya menggunakan nama para siswa, adalah alasan sangat lemah karena semua orang dengan mudah bisa mencantumkan nama-nama itu dalam tulisan yang baru ia buat, semudah memasukan nama Tini, Tono dan Budi dalam sebuah novel dan memasukan novel tersebut dalam jajaran sastra Indonesia di rak perpustakaan. 
Menggunakan alasan karena adanya nama para siswa dan kalimat “Demikianlah yang saya dengar:” sebagai alasan sutta/sutra tersebut merupakan sabda Sang Buddha, merupakan alasan yang lemah.
Saya rasa ada alasan yang lebih baik dari ini, mungkin rekan yang lain bisa menjelaskan atau anda bisa menyimak diskusi http://www.dhammacitta.org/forum/index.php/topic,130.0.html

[Kelana]

seseorang yang belum mencapai ke-arahatan namun bisa mengkritik isi sebuah sutta... apa dasarnya.

seseorang yang belum mencapai ke-arahatan namun bisa mengkritik pengkritik isi sebuah sutta...apa dasarnya.  

[dipasena]

seseorang yang belum mencapai ke-arahatan namun bisa mengkritik isi sebuah sutta... apa dasarnya.

apakah cuma seorang arahat yg boleh/bs mengkritisi isi sebuah Sutta ? misalkan ada sebuah Sutta yg dilencengkan, kemudian menggunakan embel2 Buddha Dhamma, apakah tidak boleh dikiritisi ? apakah itu diterima sebagai bagian dari Sutta ? bs ka chow itu nantinya... karena adanya kebijakan2 pribadi/kelompok terhadap Dhamma, maka bakal byk Dhamma yg terhapus demi kebijakan2 tersebut.


NB: ini diluar pembicaraan terhadap Surga Sukhavati n Buddha Amitabha bener atau tidak loh ya...

[dipasena]

seseorang yang belum mencapai ke-arahatan namun bisa mengkritik isi sebuah sutta... apa dasarnya.

seseorang yang belum mencapai ke-arahatan namun bisa mengkritik pengkritik isi sebuah sutta...apa dasarnya.  

nah bener tuh, ketika seseorang harus dituntun menjadi arahat untuk dapat mengenal dan mengkritik Sutta [Dhamma], apakah orang yg meng-kritik si peng-kritik Sutta jg mengenal Dhamma layaknya orang yg telah mencapai ke-arahatan ? jika belum, koq tau bahwa si peng-kritik Sutta itu salah dalam meng-kritisi Sutta ?

kita sama-sama tidak mengetahui, so kudu dicari tau...