In the Buddha's Words - Bhikkhu Bodhi [201]
The subtle attachment and the residual sense of “I am” that persist in the nonreturner both stem from ignorance. To reach the end of the path, the nonreturner must obliterate the remaining segment of ignorance and dispel all traces of craving and conceit. The critical point when ignorance, craving, and conceit are eradicated marks the transition from the stage of nonreturner to arahantship. The difference between the two can be a subtle one, and therefore standards for distinguishing them are necessary. In Text X,4(2) the Buddha proposes several criteria by which a trainee and an arahant can determine their respective standings. One of particular interest concerns their relationship to the five spiritual faculties: faith, energy, mindfulness, concentration, and wisdom. The trainee sees with wisdom the goal in which the faculties culminate—namely, Nibbāna—but cannot dwell in it. The arahant sees with wisdom the supreme goal and can also dwell in that goal.
The texts that follow offer different perspectives on the arahant. Text X,4(3) characterizes the arahant with a series of metaphors, elucidated in the same passage. Text X,4(4) enumerates nine things that an arahant cannot do. In Text X,4(5), the Venerable Sāriputta describes the arahant’s imperturbability in the face of powerful sense objects, and in Text X,4(6) he enumerates the ten powers of an arahant. Text X,4(7), an excerpt from the Dhātuvibhaṅga Sutta, begins as an account of the attainment of arahantship through the contemplation of the elements; the relevant passage was included in the previous chapter as Text IX,4(3)(c). The exposition then turns to the “four foundations” (cattāro adhiṭṭhāna) of the arahant, here spoken of as “the sage at peace” (muni santo). Text X,4(8), the last in this section, is a poem extolling the arahant’s distinguished qualities.
The first and foremost of the arahants is the Buddha himself, to whom the last section of this chapter is devoted. The section is titled “The Tathāgata,” the word the Buddha used when referring to himself in his archetypal role as the discoverer and bringer of liberating truth. The word can be resolved in two ways: taken as tathā āgata, “Thus Come,” it implies that the Buddha has come in accordance with an established pattern (which the commentaries interpret to mean the fulfillment of the ten spiritual perfections—the pāramīs—and the thirty-seven aids to enlightenment); taken as tathā gata, “Thus Gone,” it implies that he has gone in accordance with an established pattern (which the commentaries interpret to mean that he has gone to Nibbāna by the complete practice of serenity, insight, the paths, and the fruits).
Later forms of Buddhism draw extreme distinctions between Buddhas and arahants, but in the Nikāyas this distinction is not as sharp as one might expect if one takes later texts as the benchmark of interpretation. On the one hand, the Buddha is an arahant, as is evident from the standard verse of homage to the Blessed One (iti pi so bhagavā arahaṃ sammā sambuddho ...); on the other, arahants are buddha, in the sense that they have attained full enlightenment, sambodhi, by awakening to the same truths that the Buddha himself realized. The proper distinction, then, is that between a sammā sambuddha or Perfectly Enlightened Buddha, and an arahant who has attained enlightenment and liberation as a disciple (s̄vaka) of a Perfectly Enlightened Buddha. However, to avoid such complex locutions, we will resort to the common practice of phrasing the distinction as that between a Buddha and an arahant.
What then is the relationship between the two? Is the difference between