Guatama referred to himself as the "Tathagata" not the "Buddha"

[Invisible Acropolis]

I have always wondered why it is that Buddhism is called as such... and more specifically the figure of Guatama referenced in such a way - when in the Pali canon, Guatama consistently refers to himself as the "tathagata"... and the word "buddha" is not found in the texts until much later, after his death.

 

 

Quote

 

Tathāgata (Pali: [tɐˈtʰaːɡɐtɐ]) is a Pali word; Gautama Buddha uses it when referring to himself or other Buddhas in the Pāli Canon. The term is often thought to mean either "one who has thus gone" (tathā-gata), "one who has thus come" (tathā-āgata), or sometimes "one who has thus not gone" (tathā-agata). There are, however, other interpretations and the precise original meaning of the word is not certain. The Buddha is quoted on numerous occasions in the Pali Canon as referring to himself as the Tathāgata instead of using the pronouns me, I or myself.

 

According to Fyodor Shcherbatskoy, the term has a non-Buddhist origin, and is best understood when compared to its usage in non-Buddhist works such as the Mahabharata.  Shcherbatskoy gives the following example from the Mahabharata (Shantiparva, 181.22):

 

"Just as the footprints of birds (flying) in the sky and fish (swimming) in water cannot be seen, Thus (tātha) is going (gati) of those who have realized the Truth."

 

 

 

[Taoist Texts]

1 hour ago, Invisible Acropolis said:

and the word "buddha" is not found in the texts until much later, after his death.

its because buddha exists only after leaving this world not while in it

https://suttacentral.net/search?query=buddha

[Invisible Acropolis]

12 hours ago, Taoist Texts said:

its because buddha exists only after leaving this world not while in it

https://suttacentral.net/search?query=buddha

 

No, that is wrong.  Gautama himself spoke about this in great detail.

 

Quote

The Buddha and Sariputta, in similar passages, when confronted with speculation as to the status of an arahant after death, bring their interlocutors to admit that they cannot even apprehend an arahant that is alive.  As Sariputta puts it, his questioner Yamaka "can't pin down the Tathagata as a truth or reality even in the present life." These passages imply that condition of the arahant, both before and after parinirvana, lies beyond the domain where the descriptive powers of ordinary language are at home; that is, the world of the skandhas and the greed, hatred, and delusion that are "blown out" with nirvana.

 

Also the link you posted above makes no references to "leaving the world".

 

Although your fantasies are quite interesting from a psychological perspective, in terms of illuminating your own thoughts on the matter.

[Eduardo]

.

Edited February 7 by Eduardo
Delete

[Taoist Texts]

1 hour ago, Eduardo said:

In the Dhammapada, one of the earliest Buddhist texts that are part of the Pali Canon, the Buddha refers to himself, as  ... the Buddha.

thank you Eduardo, thats a valuable info. would you happen to have a quote where he says something along the lines 'hi, my name is the buddha in this current rebirth"? thank you, appreciate it in advance.

[Eduardo]

3 hours ago, Taoist Texts said:

thank you Eduardo, thats a valuable info. would you happen to have a quote where he says something along the lines 'hi, my name is the buddha in this current rebirth"? thank you, appreciate it in advance.

 

The Buddha devoid of vanity and egotism, without departing from the prudence and humility of the noble eightfold path in chapter 21, epigraph 296 of the Dhammapada points out:

"Gautama's followers are awake and forever watch; and always, day and night, they remember the qualities of the Buddha"

[Cobie]

.
 

 

Edited December 15, 2022 by Cobie

[Eduardo]

1 hour ago, Cobie said:

 Which one (of the 27 Buddhas preceding him) was he referring to? 
 

 

If you use bad faith, mockery and contempt of the other more than the rational and constructive analysis of Buddhist sources, I have nothing more to tell you, nor could I respond to you on this destructive level.

[Cobie]

I have removed my post.  
 

 

Edited December 15, 2022 by Cobie

[Brad M]

.

Edited December 19, 2022 by Brad M

[Mark Foote]

On 12/15/2022 at 7:27 AM, Eduardo said:

 

In the Dhammapada, one of the earliest Buddhist texts that are part of the Pali Canon, the Buddha refers to himself, as the Tathagata, the Arhant, the Buddha.

 

In fact, in this text the word Buddha appears eighteen times, it must be borne in mind that the Dhammapada was written according to the speeches that the members of the primitive Shanga heard on in various occasions.

 

The original version of the Dhammapada is in the Khuddaka Nikaya, a division of the Pali Canon of Theravada Buddhism.

(Wikipedia, "Dhammapada")

Khuddaka Nikaya, (Pali: “Short Collection”) diverse group of separate Buddhist texts constituting the fifth and last section of the Pali Sutta Pitaka (“Basket of Discourse”). Although it contains some very early works, it as a collection is later than the other four Nikayas and much more varied in form and content.

(https://www.britannica.com/topic/Khuddaka-Nikaya, emphasis added)

 

The Ksudraka Agama (Skt. Kṣudraka Āgama; English: "Minor Collection") is one of the Buddhist Agamas, a collection of Buddhist texts. It corresponds to the Khuddaka Nikaya of the Pali Canon.
 

Rupert Gethin writes that in addition to the four main Nikāya/Āgama texts, a ‘minor’ collection of miscellaneous texts was also recognized....
 

Some schools, notably the Sarvāstivāda, recognized only four Āgamas—though they had a "Kṣudraka" which they did not consider to be an "Āgama." Others—including even the Dharmaguptaka, according to some contemporary scholars—preferred to term it the "Kṣudraka Piṭaka." As with its Pāḷi counterpart, the Kṣudraka Āgama appears to have been a miscellany, and was perhaps never definitively established among many of the early schools of Buddhism.

 

(Wikipedia, "Ksudraka Agama")

Edited December 25, 2022 by Mark Foote

[Mark Foote]

On 12/14/2022 at 7:48 AM, Invisible Acropolis said:

I have always wondered why it is that Buddhism is called as such... and more specifically the figure of Guatama referenced in such a way - when in the Pali canon, Guatama consistently refers to himself as the "tathagata"... and the word "buddha" is not found in the texts until much later, after his death.

 

Not so.  

Here's a passage from the Digha Nikaya, for example:

 

Then the Exalted One addressed the brethren, and said:--It may be, brethren, that there may be doubt or misgiving in the mind of some brother as to the Buddha, or the doctrine, or the path, or the method."

 

(DN II 154, Pali Text Society DN Vol II p172
 

The "Exalted One" being Gautama.  The translator there is either T W or C A F Rhys Davids, so one of the first translations of the Pali Text Society, but I think it's unlikely that another translation applies. 

However, Gautama is not referencing himself there.  When he does, in the same lecture:

 

... But, Ananda, the Tathagata knows for certain...

(Ibid, ii 156 p 173)

 

In the "Chapter on In-Breathing and Out-Breathing" in SN V, Gautama says:
 

Formerly, monks, before I myself was enlightened with the perfect wisdom, and was yet a Bodhisattva...

(SN V 316, Pali Text Society SN V p 280)

 

Hmmm, ok, in the "Kindred Sayings on Stream-Winning", we have:
 

... the Ariyan disciple is possessed of unwavering loyalty to the Buddha, thus:  (He has faith that) He it is the Exalted One, Arahant, a fully Enlightened One, perfect in Knowledge and practice, a Happy One, world-knower, unsurpassed charioteer of men to be tamed, teacher of devas and mankind, a Buddha, an Exalted One.

(SN V 343?, Pali Text Society SN V p 297)

 

"The Exalted One" is used throughout Samyutta Nikaya to refer to Gautama, but although I think it's clear that Gautama is saying he has all these qualities, he's not referring to himself as "the Buddha". 

It's an interesting point.  

 

 

 

Edited December 25, 2022 by Mark Foote

[old3bob]

a warning: and anyone who puts themselves upon an altar is not a "Buddha"...

[forestofemptiness]

Technically, all of the Pali Canon were recorded after his death, but try this one:

 

https://suttacentral.net/an4.36/en/bodhi?reference=none&highlight=false

 

“As a lovely white lotus
is not soiled by the water,
I am not soiled by the world:
therefore, O brahmin, I am a Buddha.”

[Taoist Texts]

13 minutes ago, forestofemptiness said:

Technically, all of the Pali Canon were recorded after his death, but try this one:

 

https://suttacentral.net/an4.36/en/bodhi?reference=none&highlight=false

therefore, O brahmin, I am a Buddha.”

you left out this line

Remember me, brahmin, as a Buddha.

 

meaning this is a future tense. he will be a buddha WHEN he is gone and remembered. Note also it is 'a' buddha, not 'the' buddha meaning buddha is not his name.

 

On the future tense in this sutra see:

Quote

 

https://www.themindingcentre.org/dharmafarer/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/36.13-Pada-Dona-S-a4.36-piya.pdf

Section 2c below poses an interesting problem because there bhavissati and bhavissāmi can be rightly taken both as the future tense and as expressing perplexity. However, from the Buddha’s answer in the future tense, too

 

 

[C T]

The distinguishing factor between Buddhas, up to and including Gautama, and other awakened beings, is that only when the wheel of (Buddha)Dharma has been turned is the epithet meaningful. There have been arhats and other non-returners who followed the purānamārga (path of the ancients, the same path taken by all Buddhas) who, for various reasons, did not turn the Dhamma wheel hence were not acknowledged as Buddhas. 

 

The chief criteria concerning the turning of the wheel of Dharma relates to the transmission of knowledge of awakening. So when Gautama referred to himself as Buddha, there is a direct and specific reference to the continuity of his role as Teacher and disseminator of the purānamārga. 

[Mark Foote]

On 12/28/2022 at 10:25 AM, forestofemptiness said:

Technically, all of the Pali Canon were recorded after his death, but try this one:

 

https://suttacentral.net/an4.36/en/bodhi?reference=none&highlight=false

 

“As a lovely white lotus
is not soiled by the water,
I am not soiled by the world:
therefore, O brahmin, I am a Buddha.”
 

Gautama's companion Ananda is generally considered to have had a photographic memory for sound, and his recollections formed the basis for much of the first four Nikayas of the Pali Canon.

I think a more straightforward translation of Book of Fours 36 can be found in the Pali Text Society's editions.   Here's a little bit more of the text, starting with the questions from Dona to Gautama:

Your worship will become a deva?

No indeed, brahmin.  I'll not become a deva.

Then your worship will become a gandarva?

No indeed, brahmin, I'll not become a gandarva.

A yakka, then?

No indeed, brahmin.  Not a yakka.

Then your worship will become a human being?

No indeed, brahmin.  I'll not become a human being.

... Who then, pray, will your worship become?
... Just as, brahmin, a lotus, blue, red, or white, though born in the water, grown up in the water, when it reaches the surface stands there unsoiled by the water,--just so, brahmin, though born in the world, grown up in the world, having overcome the world, I abide unsoiled by the world.  Take it that I am a Buddha, brahmin.

(AN Book of Fours 36, Pali Text Society AN Vol 2 p 44)

 

I prefer "I abide unsoiled by the world" to "I am not soiled by the world", the sense of time in "abide" is helpful to me--like, "I spend my time in a place that is unsoiled by the world".  Subtle difference from "I am unsoiled by the world." 

Likewise, "Take it that I am a Buddha, brahmin", rather than "Therefore, o brahmin, I am a Buddha."  "Take it that I am" seems to say, "for lack of a better term, you can just write me down as a Buddha."  

Now it could be that Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation is more accurate that that of F. L. Woodward, I don't know.  I do prefer the gentler Gautama in Woodward's translation, and since grace was universally acknowledged to be a defining trait of the man, I'll continue to refer to the Pali Text Society's translations (they are available online here).

For lack of a better term, you can call it "Buddhism".

 

Edited January 18, 2023 by Mark Foote

[Invisible Acropolis]

On 12/24/2022 at 11:45 PM, Mark Foote said:

Not so.  

Here's a passage from the Digha Nikaya, for example:

 

Then the Exalted One addressed the brethren, and said:--It may be, brethren, that there may be doubt or misgiving in the mind of some brother as to the Buddha, or the doctrine, or the path, or the method."

 

(DN II 154, Pali Text Society DN Vol II p172

 

Its rather common knowledge (and so far, borne out by all the available archaeological evidence) that the entire Pali Canon was written hundreds of years after the death of Guatama.  Its also commonly thought that the text is most likely a written account of an oral tradition, which is again something that would only be derived from the followers of Guatama, which as you point out was most likely sourced from Ananda for the most part.

 

this is what I am referring to when I mentioned:

 

Quote

 and the word "buddha" is not found in the texts until much later, after his death.

 

Not that the word itself is not in the texts, but rather ALL the texts themselves are not found until much later, after his death.

 

On 12/28/2022 at 11:25 AM, forestofemptiness said:

Technically, all of the Pali Canon were recorded after his death, but try this one:

 

https://suttacentral.net/an4.36/en/bodhi?reference=none&highlight=false

 

“As a lovely white lotus
is not soiled by the water,
I am not soiled by the world:
therefore, O brahmin, I am a Buddha.”

 

Fair point - and good job finding this.   And yet I still have to wonder what it is about this passage in particular which caused the term "buddha" to become more remembered and referenced than the term "tathagata" - especially in regards to the technical definition of each.  

[Invisible Acropolis]

On 12/15/2022 at 8:27 AM, Eduardo said:

In the Dhammapada, one of the earliest Buddhist texts that are part of the Pali Canon, the Buddha refers to himself, as the Tathagata, the Arhant, the Buddha.

In fact, in this text the word Buddha appears eighteen times, it must be borne in mind that the Dhammapada was written according to the speeches that the members of the primitive Shanga heard on in various occasions.

 

The word buddha mostly appears when others talk about Guatama, rather than when he refers to himself.   

 

I still wonder why the term "buddha" was the most remembered, rather than the other terms which have other meanings.

[Mark Foote]

On 2/2/2023 at 5:54 AM, Invisible Acropolis said:

 

The word buddha mostly appears when others talk about Guatama, rather than when he refers to himself.   

 

I still wonder why the term "buddha" was the most remembered, rather than the other terms which have other meanings.

 

 

I'm a big fan of the Gospel of Thomas, one of the Nag Hammadi texts considered a "gnostic" gospel (not acknowledged by the orthodox churches as a genuine record of the teachings of Jesus).

There's no life history of Jesus in the Gospel of Thomas, just a collection of sayings, many of which are also found in the synoptic gospels.  Here's one of my favorites:
 

(13) Jesus said to his disciples, "Compare me to someone and tell me whom I am like."

Simon Peter said to him, "You are like a righteous angel."

Matthew said to him, "You are like a wise philosopher."

Thomas said to him, "Master, my mouth is wholly incapable of saying whom you are like." Jesus said, "I am not your master. Because you have drunk, you have become intoxicated from the bubbling spring which I have measured out."

And he took him and withdrew and told him three things. When Thomas returned to his companions, they asked him, "What did Jesus say to you?"

Thomas said to them, "If I tell you one of the things which he told me, you will pick up stones and throw them at me; a fire will come out of the stones and burn you up."

 

(https://www.marquette.edu/maqom/Gospel of Thomas Lambdin.pdf)

 

I've never had a lot of interest in the orthodox churches, but if I understand correctly, it was Paul who invented the notion that Jesus died to redeem mankind's sins:

 

According to the New Testament book Acts of the Apostles, Paul lived as a Pharisee. He participated in the persecution of early disciples of Jesus, possibly Hellenised diaspora Jews converted to Christianity, in the area of Jerusalem, prior to his conversion.[note 1] Some time after having approved of the execution of Stephen, Paul was traveling on the road to Damascus so that he might find any Christians there and bring them "bound to Jerusalem" (ESV). At midday, a light brighter than the sun shone around both him and those with him, causing all to fall to the ground, with the risen Christ verbally addressing Paul regarding his persecution. Having been made blind,[18] along with being commanded to enter the city, his sight was restored three days later by Ananias of Damascus. After these events, Paul was baptized, beginning immediately to proclaim that Jesus of Nazareth was the Jewish messiah and the Son of God. Approximately half of the content in the book of Acts details the life and works of Paul.

(Wikipedia, Paul the Apostle)

 

You know the consequences of Paul's teaching.  I think it's no surprise that Gautama was only represented by footprints in the era immediately after his death, and that we have footprints on the burial stone of Jesus in Kashmir (yes, I do believe that's where he wound up--one of my teachers in college told me his people believed Thomas was stoned to death in their village in South India, and truth is stranger than fiction!).  Nevertheless, soon enough there were statues everywhere of both men, with Jesus the Christ and Gautama the Buddha.  "Take it that I am a Buddha"--but really, the mouth is wholly incapable of saying what Gautama was like.