In the tathagatagarbha-sutras it is this pure consciousness that is regarded to be the seed from which Buddhahood grows: When this intrinsically pure consciousness came to be regarded as an element capable of growing into Buddhahood, there was the "embryo (garbha) of the Tathagata (=Buddha)" doctrine, whether or not this term is employed.[3]. There are those who argue that tathāgatagarbha is just emptiness (described either as dharmadhatu, the nature of phenomena, or a nonimplicative negation) and there are those who see it as the union of the mind's emptiness and luminosity (which includes the buddha qualities). [110] They thus interpret Buddha nature as an expedient term for the emptiness of inherent existence. The doctrine of buddha-nature in its full form was not present in early Buddhism and is not accepted by most contemporary Asian Theravada Buddhist traditions. The main types of Buddhism are Theravada (Theravāda), Mahayana … Buddha est le surnom qui lui sera donné après l’Illumination Intérieure (bodhi) et signifie " celui qui est passé par l’illumination intérieure " ou "l'Eveillé". I am not sure of the meaning of the “abode of the Brahmas”, but that expression adds strength to this simplification. Don’t all beings return to the Tao? Meditation plays a key role in the teaching of the Buddha. Is it not the case that if we remove all that is not-Wisdom or not-Compassion then we are part of All-Wisdom and All-Compassion? What is the Buddha-nature that we are supposed to be? BZ:- Perhaps here Unconditioned is a useful notion. That which enables things to change is their simple absence of inherent existence, their emptiness. And sometimes it is said that everyone has Buddha Nature. Buddha nature is supposed to be a general background, underlying nature that we all share. A novice is called a samanera and a full monk is called a bikkhu. What do you understand by Dhammakaya? [37], The Tathāgatagarbha Sūtra (200-250 CE) is considered (...) "the earliest expression of this (the tathāgatagarbha doctrine) and the term tathāgatagarbha itself seems to have been coined in this very sutra. an underlying ontological reality or essential nature (, the womb or matrix of Buddhahood existing in all beings. The best you can do, probably, is dig deep into the tradition in which you find yourself and allow its teachings and practice and support to take you to the goal. I remember a theosophy layer cake, the top three being Atma, Buddhi, Higher Manas. This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled.
In a Tibetan book it says we should practice “the three yanas – Hinayana, Mahayana and Vajrayana – without any contradiction or conflict between them”. But such is not necessary for Dhamma is beautiful in the beginning, beautiful in the middle and beautiful in the end. And more importantly does this mean that some kinds of experience of the mind that arise in meditation should not be rejected as simply impermanent, dukkha and non-self? [68] Candrakirti's Madhyamakāvatārabhāsya also argues, basing itself on the Lankavatara sutra, that "the statement of the emptiness of sentient beings being a buddha adorned with all major and minor marks is of expedient meaning". Some could interpret this move as the logical conclusion of a nondualistic philosophy.". All Mahayana is doing is giving this experience a name – Buddha Nature. In general, I think Mahayana/Vajrayana has far greater marketing tools. According to Matsumoto Shirõ and Hakamaya Noriaki of Komazawa University, essentialist conceptions of Buddha-nature are at odds with the fundamental Buddhist doctrine of dependent origination and non-self (anātman). Shenpen Hookham, Oxford Buddhist scholar and Tibetan lama of the Shentong tradition writes of the Buddha-nature or "true self" as something real and permanent, and already present within the being as uncompounded enlightenment. Within these rules or precepts are five which are undertaken by all those trying to adhere to a Buddhist way of life. It is Buddha-nature which we let go to in meditation and in daily life, Buddha-nature that we rely upon, Buddha-nature that connects us to all things and which gives rise to all things. I do get the impression that some perceive enlightenment as just waiting to hit them suddenly. We each have our own Buddha nature, though this essence is the same for each of us. If this explanation is difficult to understand at first, do not be discouraged. “…. In the above I am postulating “paralleling”. [80], The joining together of these different ideas supported the notion of the ekayāna, the one vehicle: absolute oneness, all-pervading Buddha-wisdom and original enlightenment as a holistic whole.
So, an Atman is a permanent, individual soul, that does not change. [25] When Buddhism was introduced to China, in the 1st century CE, Buddhism was understood through comparisons of its teachings to Chinese terms and ways of thinking. Is this then an extra category of consciousness that is not impermanent, dukkha or non-self? Of course different branches of Buddhism, as well as different Buddhist practitioners, all have different approaches.
I must say this; otherwise you might think that the innate original clear light as absolute truth really exists. Buddha Nature is an important teaching in Tibetan Buddhism, although the various schools of Tibetan Buddhism do not entirely agree on what it is. The teachings were written down in Sri Lanka during the 1st century CE. It’s been a while since I read the Heart Sutra, but the Lotus Sutra says that the three vehicals are nonesense, and just a ploy to get you out of the burning building (suffering). As for the postive approach to meditation, I’m glad you don’t bash your own head Re: ‘brightness and stillness’, I was referring to my own interest in the Dhammakaya approach to meditation which focusses on these aspects rather than the more common ‘Insight’ approaches. This view is particularly prevalent in Sri Lanka, today as in the past. [116] The Sakya scholar Rongtön meanwhile, argued that buddha nature is suchness, with stains, or emptiness of the mind with stains. Specifically with regards to the brahmaviharas I knew they were in samsara but I was attempting to rationalise with regards to Mahayana – Boddhisattva of Compassion? "[76], The Chinese Yogacara school was also split on the relationship between the tathāgatagarbha and ālayavijñāna. [49] The sutra presents the Buddha-nature or tathagatagarbha as a "Self". The basis of all forms of Buddhism is to use meditation for awakening (or enlightenment), not outside powers. . The spirit of it is more in the nature of open-hearted giving. One answer, of course, is that it is in direct relationship to the work (practice, faith, whatever) you do. It helped me a lot. Meditation and concentration are vital elements of the way to enlightenment. When we clear away what is not compassion, when we get rid of delusions then we become part of the already-existing Wisdom and Compassion. [61][note 13]. The All melts into a single whole.
To be quite honest I don’t know. I also have the same impression on the Buddha nature issue. In an attempt to rationalise I lost sight of what I had previously understood. There is a danger in this but I think it is skilful for me. From the idea of the luminous mind emerged the idea that the awakened mind is the pure (visuddhi), undefiled mind. Made me sad. And more importantly does this mean that some kinds of experience of the mind that arise in meditation should not be rejected as simply impermanent, dukkha and non-self?
That said, certain states are more conducive to penetrating Dhamma. Read more. In order to achieve Buddhahood and enlightenment, people must commit themselves to the Buddha’s teachings, which is known as, The path of the arhat – Theravada Buddhism, is a ‘worthy one’ or a ‘perfected person’. Karl Brunnholzl writes that the first probable mention of the term is in the Ekottarika Agama (though here it is used in a different way then in later texts).
Thank you so much! I love all sentient beings except for that mosquito that has just bitten me so my metta is flawed. (conditions). Out of compassion for future seekers, Bodhisattvas established the notion of Buddha Nature, openly declaring that Enlightenment is not something remote you have to attain, but rather one's innate nature to be recovered. [64] It presents the tathāgatagarbha as "an ultimate, unconditional reality that is simultaneously the inherent, dynamic process towards its complete manifestation". So I do the best I can. Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche sees an identity between the Buddha-nature, dharmadhātu (essence of all phenomena and the noumenon) and the Three Vajras, saying: Dharmadhatu is adorned with dharmakaya, which is endowed with dharmadhatu wisdom. I would like to learn from someoone who uses personification. My own meditation is far from being Vipassana only. With this as part of HHPR’s tradition and learning Hinayanan practice cannot be complete. So that brings me to the Unconditioned?
"[note 14]. I think one of the most interesting things, for me anyway, is this part here: “And more importantly does this mean that some kinds of experience of the mind that arise in meditation should not be rejected as simply impermanent, dukkha and non-self?
What do you understand by Dhammakaya? It was also seen as the mūla-vijñāna, the base-consciousness or "stream of consciousness" from which awareness and perception spring. The Nirvana Sutra is one of three Mahayana sutras that make up a collection called the Tathagatagarbha ("womb of the Buddhas") sutras. The first is the 'Knowledge-body' (Jnana-kaya), the inner nature shared by all Buddhas, their Buddha-ness (buddhata)[...] The second aspect of the Dharma-body is the 'Self-existent-body' (Svabhavika-kaya). Some join as young as seven, but one can join at any age. There are no divisions in the totality of reality [...] [I]t views the cosmos as holy, as "one bright pearl," the universal reality of the Buddha. Theravada Buddhists believe that an arhat has ‘blown out’ the, Once a person becomes an arhat, they are free from the cycle of.
In a Tibetan book it says we should practice “the three yanas – Hinayana, Mahayana and Vajrayana – without any contradiction or conflict between them”. But such is not necessary for Dhamma is beautiful in the beginning, beautiful in the middle and beautiful in the end. And more importantly does this mean that some kinds of experience of the mind that arise in meditation should not be rejected as simply impermanent, dukkha and non-self? [68] Candrakirti's Madhyamakāvatārabhāsya also argues, basing itself on the Lankavatara sutra, that "the statement of the emptiness of sentient beings being a buddha adorned with all major and minor marks is of expedient meaning". Some could interpret this move as the logical conclusion of a nondualistic philosophy.". All Mahayana is doing is giving this experience a name – Buddha Nature. In general, I think Mahayana/Vajrayana has far greater marketing tools. According to Matsumoto Shirõ and Hakamaya Noriaki of Komazawa University, essentialist conceptions of Buddha-nature are at odds with the fundamental Buddhist doctrine of dependent origination and non-self (anātman). Shenpen Hookham, Oxford Buddhist scholar and Tibetan lama of the Shentong tradition writes of the Buddha-nature or "true self" as something real and permanent, and already present within the being as uncompounded enlightenment. Within these rules or precepts are five which are undertaken by all those trying to adhere to a Buddhist way of life. It is Buddha-nature which we let go to in meditation and in daily life, Buddha-nature that we rely upon, Buddha-nature that connects us to all things and which gives rise to all things. I do get the impression that some perceive enlightenment as just waiting to hit them suddenly. We each have our own Buddha nature, though this essence is the same for each of us. If this explanation is difficult to understand at first, do not be discouraged. “…. In the above I am postulating “paralleling”. [80], The joining together of these different ideas supported the notion of the ekayāna, the one vehicle: absolute oneness, all-pervading Buddha-wisdom and original enlightenment as a holistic whole.
So, an Atman is a permanent, individual soul, that does not change. [25] When Buddhism was introduced to China, in the 1st century CE, Buddhism was understood through comparisons of its teachings to Chinese terms and ways of thinking. Is this then an extra category of consciousness that is not impermanent, dukkha or non-self? Of course different branches of Buddhism, as well as different Buddhist practitioners, all have different approaches.
I must say this; otherwise you might think that the innate original clear light as absolute truth really exists. Buddha Nature is an important teaching in Tibetan Buddhism, although the various schools of Tibetan Buddhism do not entirely agree on what it is. The teachings were written down in Sri Lanka during the 1st century CE. It’s been a while since I read the Heart Sutra, but the Lotus Sutra says that the three vehicals are nonesense, and just a ploy to get you out of the burning building (suffering). As for the postive approach to meditation, I’m glad you don’t bash your own head Re: ‘brightness and stillness’, I was referring to my own interest in the Dhammakaya approach to meditation which focusses on these aspects rather than the more common ‘Insight’ approaches. This view is particularly prevalent in Sri Lanka, today as in the past. [116] The Sakya scholar Rongtön meanwhile, argued that buddha nature is suchness, with stains, or emptiness of the mind with stains. Specifically with regards to the brahmaviharas I knew they were in samsara but I was attempting to rationalise with regards to Mahayana – Boddhisattva of Compassion? "[76], The Chinese Yogacara school was also split on the relationship between the tathāgatagarbha and ālayavijñāna. [49] The sutra presents the Buddha-nature or tathagatagarbha as a "Self". The basis of all forms of Buddhism is to use meditation for awakening (or enlightenment), not outside powers. . The spirit of it is more in the nature of open-hearted giving. One answer, of course, is that it is in direct relationship to the work (practice, faith, whatever) you do. It helped me a lot. Meditation and concentration are vital elements of the way to enlightenment. When we clear away what is not compassion, when we get rid of delusions then we become part of the already-existing Wisdom and Compassion. [61][note 13]. The All melts into a single whole.
To be quite honest I don’t know. I also have the same impression on the Buddha nature issue. In an attempt to rationalise I lost sight of what I had previously understood. There is a danger in this but I think it is skilful for me. From the idea of the luminous mind emerged the idea that the awakened mind is the pure (visuddhi), undefiled mind. Made me sad. And more importantly does this mean that some kinds of experience of the mind that arise in meditation should not be rejected as simply impermanent, dukkha and non-self?
That said, certain states are more conducive to penetrating Dhamma. Read more. In order to achieve Buddhahood and enlightenment, people must commit themselves to the Buddha’s teachings, which is known as, The path of the arhat – Theravada Buddhism, is a ‘worthy one’ or a ‘perfected person’. Karl Brunnholzl writes that the first probable mention of the term is in the Ekottarika Agama (though here it is used in a different way then in later texts).
Thank you so much! I love all sentient beings except for that mosquito that has just bitten me so my metta is flawed. (conditions). Out of compassion for future seekers, Bodhisattvas established the notion of Buddha Nature, openly declaring that Enlightenment is not something remote you have to attain, but rather one's innate nature to be recovered. [64] It presents the tathāgatagarbha as "an ultimate, unconditional reality that is simultaneously the inherent, dynamic process towards its complete manifestation". So I do the best I can. Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche sees an identity between the Buddha-nature, dharmadhātu (essence of all phenomena and the noumenon) and the Three Vajras, saying: Dharmadhatu is adorned with dharmakaya, which is endowed with dharmadhatu wisdom. I would like to learn from someoone who uses personification. My own meditation is far from being Vipassana only. With this as part of HHPR’s tradition and learning Hinayanan practice cannot be complete. So that brings me to the Unconditioned?
"[note 14]. I think one of the most interesting things, for me anyway, is this part here: “And more importantly does this mean that some kinds of experience of the mind that arise in meditation should not be rejected as simply impermanent, dukkha and non-self?
What do you understand by Dhammakaya? It was also seen as the mūla-vijñāna, the base-consciousness or "stream of consciousness" from which awareness and perception spring. The Nirvana Sutra is one of three Mahayana sutras that make up a collection called the Tathagatagarbha ("womb of the Buddhas") sutras. The first is the 'Knowledge-body' (Jnana-kaya), the inner nature shared by all Buddhas, their Buddha-ness (buddhata)[...] The second aspect of the Dharma-body is the 'Self-existent-body' (Svabhavika-kaya). Some join as young as seven, but one can join at any age. There are no divisions in the totality of reality [...] [I]t views the cosmos as holy, as "one bright pearl," the universal reality of the Buddha. Theravada Buddhists believe that an arhat has ‘blown out’ the, Once a person becomes an arhat, they are free from the cycle of.
The idea is that this nature is there exising in you and your experience if you can find it.
Is it not the practice to be “Manhattan” – to be the Boddhisattvva of Compassion? Dzogchen Ponlop, Mind Beyond Death, Snow Lion publications, New York, 2006, p. 76, Which states that all existences are empty of a "self-nature", Shiro Matsumoto, Critiques of Tathagatagarbha Thought and Critical Buddhism. The tenth chapter emphasizes, in accordance with the Bodhisattva-ideal of the Mahayana teachings, that everyone can be liberated. This contains the whole of Buddhist philosophy and ethics. It is already pure – hence the teaching that ‘you are already enlightened’ which HHPCR described as knowing you are already in Manhattan. The happiness that comes from the practise is not the same as the bliss of Nibbana. Let's go back to the original idea of a luminous mind that is always present, whether we are aware of it or not. In his talk HHPR placed a significant emphasis on Buddha-nature as a difference in the two traditions. How can I live 24/7 in a situation of mindfulness so that no conditions arise? Each part of the world reflects the totality of the cosmos: The most notable of which are greed 貪, hatred 嗔, delusion 癡, and pride 慢, Compare Mazu's "Mind is Buddha" versus "No mind, no Buddha": "When Ch'an Master Fa-ch'ang of Ta-mei Mountain went to see the Patriarch for the first time, he asked, "What is Buddha? My understanding is that these terms are synonymous. He had lived that “spiritual life” for a few years and it was significant in his development. However he had not achieved and considered himself a failure for not achieving, so he was drinking, and making no attempt. In the tathagatagarbha-sutras it is this pure consciousness that is regarded to be the seed from which Buddhahood grows: When this intrinsically pure consciousness came to be regarded as an element capable of growing into Buddhahood, there was the "embryo (garbha) of the Tathagata (=Buddha)" doctrine, whether or not this term is employed.[3]. There are those who argue that tathāgatagarbha is just emptiness (described either as dharmadhatu, the nature of phenomena, or a nonimplicative negation) and there are those who see it as the union of the mind's emptiness and luminosity (which includes the buddha qualities). [110] They thus interpret Buddha nature as an expedient term for the emptiness of inherent existence. The doctrine of buddha-nature in its full form was not present in early Buddhism and is not accepted by most contemporary Asian Theravada Buddhist traditions. The main types of Buddhism are Theravada (Theravāda), Mahayana … Buddha est le surnom qui lui sera donné après l’Illumination Intérieure (bodhi) et signifie " celui qui est passé par l’illumination intérieure " ou "l'Eveillé". I am not sure of the meaning of the “abode of the Brahmas”, but that expression adds strength to this simplification. Don’t all beings return to the Tao? Meditation plays a key role in the teaching of the Buddha. Is it not the case that if we remove all that is not-Wisdom or not-Compassion then we are part of All-Wisdom and All-Compassion? What is the Buddha-nature that we are supposed to be? BZ:- Perhaps here Unconditioned is a useful notion. That which enables things to change is their simple absence of inherent existence, their emptiness. And sometimes it is said that everyone has Buddha Nature. Buddha nature is supposed to be a general background, underlying nature that we all share. A novice is called a samanera and a full monk is called a bikkhu. What do you understand by Dhammakaya? [37], The Tathāgatagarbha Sūtra (200-250 CE) is considered (...) "the earliest expression of this (the tathāgatagarbha doctrine) and the term tathāgatagarbha itself seems to have been coined in this very sutra. an underlying ontological reality or essential nature (, the womb or matrix of Buddhahood existing in all beings. The best you can do, probably, is dig deep into the tradition in which you find yourself and allow its teachings and practice and support to take you to the goal. I remember a theosophy layer cake, the top three being Atma, Buddhi, Higher Manas. This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled.
In a Tibetan book it says we should practice “the three yanas – Hinayana, Mahayana and Vajrayana – without any contradiction or conflict between them”. But such is not necessary for Dhamma is beautiful in the beginning, beautiful in the middle and beautiful in the end. And more importantly does this mean that some kinds of experience of the mind that arise in meditation should not be rejected as simply impermanent, dukkha and non-self? [68] Candrakirti's Madhyamakāvatārabhāsya also argues, basing itself on the Lankavatara sutra, that "the statement of the emptiness of sentient beings being a buddha adorned with all major and minor marks is of expedient meaning". Some could interpret this move as the logical conclusion of a nondualistic philosophy.". All Mahayana is doing is giving this experience a name – Buddha Nature. In general, I think Mahayana/Vajrayana has far greater marketing tools. According to Matsumoto Shirõ and Hakamaya Noriaki of Komazawa University, essentialist conceptions of Buddha-nature are at odds with the fundamental Buddhist doctrine of dependent origination and non-self (anātman). Shenpen Hookham, Oxford Buddhist scholar and Tibetan lama of the Shentong tradition writes of the Buddha-nature or "true self" as something real and permanent, and already present within the being as uncompounded enlightenment. Within these rules or precepts are five which are undertaken by all those trying to adhere to a Buddhist way of life. It is Buddha-nature which we let go to in meditation and in daily life, Buddha-nature that we rely upon, Buddha-nature that connects us to all things and which gives rise to all things. I do get the impression that some perceive enlightenment as just waiting to hit them suddenly. We each have our own Buddha nature, though this essence is the same for each of us. If this explanation is difficult to understand at first, do not be discouraged. “…. In the above I am postulating “paralleling”. [80], The joining together of these different ideas supported the notion of the ekayāna, the one vehicle: absolute oneness, all-pervading Buddha-wisdom and original enlightenment as a holistic whole.
So, an Atman is a permanent, individual soul, that does not change. [25] When Buddhism was introduced to China, in the 1st century CE, Buddhism was understood through comparisons of its teachings to Chinese terms and ways of thinking. Is this then an extra category of consciousness that is not impermanent, dukkha or non-self? Of course different branches of Buddhism, as well as different Buddhist practitioners, all have different approaches.
I must say this; otherwise you might think that the innate original clear light as absolute truth really exists. Buddha Nature is an important teaching in Tibetan Buddhism, although the various schools of Tibetan Buddhism do not entirely agree on what it is. The teachings were written down in Sri Lanka during the 1st century CE. It’s been a while since I read the Heart Sutra, but the Lotus Sutra says that the three vehicals are nonesense, and just a ploy to get you out of the burning building (suffering). As for the postive approach to meditation, I’m glad you don’t bash your own head Re: ‘brightness and stillness’, I was referring to my own interest in the Dhammakaya approach to meditation which focusses on these aspects rather than the more common ‘Insight’ approaches. This view is particularly prevalent in Sri Lanka, today as in the past. [116] The Sakya scholar Rongtön meanwhile, argued that buddha nature is suchness, with stains, or emptiness of the mind with stains. Specifically with regards to the brahmaviharas I knew they were in samsara but I was attempting to rationalise with regards to Mahayana – Boddhisattva of Compassion? "[76], The Chinese Yogacara school was also split on the relationship between the tathāgatagarbha and ālayavijñāna. [49] The sutra presents the Buddha-nature or tathagatagarbha as a "Self". The basis of all forms of Buddhism is to use meditation for awakening (or enlightenment), not outside powers. . The spirit of it is more in the nature of open-hearted giving. One answer, of course, is that it is in direct relationship to the work (practice, faith, whatever) you do. It helped me a lot. Meditation and concentration are vital elements of the way to enlightenment. When we clear away what is not compassion, when we get rid of delusions then we become part of the already-existing Wisdom and Compassion. [61][note 13]. The All melts into a single whole.
To be quite honest I don’t know. I also have the same impression on the Buddha nature issue. In an attempt to rationalise I lost sight of what I had previously understood. There is a danger in this but I think it is skilful for me. From the idea of the luminous mind emerged the idea that the awakened mind is the pure (visuddhi), undefiled mind. Made me sad. And more importantly does this mean that some kinds of experience of the mind that arise in meditation should not be rejected as simply impermanent, dukkha and non-self?
That said, certain states are more conducive to penetrating Dhamma. Read more. In order to achieve Buddhahood and enlightenment, people must commit themselves to the Buddha’s teachings, which is known as, The path of the arhat – Theravada Buddhism, is a ‘worthy one’ or a ‘perfected person’. Karl Brunnholzl writes that the first probable mention of the term is in the Ekottarika Agama (though here it is used in a different way then in later texts).
Thank you so much! I love all sentient beings except for that mosquito that has just bitten me so my metta is flawed. (conditions). Out of compassion for future seekers, Bodhisattvas established the notion of Buddha Nature, openly declaring that Enlightenment is not something remote you have to attain, but rather one's innate nature to be recovered. [64] It presents the tathāgatagarbha as "an ultimate, unconditional reality that is simultaneously the inherent, dynamic process towards its complete manifestation". So I do the best I can. Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche sees an identity between the Buddha-nature, dharmadhātu (essence of all phenomena and the noumenon) and the Three Vajras, saying: Dharmadhatu is adorned with dharmakaya, which is endowed with dharmadhatu wisdom. I would like to learn from someoone who uses personification. My own meditation is far from being Vipassana only. With this as part of HHPR’s tradition and learning Hinayanan practice cannot be complete. So that brings me to the Unconditioned?
"[note 14]. I think one of the most interesting things, for me anyway, is this part here: “And more importantly does this mean that some kinds of experience of the mind that arise in meditation should not be rejected as simply impermanent, dukkha and non-self?
What do you understand by Dhammakaya? It was also seen as the mūla-vijñāna, the base-consciousness or "stream of consciousness" from which awareness and perception spring. The Nirvana Sutra is one of three Mahayana sutras that make up a collection called the Tathagatagarbha ("womb of the Buddhas") sutras. The first is the 'Knowledge-body' (Jnana-kaya), the inner nature shared by all Buddhas, their Buddha-ness (buddhata)[...] The second aspect of the Dharma-body is the 'Self-existent-body' (Svabhavika-kaya). Some join as young as seven, but one can join at any age. There are no divisions in the totality of reality [...] [I]t views the cosmos as holy, as "one bright pearl," the universal reality of the Buddha. Theravada Buddhists believe that an arhat has ‘blown out’ the, Once a person becomes an arhat, they are free from the cycle of.
You can find the whole history of our little Bangkok Sangha below.