Could you describe..

[sharon]

. some of the cultural differences between a Saint, a Sage and a Bodhisattva please?

It looks to me like they are all the same, though civilisations apart. It's this civilisation of them that has created some baggage. I'm interested in some of the more refined observations about how these states of being feel and how much deeper the Boddhisattva tail is than the tale of a Saint. And whether the Sage is as much a competent student as the Saint and the Bodhisattva.

Thanks
  

[andrew]

I'm not the best one to answer this by any means, but I feel the Bodhisattiva knows that one's own state of being is interwoven with the broader state of being. In this sense, their own growth ties in with broader growth (and vice versa). I have sometimes felt this is my path and is not something I have chosen, but I know it, because e.g when I see an animal suffering, I know that I must grow. I understand the perfection of the suffering, I know the animal has its own life path to follow, but still, I am compelled to look within myself and know that I can act internally on that suffering, and therefore it is my responsibility to act on that. And I won't properly rest until there really is nothing more to be done, though I am often content, happy and having fun in the absence of that proper rest. It's just the way 'my individuality' is.

A Sage...a wise teacher of spiritual truths? A Saint? That's Roger Moore isn't it hehe?

[zendancer]

Jul 8, 2023 7:45:25 GMT -5 sharon said:

. some of the cultural differences between a Saint, a Sage and a Bodhisattva please?

It looks to me like they are all the same, though civilisations apart. It's this civilisation of them that has created some baggage. I'm interested in some of the more refined observations about how these states of being feel and how much deeper the Boddhisattva tail is than the tale of a Saint. And whether the Sage is as much a competent student as the Saint and the Bodhisattva.

Thanks
  

Good question and a full response would probably create a text wall several pages long. I associate the word "saint" primarily with Catholicism, and that tradition deems people to be saints either because they've performed some sort of miracles that the church has investigated and corroborated, or because they've been involved in long service to disadvantaged or marginalized communities, or because their teachings have become famous as a part of the mystical tradition revered by many. St. Teresa, St. John of the Cross, and Saint Francis come to mind in the ND context. I can't remember if Mother Theresa attained sainthood, but she would be an example of the "good works" variety of saint (although anyone who read the TIME magazine article about what she told her confessor would realize that she was a spiritually unhappy person who never attained anything of significant depth). Meister Eckhart was never granted sainthood, but he was finally rehabilitated by the church because his sermons and teachings became so famous over time. Laughter could expand upon these ideas regarding saints.

I consider sages to be any humans who have discovered THIS and also had realizations that resulted in significant wisdom. Most modern sages state that their primary interest lies in helping other people discover THIS, but many of them also set up foundations whose purpose is to help people in many different ways (prison programs, food programs, health programs, medical programs, etc). In this sense, a sage could be considered a Bodhisattva because a primary goal is to be of service to others in every possible sphere of life.

In the Buddhist tradition a Bodhisattva is a human who has given up any desire for personal attainment and only lives to serve others. The classic claim in the literature is that a Bodhisattva willingly gives up any personal desire for paradise, or enlightenment, until every other human has attained it. Ouroboros and other Buddhists can probably expand upon this.

[laughter]

Jul 8, 2023 7:45:25 GMT -5 sharon said:

. some of the cultural differences between a Saint, a Sage and a Bodhisattva please?

It looks to me like they are all the same, though civilisations apart. It's this civilisation of them that has created some baggage. I'm interested in some of the more refined observations about how these states of being feel and how much deeper the Boddhisattva tail is than the tale of a Saint. And whether the Sage is as much a competent student as the Saint and the Bodhisattva.

Thanks
  

Seems to me the differences are cultural, but the basis of my knowledge for all but Saint is rather superficial, and even that, I have no details of any given Saint. Each term seems to me to reflect a context. Saints embody various facets of Jesus Christ and their stories reflect aspects of his life. Endurance of oppression without returning it with hatred. Kindness, but not weakness. Miracles. Hope in the face of pitiless enemies with all the power. If you consider the demands made on any Catholic priest, it's sort of an imposed state of "sainthood".

Bodhisattva and Sage each imply the character to me of someone who decides to reach out a compassionate hand to folks that are lost. The only sermon of the Buddha that I'm familiar with is the Diamond Sutra, and in that he essentially renounces any position of authority other than as the source of the teaching. Strikes me as quite similar to Niz, that way, just that Niz personalized his dialogs, and it is with Advaita that I'd associate "Sage". I'd say it's interesting that this word for a wise person survived Christianity in England.

[ouroboros]

@zd: Ouroboros and other Buddhists can probably expand upon this

Okay, well you're right about the text wall …

Regarding the bodhisattva, I've collected a few snippets on my travels. It seems to be particularly prevalent in the Mahayana tradition, which actually seems to be built largely around the notion, and although it does crop up in Theravada it's usually in a different sense.

Basically, in the Mahayana tradition it's used to refer to someone whose focus is on helping others toward liberation. But more specifically, someone who is motivated by a spontaneous compassion to alleviate the suffering of other sentient beings, and who does so by attaining enlightenment as expediently as possible but then voluntarily delaying their own 'full liberation', ie by remaining bound in samsara in order to do so. Effectively foregoing full liberation indefinitely. My impression is that the premise seems to be indirectly based on a certain tale of the Buddha, (paraphrasing) who it's said that after sitting beneath the tree [for however long] and attaining full enlightenment, was on the cusp of passing out of samsara and into paranibbana but was beseeched [by some or other deity] to remain and pass what he had gleaned on into the world, lest over time the world fall into darkness and be lost. Which the buddha undertook to do and did so in the form of the dhamma. (Obviously, at least portions of that tale should perhaps be considered largely allegorical). Additionally, as Andrew intimated, there seems to be some debate within the tradition as to whether there can actually be full and lasting Peace whilst other beings continue to suffer.

"The Mahayana ideal regards the Bodhisatta as a being who, having brought himself to the brink of [Para]Nibbana, voluntarily delays the acquisition of his prize so that he may return to the world to make it accessible to others. He deliberately chooses to postpone his release from Samsara in order to show the path for others to attain Nibbana."

By contrast, in the Theravada tradition the comparable Pali phrase "boddhisatta" tends to be limited to refer merely to a being who is on the path to enlightenment but has not yet attained it. This includes the previous lives of the Shakyamuni himself, i.e. those lives before the life in which he became enlightened. In fact, I'm given to understand that's how he referred to himself in a pre-enlightened sense (detailed in the Jataka tales) as opposed to "the tathagata" which he used to refer to himself post enlightenment. To be clear, in Theravada the highest buddhahood doesn't seem to be considered requisite for full liberation. Accordingly, although Theravada holds that anybody can be a bodhisattva, it does not stipulate or insist that all must be bodhisattva which is considered not practical. Thus, it could be said that whilst both Theravada and Mahayana unanimously accept the Bodhisattva ideal as the highest…

"it may more accurately portray the differences that exist between the two 'vehicles' by referring to Mahayana Buddhism as a vehicle in which the bodhisattva ideal is more universally applied, and to Theravada Buddhism as a vehicle in which the bodhisattva ideal is reserved for and appropriated by certain exceptional people."

Basically, Theravada might be considered the more orthodox buddhism and Mahayana as "degenerated" or buddhism "upholding the true spirit of the teaching above its letter", depending on your perspective.

With all this in mind what I tend to find is, the very notion of the bodhisattva naturally leads to a number of other considerations, like the nature of 'a being', and the nature of 'the conveyor-belt of beings over successive lives' etc, and perhaps by extension, 'first causes' etc. And in a way that notions of saints or sages perhaps don't necessarily do as we're naturally more inclined to take those instances at face value. So anyway, as a topic it can get quite broad, quite quickly.

"Must a Bodhisatta always be a Buddhist? We may find among Buddhists some self-sacrificing and ever loving Bodhisattas. Sometimes they may not even be aware of their lofty aspiration, but they instinctively work hard to serve others and cultivate their pristine qualities. Nevertheless, Bodhisattas are not only found among Buddhists, but possibly among the other religionists as well."

_______________

Just to briefly address Sharon's query, I think zd summed it up quite well. With regard to bodhisattvas, sages and saints, there are obvious similarities between all three examples. Such as the spontaneous compassion based motivation to help alleviate the suffering of other sentient beings through their emanations and other skilful means. Indeed, many of the hallmarks will be the same and the virtues are generosity, morality, renunciation, wisdom, energy, patience, truthfulness, determination, loving-kindness, and even mindedness. So, the fact is it's quite hard to make distinctions and I've seen all three used somewhat interchangeably, albeit perhaps contextually.

That said, personally I tend to associate sagacity more specifically with wisdom and good judgement, so that is to say perhaps more narrowly, or even more shallowly than bodhisattvahood. It's hard to qualify that, but I'm saying sagacity does not necessarily incorporate what I call 'biggest picture stuff' and so might not be as comprehensive. And I tend to associate sainthood more specifically with a more temporary form of alleviation and in this instance also having the potential to deviate into mere 'halo polishing'. Or at least, again, without the highest wisdom underpinning it. Although the motivation may well be pure.

[zendancer]

Ouroboros: That's a good point about sagacity and sages. I've been generally referring to people like Tolle, Adya, Ramana, Niz, et al as sages, but perhaps a better term might be something like "awakened" or "liberated". SR, alone, doesn't seem sufficient because some people penetrate the illusion of selfhood and still don't seem to be free (the Ruthless Truth people come to mind in this regard). I certainly wasn't using the word "sage" to primarily refer to wisdom, but I can see how other people might think that considering that sagacity would be the attribute most closely associated with the word "sage." I liked the term "sage" because it was short, so maybe TR, for THIS-realized, would be a better substitute.

[sharon]

Jul 8, 2023 9:46:33 GMT -5 zendancer said:

Jul 8, 2023 7:45:25 GMT -5 sharon said:

. some of the cultural differences between a Saint, a Sage and a Bodhisattva please?

It looks to me like they are all the same, though civilisations apart. It's this civilisation of them that has created some baggage. I'm interested in some of the more refined observations about how these states of being feel and how much deeper the Boddhisattva tail is than the tale of a Saint. And whether the Sage is as much a competent student as the Saint and the Bodhisattva.

Thanks
  

Good question and a full response would probably create a text wall several pages long. I associate the word "saint" primarily with Catholicism, and that tradition deems people to be saints either because they've performed some sort of miracles that the church has investigated and corroborated, or because they've been involved in long service to disadvantaged or marginalized communities, or because their teachings have become famous as a part of the mystical tradition revered by many. St. Teresa, St. John of the Cross, and Saint Francis come to mind in the ND context. I can't remember if Mother Theresa attained sainthood, but she would be an example of the "good works" variety of saint (although anyone who read the TIME magazine article about what she told her confessor would realize that she was a spiritually unhappy person who never attained anything of significant depth). Meister Eckhart was never granted sainthood, but he was finally rehabilitated by the church because his sermons and teachings became so famous over time. Laughter could expand upon these ideas regarding saints.

I consider sages to be any humans who have discovered THIS and also had realizations that resulted in significant wisdom. Most modern sages state that their primary interest lies in helping other people discover THIS, but many of them also set up foundations whose purpose is to help people in many different ways (prison programs, food programs, health programs, medical programs, etc). In this sense, a sage could be considered a Bodhisattva because a primary goal is to be of service to others in every possible sphere of life.

In the Buddhist tradition a Bodhisattva is a human who has given up any desire for personal attainment and only lives to serve others. The classic claim in the literature is that a Bodhisattva willingly gives up any personal desire for paradise, or enlightenment, until every other human has attained it. Ouroboros and other Buddhists can probably expand upon this.

Thanks, I'm happy to read a few pages of text on this subject. If you get a flow on then cool.

Ah, yes a Catholic origin would make sense. But why the word Saint? How did the word form? According to the internet the word is only 800 years old.

www.etymonline.com/word/saint

So the origin of it was Sanctus.. that word has much more body to it.

I like Sanct Francis of Assisi, it looks like he was kind to animals and saw them as himself. Yeah Sanct Meister Eckhart sounds awesome. 

So to summarise so far.. a Saint serves the Church and sages and boddhisattvas serve their people?
 

[sharon]

Jul 8, 2023 12:42:21 GMT -5 laughter said:

Jul 8, 2023 7:45:25 GMT -5 sharon said:

. some of the cultural differences between a Saint, a Sage and a Bodhisattva please?

It looks to me like they are all the same, though civilisations apart. It's this civilisation of them that has created some baggage. I'm interested in some of the more refined observations about how these states of being feel and how much deeper the Boddhisattva tail is than the tale of a Saint. And whether the Sage is as much a competent student as the Saint and the Bodhisattva.

Thanks
  

Seems to me the differences are cultural, but the basis of my knowledge for all but Saint is rather superficial, and even that, I have no details of any given Saint. Each term seems to me to reflect a context. Saints embody various facets of Jesus Christ and their stories reflect aspects of his life. Endurance of oppression without returning it with hatred. Kindness, but not weakness. Miracles. Hope in the face of pitiless enemies with all the power. If you consider the demands made on any Catholic priest, it's sort of an imposed state of "sainthood".

Bodhisattva and Sage each imply the character to me of someone who decides to reach out a compassionate hand to folks that are lost. The only sermon of the Buddha that I'm familiar with is the Diamond Sutra, and in that he essentially renounces any position of authority other than as the source of the teaching. Strikes me as quite similar to Niz, that way, just that Niz personalized his dialogs, and it is with Advaita that I'd associate "Sage". I'd say it's interesting that this word for a wise person survived Christianity in England.

Ok, I understand. So Jesus was the original Saint, and all use of the word after him is due to the travails of life bringing with them opportunities to transmutate these events into honourable happenings?

I don't know if the word Sage 'survived' Christianity, my encounters with it have come from those with an Islamist heritage.

[stardustpilgrim]

Jul 9, 2023 11:00:02 GMT -5 sharon said:

Jul 8, 2023 9:46:33 GMT -5 zendancer said:

Good question and a full response would probably create a text wall several pages long. I associate the word "saint" primarily with Catholicism, and that tradition deems people to be saints either because they've performed some sort of miracles that the church has investigated and corroborated, or because they've been involved in long service to disadvantaged or marginalized communities, or because their teachings have become famous as a part of the mystical tradition revered by many. St. Teresa, St. John of the Cross, and Saint Francis come to mind in the ND context. I can't remember if Mother Theresa attained sainthood, but she would be an example of the "good works" variety of saint (although anyone who read the TIME magazine article about what she told her confessor would realize that she was a spiritually unhappy person who never attained anything of significant depth). Meister Eckhart was never granted sainthood, but he was finally rehabilitated by the church because his sermons and teachings became so famous over time. Laughter could expand upon these ideas regarding saints.

I consider sages to be any humans who have discovered THIS and also had realizations that resulted in significant wisdom. Most modern sages state that their primary interest lies in helping other people discover THIS, but many of them also set up foundations whose purpose is to help people in many different ways (prison programs, food programs, health programs, medical programs, etc). In this sense, a sage could be considered a Bodhisattva because a primary goal is to be of service to others in every possible sphere of life.

In the Buddhist tradition a Bodhisattva is a human who has given up any desire for personal attainment and only lives to serve others. The classic claim in the literature is that a Bodhisattva willingly gives up any personal desire for paradise, or enlightenment, until every other human has attained it. Ouroboros and other Buddhists can probably expand upon this.

Thanks, I'm happy to read a few pages of text on this subject. If you get a flow on the cool.

Ah, yes a Catholic origin would make sense. But why the word Saint? How did the word form? According to the internet the word is only 800 years old.

www.etymonline.com/word/saint

So the origin of it was Sanctus.. that word has much more body to it.

I like Sanct Francis of Assisi, it looks like he was kind to animals and saw them as himself. Yeah Sanct Meister Eckhart sounds awesome. 

So to summarise to far.. a Saint serves the Church and sages and boddhisattvas serve their people?
 

To be a Saint of the Catholic Church, you have to be dead. That's one drawback. (But, you have to have been a saint, to become a Saint). And it usually takes a long time to become a Saint. So, Bodhisattvas are better.

A very nicely curious, but not really, story of St Thomas Aquinas, maybe the greatest theologian of the Catholic Church. He wrote a lot, tons of tomes. But near the end of his life he got what Meister Eckhart had in spades (who would have been excommunicated if he hadn't died in the process, that's from memory but I think correct). But after his ~mystical experience~ Unity or ND or CC or whatever it was, Saint Thomas Aquinas said that all he had previously written was like straw, in comparison.

St. Thomas Aquinas is said to have uttered the phrase, “All that I have written seems like straw to me”1234. This quote is often cited as an expression of his humility and recognition of the limitations of human knowledge. It is said that he had a mystical experience close to the end of his life, which led him to put down his pen. When his secretary, Reginald, tried to encourage him to do more writing, he said, "Reginald, I can do no more. Such things have been revealed to me that all I have written seems as so much straw." Firm in his resolve, he wrote not another word and died a year later.

[sharon]

Jul 9, 2023 11:17:49 GMT -5 stardustpilgrim said:

Jul 9, 2023 11:00:02 GMT -5 sharon said:

Thanks, I'm happy to read a few pages of text on this subject. If you get a flow on the cool.

Ah, yes a Catholic origin would make sense. But why the word Saint? How did the word form? According to the internet the word is only 800 years old.

www.etymonline.com/word/saint

So the origin of it was Sanctus.. that word has much more body to it.

I like Sanct Francis of Assisi, it looks like he was kind to animals and saw them as himself. Yeah Sanct Meister Eckhart sounds awesome. 

So to summarise to far.. a Saint serves the Church and sages and boddhisattvas serve their people?
 

To be a Saint of the Catholic Church, you have to be dead. That's one drawback. (But, you have to have been a saint, to become a Saint). And it usually takes a long time to become a Saint. So, Bodhisattvas are better.

A very nicely curious, but not really, story of St Thomas Aquinas, maybe the greatest theologian of the Catholic Church. He wrote a lot, tons of tomes. But near the end of his life he got what Meister Eckhart had in spades (who would have been excommunicated if he hadn't died in the process, that's from memory but I think correct). But after his ~mystical experience~ Unity or ND or CC or whatever it was, Saint Thomas Aquinas said that all he had previously written was like straw, in comparison.

St. Thomas Aquinas is said to have uttered the phrase, “All that I have written seems like straw to me”1234. This quote is often cited as an expression of his humility and recognition of the limitations of human knowledge. It is said that he had a mystical experience close to the end of his life, which led him to put down his pen. When his secretary, Reginald, tried to encourage him to do more writing, he said, "Reginald, I can do no more. Such things have been revealed to me that all I have written seems as so much straw." Firm in his resolve, he wrote not another word and died a year later.

He would only have been 9 years old in 1234. Geeza was a prodigy!   

[sharon]

Jul 8, 2023 8:26:12 GMT -5 andrew said:

I'm not the best one to answer this by any means, but I feel the Bodhisattiva knows that one's own state of being is interwoven with the broader state of being. In this sense, their own growth ties in with broader growth (and vice versa). I have sometimes felt this is my path and is not something I have chosen, but I know it, because e.g when I see an animal suffering, I know that I must grow. I understand the perfection of the suffering, I know the animal has its own life path to follow, but still, I am compelled to look within myself and know that I can act internally on that suffering, and therefore it is my responsibility to act on that. And I won't properly rest until there really is nothing more to be done, though I am often content, happy and having fun in the absence of that proper rest. It's just the way 'my individuality' is.

A Sage...a wise teacher of spiritual truths? A Saint? That's Roger Moore isn't it hehe?

Sorry, only just seen your post Andrew.

Yeah empathy for animals is more bodhisattvic than saintly to my mind too. Walking to an animals last breath with them is deep. It's comforting to know that what they really are, understands that walk too.

A Sage is a being that recognises their own Emptiness and doesn't seek to change anything about it. (That's me just playing wih ideas really.)

My Saint was Ian Ogilvy. Much prettier

[stardustpilgrim]

Jul 9, 2023 14:48:50 GMT -5 sharon said:

Jul 9, 2023 11:17:49 GMT -5 stardustpilgrim said:

To be a Saint of the Catholic Church, you have to be dead. That's one drawback. (But, you have to have been a saint, to become a Saint). And it usually takes a long time to become a Saint. So, Bodhisattvas are better.

A very nicely curious, but not really, story of St Thomas Aquinas, maybe the greatest theologian of the Catholic Church. He wrote a lot, tons of tomes. But near the end of his life he got what Meister Eckhart had in spades (who would have been excommunicated if he hadn't died in the process, that's from memory but I think correct). But after his ~mystical experience~ Unity or ND or CC or whatever it was, Saint Thomas Aquinas said that all he had previously written was like straw, in comparison.

St. Thomas Aquinas is said to have uttered the phrase, “All that I have written seems like straw to me”1234. This quote is often cited as an expression of his humility and recognition of the limitations of human knowledge. It is said that he had a mystical experience close to the end of his life, which led him to put down his pen. When his secretary, Reginald, tried to encourage him to do more writing, he said, "Reginald, I can do no more. Such things have been revealed to me that all I have written seems as so much straw." Firm in his resolve, he wrote not another word and died a year later.

He would only have been 9 years old in 1234. Geeza was a prodigy!   

I should have edited that (out) ...those indicated footnotes.

[justlikeyou]

Jul 9, 2023 7:49:32 GMT -5 zendancer said:

so maybe TR, for THIS-realized, would be a better substitute.

I like that.

[laughter]

Jul 9, 2023 11:08:10 GMT -5 sharon said:

Jul 8, 2023 12:42:21 GMT -5 laughter said:

Seems to me the differences are cultural, but the basis of my knowledge for all but Saint is rather superficial, and even that, I have no details of any given Saint. Each term seems to me to reflect a context. Saints embody various facets of Jesus Christ and their stories reflect aspects of his life. Endurance of oppression without returning it with hatred. Kindness, but not weakness. Miracles. Hope in the face of pitiless enemies with all the power. If you consider the demands made on any Catholic priest, it's sort of an imposed state of "sainthood".

Bodhisattva and Sage each imply the character to me of someone who decides to reach out a compassionate hand to folks that are lost. The only sermon of the Buddha that I'm familiar with is the Diamond Sutra, and in that he essentially renounces any position of authority other than as the source of the teaching. Strikes me as quite similar to Niz, that way, just that Niz personalized his dialogs, and it is with Advaita that I'd associate "Sage". I'd say it's interesting that this word for a wise person survived Christianity in England.

Ok, I understand. So Jesus was the original Saint, and all use of the word after him is due to the travails of life bringing with them opportunities to transmutate these events into honourable happenings?

I don't know if the word Sage 'survived' Christianity, my encounters with it have come from those with an Islamist heritage.

Well, there is a plant named after it, so there's that, kind of a clue.

[zazeniac]

Jul 9, 2023 11:00:02 GMT -5 sharon said:

Jul 8, 2023 9:46:33 GMT -5 zendancer said:

Good question and a full response would probably create a text wall several pages long. I associate the word "saint" primarily with Catholicism, and that tradition deems people to be saints either because they've performed some sort of miracles that the church has investigated and corroborated, or because they've been involved in long service to disadvantaged or marginalized communities, or because their teachings have become famous as a part of the mystical tradition revered by many. St. Teresa, St. John of the Cross, and Saint Francis come to mind in the ND context. I can't remember if Mother Theresa attained sainthood, but she would be an example of the "good works" variety of saint (although anyone who read the TIME magazine article about what she told her confessor would realize that she was a spiritually unhappy person who never attained anything of significant depth). Meister Eckhart was never granted sainthood, but he was finally rehabilitated by the church because his sermons and teachings became so famous over time. Laughter could expand upon these ideas regarding saints.

I consider sages to be any humans who have discovered THIS and also had realizations that resulted in significant wisdom. Most modern sages state that their primary interest lies in helping other people discover THIS, but many of them also set up foundations whose purpose is to help people in many different ways (prison programs, food programs, health programs, medical programs, etc). In this sense, a sage could be considered a Bodhisattva because a primary goal is to be of service to others in every possible sphere of life.

In the Buddhist tradition a Bodhisattva is a human who has given up any desire for personal attainment and only lives to serve others. The classic claim in the literature is that a Bodhisattva willingly gives up any personal desire for paradise, or enlightenment, until every other human has attained it. Ouroboros and other Buddhists can probably expand upon this.

Thanks, I'm happy to read a few pages of text on this subject. If you get a flow on then cool.

Ah, yes a Catholic origin would make sense. But why the word Saint? How did the word form? According to the internet the word is only 800 years old.

www.etymonline.com/word/saint

So the origin of it was Sanctus.. that word has much more body to it.

I like Sanct Francis of Assisi, it looks like he was kind to animals and saw them as himself. Yeah Sanct Meister Eckhart sounds awesome. 

So to summarise so far.. a Saint serves the Church and sages and boddhisattvas serve their people?
 

Francis of Assissi is a lovely human. My favorite. His famous quote:"What we're looking for is what is looking."  That's it. Period.