Arahanism vs. Buddhism
Awakening Within the World or Liberation Beyond It
14. The Bodhisattva Ideal and the Displacement of Arahantship
The elevation of the Bodhisattva ideal changes the hierarchy of spiritual attainment.
Within Arahanism, Arahantship represents the completion of the path. The practitioner must eradicate rāga, dosa, and moha entirely, sever the bonds of worldly existence, and fulfil the training directed towards the Deathless.
The Bodhisattva ideal, by contrast, places the aspiration to Buddhahood Awakening at the summit of spiritual practice and paradoxically placed it above Arahantship. Arahantship is consequently not treated as the ultimate objective within the Mahāyāna framework. The practitioner directs the path towards a different conception of supreme attainment.
From the Arahanist perspective, this is not a minor adjustment. It changes what counts as the highest spiritual accomplishment.
When Arahantship is the final goal, the practitioner measures progress by the abandonment of worldly bondage and the completion of purification. When Buddhahood becomes the supreme aspiration, progress is evaluated in relation to the Bodhisattva’s journey towards Buddhahood, which is subjective and chaotic.
The difference has consequences for the interpretation of renunciation. If Buddhahood is established as the highest goal, monastic discipline can be understood as one optional component of the Bodhisattva path rather than as the definitive framework for completing Arahantship.
The Arahanist criticism is that this reverses the proper order of spiritual priorities. Renunciation is no longer governed by the immediate objective of complete liberation from worldly bondage. It is incorporated into a broader ideal whose final destination is defined differently.
Arahanism regards this as an obscuration of Gautama’s true Dhamma of the Liberation Path.
This judgment does not require denying that Mahāyāna traditions cultivate compassion, generosity, wisdom, and disciplined practices. Nor does it require claiming that every Bodhisattva remains attached to sensual pleasure or household existence. The issue is the relationship between these qualities and the final objective.
Compassion is not itself Arahantship. Wisdom is not necessarily lead to purification. A profound aspiration to benefit sentient beings does not, by itself, establish that the bonds of worldly existence have been eradicated, or maybe is augmented.
For Arahanism, the decisive standard remains the complete ending of rāga, dosa, and moha. No alternative spiritual ideal can substitute for that accomplishment.
15. The Pāli Canon and the Question of Authenticity for Mahāyāna Sūtras
Arahanism takes the Pāli Canon as its scriptural foundation. Its understanding of Gautama’s Liberation Path is grounded in those Nikāyas and Vinaya that preserve the renunciant discipline and the pursuit of liberation from the world.
The Pāli Canon presents a path of sense restraint, samādhi, wisdom, disenchantment, dispassion, and liberation from the world. It places worldly renunciation at the centre of the monastic life and identifies the eradication of the defilements as essential to the attainment of Arahantship.
Arahanism regards this liberation-centred orientation as the defining character of the true Dhamma from Gautama, the supreme Arahant it seeks to preserve.
Mahāyāna traditions rely on additional sūtras that are not part of the Theravāda Pāli Canon. These texts establish teachings, philosophical interpretations, and spiritual ideals that differ in significant respects from the scriptural framework adopted by Arahanism. And are obviously not historical accounts.
Arahanism does not recognize these additional sūtras as authentic words of Gautama, the Supreme Arahant. In its assessment, they represent later doctrinal developments that reconfigure the purpose of the spiritual practice, particularly through the elevation of the Bodhisattva ideal and the reinterpretation of emptiness, selfhood, and Buddhahood.
This is a central point of doctrinal separation.
If a teaching establishes a spiritual objective different from the complete liberation presented in the Pāli Canon, Arahanism does not regard the mere attribution of that teaching to Gautama as sufficient to establish its authenticity. The teaching must be examined according to its content, its relationship to the liberation path, and the spiritual destination it proposes.
This does not mean that the historical origins of every Mahāyāna text can be settled simply by comparing its contents with the Pāli Canon. Mahāyāna scriptures developed across different periods and communities, and their historical formation remains a subject of scholarly study. Arahanism’s position is a doctrinal judgment: these texts do not constitute its authoritative foundation because their teachings and spiritual objectives do not, in its understanding, preserve Gautama’s original Liberation Path.
The issue is therefore not the prestige of a scripture, the size of the community that accepts it, or the antiquity claimed for its teachings. The issue is whether the teaching leads to the liberation that Arahanism identifies with Gautama, the Supreme Arahant.
16. Emptiness, Non-Duality, and the Question of Existential Liberation
Arahanism also distinguishes its understanding of liberation from the world from Mahāyāna interpretations of emptiness and non-duality that Arahanism considers incompatible with the complete severance of worldly bondage and attainment of Nibbāna-dhātu, the real deathless realm out of the universe into which a purified citta enters.
Some Mahāyāna philosophies, particularly those associated with Madhyamaka, use emptiness to challenge the idea that beings possess independent, intrinsic existence. Other Buddhist traditions explore non-dual awareness and the relationship between consciousness and experience in different ways.
Arahanism does not accept the assumption that such doctrines necessarily establish the same liberation taught by Gautama. It examines them according to a more fundamental question: what happens to the practitioner, and what is the ultimate destination of the path?
In the Arahanist understanding, the complete liberation of the citta from the worldly bondage cannot be equated with its dissolution into a universal source, its absorption into a cosmic consciousness, or the annihilation of individuality. These are not interchangeable descriptions of the Deathless, permanence, ultimate peace and joy for Gautama’s goal of liberation: Nibbāna-dhātu.
Arahanism understands Nibbāna-dhātu as the real Deathless realm beyond the world, not a psychological state, or as a state of annihilation, or the merging of an individual into the source of the universe. The liberation sought is the complete severance of worldly bondage and the entry into that Deathless realm destination.
Consequently, a spiritual experience of unity or non-duality does not establish Arahantship merely because ordinary distinctions appear to disappear. Such an experience may alter perception, diminish self-concern, or provide substantial relief from emotional suffering. Yet its existential significance must be examined independently.
If a realization leads the practitioner to understand liberation as dissolution into an impersonal source, Arahanism regards that conclusion as fundamentally different from its own understanding of Nibbāna-dhātu.
The issue is not whether an experience feels profound. It is whether the teaching accurately identifies the destination of liberation.
Arahanism therefore refuses to treat all forms of emptiness, non-duality, awakening, and mystical unity as equivalent. Their meanings and consequences must be examined according to the criterion of complete liberation from the worldly bondage.
17. The Identity of the Bhikkhu and Bhikkhunī Saṅgha: Inheriting Gautama’s Dhamma
The identity of the Bhikkhu and Bhikkhunī Saṅgha must be understood through the Dhamma that Gautama transmitted to his disciples and the ultimate goal for which they undertook renunciation. The Saṅgha is not defined merely by the wearing of robes, the observance of monastic regulations, or membership in an institution. Its spiritual identity rests upon its relationship to Gautama’s Dhamma and its commitment to the path of liberation.
In the Itivuttaka 4.100, Brāhmaṇa Dhamma Yāga Sutta, Gautama declares: “Bhikkhus, I am a brāhmaṇa,
accessible to requests (dhamma), always with clean hands—nothing to hide, bearing the final body,
a physician and surgeon for the supreme crossing-over. You are my breast-born sons (citta), born from my mouth, born of my Dhamma, formed by my Dhamma, heirs to my Dhamma, not heirs to material things.”
This declaration establishes a profound relationship between Gautama, his Dhamma, and those who have entered the renunciant life under his teaching. Gautama identifies his disciples as those born of his Dhamma, formed by his Dhamma, and destined to inherit his Dhamma rather than material possessions. Their inheritance is therefore spiritual: they are to receive, practise, embody, and preserve the teaching through which liberation is realized.
The distinction between inheriting Dhamma and inheriting material things is particularly significant for the renunciant. One who leaves household life relinquishes the ordinary pursuits of possession, wealth, status, and worldly advancement. The purpose of this relinquishment is not simply to adopt a different social identity or to belong to a religious institution. It is to dedicate one’s life to the Dhamma and to the complete liberation for which the renunciant training exists.
To be formed by Gautama’s Dhamma is to undergo a transformation through practice. The renunciant undertakes Sīla, develops Samādhi, cultivates Paññā, and progresses through Nibbidā and Virāga towards Vimutti. The training is not complete merely because one has received ordination or acquired scriptural knowledge. Its fulfilment lies in the purification of the citta from rāga, dosa, and moha, and in the realization of the goal of liberation from worldly bondage.
From the perspective of Arahanism, this inheritance must be understood in relation to the ultimate purpose of Gautama’s teaching: Arahantship and complete liberation from worldly bondage. The Bhikkhu and Bhikkhunī Saṅgha inherit Gautama’s Dhamma fully by preserving and practising the Liberation Path that leads to this goal. The robes and the Vinaya provide the outward form and discipline of renunciation; the Dhamma provides its direction, purpose, and fulfilment.
This principle also provides the basis for Arahanism’s distinction between outward monastic identity and governing spiritual commitment. Today’s wider Buddhist traditions may share robes, ordination forms, and elements of monastic discipline while differing in their understanding of the highest spiritual goal. Where Arahantship is displaced by a different ideal as the governing purpose of religious life, Arahanism regards this as a fundamental departure from its understanding of Gautama’s original Liberation Path. The issue is not simply whether practitioners sincerely follow a religious tradition, but whether the tradition preserves the goal and path that Arahanism identifies as the heart of Gautama’s Dhamma.
Arahanism therefore does not regard institutional continuity or outward resemblance as sufficient proof of fidelity to the original teaching. The decisive question is what the Saṅgha inherits, preserves, and practises. If Gautama’s disciples are his Dhamma-born sons and daughters, formed by his Dhamma and heirs to it, then the responsibility of the renunciant community is to protect the integrity of that inheritance and to transmit it through practice, instruction, and example.
For Arahanism, this responsibility means restoring renunciation and Arahantship to the centre of spiritual training. The Bhikkhu and Bhikkhunī Saṅgha must be understood not merely as a religious institution that perpetuates its own existence, but as a community dedicated to the realization and transmission of Gautama’s Liberation Path. Its highest purpose is not the accumulation of material or institutional achievements, nor the pursuit of spiritual ideals detached from complete liberation from the worldly bondage, but the fulfilment of the training through which the practitioner reaches Vimutti.
To inherit Gautama’s Dhamma is therefore to accept the responsibility of living according to it, practising it to its culmination, and transmitting it without abandoning its essential purpose. In this understanding of Arahanism, the true inheritance of the Saṅgha is the Liberation Path of Gautama, the Supreme Arahant: the path of worldly renunciation, purification of the citta, Arahantship, and realization of the Deathless realm.
18. Reversing the Paradigm: The Mission of Arahanism
Arahanism presents itself as a movement to reverse what it understands as a historical displacement of the original liberation objective.
In its interpretation, the elevation of the Bodhisattva ideal and Buddhahood above Arahantship changed the governing purpose of today’s wider Buddhist spiritual practice. Renunciation was incorporated into a different framework of aspiration, and the highest ideal was redefined.
Arahanism seeks to restore the opposite order.
Arahantship must again stand at the centre of the path. Complete renunciation must be understood in relation to the eradication of worldly bondage. Sīla, Samādhi, and Paññā must be cultivated as stages of a comprehensive training whose completion is Vimutti, liberation from worldly bondage.
This restoration requires a re-examination of the teachings accepted as authoritative, the ideals presented to practitioners, and the meaning assigned to awakening. It also requires renewed recognition of the Bhikkhu and Bhikkhunī as full-time renunciants whose lives are dedicated to the completion of liberation from the world.
Arahanism therefore does not seek merely to establish another interpretation alongside many others while leaving their respective objectives undifferentiated. It seeks to make a clear claim about the spiritual destination that it upholds.
The movement’s purpose is to recover the Liberation Path of Gautama, the Supreme Arahant, as a distinct religious commitment. It challenges teachings that, in its assessment, obscure the distinction between awakening within the world and complete liberation beyond worldly bondage.
The standard remains uncompromising: rāga, dosa, and moha must be eradicated completely. The practitioner must fulfil the renunciant discipline. The final goal is not merely a transformed understanding of existence, but liberation from the bonds that sustain it.
This is the paradigm Arahanism seeks to restore.
19. The True Dhamma: Returning to Gautama, the Supreme Arahant
Arahanism understands itself as a return to what it regards as the true Dhamma of Gautama, the Supreme Arahant.
Its claim rests upon a particular understanding of the path: Gautama’s teaching directs the practitioner towards complete purification, the eradication of rāga, dosa, and moha, and the severance of worldly bondage. The purpose of renunciation is to fulfil this path, not merely to cultivate a spiritual identity or attain a different form of awakening.
From this perspective, the movement from Arahantship to Buddhahood as the supreme ideal represents more than a change in aspiration. It changes the meaning of spiritual completion. When the Bodhisattva path becomes the governing ideal, the religious life is directed towards a different final objective, and the original liberation paradigm is, in Arahanism’s assessment, obscured.
Arahanism calls for a reversal of this development.
It seeks to restore the primacy of renunciation, reaffirm the Pāli Canon as its scriptural foundation, and establish Arahantship as the definitive goal of its spiritual training. It calls practitioners to examine whether their understanding of awakening actually leads to complete liberation, rather than assuming that all forms of spiritual realization share the same destination.
The movement also seeks to establish religious communities whose identity is defined by this purpose. The Bhikkhu and Bhikkhunī are not simply bearers of inherited titles. They are renunciants undertaking the rigorous purification required for Arahantship. Their training must remain directed towards the complete ending of worldly bondage.
Arahanism does not measure its success by the number of people who adopt its name, nor by the prestige of its institutions. Its defining standard is the liberation it seeks to preserve and realize.
The question is whether the practitioner has completed the work of purification. Has rāga been eradicated? Has dosa been eradicated? Has moha been eradicated? Has the bondage connecting the citta to worldly objects been completely severed?
These are the questions that determine the meaning of the path.
Arahanism — The Liberation Path of Gautama, the Supreme Arahant.
Its mission is to restore Arahantship to the centre of spiritual life, renew the primacy of complete renunciation from the world, and guide practitioners towards Nibbāna-dhātu, the Deathless realm beyond the world.
This is the return Arahanism seeks: not simply to a name, a robe, or an institution, but to the liberation that it understands as the ultimate purpose of Gautama’s true Dhamma.
