SuttaCentral
It seems to me that the Bodhisattva was not a Sotapanna or higher, because he committed one of the six acts MN115 says Sotapanna’s cannot commit - taking another teacher.
Does this mean the Bodhisattva was the same thing as a Pathujjana? No. But there’s some strong contradictory evidence against the idea that the Bodhisattva was one of the four kinds of noble disciples.
So how to become buddha ? Why did the buddha speak so little about buddhahood path compared to arahant path ?
Because he wanted people to put an end to the cycle of rebirth as quickly as possible. He said that even like a tiny spot of excrement still stinks, in the same way he doesn’t praise even a little bit of rebirth.
In places where stories from the Jatakas form the foundation for Buddhist education, especially in childhood, people often get the wrong idea that the Buddha was encouraging people to become Buddhas, even though he never did. So it can come as a shock that he never explained the path to become a Buddha directly.
But if you really want to explore how to become a Buddha, you should start a new thread since it isn’t related to this one. 
If the future Buddha was an ariya (once returner) before his last life, then it is impossible for him to practice self-mortification because an ariya should know that is a wrong practice…
My interpretation:
I believing the requirement to become a Buddha is by fulling the paramitas? Is that correct?
Yup.
10 for Theravada,
6 for Mahayana, but then Mahayana also have a list of 10 by adding 4 more, different from the 10 from Theravada.
Some people think that the 10 from Theravada is back import from Mahayana’s bodhisattva movement. Back when both are in India and Sri Lanka. So EBT people generally disregard the perfections, although it’s still cool to cultivate them.
But if there was no other teacher of the true Dhamma, then a bodhisatta–whether fully unenlightened or a once-returner, would have to somehow learn the meditative skills to be able to instruct later on? And if…knowing the little we do of kamma, it would make sense that in that specific lifetime, all the fruits of his kamma would ripen so as to create a straight path towards his becoming that kalpa’s specific Buddha?
Sure. But it’s categorically ruled out that sotapannas or higher can take another teacher. So maybe there are some buddhas who were once returners and learned through some means other than taking a sectarian master as a teacher, I can’t confidently deny that possibility. But our Buddha did take others as a teacher, and sotapannas, non returners, and once returners cannot do that.
Yeah that’s right. Sotāpannas also cannot fall into the extremes of self-indulgence of self-mortification either.
Hmm…at most then, a cula-sotapanna? Or he just got super lucky and the perfections came through at the right time.
Well it probably wasn’t luck. To my understanding, all extant traditions agree he made a vow in a previous life in the presence of a previous Buddha. I believe I learned on this forum that that is not present in the EBT, but still, I think its commonality is meaningful. Definitely in the canon is the idea that his second-to-last life, in the Tutsita realm, was a meaningful and distinct stage in the process of the arising of a Buddha, and that Siddharta was distinguished above other beings even at birth. It’s just that this distinguishment doesn’t fit into any elaborate classification system in the EBT, and it is somewhat unclear what the characteristics he had (aside from paramis).
Of course in Mahayana Buddhism there’s elaborate systems of a Bodhisattva’s enlightment, Bhumi and watnot.
Yeah that commonality is the thing. But I guess strictly basing on EBTs, without a solid mention of such an event that ensured his success from unenlightened bodhisatta to Buddhahood, probably sheer luck + endless kalpas of building perfections and somehow not ending up in a hell or animal realm for way too long, assuming he was completely unenlightened at the time. Or somehow maintained cula-sotapanna or whatever mind state was enough to keep him in successive enough rebirths that he kept being able to build up perfections.
But then I realize that perfections seem to be a Mahayana back transplant into Theravada as well…so who really knows how the mechanism that builds a Buddha really works I guess?
To OP, the answer is “No”.
Siddhartha Gautama wasn’t an Anagami back then. He was a Bodhisatta, without knowledge of four Noble Truths.
With immeasurable merits accumulated over many past lives and gradually perfected 30 Paramis, Siddhartha Gautama gained the conditions where he meditates with Anapanasati method and straight up to the Supreme Enlightenment, hence realised, penetrated and fully understood Four Noble Truths.
It seems one categorical statement made in the suttas is that the Buddha had never been born in Pure Abodes in MN 12 The Longer Discourse on Lion’s Roar (FWIW).
“There are some ascetics and brahmins who have this doctrine and view: ‘Purity comes from transmigration.’ But it’s not easy to find a realm that I haven’t previously transmigrated to in all this long time, except for the gods of the pure abodes. For if I had transmigrated to the gods of the pure abodes I would not have returned to this realm again.”
Makes good sense. A non-returner just can’t come back to the form realms.
It’s about once-returner not non returner
Same, Bodhisatta isn’t Sotapanna, Sakadagami, Anagami to begin with.
This is why he kept saying: “When I was an unenlightened Bodhisatta”…
Okay so not to beat a dead horse, but I’m curious what you think.
Gotama Buddha may have taken other teachers and therefore could not even be a stream-enterer as he took other teachers…
But what about Vipassi Buddha? I was reading DN 14 (Mahāpadānasutta) and when Gotama Buddha recounts his knowledge of Vipassi Buddha’s enlightenment Vipassi knows for himself in one go…no other teachers needed. I’m not sure what the commentaries say about this but with regards to the question here it seems relevant? It sounds like it could be possible that Vipassi Buddha was at least a stream-enterer based on that sutta alone, although I don’t know what commentaries or if any other suttas say anything about that.
note the classification for the ariya Path exists for times when a Buddha teaching is present.
Somebody can realize nibbana despite no knowledge of the Path of the Buddhas. In these cases, nibbana would not be properly a nibbana in our common terms, neither that person will be an stream-enterer because obviously there is no Dhamma Stream to enter. This happens when somebody arise in a life without Dhamma around or in that whole world.
Normally these persons can be confused or they will try to fit the supramundane experience inside other beliefs available and etc. Without Dhamma teaching the later wrong ideas will arise, although anyway the accumulation existed when pañña arose to catch the Truth. The problem here is when no Dhamma teaching is available to populate the reason, to fit later the supramundane experience in Dhamma concepts to realize that there is a Path to follow and its reach.
In short, the Path and the Fruits both should exist, and then there is a Dhamma stream to enter and there are stream-enterers and the rest.
PaccekaBuddhas are the highest expression of that missed situation. They realize Buddhahood in conditions of absence of Dhamma teaching. Although obviously in such worlds and situations there is more people pursuing the Truth, and also they are accumulating panna and realizations. All that kammic activity will fructify in a future rebirth with Dhamma available. Or still better to meet a Buddha in person.
That situation of PaccekaBuddhas and the worlds and rebirths without Dhamma teaching, in where there are realizations and accumulations of wisdom, this is also interesting to rethink in the power of the human spirit and the real scope of the Buddha teaching. Specially for those unavoidable dicussions to know the “authentic practice” taught by the Buddha, be with jhanas, without jhanas, insight, morality and etc.
When we think in all that kamma activity including the realizations and panna accumulations in previous lives of so many people, then the thought about there is only one valid practice or to penetrate into the Truth can sound funny. However, we know that only a Buddha is able to taught and satisfy to all the endless variety of beings. There are no Buddhas now, and therefore we should be generous and patient in front the exclusivist ideas always ready to deny other possibilities. Because everybody needs some feeling of security in this Path, and commonly this can derive in pulsions of control over a Reality which is out of control.
“Sometimes insight into the truths or into certain doctrinal points is not the direct result of systematic practise, but arises spontaneously under the influence of circumstances. The first flash of insight occurs thus and then the Paccekabodhisatta can systematically contemplate it. This rather sudden insight, as described in the relevant texts, occurs either through understanding the doctrine of impermanence, suffering and non-self, or through understanding the origination by dependence (paticcasamuppāda). In some cases it arises through insight into the true nature of the round of existence, i.e., samsāra, and the end of the round, i.e., Nibbāna.”
- The Paccekabuddha: A Buddhist Ascetic A Study of the Concept of the Paccekabuddha in Pali Canonical and Commentarial Literature, Ria Kloppenborg
Some readings about the PaccekkhaBuddhas can be useful in this issue. To open the mind, about the possibilities of many kamma accumulations and the logical difficulty to fit the characters from the Suttas. Here there are two: