It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
I would like to discuss, with anyone who shares an interest, this peculiar but relevant aspect of buddhism, as it touches on very sensitive nerves as far as I am concerned, and relates to much discussion which I have witnessed on various buddhist websites, and on this one as well to some degree. What do you think about this classification of buddhas?
This very 'lone' or 'private' buddha, as wikipedia would like to describe them, achieves enlightenment by themselves regardless of any teachings, by its own power of the investigation of its mind. As a result as they are without teachers and disconnected to the historical buddha, they will generally stand as accused and opposed to the more traditional buddha teachings.
Question: is not the investigation of our mind and the result of that investigation the core principle thrust of buddhist ideology that leads to realisation?
In the Theravada tradition, which has its own class - a pacceca buddha - who attains enlightenment by and for itself, appears to have the prerequisite of a teacher.
However, let me try and explain something I have recently come to understand. A pratyekabuddha, is still a buddha and as buddha is our ultimate nature; spontaneous liberation will always be possible if it is within our natur. So a pratekyabuddha should be respected.
Sparks from a forest fire may ignite another part of the forest; that is what sparks do.
Just thought for those who like to think....