The Buddha's timeframe for enlightenment

Bunks

For those of you who don't believe in or are unsure about rebirth, are you surprised that the Buddha was able to find enlightenment within 6 short years with no teacher or teachings to follow?

I know people who have been sitting for 20+ years and still say they struggle with the ego etc.

Interested to hear people's thoughts.

vinlyn

Interesting question.

I don't guess that Siddhartha was doing much multi-tasking.

But ask Lobster. He says he'll be enlightened in just weeks from now.

ordinarybeing

There are things beyond our imagining that can and do exist. There are bodhisattvas that sit on the cushion everyday, they may not be born in a pureland or have six arms, but they are there I asure you. I am sure they are many people that may have the powers theat the buddha said may develop in meditation. The thing is, they are to humble and wise to care about their levels of attainment. Ask a "stream-winner", or "once-returner", or "non-returner", or an "Arahant" if they are enlightened, they will say "I don't know."

Read the heart sutra, it helps me.

blu3ree

Bunks said:

For those of you who don't believe in or are unsure about rebirth, are you surprised that the Buddha was able to find enlightenment within 6 short years with no teacher or teachings to follow?

I know people who have been sitting for 20+ years and still say they struggle with the ego etc.

Interested to hear people's thoughts.

I believe the religion in his time period that was locally practiced was Hinduism he was after all born in India. He also learned from many gurus. When he attained supreme enlightenment by ridding the mind of ignorance he was alone. He sat under the bodhi tree and remembered previous rebirths.

lobster

The Buddhas teachers
http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/buddhism/lifebuddha/13lbud.htm

To make progress in a short period of time is not surprising. It is often a question of following what is already known or implementing and digesting teachings one is already familiar with.

It is a question of genuine aspiration and implementation. Nobody trains to win a marathon in their 'next life' . . .

More details as I become enlightened . . .

poptart

The real stumbling block to enlightenment is not choosing it.
Everyone has Buddha potential. The truth is most don't really want it.

BhikkhuJayasara

There is no such thing as short period enlightenment.. it may seem that it was wow so quick, but it took him many lifetimes to get up to that point.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/index.html

A Gradual Training
The Dhamma, the truth taught by the Buddha, is uncovered gradually through sustained practice. The Buddha made clear many times that Awakening does not occur like a bolt out of the blue to the untrained and unprepared mind. Rather, it culminates a long journey of many stages:[1]

Just as the ocean has a gradual shelf, a gradual slope, a gradual inclination, with a sudden drop-off only after a long stretch, in the same way this Doctrine and Discipline (dhamma-vinaya) has a gradual training, a gradual performance, a gradual progression, with a penetration to gnosis only after a long stretch.

— Ud 5.5

Monks, I do not say that the attainment of gnosis is all at once. Rather, the attainment of gnosis is after gradual training, gradual action, gradual practice. And how is there the attainment of gnosis after gradual training, gradual action, gradual practice? There is the case where, when conviction has arisen, one visits [a teacher]. Having visited, one grows close. Having grown close, one lends ear. Having lent ear, one hears the Dhamma. Having heard the Dhamma, one remembers it. Remembering, one penetrates the meaning of the teachings. Penetrating the meaning, one comes to an agreement through pondering the teachings. There being an agreement through pondering the teachings, desire arises. When desire has arisen, one is willing. When one is willing, one contemplates. Having contemplated, one makes an exertion. Having made an exertion, one realizes with the body the ultimate truth and, having penetrated it with discernment, sees it.

although I will add in this for kicks, at the end of the Maha Satipathana sutta -

"Now, if anyone would develop these four frames of reference in this way for seven years, one of two fruits can be expected for him: either gnosis right here & now, or — if there be any remnant of clinging-sustenance — non-return.

"Let alone seven years. If anyone would develop these four frames of reference in this way for six years... five... four... three... two years... one year... seven months... six months... five... four... three... two months... one month... half a month, one of two fruits can be expected for him: either gnosis right here & now, or — if there be any remnant of clinging-sustenance — non-return.

"Let alone half a month. If anyone would develop these four frames of reference in this way for seven days, one of two fruits can be expected for him: either gnosis right here & now, or — if there be any remnant of clinging-sustenance — non-return.

"'This is the direct path for the purification of beings, for the overcoming of sorrow & lamentation, for the disappearance of pain & distress, for the attainment of the right method, & for the realization of Unbinding — in other words, the four frames of reference.' Thus was it said, and in reference to this was it said."

That is what the Blessed One said. Gratified, the monks delighted in the Blessed One's words.

riverflow

Sheng Yen puts it down to causes and conditions being ripe for the individual in question. Because of karma before one's birth and also during one's lifetime an individual may have more or less obstacles to overcome in order to awaken.

By (imperfect) analogy, anyone can learn to play the piano, but for some it is easier than others if they have a natural inclination toward music.

Jason

Bunks said:

For those of you who don't believe in or are unsure about rebirth, are you surprised that the Buddha was able to find enlightenment within 6 short years with no teacher or teachings to follow?

I know people who have been sitting for 20+ years and still say they struggle with the ego etc.

Interested to hear people's thoughts.

Not really. For one, it was 6 years of intense practice, all of which was spent working towards this singular goal. For another, the Buddha himself says in DN 22 that:

"Now, if anyone would develop these four frames of reference in this way for seven years, one of two fruits can be expected for him: either gnosis right here & now, or — if there be any remnant of clinging-sustenance — non-return.

"Let alone seven years. If anyone would develop these four frames of reference in this way for six years... five... four... three... two years... one year... seven months... six months... five... four... three... two months... one month... half a month, one of two fruits can be expected for him: either gnosis right here & now, or — if there be any remnant of clinging-sustenance — non-return.

"Let alone half a month. If anyone would develop these four frames of reference in this way for seven days, one of two fruits can be expected for him: either gnosis right here & now, or — if there be any remnant of clinging-sustenance — non-return.

"'This is the direct path for the purification of beings, for the overcoming of sorrow & lamentation, for the disappearance of pain & distress, for the attainment of the right method, & for the realization of Unbinding — in other words, the four frames of reference.' Thus was it said, and in reference to this was it said."

That is what the Blessed One said. Gratified, the monks delighted in the Blessed One's words.

In general, I'd hazard to say that the degree of progress towards awakening is, in most cases, directly proportional to the time and effort one puts into their practice.

genkaku

I am glad so many seem to assume that they know what "enlightenment" is and seem to feel that they or others can work towards or attain it ... and also that they seem sure that Gautama attained it.

It does feel, however, a bit like the inveterate mall maven who may not know what she's shopping for but is an expert at shopping and therefore goes to the mall just knowing she will find the perfect item.

After 40-plus years, I think it may be enough to be determined and patient in your practice and let "enlightenment" take care of itself.

lobster

genkaku said:

After 40-plus years, I think it may be enough to be determined and patient in your practice and let "enlightenment" take care of itself.

Perhaps.
Perhaps ignorance will similarly arise of itself.
There is often not enough years, practice and patient doctoring to care for maybe scenarios

Is enough enough or just sufficient . . .

:wave:

Jeffrey

genkaku said:

I am glad so many seem to assume that they know what "enlightenment" is and seem to feel that they or others can work towards or attain it ... and also that they seem sure that Gautama attained it.

It does feel, however, a bit like the inveterate mall maven who may not know what she's shopping for but is an expert at shopping and therefore goes to the mall just knowing she will find the perfect item.

After 40-plus years, I think it may be enough to be determined and patient in your practice and let "enlightenment" take care of itself.

One of the lojong slogans which were preserved by Atisha says:

Abandon all hope of fruition

Sorry lobster

genkaku

If it's not too far off topic, I have several questions. I do not mean these questions as a way of elevating myself or putting anyone else down. They are, as I say, questions.

How could anyone know what "enlightenment" was without being enlightened?
How could anyone know what "enlightenment" wasn't without being enlightened?

I mean "know" in the same sense anyone might say they "know" what tea tastes like after having tasted it.

I use the word "know" as distinct from simply believing. If Buddhism relied solely on belief, then what value would it have, considering the fact that belief relies on doubt and Buddhism is said to eradicate doubt. If Buddhism relied on belief, how could it differ from the popular appreciations of Christianity, Judaism, Islam, etc?

If it's not too far off topic, I would be interested in others' views.

vinlyn

genkaku said:

If it's not too far off topic, I have several questions. I do not mean these questions as a way of elevating myself or putting anyone else down. They are, as I say, questions.

How could anyone know what "enlightenment" was without being enlightened?
How could anyone know what "enlightenment" wasn't without being enlightened?

I mean "know" in the same sense anyone might say they "know" what tea tastes like after having tasted it.

I use the word "know" as distinct from simply believing. If Buddhism relied solely on belief, then what value would it have, considering the fact that belief relies on doubt and Buddhism is said to eradicate doubt. If Buddhism relied on belief, how could it differ from the popular appreciations of Christianity, Judaism, Islam, etc?

If it's not too far off topic, I would be interested in others' views.

Personally, I think you're getting too far down into semantics. I've never been murdered, but I know what being murdered means. I accept that language allows us to understand the meaning of a word, without actually perceiving the word experientially. Otherwise, how would we know anything?

Jason

genkaku said:

If it's not too far off topic, I have several questions. I do not mean these questions as a way of elevating myself or putting anyone else down. They are, as I say, questions.

How could anyone know what "enlightenment" was without being enlightened?
How could anyone know what "enlightenment" wasn't without being enlightened?

I mean "know" in the same sense anyone might say they "know" what tea tastes like after having tasted it.

I use the word "know" as distinct from simply believing. If Buddhism relied solely on belief, then what value would it have, considering the fact that belief relies on doubt and Buddhism is said to eradicate doubt. If Buddhism relied on belief, how could it differ from the popular appreciations of Christianity, Judaism, Islam, etc?

If it's not too far off topic, I would be interested in others' views.

My view is that:

A. Buddhism doesn't rely solely on faith, just as it doesn't rely solely on reason or direct experience.

B. While nibbana in the sense of the extinguishing of greed, hatred, and delusion (SN 38.1) is something that most of us take on faith at the beginning, in some sense, we all have already tasted it. As Buddhadasa Bhikkhu articulates in Nibbana For Everyone:

When Prince Siddhartha first took up the homeless spiritual life, he wandered in search of the Nibbana that is the total quenching of all dukkha — he wasn't looking for death! From the famous teachers of India at that time, he learned nothing higher than the experience of neither perception nor non-perception (nevasanyanasanyayatana), a degree of mental tranquility so deep that we can describe it neither as "death" nor as "non-death." He couldn't accept this as the supreme Nibbana, so he went off to search on his own until he discovered the Nibbana that is the coolness remaining when the defilements have finally ended. He called it "the end of dukkha," meaning the exhaustion of all the heat produced by defilements. However much the defilements are exhausted, there's that much coolness, until there is perfect coolness due to the defilements being finished completely. In short, to the degree that the defilements are ended, there will be that much coolness or Nibbana. That is, Nibbana is the coolness resulting from the quenching of defilements, whether they quench on their own or someone quenches them through Dhamma practice. Whenever the defilements are quenched, then there is the thing called "Nibbana," always with the same meaning — coolness.

Next, notice that the defilements are concocted things (sankharadhammas) that arise and pass away. As it says in the Pali,

Yankinci samudayadhammam sabbantam nirodhadhammam.
(Whatever things originate, all those will cease.)

Any reactive emotion that arises ceases when its causes and conditions are finished. Although it may be a temporary quenching, merely a temporary coolness, it still means Nibbana, even if only temporarily. Thus, there's a temporary Nibbana for those who still can't avoid some defilements. This indeed is the temporary Nibbana that sustains the lives of beings who are still hanging onto defilement. Anyone can see that if the egoistic emotions exist night and day without any pause or rest, no life could endure it. If it didn't die, it would go crazy and then die in the end. You ought to consider carefully the fact that life can survive only because there are periods when the defilements don't roast it, which, in fact, outnumber the times when the defilements blaze.

These periodic Nibbanas sustain life for all of us, without excepting even animals, which have their levels of Nibbana, too. We are able to survive because this kind of Nibbana nurtures us, until it becomes the most ordinary habit of life and of the mind. Whenever there is freedom from defilement, then there is the value and meaning of Nibbana. This must occur fairly often for living things to survive. That we have some time to relax both bodily and mentally provides us with the freshness and vitality needed to live.

lobster

Abandon all hope of fruition

Like with a cherry tree, abandon all
hope of non fruition.
Still, it will flower.

Prune too much, flowers but no fruit
Conditions wrong, buds drop

When the cherry tree flowers, it is still a tree
Without flowering, still we know its nature

In a garden, we are more hopeful
Have we tended? Have we grafted?
Spring comes, needs met, blossom falls away
Every year is it the same

Jeffrey

"One of the most powerful teachings of the Buddhist tradition is that as long as you are wishing for things to change, they never will. As long as you're wanting yourself to get better, you won't. As long as you have an orientation toward the future, you can never just relax into what you already have or already are.

One of the deepest habitual patterns that we have is to feel that now is not good enough. We think back to the past a lot, which maybe was better than now, or perhaps worse. We also think ahead quite a bit to the future - which we may fear - always holding out hope that it might be a little bit better than now. Even if now is going really well -we have good health and we've met the person of our dreams, or we just had a child or got the job we wanted-nevertheless there's a deep tendency always to think about how it's going to be later. We don't quite give ourselves full credit for who we are in the present.

For example, it's easy to hope that things will improve as a result of meditation, that we won't have such bad tempers anymore or we won't have fear anymore or people will like us more than they do now. Or maybe none of those things are problems for us, but we feel we aren't spiritual enough. Surely we will connect with that awake, brilliant, sacred world that we are going to find through meditation. In everything we read -whether it's philosophy or dharma books or psychology- there's the implication that we're caught in some kind of very small perspective and that if we just did the right things, we'd begin to connect with a bigger world, a vaster world, different from the one we're in now."

http://lojongmindtraining.com/Commentary.aspx?author=3&proverb=26


"In one of the first teachings I ever heard, the teacher said, "I don't know why you came here, but I want to tell you right now that the basis of this whole teaching is that you're never going to get everything together." I felt a little like he had just slapped me in the face or thrown cold water over my head. But I've always remembered it. He said, "You're never going to get it all together." There isn't going to be some precious future time when all the loose ends will be tied up. Even though it was shocking to me, it rang true. One of the things that keeps us unhappy is this continual searching for pleasure or security, searching for a little more comfortable situation, either at the domestic level or at the spiritual level or at the level of mental peace."

lobster

The below from another forum explains very well both the simplicity and presence of the time independent state

There are no signs. From early on signlessness (animitta) has been one of the characteristics of ultimate reality.

"What is the samadhi of signlessness apart from the samadhi of emptiness? If there is a remaining samadhi taking part in nirvana as its objective representation, this is called animitta samadhi. Again, animitta samadhi: The conditioned world has signs. Nirvana is signless. The conditioned world has three signs: arising, staying and passing away. Nirvana has three signs. Not arising, not staying, and not passing away. Thus the conditioned world has signs and nirvana is signless."
(Sariputrabhidharmasastra in "Nagarjuna in Context", p. 162)

From a practical advice:

"If you identify by thinking "It's emptiness,"
or thinking "It is signless and aspirationless:·
thinking "It is unidentifiable," thinking "It is completely pure,"
thinking "It is birthless," thinking "It is unperceivable,"
thinking "It has no nature:' thinking "It is without elaboration,"
thinking "It is not an object for analysis by speech or mind;'
thinking "It is uncreated and naturally present;' and so on,
however profound these thoughts, our recognition of emptiness
will not transcend the conceptualization of an arrogant mind.
Attachment to concepts leads to a fall into inferior states
and a continuous ripening of karma from inferior actions."
(Lama Shang: The Ultimate Supreme Path of Mahamudra in "Mahamudra and Related Instructions", p. 86)

And just to show again what the essential nature of mind is:

"To realize that mind is empty of all empirical characteristics and devoid of any enduring essence is to realize the nature of mind. This insight will help you to understand the nature of the self as well. If you can realize this, you will also realize the nature of physical things to be empty of enduring essence. The result of understanding that emptiness is the nature of both the mental and physical realms is that you will no longer generate conflicting emotions in response to situations."
(Traleg Kyabgon: Ocean of Certainty, p. 110)

Just that short quote tells that emptiness has to be realised, which is the simple fact of the lack of anything graspable (i.e. any sign), from what comes freedom from (but not elimination of) emotions and ideas. Whatever concept you want to hold on to, that is mistaking illusion for reality, that is the root cause of ignorance. The nature of mind is that it is incomprehensible, that there is nothing at all to hold on to, to identify with, to discover, to realise; because suffering comes from attachment to something, and attachment is also the view that there is something to attach to. Thus the essential instruction is: relax. Relaxing means letting go of attachment. And that's it. Nothing more, nothing less. You can find proof of this any time. Just see what happens when you follow a thought and when you don't.

"Basic wakefulness is the very essence of the mind that fixates or thinks of something. Yet our dualistic fixation and thinking is like a veil that covers and obscures this luminosity.
In short, what is recognized is not a thing. What, then, do we recognize? We must experience naked wakefulness directly, and this occurs the instant that our mind is stripped bare of conceptual thinking. That experience, therefore, is not a product of our fabrication. It simply is. The problem is that it is too near to us, just like something held so close to your eyes that it is difficult to see. Moreover, it is too easy. We would prefer something more difficult. Simply remaining free from concepts is extremely easy. The only difficulty is that it goes against our tendencies—we enjoy conceptual activity, we like to have something to take hold of. So, although it is easy to remain freely, our habitual tendencies pull us away from that state."
(Chökyi Nyima Rinpoche: Three Words in "Quintessential Dzogchen", p. 185-186)

Jeffrey

Milarepa, the Logician

I bow at the feet of my teacher Marpa.
And sing this song in response to you.
Listen, pay heed to what I say,
forget your critique for a while.

The best seeing is the way of "nonseeing" --
the radiance of the mind itself.
The best prize is what cannot be looked for --
the priceless treasure of the mind itself.

The most nourishing food is "noneating" --
the transcendent food of samadhi.
The most thirst-quenching drink is "nondrinking" --
the nectar of heartfelt compassion.

Oh, this self-realizing awareness
is beyond words and description!
The mind is not the world of children,
nor is it that of logicians.

Attaining the truth of "nonattainment,"
you receive the highest initiation.
Perceiving the void of high and low,
you reach the sublime stage.

Approaching the truth of "nonmovement,"
you follow the supreme path.
Knowing the end of birth and death,
the ultimate purpose is fulfilled.

Seeing the emptiness of reason,
supreme logic is perfected.
When you know that great and small are groundless,
you have entered the highest gateway.

Comprehending beyond good and evil
opens the way to perfect skill.
Experiencing the dissolution of duality,
you embrace the highest view.

Observing the truth of "nonobservation"
opens the way to meditating.
Comprehending beyond "ought" and "oughtn't"
opens the way to perfect action.

When you realize the truth of "noneffort,"
you are approaching the highest fruition.
Ignorant are those who lack this truth:
arrogant teachers inflated by learning,
scholars bewitched by mere words,
and yogis seduced by prejudice.
For though they yearn for freedom,
they find only enslavement.

Wisdom23

This may be a bit wierd but here goes. Often when i hear a story like such i often take the message from it rather than the story. He may very well of done so with no xbox or tv to distract him and whole hearte dedication. If the story went along the lines of he meditated on and off for 20 minutes a day and when he was sixty he was enlightened, that wouldn't be much inspiration. He had to set the bar high coz he's da Buddha lol. I find it a bit disheartening when people pick apart religion. Something i have been meditating on recently (Verse 7 i think) in the dhamapada talking about everyone will die as morbid as it is. We ofcourse dont know when and how it is going to come so i think we should live every second as fully as possible so are we going to pick apart the stoy or apply it and live it.

I hope this helps, all the best.

ZendoLord84

Maybe the buddha stumbled upon enlightenment.