Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Who here is enlightened?
ShiftPlusOne
Veteran
How do you know?
For those who are not, how do you know you're not?
For those who are not, how do you know you're not?
0
Comments
namaste
-- Pema Chodron
"Blink dammit! Blink!"
-- Bonsai Doug
Blinking away like daft here.
Don't blink and drive! (warning: contains spoilers
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f6wq20cZosQ&feature=related :eek:
One thing all religions seem to do is distance the sacred goals away from the layity and towards the religious leaders. This seems to have happened with Buddhism today but it doesn't seem to have been like it in the times of the Buddha, quite the opposite.
If enlightenment really is mundane and really is to do just withing seeing dependent origination and its conditioning then maybe loads of people are enlightened in the same way the buddha was but, because of the religious nature of enlightenment today, they cannot accept that they are enlightened?
namaste
is it necessary to accept by anyone?
is it necessary to proclaim?
NO
There is no need
I don't think that humility enters into it. The dharma is well rooted, so there is no need to sell it anymore... the credence is present to any who openly looks.
Claiming enlightenment is somewhat of an enigma, because applying an label to self requires threads that aren't present... long before suffering fully ceases. Much like a dead person would not call themselves dead, because the conditions for speech are no longer present.
Depending, of course, what is meant by 'enlightenment'. Some use it much like the word "insight".
LOL
What? You mean I'm NOT!?!? Jeez... that's so disappointing.
If a person is kind and compassionate, has a level of wisdom and insight and doesn't act out of anger or greed are they enlightened?
So I was thinking, overcoming suffering isn't that hard and not letting negative emotions guide us is quite achievable. The compassion and selfless kindness is somewhat hard (for me). Gil Fronsdal said the answer he got to the question "how do you know when somebody is enlightened?" was "They are kinder to everybody".
I can see how that would work. Altruistic compassion and kindness would be a sort of last step in a lot of cases. I can think of other cases too, I know plenty of selfless people who suffer over the little thing, so perhaps for them overcoming suffering would be the last step.
Or is that not enough? Is it complete purity of the mind (+body+spirit?)? "get rid of all defilement of the mind", as upekka put it. Is that even possible? Is anything so absolute? I think not.
From my pondering, enlightenment isn't instant or in discrete stages, but there are milestones. Also, after enlightenment there's still lots of room for improvement, it isn't a "big thing" and can quite easily be reversed.
I can also see how false enlightenment due to a lack of insight can happen. For example, I thought I was a pretty decent person, but as it turns out I do some pretty selfish and self-centered things. I couldn't see it before, so if I was to overcome suffering I would've thought there are no further steps.
Or am I way off? Is enlightenment indeed instantaneous and absolute purity? Or perhaps somewhere in between? What do you think?
"Vatthupama Sutta: The Simile of the Cloth" (MN 7), translated from the Pali by Nyanaponika Thera. Access to Insight, June 14, 2010, http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.007.nypo.html
Because there is no knowledge that "it is liberated"...so presumably "it is not liberated". Plus there is still plenty of avijja and tanha.
According to the Sutta quote that I just posted, this would not appear to be the case: 'Birth is exhausted, the life of purity has been lived, the task is done, there is no more of this to come.'
It could be that it was easier for people to become enlightened because they had the best and most inspiring Teacher...The Buddha! Granted, we can access the Buddha's words in the Suttas and I am very grateful for this, but I don't think it would compare with actually meeting and talking to the Buddha. If the Suttas are accurate, some people became Stream-Enterer's merely upon hearing a discourse.
While I believe that lay people can become enlightened, it seems that many people (both now and in the time of the Buddha) recognize that the monastic path may be more suitable for pursuing the goal:
http://www.leighb.com/mn38.htm
Even the Buddha-to-be left home.
It depends what you mean by "seeing"...do you mean thinking about it? Even understanding what it means on an intellectual level? This is useful, but I don't think it is the same thing as perfecting Right View (first stage of enlightenment). Perfecting Right View means that we have actually seen that form, feeling, perception, mental formations, consciousness are impermanent, suffering and not-self...I understand on an intellectual level that this is the case, but I certainly haven't seen it for myself.
This part refers to dependent arising. So, it's basically talking about the second and third noble truths. It means overcoming suffering and is only referring to suffering.
Still talking about dependent arising. The mind is liberated of suffering. You've follower the eightfold path and have achieved cessation of suffering. There's no more suffering.
Sure, but when I meant room for improvement I meant more joy, more compassion, more helping and so on. As the zen saying goes "Before Enlightenment chop wood carry water, after Enlightenment, chop wood carry water." right?
By 'it can be reversed' I think you can slip back into suffering. I can see how this particular point (reversal) is arguable, and I don't think this ultimately matters, so I'll leave this.
GuyC, I don't think that quote contradicts what I said. I don't think I twisted it in any way either, just interpreted it in context. It's important to pay attention to what is refereed to by "this" and "it" and what is meant by birth, task and life of purity. It's all within the context of the four noble truths and dependent arising.
but outsiders can not know that his action are (still) based on delusion, therefore outsiders can not know for sure whether the said person is enlightened or not
that is because still there is delusion
but there are people who are kinder to everybody and still are not enlightened this is the byproduct of enlightenement
knowing what is the suffering exactly is, knowing how to get rid of suffering, working on it is the last step
working on it itself is the overcoming suffering
yes
it says:
avoid bad
do good
purify the mind
this is all Buddhas advice
if it is not possible Buddha's wouldn't ask us to do so
it is high time to stop pondering and thinking
instead try to DO and experience
uppeka, you speak in a very matter of fact way. Are you an expert of some sort? (genuine question, don't take it the wrong way)
Buddha is said to be the most compassionate one and delivered Dhamma he revealed to the world because of his compassion for worldlings
i take it as a compliment
i have no doubt about Buddha's Teaching anymore
i have no doubt about Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha anymore
Who is enlightened? Don't know.
Maybe! But that would make Dharma about a personality rather than the truth, perhaps? it certainly doenst seem to be the spirit of what the buddha taught when alive.
Alas, we cannot access the Buddha's words, just the echos of them.
Yes! this is my point:) Does that mean that the Buddha had a manic gift to bring this on, or does it mean what was taught was what was important?
There wasn't really that life until after his death, I reckon.
I mean the whole shebang:) The mental, meditative, philosophical, pragmatic etc aspects...
namaste
If you read the Suttas many people who see the Buddha are instantly impressed by both his appearance and the way he conducts himself. It is said that he possesses all of the "32 marks of a great man". This is probably especially convincing for those with a devotional personality.
To imply that personality has no influence on learning the Dhamma I think would be a mistake. For example different teachers/different meditation techniques may be more or less suited to certain people based upon their mental disposition.
Another point worth mentioning is that the Buddha was said to be able to thoroughly know the minds of others, so (if this is true) he knew exactly what teaching was the most suitable to a particular person. Even Venerable Sariputta who was called "the foremost in wisdom" made some mistakes in choosing a suitable meditation object.
Yet another possibility is that it could have something to do with the Paramis of the listeners who were fortunate enough to be born as human beings while the Buddha was alive.
Maybe. I guess it depends on what you think Dharma is?
I don't believe such accounts are accurate. I don't believe any of the more "magical" aspects are accurate at all, in fact:)
So one's potential to escape samsara or the idea of samsara is based upon historical context? This doesn't seem to be the dharma the Buddha discovered and taught, least not to me.
Another possibility is that enlightenment is a supremely mundane realisation and over the years the mundane has been suppressed by the mystical, I don't consider this too far fetched.
namaste
Sure:) And for the record, I'm not even close to sure I agree with myself on this issue.
namaste
Can it not be both?
He's said that's rollox, and Enlightenment is actually the 'natural state of being'.
Speaking from my own experience, I've had two (pitifully short) experiences of being absolutely peaceful and everything felt and looked beautiful - it wasn't drug or alcohol induced - it only lasted maybe less than a minute (it went when I tried to hold onto it), once while meditating (a few months after I started meditating) and once while smoking a very normal cigarette first thing in the morning by my front door (I do this every morning, but never felt like this).
Both short periods felt like nothing I've experienced before and I'm not articulate enough to describe them fully.
If those short periods of absolute calmness is anything like Enlightenment; I want more of it.
That could be an obstacle
I know!
It keeps me motivated though.
You learnt an important lesson: clinging leads to suffering, letting go leads to peace.
I was just meditating and I got in a state of deep concentration where I was barely breathing but then I noticed it and got excited as well as felt as if I needed to breathe more and it screwed the whole thing up.(well, I can't say anything negative about it, as it was my best meditation experience thus far and i'm sure the experience of it will be beneficial) But yea, this is something I struggle with. When you're experiencing something good, don't get excited or cling. Simply observe. You can be happy, but don't get all excited to the point that you're dependent on it.
I highly recommend Ajahn Brahm's book "Happiness Through Meditation". He talks about what to do at this stage (as well as most of the common obstacles you will face in meditation). Basically he says that when the breath is no longer perceptible (because it has calmed down so much) just take up the calmness as the object of your meditation instead of the breath. Remember to make peace, be kind, be gentle and be patient.
Who really wants to know that your that way with yourself. Ooooh! Perfectly normal of course but it's the most private thing of privates if you know what I mean. Your own personal thingymabob.
One could hold that such "secrecy" about enlightenment goes against the key dharmic principle of propagating Dharma?
What on earth could Enlightenment be other than an increasing understanding of the Four Noble Truths and Practice of the Eightfold Path?
namaste
For me, the Path leads gradually to the "cessation of dukkha", and when I get there, I'll probably figure out the rest.
Is it true the buddha in fact managed to enlighten people ''back in the day'' so to speak, with mere words? He could cause a person to become fully awoken with one sentence. Is this a myth that has grown over time or is it something believable?
He probably just engaged his "thingy". Sum up, spontaneity, and delivery in one go.
An Extract from an online document : http://triple-gem.net/Vistas_02Nov07.pdf
"Arahattaship (which is sometimes ridiculously confused with saintship) is often understood to be easy of attainment, due to the fact that during Buddha's time he had only to utter a few words and this one or that one became a completely Emancipated One, endowed with all the supernatural faculties.
The example of Bāhiya Dāruciriya is a case in point:
"Therefore, Bāhiya, thus must you learn: In the seen there can be only what is seen, in the heard there can be only what is heard, in the thought there can be only what is thought, in the known there can be only what is known. Since, Bāhiya, for you in the seen there can be only what is seen, in the heard what is heard, in the thought what is thought, in the known what is known therefore you, Bāhiya, are not here. Since you, Bāhiya, are not here, therefore you, Bāhiya, are neither in this world nor in the next world, nor betwixt the two. This alone is the end of pain."
At which Bāhiya immediately became an Emancipated One. To the rest of the Bhikkhus, Bāhiya's conversion and attainment seemed an extremely surprising and swift one, not knowing his remote past history in the dispensation of the previous Buddha, Kassapa, at which time even after severe struggles
he failed to attain enlightenment, and died. Now, however, his time had come.
Let it be reaffirmed here, therefore, that there is no short-cut to release. One becomes an Arahatta at all only because one's time is ripe, it being the fruit of an earnest resolve (adhitLtLhāna) in the remote past,
together with the fulfilment of the requisite pārami. Only after these factors have been fulfilled does
emancipation cease to be a mere dream and becomes a reality in which to exist."