Which is it?

TheJourney

There are no people claiming buddhahood like gautama buddha did, teaching with that kind of authority. Is it because there is some reason unknown until enlightenment that we shouldn't claim that kind of authority, or is it that upon achieving enlightenment you enter some sort of other realm? Or what is it? Cuz noone's claiming enlightenment, letalone buddhahood. The dalai lama is the epitome of buddhism, and he will tell you he's not enlightened.

GuyC

Claiming to be enlightened is like putting a sign over your head that says "definitely not enlightened". Why would someone even want to claim they are enlightened? It is most likely coming from ego that someone would say something like that. Someone once said (can't remember who) even if the person who makes the claim is enlightened, they are going to have to spend the rest of their lives having to prove it. It is much better for everyone if Enlightened beings spend their time teaching the Dhamma rather than making (and proving) claims about attainments.

Also, for Bhikkhus and Bhikkhuni's, they are not allowed to discuss such things with lay people anyway.

questionful

The Buddha claimed to be a Tathagata didn't he? First thing, when he met the five ascetics after reaching enlightenment. And he had his reasons.

I think there are people that claim to be enlightened. But I have heard that people say that there are different "levels" of enlightenment. In other words, there are some "attainments" that when people experience them, they say, "I call this enlightenment" even if it is not the thing that the Buddha achieved.

I would not say that the Dalai Lama is the most "attained" practitioner of the teachings, he's just the one with the most attention and the biggest teaching job (he teaches laypeople all over the world). He has said that his practice is "very poor".

I don't think anyone has been a Tathagata like the Buddha since his time. But I'm not sure. And I don't think it's that important to think about. I remember reading that Ajahn Chah refused to label his "attainments" when asked about them by students, because he didn't want them to get distracted or deluded. I know that the path leads to good things, so I practice it.

RichardH

There was retreat earlier this year with Ajahn Sumedho. In a touching moment he was talking about how we are doing this for enlightenment, for realizing the unconditioned and sustaining that. Many people were having the struggles you have on retreat, physical pain, and having lots of chaos come up. At a certain point he just looked at us and said, "You have to do this yourself. I can't do it for you. If I could I would, but it has taken me my whole life to do it myself." He was matter of fact about being liberated, but made no claim either. There was no ego in it, he was just there, and he was just teaching. It was humbling. There are all kinds of people along the spectrum of practice. Ordinary practitioners like you and me can know our "Buddha Nature". It is really no big deal. "Having the insight" ,as Sumedho put it, is just part of practice. In Zen, according to the teachings of Chinul, practice starts with "Enlightenment" or sudden awakening to Form/Emptiness, then continues as an ongoing process of unbinding the habit energy of greed, hatred, and delusion. There are people out there who have uprooted greed hatred and delusion. They are an inspiration. They are marked by their conduct. Look for conduct.

nanadhaja

TheJourney wrote: »

There are no people claiming buddhahood like gautama buddha did, teaching with that kind of authority. Is it because there is some reason unknown until enlightenment that we shouldn't claim that kind of authority, or is it that upon achieving enlightenment you enter some sort of other realm? Or what is it? Cuz noone's claiming enlightenment, letalone buddhahood. The dalai lama is the epitome of buddhism, and he will tell you he's not enlightened.

Hi TheJourney.Lord Buddha was a Sammasambuddha.As far as as I know the next one is not due for some time yet.This is why we have not had a teacher of that authority.This type of Buddha is self taught and able to teach others.
The next type of Buddha is called a Paccekabuddha. Like a Sammasambuddha they are self taught but do not teach.
The third one is called a Savakabuddha.In the Theravada tradition this is what we would normally refer to as an Arahant.Arahants of course are said to come to enlightenment through listening to a Buddha or a noble one.
According to the Vinaya,a monk is not allowed to tell a lay person if they have attained any sort of stream entry.
With metta

Chrysalid

nanadhaja wrote: »

According to the Vinaya,a monk is not allowed to tell a lay person if they have attained any sort of stream entry.

Does the Vinaya say why?

thickpaper

TheJourney wrote: »

There are no people claiming buddhahood like gautama buddha did, teaching with that kind of authority. Is it because there is some reason unknown until enlightenment that we shouldn't claim that kind of authority, or is it that upon achieving enlightenment you enter some sort of other realm? Or what is it? Cuz noone's claiming enlightenment, letalone buddhahood. The dalai lama is the epitome of buddhism, and he will tell you he's not enlightened.

One possible answer to your question (I think its an interesting one, for sure) is that enlightenment in the time of the buddha was Mundane. This doesn't belittle it at all.

Enlightenment in the suttas of the PC certainly seems to be pretty Mundane; it happens fairly often and often after a very short amount of time. Moreover, once happen it seems its "business as usual", except it is at peace and within truth and with the aim of passing it on.

namaste

Mountains

I'm enlightened. I'm the reincarnation of Buddha. Follow my teachings! To make a tax deductible donation in support of our ministries, call 1-800-IMBUDDHA