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.
Enlightenment in different traditions
Joshua
Veteran
Since there's very large amount of adherents to both Vedic and Shramanic traditions alike who earnestly believe they're reaching Nirvana/Moksha if I'm to have an integrity as an individual practising Buddhism I must assume they'd all reaching the same transcendental truth, correct?
Gautama thought the Vedic practises completely wrong (though probably the traditions, pantheon and caste more than the actual transcendentalism) so he opted rather to chase after Shramanic ones, only to find extremes that warranted his new philosophy of the "middle-way" as a superior alternative. Yet 2,600 years later people still maintain staunch convictions in their religion's doctrines no doubt fueled by their gurus' apparent enlightenment.
Gautama thought the Vedic practises completely wrong (though probably the traditions, pantheon and caste more than the actual transcendentalism) so he opted rather to chase after Shramanic ones, only to find extremes that warranted his new philosophy of the "middle-way" as a superior alternative. Yet 2,600 years later people still maintain staunch convictions in their religion's doctrines no doubt fueled by their gurus' apparent enlightenment.
0
Comments
Just my opinion i guess.
There is no reason to be buddhist, other than the fact that it explains the truth and the path to discovering it yourself/enlightenment. Yes, we will all find liberation, but why does it bother you if someone else doesn't follow buddhism and yet will eventually achieve enlightenment? "Buddhism" is just a word, like any other. It's insignificant. There is only the path. Follow your path, and don't worry about others beyond caring about all and helping all on their path.
Word.
It is not the adept's beliefs that are the cause of liberation, or even a hindrance to liberation. Rather, the removal of emotional obscurations is the cause of liberation. Cognitive obscurations will remain, however, even for a liberated being; beliefs, IMO, would fall under this category of cognitive obscurations.
Fully enlightened beings (such as Buddhas) have removed both types of obscurations.
None of it is true. That's the thing. Ultimately there is no separation, and in attempting to describe it you're separating "truth" from "untruth" and as such it is not the truth.
this is intriguing, is there any way you can elabourate?
Well, what I am implying is that liberation (remember: this is liberation from suffering uncontrollable rebirths in samsara) is the cessation of those causes and conditions of suffering. A belief that the world was danced into being by Vishnu might not be a correct description of reality, but it doesn't cause suffering. It is an ignorance, for sure, but it is not the ignorance (avidya) that, along with greed and hatred, are the three causes of suffering uncontrollable rebirths. The ignorance that is a cause of suffering is one of not knowing behavioral cause and effect. This ignorance of karma is due to the blindness caused by emotional obscuration.
The belief in Vishnu is an ignorance of anatman and sunyata.
The yogis of old had already developed Samatha(calm) but Vipassana(insight) begins with Lord Buddha.
After ending the cycle, however, you may choose to come back for the benefit of all living beings and with the desire to yourself become a buddha.
I believe Jain gurus taught Siddhartha the highest jhana meditation. Apparent the first taught him three and the second taught him the final, fourth jhana. Somehow being an inch from enlightenment wasn't fitting to find final release? Though I was under the impression that the meditation sequence usually goes samatha -> vipassana -> jhana. Is it possible that Siddhartha made lofty claims but was in all actuality taught vipassana by Jains. But as TheJourney says:
I don't think any of this really matters because I don't even believe Gautama existed and all the stories are legends.
The only real important thing is as upalabhava said:
But as rational as even Buddhism is, there's quite a bit of faith. Using the noble truths as an alternative to popular psychology is one thing, but in order to circumvent rebirths is an entirely different thing laced with many dogmatic implications.
Here is a quote:
This suggest that Jhana is a part of Samatha--> Vipassana.
I thought we were talking about moksha in various traditions. Moksha is liberation from samsara.
And, yes, faith is involved. Before you can come to know what enlightenment is, you must have faith that enlightenment is possible. Even rational science is built upon faith, a faith that (empirical) evidence is sufficient for proof.