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.
do all buddhists believe in enlightenment?
do all buddhists believe in enlightenment?
0
Comments
A lot of people might say I'm not really a Buddhist, though. YMMV.
The very point of Buddhism is to reach these states of liberation (awakening/enlightenment) through proper understanding of the Four Noble Truths and following the Noble Eightfold Path. Some Buddhists do not practice Buddhism for that purpose, but that does not change what the purpose of the Buddha's teachings actually is: Nirvana.
The issue that can arise that leads to confusion is what constitutes enlightenment. There are people who think the supramundane enlightenment does not exist, but rather that having a thorough understanding and agreement with the teachings constitutes enlightenment itself; that this is wisdom. Such is merely ignorance, and in line with that thought such people would be frustrated that they still suffer. They suffer because they are not liberated; have not found freedom that is gained only systematically through practice and the attainment of the four levels of awakening (stream-entry, once-returner, non-returner and worthy one; Sotapanna, Sakadagami, Anagami and Arahant respectively).
This question is like asking do all toads believe in the lilypad? Whether they do or not, they are still sitting on it. Some will look a bit closer though I imagine.
If there is no improvement ever what motivates us to practice?
"Buddha" means "the Enlightened one." Buddhism is the path to enlightenment.
It really depends on which Buddhist you ask, different traditions answer this question differently.
Not trying to argue or anything, I'm sure that's what you meant.
We already know what it feels like to be partially enlightened I think. For example, if we look outside and see a tree, and see that some of its leaves are missing, we just observe that some of its leaves are missing, we do not judge it as good or bad, we just say that some of its leaves are missing, there is no emotion attached. If someone was attached to the tree being full of leaves, or absent of leaves, or in any form other than it currently was, they would be suffering. They would say "I wish the tree had more leaves," and suffer. But we can look at it and not judge the tree, just appreciate it for what it is. I imagine that full enlightenment would be similar, but would apply to all situations and circumstances. Computer broke? House burned down? Ate some chocolate? Won a million dollars? Lost a million dollars? Those would be as empty as the feeling about the tree having some of it's leaves missing. There is no attachment.
So I "believe" in enlightenment, because I can already personally experience what it feels like to be enlightened in certain aspects. Suffering is a product of our clinging, and since we know what it feels like to not cling to certain things, we can know what it feels like to cling to nothing, and just accept what "is." And enlightenment, or the cessation of suffering, is a pretty fundamental Buddhist teaching, in fact, the cessation of suffering is really the only teaching, that's what it's all about, so I don't see why a Buddhist wouldn't "believe" in it.
And here I thought that's what a nice fresh home grown tomato sandwich was!
The Buddha's direct experience is more than well-documented in the suttas. If you are asking if I/we/anyone believes that the Buddha was enlightened, I would point back to the suttas, because according to him and an awful lot of sharp people...he was enlightened.
The different training and myriad of different translations, cultural infusions (across Asia and here into the west) have muddied the water of what enlightenment even means, but that is fine as far as I am concerned. Having a perfect doctrinal definition is something we let Christians, Jews, and Muslims insist on and on about. We are fine with valuing YOUR experience, and we can point to many great teachers, authors, and beings full of compassion throughout our history and within many different traditions. If that isn't enough, then you are probably expecting something that the dhamma never promised to deliver.
While "progress" and "improvement" are definitely evident, they are not the goal of practice. Practice is done for the sake of it....being in the moment. Mindful. tranquil. That is sufficient. As the Buddha taught...such an experience is an auspicious day! (MN 131)
Enlightenment is increased awareness. I don't see what it has to do with suffering. I think you mean Nirvana which is supreme Enlightenment combined with the cessation of suffering.
Buddha reached Enlightenment under the Bodhi tree when he attained the answers to the Universe and the wisdom of the suttas and sutras.
Do you have a sutta citation for that? For enlightenment as opposed to nibbana?
But doesn't increased awareness lead to the end of suffering? I read that the Eightfold path leads to the end of suffering and Elightenment. Some people use the words Enlightment and Nirvana interchangeably.
In the end you overcome that craving. Along the way you use it as motivation to attract the things you need. Meditative wisdom. Good karma to support your stability of mind.
In Buddhist psychology, for lack of a better word, desire and craving are two different things: desires (chanda) is a neutral term, and one generally has to have the desire to achieve a goal in order to achieve it, even nibbana (SN 51.15); whereas the Pali word for craving, tahna (literally "thirst"), is something that's directly tied to suffering.
The second noble truth states that the origination of suffering is "the craving that makes for further becoming — accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now here & now there — i.e., craving for sensual pleasure, craving for becoming, craving for non-becoming" (SN 56.11). As Thanissaro Bhikkhu explains in Wings to Awakening:
<blockquote>Craving for sensuality, here, means the desire for sensual objects. Craving for becoming means the desire for the formation of states or realms of being that are not currently happening, while craving for non-becoming means the desire for the destruction or halting of any that are. "Passion and delight," here, is apparently a synonym for the "desire and passion" for the five aggregates that constitutes clinging/sustenance url=http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/wings/part3.html#part3-h-2%22%20target=%22_blank" target="_blank]III/H/ii[/url.</blockquote>
Desire, on the other hand, can be skillful (kusala) and unskillful (akusala). The desire for happiness, especially "long-term welfare and happiness," is actually an important part of the Buddhist path. For example, are you familiar with the four bases of power (iddhipada)? The four qualities listed in the bases of power are desire, persistence, intent and discrimination. In Wings to Awakening, Thanissaro Bhikkhu points to this passage:
He goes on to explain that, "This passage shows that the problem lies not in the desire, effort, intent or discrimination, but in the fact that these qualities can be unskillfully applied or improperly tuned to their task."
If we take a look at the exchange between Ananda and the brahmin Unnabha in SN 51.15, for example, we can see that the attainment of the goal is indeed achieved through desire, even though paradoxically, the goal is said to be the abandoning of desire. That's because at the end of the path desire, as well as the other three bases of power, subside on their own. As Ananda explains at the end of SN 51.15:
Nirvana is not "supreme enlightenment combined with the cessation of suffering", nirvana is the cessation of the defilements that cause suffering.
There is no one answer to the original question. Different traditions specify different results, paths, and methods.
The idea that enlightenment is some kind of increased awareness is very new-agey.
And no, I dont think one can say that "all Buddhists believe in enlightenment". I have personally met many who do not.
And? Enlightenment can lead to the end of sufferring, but it is fallacious to equivocate the two. Enlightenment is Enlightenment. The end of suffering is the end of sufferring.
Wars lead to death, but "war" and "death" aren't synonymous.
These terms are also different. Nirvana is liberation from Samsara, loss of ego-self, cessation of suffering, and supreme Enlghtenment. Enlightenment is increased understanding.
.
Sometimes its just about breathing