Yes, hence the category of āryas called "pratyekabuddhas." But since they do not teach, how would one know who they are?gad rgyangs wrote:as you said:Malcolm wrote:gad rgyangs wrote:
so anyone who awakens to reality is a "Buddha", even if she is from a different tradition (Christianity, Vedanta) or no tradition (philosophy, science)?
That really depends on what they awaken to, now doesn't it?
either you awaken to this "reality of things" or you don't. But the implication of what you are saying is that anyone can awaken to it even if they have never heard of Buddhas or Buddhism. So, they could be a Christian, a Vedantin, a secular philosopher, a poet, etc.the reality of things is always there, awakening to it is always possible whether or not there is a buddha in the world
Illusion
Re: Illusion
-
- Posts: 368
- Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2016 2:54 am
Re: Illusion
I think you're forgetting one very famous example of a person who became enlightened without hearing a Buddha teach. He became a teacher as well. I'll let you think it through.
Relax! Smile From The Heart!
There is a difference between the Mundane and the Transcendental. If you purposefully confuse them, I will ignore you, you nihilist.
There is no Emotion, there is Peace. There is no Ignorance, there is Knowledge. There is no Passion, there is Serenity. There is no Death, there is the Force.
There is a difference between the Mundane and the Transcendental. If you purposefully confuse them, I will ignore you, you nihilist.
There is no Emotion, there is Peace. There is no Ignorance, there is Knowledge. There is no Passion, there is Serenity. There is no Death, there is the Force.
Re: Illusion
AlexMcLeod wrote:I think you're forgetting one very famous example of a person who became enlightened without hearing a Buddha teach. He became a teacher as well. I'll let you think it through.
Not really into guessing games. If you've someone in mind, please be forthcoming.
-
- Posts: 7885
- Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am
Re: Illusion
I'm gonna guess he's talking about Sakyamuni.Malcolm wrote:AlexMcLeod wrote:I think you're forgetting one very famous example of a person who became enlightened without hearing a Buddha teach. He became a teacher as well. I'll let you think it through.
Not really into guessing games. If you've someone in mind, please be forthcoming.
1.The problem isn’t ‘ignorance’. The problem is the mind you have right now. (H.H. Karmapa XVII @NYC 2/4/18)
2. I support Mingyur R and HHDL in their positions against lama abuse.
3. Student: Lama, I thought I might die but then I realized that the 3 Jewels would protect me.
Lama: Even If you had died the 3 Jewels would still have protected you. (DW post by Fortyeightvows)
2. I support Mingyur R and HHDL in their positions against lama abuse.
3. Student: Lama, I thought I might die but then I realized that the 3 Jewels would protect me.
Lama: Even If you had died the 3 Jewels would still have protected you. (DW post by Fortyeightvows)
Re: Illusion
smcj wrote:I'm gonna guess he's talking about Sakyamuni.Malcolm wrote:AlexMcLeod wrote:I think you're forgetting one very famous example of a person who became enlightened without hearing a Buddha teach. He became a teacher as well. I'll let you think it through.
Not really into guessing games. If you've someone in mind, please be forthcoming.
Yeah, I don't play games...and this is not even necessarily true. For example, after Śakyamuni's awakening, according to the Sarvatathāgatatatvasamgraha tantra, the root tantra of Yoga tantra, there was still something he needed to do...so the tathāgatas appeared to him and schooled him in the five abhisambodhis...then he attained full buddhahood.
-
- Posts: 368
- Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2016 2:54 am
Re: Illusion
Of course I meant Shakyamuni. And the question was whether awakening could occur without knowledge of a Buddha's teaching. No shifting the goal posts here. The point is that you have no way of knowing a person's karma and merit just by looking at what religion they outwardly profess. Some people are just ripe, and the slightest breeze will cause an awakening.
Perfect enlightenment is a different topic. And on the other point, what information (including teachings of previous Buddhas) an awakened being has access to is a direct result of their awakeness. Awakening is the immediate goal, perfect enlightenment is guaranteed afterwards. At least, according to the Pali Suttas.
Because of these points, who is to say that there have been no great masters, who were Aryan, amongst the saints or scholars of other religions. Would not the best way to help people be to teach at their level of development?
Perfect enlightenment is a different topic. And on the other point, what information (including teachings of previous Buddhas) an awakened being has access to is a direct result of their awakeness. Awakening is the immediate goal, perfect enlightenment is guaranteed afterwards. At least, according to the Pali Suttas.
Because of these points, who is to say that there have been no great masters, who were Aryan, amongst the saints or scholars of other religions. Would not the best way to help people be to teach at their level of development?
Relax! Smile From The Heart!
There is a difference between the Mundane and the Transcendental. If you purposefully confuse them, I will ignore you, you nihilist.
There is no Emotion, there is Peace. There is no Ignorance, there is Knowledge. There is no Passion, there is Serenity. There is no Death, there is the Force.
There is a difference between the Mundane and the Transcendental. If you purposefully confuse them, I will ignore you, you nihilist.
There is no Emotion, there is Peace. There is no Ignorance, there is Knowledge. There is no Passion, there is Serenity. There is no Death, there is the Force.
-
- Posts: 1333
- Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 12:56 pm
Re: Illusion
beautiful. this thread is really quite something! i begin to understand what you Dzogchenpas and Mahamudrins mean by ''non duality'' or ''non judgement''. its not my style, but still i can see the truth in this approach. i would say that one should be free to practice virtue or non virtue as ones conscience dictates. just to naturally be an ordinary person, or if one chooses: extraordinary. freedom to say no or yes as one naturally would. to see the virtue for example in a buddha's anger, or impatience is liberating.Malcolm wrote:That very much depends on which one of the five Samantabhadra's one is discussing. But in general here we are discussing the adibuddha who attained liberation without engaging in an iota of virtue.
best wishes, Tom.
in any matters of importance. dont rely on me. i may not know what i am talking about. take what i say as mere speculation. i am not ordained. nor do i have a formal training. i do believe though that if i am wrong on any point. there are those on this site who i hope will quickly point out my mistakes.
Re: Illusion
That is not what is meant by the above. Samantabhadra achieved buddhahood prior to the split between samsara and nirvana.White Lotus wrote:beautiful. this thread is really quite something! i begin to understand what you Dzogchenpas and Mahamudrins mean by ''non duality'' or ''non judgement''. its not my style, but still i can see the truth in this approach. i would say that one should be free to practice virtue or non virtue as ones conscience dictates. just to naturally be an ordinary person, or if one chooses: extraordinary. freedom to say no or yes as one naturally would. to see the virtue for example in a buddha's anger, or impatience is liberating.Malcolm wrote:That very much depends on which one of the five Samantabhadra's one is discussing. But in general here we are discussing the adibuddha who attained liberation without engaging in an iota of virtue.
best wishes, Tom.