Anonymous X wrote:It is a symbolic action.
If that were not the case, then it would be just rhetoric to trick people.
One can practice for many years and suddenly awaken. All awakening seems to be sudden to my understanding. That would preclude any step by step.
Gradual practice followed by a "sudden" awakening is a different issue.
Step by step always has a division of subject/object unless there is first, an awakening to the Buddhanature.
Only buddhas are awakened to the buddha-nature.
I never mentioned enlightenment and rarely use the word. If you mean awakening to Buddhanature, why would you need a cause if it is our intrinsic natural state? It only seems like something causes it. If it is a meditatvie state of mind, I would agree with you.
There is necessarily a path to liberation, otherwise there is no chance of anyone becoming free from samsara. Assuming there is no cause of awakening is considered a wrong view in Buddhism.
In Dzogchen, they call rigpa, self-sprung.
I assume you mean rangjung (rang - self; byung - arise).
Who is working on understanding emptiness? Who is realising it? Who is cultivating it?
It's called a bodhisattva.
This is all symbolic, not literal.
What is the difference between symbolic and literal? Can you give examples to both?
There is a momentum, but it is non dual and you are not in charge.
What is viryaparamita for then?