Yup. He spent two years with Yogis, and six years with ascetics. Apparently, he did very well in them, but the problem didn't go away.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
How Enlighten Was Buddha
- Thread starter CynthiaCypher
- Start date
Yup. He spent two years with Yogis, and six years with ascetics. Apparently, he did very well in them, but the problem didn't go away.
I think you know what I mean.
CynthiaCypher
Well-Known Member
Sorry I just had to use that one.
To be enlightened could mean to be aware and well-informed, to possess rationality and to live consistently with the truth. To free from ignorance and falsehood.
Even for a being not subject to Karma, ill-consequence, or dissatisfaction, in any form?
Serious according to whom, for what reason, and to what effect?
CynthiaCypher
Well-Known Member
You know I have not once have I encountered the term self-realization in orthodox or gnostic scriptures. Must have missed it, because from what I read of gnosis, the self is tenuous at best. And ascribing to much importance to self is ignorance. If anything it is the exact opposite of self-realization.
Meister Eckhart believe that we have to unlearn the self. I tend to agree.
I see: a knowledge-based enlightenment.
Thing is, the Buddha's enlightenment had little to do with simple knowledge. It's core was the end of suffering. IOW, he became enlightened to the nature of suffering (dukkha) and its cessation: the Four Noble Truths.
Anything else would have been his own personal commentary which is subject to his own perception.
When he called it supreme enlightenment, that didn't mean he thought he knew everything.
I think she means that consciousness continues for everyone else, except those of us who are dead, if I am correct. The frightening part is that if I am correct, I understood.
It's a cultural thing, sort of how we have to shake hands when we meet people, or offer a certain kind of hospitality to guests. There isn't really rational basis; it's just part of what defines our culture.
Is a Buddha bound by a culture?
We are bound by laws of nature which is why the aim is freedom from it.
Even if it means needless death?Probably not, but that's no excuse not to be polite.
So was the Buddha free from them, or no?
He was getting old. He may have wanted to die by that point.
Maybe. TBH, I don't really know. His type of enlightenment wasn't about escaping from the real world.
Not completely while alive. But I'm not really as familiar with thervada buddhism.
Arahant
Main article: Arahant
The fourth stage is that of Arahant, a fully enlightened being who has abandoned all ten fetters and who, upon death (Sanskrit: Parinirvāṇa, Pāli: Parinibbāna) will never be reborn in any plane or world, having wholly escaped saṃsāra.[4]
Four stages of enlightenment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I think she means that consciousness continues for everyone else, except those of us who are dead, if I am correct. The frightening part is that if I am correct, I understood.
Well, you may be right there and me bad.
I can't see any significant difference between Anarcho-Gnostic and atheists. But I'm not going to ask.
CynthiaCypher
Well-Known Member
Why would a Buddha who was free from suffering want to die even if he was old?
...uh...
...because...
...
LOOK AT THE PRETTY BUNNY!
LOOK AT THE PRETTY BUNNY!!
Okay, in all seriousness, that is a good point.
TBH, I don't fully understand that part of the story myself (clearly lol). Remember, I'm not Buddhist.
CynthiaCypher
Well-Known Member
You mean besides the fact that I believe in God?
Chisti
Active Member
Why do you believe in god?