Originally posted by whylikethatah:Or is it if i never take refuge means i go back samsara lah? must have passport first ah.
ok if u put it this way. i thinking problem is not many know the Right way to do so, if so a lot of meditators during Buddha's time would have accomprise Arahathood, why must after Buddha came then people start to attain Arahathood.
but it's a good question whether refuge is really needed.
have to search "refuge" in Pali canon:
to me, refuge is not just the apparent taking refuge/believe in the image of Buddha, Dharma and sangha.
i like Master Hui Neng taught that refuge in Buddha represent Awareness觉, Dharma represent Properæ£, and Sangha represent Purity净. so its the quality that one take refuge in. all and all it's a form of practice in itself. if a person without knowing Buddhism yet can meet the requirement of the Noble eightfold path, which is not so easy, can also attain Enlightenment. i think that person is a Buddha already.
This is all delusion. If one cannot completely rid craving and clinging, one cannot be enlightened. There is no such thing as partial craving, some desire still remaining.
i think it's like quiting smoking for example. smoking is a craving. if one can one day quit. cool. i salute him/her. to me Hui Neng did it in one shot. some though, do it gradually. maybe reduce 1 stick at a time. i think a lot people did it in one shot during Buddha's time. but now, i'm afriad, for me, need to do it gradually. as craving too strong.
btw, there's two kind of bodhisattvas, one of which can "postpone" Nirvana, not because they cannot reach Nirvana, but they can if they want to. the other "half-baked" one do not really know how to reach Nirvana yet want to postpone nirvana. this i also do not encourage. if one cannot reach Nirvana yet want to learn to help others, i prefer they rather not! it's like not able to swim yet jump into the water to save others. u will be the one who will drown together with the victim!
/\
Originally posted by sinweiy:
ok if u put it this way. i thinking problem is not many know the Right way to do so, if so a lot of meditators during Buddha's time would have accomprise Arahathood, why must after Buddha came then people start to attain Arahathood.but it's a good question whether refuge is really needed.
have to search "refuge" in Pali canon:
to me, refuge is not just the apparent taking refuge/believe in the image of Buddha, Dharma and sangha.
i like Master Hui Neng taught that refuge in Buddha represent Awareness觉, Dharma represent Properæ£, and Sangha represent Purity净. so its the quality that one take refuge in. all and all it's a form of practice in itself. if a person without knowing Buddhism yet can meet the requirement of the Noble eightfold path, which is not so easy, can also attain Enlightenment. i think that person is a Buddha already.
i think it's like quiting smoking for example. smoking is a craving. if one can one day quit. cool. i salute him/her. to me Hui Neng did it in one shot. some though, do it gradually. maybe reduce 1 stick at a time. i think a lot people did it in one shot during Buddha's time. but now, i'm afriad, for me, need to do it gradually. as craving too strong.
btw, there's two kind of bodhisattvas, one of which can "postpone" Nirvana, not because they cannot reach Nirvana, but they can if they want to. the other "half-baked" one do not really know how to reach Nirvana yet want to postpone nirvana. this i also do not encourage. if one cannot reach Nirvana yet want to learn to help others, i prefer they rather not! it's like not able to swim yet jump into the water to save others. u will be the one who will drown together with the victim!
/\
why dont have Arahants during Buddha's time? got what...the direct disciples of Buddha when they convened at a council meeting or something, when Ananda attained Arahant-hood when he was about to lie down on bed in the wee hours. He was the only 1 left to attain Arahant-hood and the rest of the people at the meeting had already all attained Arahant-hood.
What u talking about "u think that person is a buddha already." U're going against the authenticity of Pali Canon, cos it says theres only 1 fully-enlightened Buddha during at any 1 era. duh.
Just like all these angmoh 'teachers' this AEN always mentions about, and the people these teachers lead them to, they all may not be buddhists who have taken refuge but are interested in the path of spirituality. who is to deny they cannot make it to attain Anagami or even Arahanthood?
Isn't there infinite levels of Enlightment?Not from a strict theoretical stand point of view?
Read the followings.
Therefore one must begin by becoming aware of the qualities of the Buddha, the Dharma, and the Sangha, and by understanding exactly what they are. By means of that, one will give rise to faith in them. One will be able to feel one's faith and go for refuge to them. It is necessary that this occur as a basis for the practice, but beyond that, the going for refuge must be something that is continually practiced and renewed in one's daily practice; this is extremely important.
The reason why the taking of refuge is so important is that at present we are immersed in samsara, which is an experience of suffering, an experience of impermanence, and an experience of constant change. If we wish to free ourselves from this, we cannot do so simply by ourselves. However, we can travel the path to liberation by relying upon the compassion of the Three Jewels. That is why it is necessary to go to them for refuge.
As ordinary beings, we do not know or understand the methods that we must engage in to obtain Buddhahood. For that reason we need a guide or a companion on the path to Buddhahood. This is something that can be explained by an example that is easily understood by Westerners. If one wanted to get from here to New York City and one tried to walk, one would either not get there at all or it would take a very long time. However, if one were to stand by the side of the road and put out one's thumb, then eventually some good minded individual would stop their car; one could get in and one would reach the city. It's the same way if we want to reach the City of Enlightenment. We have to hitchhike or take refuge in the Three Jewels
The Buddha, the Dharma, and the Sangha are beings or things that are separate from us, distinct from us. We are individuals and we are quite a distance from them. One might ask how it is possible to establish a connection. First of all, all phenomena arise through interdependence through the actions of causes and conditions. In the case of the path, what must occur is the coming together of the conditions of one's own faith, and the compassion and blessing of the Three Jewels. If these two come together, then the connection is established and one can travel the path.
The presence of the faith on one's own part and the compassion and qualities on the part of the Three Jewels is sufficient to create the connection. It does not depend on distance, like a television station that is sending out a TV program. If one has the box and the set, one can see the program. If the TV station isn't sending it out, then even if one has the TV set one can't see it. If the TV station is sending it out but one does not have the TV set, then one also can't see it . But in either case, if these two things are present, then regardless of the distance that separates the two, although there is no direct physical connection that one can see, the TV program still arrives somehow. In the same way, the actual blessing and compassion of the Three Jewels can be received, and one can enter through one's faith.
Another example is that the compassion, blessing, and power of the Three Jewels is like a hook, and one's faith is like a ring. If these two are present and connect one with another, then the hook will lead the ring and oneself, held by the ring, from suffering to happiness and finally to liberation
Irrelevant
Originally posted by yhjow:I'm under the notion that there are several levels of enlightenments, ranging from "small enlightenment" such as realization of certain dharma truth, realization of wisdom etc. So, as one practise Buddhism and engaged on a spiritual path, as one gets deeper into higher levels of wisdoms, I'm just wondering if there is really categorized "levels" of enlightenment? Can this be calculated?
Did Buddha say anything about 'levels' of enlightenment?
Or is it just infinite levels until one reached full enlightenment such as Buddhahood?
Can someone enlightened me about this doubt?
There are a lot of maps of enlightenment.
Personally, these maps are most useful for my own practice and experience:
Thusness/PasserBy's Seven Stages of Enlightenment
Mahamudra's Four Yogas
Tozan's Five Ranks
Four Stages to Arhantship
Bodhisattva's 10 Bhumis
Originally posted by Loor:so from present state, can 'skip' levels?
i.e. from a full wine bottle to empty bottle with no smell in one step?
There are in history, very very few people who can actually skip levels. By few, I mean the numbers can be counted by hands...
Most people need to go through stages.
Though this is on Dzogchen practice, this applies to other Buddhist practices as well:
There are two types of dzogchen practitioners: those who progress in stages (lam-rim-pa) and those for whom it happens all at once (cig-car-ba). This differentiation regards the manner of proceeding to enlightenment for practitioners once they have realized essence rigpa. In other words, it regards those who have become aryas (‘ phags-pa, highly realized beings) with the attainment of a seeing pathway mind (mthong-lam, path of seeing) and the true stopping of the emotional obscurations.
Those who progress in stages proceed through the arya bodhisattva ten bhumi levels of minds (sa, Skt. bhumi), one by one, gradually removing the cognitive obscurations.
Those for whom it happens all at once achieve a true stopping of both sets of obscuration all at once with the first realization of essence rigpa. Thus, they become aryas and Buddhas simultaneously.
Although dzogchen texts usually speak more of the second variety, only a tiny fraction of practitioners is of this type. Their elimination of both sets of obscuration with the first realization of essence rigpa is due to the enormous amount of positive force (merit) they have built up with bodhichitta and dzogchen practice in previous lives. That positive force may also enable them to proceed through the stages before achieving a seeing pathway mind more quickly than most. Nevertheless, no one asserts the attainment of enlightenment without the buildup of vast networks of positive force and deep awareness, from intense practice of preliminaries, meditation, and bodhisattva conduct – even if the majority of this has occurred in previous lifetimes.
Therefore, when dzogchen texts refer to the recognition of rigpa as the one that cuts off all for complete liberation (chig-chod kun-grol, the panacea for complete liberation), we need to understand this correctly. For those for whom it happens all at once, the first realization of essence rigpa is sufficient for cutting all obscurations for the complete attainment of enlightenment. This does not mean, however, that realization of rigpa is sufficient by itself for attaining enlightenment, without need for any preliminaries, such as bodhichitta or strengthening the two enlightenment-building networks, as the causes for achieving that realization.
�欢喜地】
�地之第一地。 ����地�。
����地】
一ã€�欢喜地，è�©è�¨æ—¢æ»¡åˆ�阿僧祇劫之行，åˆ�çª¥å¿ƒæ€§ï¼Œç ´è§�惑，è¯�二空ç�†ï¼Œæˆ�就檀波罗蜜，生大欢喜。
二ã€�离垢地，è�©è�¨æ–æ€�惑，除æ¯�犯之é�žï¼Œä½¿èº«æ¸…净，æˆ�就戒波罗蜜，离一切垢。
三ã€�å�‘光地，è�©è�¨ç�æ— æ˜Žæš—ï¼Œè€Œå¾—ä¸‰æ˜Žï¼Œæˆ�å°±å¿�波罗蜜，心光开å�‘。
å››ã€�焰慧地，è�©è�¨äºŽä¸‰å��七é�“å“�ï¼Œåœ†æ»¡å…·è¶³ï¼Œè¿›è€Œä¿®ä¹ åŠ›æ— ç•�，ä¸�å…±ä½›æ³•ï¼Œè¿œç¦»æ‡ˆæ€ ï¼Œæˆ�就精进波罗蜜，使慧焰炽盛。
五ã€�æž�难胜地，è�©è�¨ä¸ºåˆ©ç›Šä¼—ç”Ÿï¼Œå¤–ä¹ è¯¸æŠ€è‰ºï¼Œå†…æˆ�就禅波罗蜜，æž�难制胜。
å…ã€�现å‰�地，è�©è�¨ä½�è§£è„±æ³•é—¨ï¼Œä¿®ç©ºæ— ç›¸æ— æ„¿ä¸‰æ˜§ï¼Œæˆ�就般若波罗蜜，使现å‰�差别尽泯。
七ã€�远行地，è�©è�¨æ–诸业果细现行相，起殊胜行，广化众生，æˆ�就方便波罗蜜，备远行资粮。
å…«ã€�ä¸�动地，è�©è�¨ä½�æ— ç”Ÿå¿�，æ–诸功用，身心寂ç�，犹如虚空，æˆ�就愿波罗蜜，于涅槃心，湛然ä¸�动。
ä¹�ã€�善慧地，è�©è�¨ç�心相，è¯�智自在，具大神通，善护诸佛法è—�，æˆ�就力波罗蜜，善è¿�慧解。
å��ã€�法云地，è�©è�¨å¹¿é›†æ— é‡�é�“æ³•ï¼Œå¢žé•¿æ— è¾¹ç¦�智，悉知一切众生心行，ä¾�上ä¸ä¸‹æ ¹ï¼Œä¸ºè¯´ä¸‰ä¹˜ï¼Œæˆ�就智波罗蜜，有如大云，雨大法雨。
Originally posted by whylikethatah:why dont have Arahants during Buddha's time? got what...the direct disciples of Buddha when they convened at a council meeting or something, when Ananda attained Arahant-hood when he was about to lie down on bed in the wee hours. He was the only 1 left to attain Arahant-hood and the rest of the people at the meeting had already all attained Arahant-hood.
What u talking about "u think that person is a buddha already." U're going against the authenticity of Pali Canon, cos it says theres only 1 fully-enlightened Buddha during at any 1 era. duh.
Just like all these angmoh 'teachers' this AEN always mentions about, and the people these teachers lead them to, they all may not be buddhists who have taken refuge but are interested in the path of spirituality. who is to deny they cannot make it to attain Anagami or even Arahanthood?
You didn't understand what sinweiy is saying. Sinweiy is saying that a Buddha is needed to point the right way in order for people to attain arhantship. He didn't say nobody attained arhantship - he said people attained arhantship only AFTER the Buddha started teaching.
Also what ang moh teachers are you talking about?
Originally posted by whylikethatah:so if i am Anagami, i go to Pure Abode..but if i last min decide to believe in another religion's "saviour", then i go where? u got your beliefs, other people also got theirs mah.
Even a Sotapanna will not be able to accept another religion's savior. Why?
A sotapanna has removed the first three fetters, which includes doubts. Means, a sotapanna has direct realization about the nature of reality, that of anatta/no-self and dependent origination.
If a person understands dependent origination, there is no possibility that he can end up believing in a creator God or a personal saviour.
Furthermore, a person with direct realization about the nature of reality, will be able to authenticate and see that only Buddha teaches the correct teachings that accords with reality, and not other religions.
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:There are in history, very very few people who can actually skip levels. By few, I mean the numbers can be counted by hands...
Most people need to go through stages.
Though this is on Dzogchen practice, this applies to other Buddhist practices as well:
Those Who Progress in Stages and Those for Whom It Happens All at Once
There are two types of dzogchen practitioners: those who progress in stages (lam-rim-pa) and those for whom it happens all at once (cig-car-ba). This differentiation regards the manner of proceeding to enlightenment for practitioners once they have realized essence rigpa. In other words, it regards those who have become aryas (‘ phags-pa, highly realized beings) with the attainment of a seeing pathway mind (mthong-lam, path of seeing) and the true stopping of the emotional obscurations.
Those who progress in stages proceed through the arya bodhisattva ten bhumi levels of minds (sa, Skt. bhumi), one by one, gradually removing the cognitive obscurations.
Those for whom it happens all at once achieve a true stopping of both sets of obscuration all at once with the first realization of essence rigpa. Thus, they become aryas and Buddhas simultaneously.
Although dzogchen texts usually speak more of the second variety, only a tiny fraction of practitioners is of this type. Their elimination of both sets of obscuration with the first realization of essence rigpa is due to the enormous amount of positive force (merit) they have built up with bodhichitta and dzogchen practice in previous lives. That positive force may also enable them to proceed through the stages before achieving a seeing pathway mind more quickly than most. Nevertheless, no one asserts the attainment of enlightenment without the buildup of vast networks of positive force and deep awareness, from intense practice of preliminaries, meditation, and bodhisattva conduct – even if the majority of this has occurred in previous lifetimes.
Therefore, when dzogchen texts refer to the recognition of rigpa as the one that cuts off all for complete liberation (chig-chod kun-grol, the panacea for complete liberation), we need to understand this correctly. For those for whom it happens all at once, the first realization of essence rigpa is sufficient for cutting all obscurations for the complete attainment of enlightenment. This does not mean, however, that realization of rigpa is sufficient by itself for attaining enlightenment, without need for any preliminaries, such as bodhichitta or strengthening the two enlightenment-building networks, as the causes for achieving that realization.
so seems like it's a long-hard, but worthwhile road to take.
No '2-minute' enlightenment, but at least in amongst stages better than present state?
Originally posted by Loor:
so seems like it's a long-hard, but worthwhile road to take.No '2-minute' enlightenment, but at least in amongst stages better than present state?
It is definitely possible to attain the stages of Bodhisattvahood and Arhantship, realize the twofold emptiness and overcome afflictions in this life. I know people personally having made it, so I am not speaking in vain.
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:You didn't understand what sinweiy is saying. Sinweiy is saying that a Buddha is needed to point the right way in order for people to attain arhantship. He didn't say nobody attained arhantship - he said people attained arhantship only AFTER the Buddha started teaching.
Also what ang moh teachers are you talking about?
anyway sinweiy's reply also didn't really answer my question, that you see, those angmoh teachers u always make references to...like Eckhart Tolle, Jeff Foster, etc...and so many more, basically all leading to realisations right...the people don't necessarily have to be buddhists, yet they are taught the buddhist way of practise i.e 3 Marks of Existence...who is to say or deny that they all cannot attain Anagami level? or say an american guy who practised according to buddhist teachigns, never took the refuge at all, has reached the Anagami level, he doesn't make it to the Pure Abode?
Wow... it was so long ago since I quoted Eckhart Tolle or Jeff Foster.
Their teachings are helpful, but they are not Buddhism. Even so, Buddhists can read their stuff, just that they must be able to differentiate between dharma and advaita vedanta. Those teachers you mentioned belong to the advaita vedanta type, their view and teachings are more in line with the substantialist non-dual traditions of Hinduism than Buddhism. See Advaita Vedanta - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Eckhart Tolle is Stage 1 and 2 of Thusness/PasserBy's Seven Stages of Enlightenment, Jeff Foster is Stage 4.
Anatta is Stage 5, Dependent Origination and Emptiness is Stage 6.
I do not consider someone as even a Sotapanna until they have at least Stage 5 realization.
The realization of the twofold emptinesses (emptiness of self/anatta, plus the emptiness of objects) is the attainment of 1st bhumi bodhisattva.
Originally posted by Bio-Hawk:Isn't there infinite levels of Enlightment?Not from a strict theoretical stand point of view?
No, there isn't. Because once you attain Buddhahood, you are omniscient.
You can't get more omniscient than omniscient, so there aren't infinite levels of enlightenment.
To put things simple,with no playing with words and quoting long articles,There is only one enlightenment with all the defilments removed.
To say how many level of enlightenment are they is quite misleading instead its will be better to put "stages towards enlightenment".Depending on the time and personally of people thus there are prefectly self enlighten buddhas(who are the first to rediscover the truth in a period where no similar teaching is known) slient buddhas(who rediscover the themselves but dont really teach due to the limitations of their enviroment and their ability) arahants(who will only arise when a samasambuddha arises to teach them).
In terms of enlightenment they are all they same but they arise at different period of time and with different qualities other than having their defilements removed.
To take refuge is only a symbol that one believe in the teachings,however they are people who have taken refuge after arahantship depending on their understanding/willingness to take up and aknowledge the buddhas teachings.Thus its a issue of whether you are willing to practice according rather than to take refuge but not doing much.
Pure abodes are only for people who have understand the 5 aggregates in terms of the 3 characteristiscs,those who have power and deep meditation ability will go somewhere else not here,becos this realm is a realm base on understanding of the dharma not just diligent practice.The doctrine is not contradict in anyway becos these people still have certain residue in them and unfortunately before they can fully reach enlightenment their life span ended thus they will carry on with rebirth to a place where they will finish off their remaining dusts and gain enlightenment there.
Just curious, any idea why it takes a Sotapanna up to 7 rebirths before Nirvana is attained? Does the figure 7 represent something else as well?
Originally posted by Aik TC:
Just curious, any idea why it takes a Sotapanna up to 7 rebirths before Nirvana is attained? Does the figure 7 represent something else as well?
A stream enterer has entered into the irreversible conveyer belt towards Nirvana, has entered the noble path towards Nirvana. Precisely because of this, it is called 'stream entry'.
Therefore his/her destination is already set.
It's like the moment we are born, we will die in at most 120 years... that is our maximum lifespan.
A person entering the irreversible conveyer belt to Nirvana will no longer stay in samsara for more than 7 lifetimes.
Other than that, I don't think there is any special reason to the '7 lives'.
hmmm .... perhaps, someone would throw light on what exactly is
1) 'awkened'
2) 'enlightenment'
3) 'nirvana'
Originally posted by I No Stupid:hmmm .... perhaps, someone would throw light on what exactly is
1) 'awkened'
2) 'enlightenment'
3) 'nirvana'
First and second is synonymous.
However!
Awakening is the word used by Buddha.
The word 'enlightenment' does not exist in Buddha's dictionary, nor the language of their times, as far as I understand... or even if it does, it is not the word used by Buddha.
'Enlightenment' is a western word, and somehow in the western world they have used 'awakening' and 'enlightenment' synonymously.
I prefer awakening because the word captures the essence more: because precisely, awakening means awakening from our delusions into the true nature of reality: the no-self, the dependent origination, impermanent, and unsatisfactory nature of all experiences.
It is this awakening, that ends all our ignorance, delusion, craving, clinging, and thus allow us to experience Nirvana.
What is Nirvana? It means cessation... cessation of what? There are two levels of nirvana.
Nirvana with remainder means the cessation of ignorance (such as the delusion that there is a self), delusion, mental afflictions like craving, aversion/anger, fear, and so on, and basically all mental sufferings. An Arhat who is still living and have not experienced the death of the body, experiences 'nirvana with remainder' - the remainder being the bodily's sensory functions, the experience of the senses, are still fully intact.
Nirvana without remainder is that an Arhat experiences the cessation of all bodily and mental formation, and owing to the fact that no more karmas are being produced which could lead to further rebirth in samsara, there is no more further samsaric births for the arahat - therefore it is 'nirvana without remainder'.
In short, Nirvana is the cessation of suffering, and awakening results in the experience of Nirvana.
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Wow... it was so long ago since I quoted Eckhart Tolle or Jeff Foster.
Their teachings are helpful, but they are not Buddhism. Even so, Buddhists can read their stuff, just that they must be able to differentiate between dharma and advaita vedanta. Those teachers you mentioned belong to the advaita vedanta type, their view and teachings are more in line with the substantialist non-dual traditions of Hinduism than Buddhism. See Advaita Vedanta - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Eckhart Tolle is Stage 1 and 2 of Thusness/PasserBy's Seven Stages of Enlightenment, Jeff Foster is Stage 4.
Anatta is Stage 5, Dependent Origination and Emptiness is Stage 6.
I do not consider someone as even a Sotapanna until they have at least Stage 5 realization.
The realization of the twofold emptinesses (emptiness of self/anatta, plus the emptiness of objects) is the attainment of 1st bhumi bodhisattva.
doesn't mean i quote those 2 persons means i know their stuff, nor has their stuff anything to do with my question. u asked me, so i quoted off-hand their names as i saw before from your blog. my question still isn't answered, a non-buddhist(person who had not taken refuge), though have learnt proper buddhist stuff, can still attain Anagami stage and enter Pure Abode? or not?
Originally posted by whylikethatah:doesn't mean i quote those 2 persons means i know their stuff, nor has their stuff anything to do with my question. u asked me, so i quoted off-hand their names as i saw before from your blog. my question still isn't answered, a non-buddhist(person who had not taken refuge), though have learnt proper buddhist stuff, can still attain Anagami stage and enter Pure Abode? or not?
lastime already answered you.
In the suttas, there are people who attain not only Anagami, but even Arhantship *before taking refuge*.
Some just attain enlightenment upon hearing Buddha's speech... only after that did they decide to follow the Buddha's teachings, take refuge, become a monk or whatever... because of course if you hear a teaching as good as Buddha and truly benefit from it, there is no reason you will not become a Buddha's follower.
For us, if we do not have such great calibres like the ancient arhants, we have to sincerely take refuge first, and vow to practice hard to attain enlightenment.
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:lastime already answered you.
In the suttas, there are people who attain not only Anagami, but even Arhantship *before taking refuge*.
Some just attain enlightenment upon hearing Buddha's speech... only after that did they decide to follow the Buddha's teachings, take refuge, become a monk or whatever... because of course if you hear a teaching as good as Buddha and truly benefit from it, there is no reason you will not become a Buddha's follower.
For us, if we do not have such great calibres like the ancient arhants, we have to sincerely take refuge first, and vow to practice hard to attain enlightenment.
so if you or eckhart tolle or some indian or angmoh spiritual teacher lead me and other people(who are non-buddhists, never took refuge at all) and we attain some level of enlightenment, we can also be stream-enterer? like any of those people whom u talk to in other buddhist forums, they may be enlightened in your opinion, maybe they never take refuge before also, who knows.
Let's see if I can answer this correctly:
Of course they can be stream-enterer. Enlightenment is enlightenment. The Buddha didn't *create* nor patent enlightenment, he just pointed out the truths and the way to realizing those truths. No one can take your realizations nor attainments away. Unlike certain religions, there's no guy guarding the gates to the pure abodes who's refusing you entry just because you never got to listen to a sutra or meditated. Stream-enterer is just a term. If you can achieve it without any help at all from ancient/modern texts and teaching, power to you.
Realization is realization. The truth doesn't belong to any entity or organisation!
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:First and second is synonymous.
However!
Awakening is the word used by Buddha.
The word 'enlightenment' does not exist in Buddha's dictionary, nor the language of their times, as far as I understand... or even if it does, it is not the word used by Buddha.
'Enlightenment' is a western word, and somehow in the western world they have used 'awakening' and 'enlightenment' synonymously.
I prefer awakening because the word captures the essence more: because precisely, awakening means awakening from our delusions into the true nature of reality: the no-self, the dependent origination, impermanent, and unsatisfactory nature of all experiences.
It is this awakening, that ends all our ignorance, delusion, craving, clinging, and thus allow us to experience Nirvana.
What is Nirvana? It means cessation... cessation of what? There are two levels of nirvana.
Nirvana with remainder means the cessation of ignorance (such as the delusion that there is a self), delusion, mental afflictions like craving, aversion/anger, fear, and so on, and basically all mental sufferings. An Arhat who is still living and have not experienced the death of the body, experiences 'nirvana with remainder' - the remainder being the bodily's sensory functions, the experience of the senses, are still fully intact.
Nirvana without remainder is that an Arhat experiences the cessation of all bodily and mental formation, and owing to the fact that no more karmas are being produced which could lead to further rebirth in samsara, there is no more further samsaric births for the arahat - therefore it is 'nirvana without remainder'.
In short, Nirvana is the cessation of suffering, and awakening results in the experience of Nirvana.
Siddhartha Gotama’s followers called him the Awakened One – Buddha. However, Gotama referred to himself as TathÄ�gata. Logically, Gotama was first ‘awakened’, then he attained nirvana (during his life-time) and upon his death he entered parinirvana (final nirvana) whereupon he no longer was reborn (the goal he was seeking all the while).
Since enlightenment is a western word and was not used similarly by the Buddha or during his time, from which word (Buddha’s language) was it translated to enlightenment?
Nirvana is the cessation of suffering (3rd NT), but awakening is NOT the same as nirvana, much less an experience.