If the original poster is still around, I would like to offer my two sense on other types of enlightenment. The truth is, in Buddhism, there is mainly one type of enlightenment and everything else is different. In the Digha Nikaya it is revealed that 62 speculative views exist, inside of which one person or another travels from this world to a higher world, or from one world of some kind to another world of some kind. In brief, the views cover beliefs about Eternity, Nothingness, Morality, The Origins of the world, the existence of life after death, the existence of God, and (along with other things), the extent of space.
In the Digha Nikaya, the Buddha expresses that he understands all of these speculative views and understands where they lead to. He expresses that he is the possessor of knowledge which transcends these views. For instance, some wise men, back in his day, and also in our day as well, I would presume, quibble over the extent of space. And I am not referring to scientists (although the logical aspect of one's convictions as to the way in which space exists can be included in the group of 62 speculative views. No! I mean the transcendental awareness that space is infinite, or that space is not infinite, or that space is infinite along its edges, but has a limit along its top and bottom. Science proves that "the world", as we know it -is more or less flat. And all the other things follow about space-time expansion, theories and what not. The mystical experience of space is enlightening to everyone. Once you have realized that space is infinite you have realized something profound. It is as profound as other things regarding the absurdity of existence. This question; "Why something instead of nothing? Wouldn't the world be better off as nothing? And since that is not the case, where did all of this something come from"...such questions have proven to be the source of profound insight throughout the history of mankind. Do they lead to better lives? Not really. That is why, in this case, the "Extensionist" preoccupation with the expanse of space is counterproductive to what reality is about.
However, in the mystical realm these ideas about infinite space and so forth are believed to be of some impetus to the soul. The realization that the world is infinite is about transcending normal existence, elevating the soul into a sphere of understanding where one can dwell above and beyond the rest of normal folk.
Again, the mystical realizations of the Eternalists have everything to do with that sphere of being called heaven. Folks ascend to heaven in flocks and groves. It is the manic-depressive story of every Jesus type who ever lived that there exists an eternal principle of good. The practice of this principle elevates one and purifies the soul, sending it to heaven upon the death of the body. Again, all of this is mystical. The Buddha explains in Digha Nikaya 1 that he understands these speculative views and not only that but also what they lead to and why people desire such knowledge. He explains that what he knows is quite another thing altogether.
So, perhaps you can understand that those who strictly object to any idea that Buddhist Enlightenment is in no way mystical are coming from a point of view which stems right at the beginning with all of the ideas expressed in the first discourse of the long-length suttas. I can't speak for anyone. I can't even speak for my self. But the Buddha doesn't deny mysticism. He just explains that, indeed heavens and hells, states of long lasting non-existence, and unions with god exist. The meaning of DN 1 is to decisively point out that if you're going to start reading up on Buddhism, prepare your self for something completely different. ]
People on this site might send you packing simply because you hint at the conjecture that there is anything mystical in Buddhism. The reason is that the Buddha said right from the start, don't touch that stuff. Don't fondle the teachings of eternal life, eternal extinction, what is the origin of the world, where did it come from, how far does it go, nada nada nada. He said this is the truth. These are the points. This is what you need to know. That other stuff is not important. If you're going to be one of my followers prepare to focus just on what I teach you and not on the other stuff. All of the other stuff is very real and so on. But, in one edition of Digha Nikaya, the Buddha explains the speculative views and then mentions that having surpassed all of these views with knowledge far exceeding all of these views he is not "puffed up" on that account, in reference to knowing such things.
Other people get "puffed up" on account of knowing these things which are mystical in nature. So, the negative response here is that Buddhism is anything but completely to the point. The harsh reaction is probably because of the way in which his teachings are put forth. They are put forth right at the beginning with a description of what Buddhism isn't. What it is not. And it is not what the Christian's strive for. It is not what the Brahman's strive for. Both of these people strive for God, heaven, or a heavenly world. There won't be many people willing to agree that there are lots and lots of different types of enlightenment because it's pointed out from the start what is and what is not enlightenment. Since this has gone on for far too long, I think I should stop and start doing something productive with my St. Columbus Day. Maybe I'll make some more hot chocolate. Would you like to know why I prefer hot chocolate over coffee. The other day I was getting a cardio vascular work out. I was skateboarding actually. Why does a 30 year old man skateboard? Well, there's nothing better to do some days. I will pay for it when I get into my late fourties, I'm sure. But anyhow. The coffee didn't sit well in my stomach. That is why I'm trying to get away from it, for a while at least.