gregkavarnos wrote:Really? Coz are far as I have been taught there are actual signs of realisation (specific signs for specific practices and more general signs).
In which you also have to believe, right?
gregkavarnos wrote:And what is the guarantee that my assessment is not based in delusion and ignorance?
gregkavarnos wrote:I believe that to say "enlightenment includes omnsicience" is a case of presumptive evidence. It is presumed that all enlightened beings are omniscient, the Buddha was an enlightened being, thus... Legally speaking, the burden of proof is now on you to show the presumption is false.
"Enlightenment includes omniscience" is a presumption, but what is the evidence? Before you presume something, there must be clues leading you to that presumption, thus I asked for them.
gregkavarnos wrote:Why (or how) does it make a hell of a difference to ending your suffering?
Not my suffering is the problem here, because I did not fall for it in the first place. If buddha is omniscient, then a practitioner will strive for omniscience. He will look for signs of it on the path. A great thorn for people practicing shikantaza, and any goalless method. As we saw in prajnaparamita, Buddha explanation not only removes this thorn, but also facilitates those types of practice.
gregkavarnos wrote:Ummmm? Where exactly did I do that? Let me answer for you: NOWHERE.
gregkavarnos wrote:a)You don't know if the Buddha actually said this or whether it is just an "unrelible translation", or somebody pretending that the Buddha said it.
I was quite happy while reading this, as sutras should be questioned for their authority. It is their power to make an actual change that makes them worthy of respect. And this is how I approach them. To be honest, I don't think that for example Nirvana Sutra was memorized for 500 years and then written down (because of its length). It is very probable that somebody pretended that the Buddha said it. But it doesn't really matter at all.
As you say you never questioned sutras, I will ask. Are you certain that Buddha actually said what is written in sutras, that translations are always reliable, and nobody faked them?