Was the Buddha "FULLY" enlightened?

Discussion of the fifth religious tradition of Tibet.
User avatar
ronnewmexico
Posts: 1601
Joined: Fri Dec 25, 2009 10:17 pm

Re: Was the Buddha "FULLY" enlightened?

Postby ronnewmexico » Tue Jun 21, 2011 7:22 pm

Caveman

your perception of the role and importance of a man as opposed to a woman is greatly overrated.

It does in fact reflect your paternalistic backround.
If you were refecting a maternal backround you would find such things of not of the criticalness you describe.

Women leave men and families every day for good reason every day.
Men leave women and families every day for good reason every day.

Such is samsara. The buddha was the buddha he was providing a means to end samsara for us not for a end to samsara itself.
"This order considers that progress can be achieved more rapidly during a single month of self-transformation through terrifying conditions in rough terrain and in "the abode of harmful forces" than through meditating for a period of three years in towns and monasteries"....Takpo Tashi Namgyal.

caveman
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 7:15 pm

Re: Was the Buddha "FULLY" enlightened?

Postby caveman » Tue Jun 21, 2011 7:25 pm

Astus wrote:
caveman wrote:Can you or anyone address the REAL LIFE ACTIONS of the Buddha.


Real life actions must go along with real life teachings, I assume. From such teachings one understands that desire is an affliction and the root of samsara. Those who have attained nirvana have no sensual desire but see that it is only pain, then why live in marriage at all?


Sir, the teaching state that nirvana is just as much an illusion as is samsara.

"But see that it is only pain". DUALITY, DUALITY.

No PAIN no PLEASURE you are talking DUALITY ( :oops: ).

"Then way live in marriage at all" .

You are joking aren't you.

User avatar
conebeckham
Posts: 3857
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
Location: Bay Area, CA, USA

Re: Was the Buddha "FULLY" enlightened?

Postby conebeckham » Tue Jun 21, 2011 7:28 pm

caveman wrote:And you Sir are only guessing about why the buddha did what he did.

Deeds Speak and you can make up all the reasons but Sir you will never convince a woman that leaving your wife and child for the dharma is OK.

They do not consider this enlightened or compassion in action.

They call it cowardly!


Of course I'm guessing! But, sitting here in the 21st Century, I have the good fortune to see what the results of the Buddha's actions were. Seems to me he made the right choices. From what I've read and studied, it seems to me that his family felt the same way. Do you think Sakyamuni's wife and child called him "Cowardly?"
དམ་པའི་དོན་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ཆེ་བ་དང་།
རྟོག་གེའི་ཡུལ་མིན་བླ་མའི་བྱིན་རླབས་དང་།
སྐལ་ལྡན་ལས་འཕྲོ་ཅན་གྱིས་རྟོགས་པ་སྟེ།
དེ་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ལ་ནི་ལོ་རྟོག་སེལ།།


"Absolute Truth is not an object of analytical discourse or great discriminating wisdom,
It is realized through the blessing grace of the Guru and fortunate Karmic potential.
Like this, mistaken ideas of discriminating wisdom are clarified."

May any merit generated by on-line discussion
Be dedicated to the Ultimate Benefit of All Sentient Beings.

caveman
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 7:15 pm

Re: Was the Buddha "FULLY" enlightened?

Postby caveman » Tue Jun 21, 2011 7:30 pm

[quote="ronnewmexico"]Caveman

your perception of the role and importance of a man as opposed to a woman is greatly overrated.

It does in fact reflect your paternalistic backround.
If you were refecting a maternal backround you would find such things of not of the criticalness you describe.

Women leave men and families every day for good reason every day.
Men leave women and families every day for good reason every day.

First of all are you so sure I'm a man and not a woman using a man's name.

Ronnewmexico, men and woman also leave their families every day for NO good reason.

Is it paternalistic to care for the well being of your spouse and children.

No my friend, NO!

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 20013
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Was the Buddha "FULLY" enlightened?

Postby Malcolm » Tue Jun 21, 2011 7:32 pm

conebeckham wrote:
caveman wrote:And you Sir are only guessing about why the buddha did what he did.

Deeds Speak and you can make up all the reasons but Sir you will never convince a woman that leaving your wife and child for the dharma is OK.

They do not consider this enlightened or compassion in action.

They call it cowardly!


Of course I'm guessing! But, sitting here in the 21st Century, I have the good fortune to see what the results of the Buddha's actions were. Seems to me he made the right choices. From what I've read and studied, it seems to me that his family felt the same way. Do you think Sakyamuni's wife and child called him "Cowardly?"


Actually, Rahula was pretty pissed at his father, in fact.

N
http://www.atikosha.org
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://www.bhaisajya.guru
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


So called “sentient beings” are merely delusions self-appearing from the dhātu of luminosity.

-- Ju Mipham

User avatar
conebeckham
Posts: 3857
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
Location: Bay Area, CA, USA

Re: Was the Buddha "FULLY" enlightened?

Postby conebeckham » Tue Jun 21, 2011 7:34 pm

Namdrol wrote:Actually, Rahula was pretty pissed at his father, in fact.

N


Yeah. Initially, right?
དམ་པའི་དོན་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ཆེ་བ་དང་།
རྟོག་གེའི་ཡུལ་མིན་བླ་མའི་བྱིན་རླབས་དང་།
སྐལ་ལྡན་ལས་འཕྲོ་ཅན་གྱིས་རྟོགས་པ་སྟེ།
དེ་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ལ་ནི་ལོ་རྟོག་སེལ།།


"Absolute Truth is not an object of analytical discourse or great discriminating wisdom,
It is realized through the blessing grace of the Guru and fortunate Karmic potential.
Like this, mistaken ideas of discriminating wisdom are clarified."

May any merit generated by on-line discussion
Be dedicated to the Ultimate Benefit of All Sentient Beings.

User avatar
ronnewmexico
Posts: 1601
Joined: Fri Dec 25, 2009 10:17 pm

Re: Was the Buddha "FULLY" enlightened?

Postby ronnewmexico » Tue Jun 21, 2011 7:34 pm

They converted.

Someone here 2500 years later in a world of difference of circumstance and societal influence is calling him cowardly.

That is who is calling the buddha cowardly.

No my friend....."Is it paternalistic to care for the well being of your spouse and children"...what is paternalistic is to view the male as the whole provider of things of all sorts to the extent of which without them they would cease to exist, or be "abandoned" as one would a old car in the road.

They were well taken care of. No story I have ever heard attests to that they were not. Spiritually challenged and wanting during that time...sure.
We all are.
"This order considers that progress can be achieved more rapidly during a single month of self-transformation through terrifying conditions in rough terrain and in "the abode of harmful forces" than through meditating for a period of three years in towns and monasteries"....Takpo Tashi Namgyal.

caveman
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 7:15 pm

Re: Was the Buddha "FULLY" enlightened?

Postby caveman » Tue Jun 21, 2011 7:35 pm

conebeckham wrote:
caveman wrote:And you Sir are only guessing about why the buddha did what he did.

Deeds Speak and you can make up all the reasons but Sir you will never convince a woman that leaving your wife and child for the dharma is OK.

They do not consider this enlightened or compassion in action.

They call it cowardly!


Of course I'm guessing! But, sitting here in the 21st Century, I have the good fortune to see what the results of the Buddha's actions were. Seems to me he made the right choices. From what I've read and studied, it seems to me that his family felt the same way. Do you think Sakyamuni's wife and child called him "Cowardly?"




Do you Sir believe that his wife and new born son jumped up and down with happiness when they discovered he had fled from them in the middle of the night.

Woman would say NO. As would anyone who was abandoned by the person they thought loved them and married them.
:broke: :broke: :broke: :broke: :broke:

User avatar
ronnewmexico
Posts: 1601
Joined: Fri Dec 25, 2009 10:17 pm

Re: Was the Buddha "FULLY" enlightened?

Postby ronnewmexico » Tue Jun 21, 2011 7:41 pm

"they thought loved them and married them."

the whole concept of marriage then and now in India is not as it is in other places. Marriage is not for love but a arrangement.

Such is the cultural divide and nunance to this thing which makes perhaps for inappropriate misreadings.
"This order considers that progress can be achieved more rapidly during a single month of self-transformation through terrifying conditions in rough terrain and in "the abode of harmful forces" than through meditating for a period of three years in towns and monasteries"....Takpo Tashi Namgyal.

User avatar
Sönam
Posts: 1999
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 2:11 pm
Location: France
Contact:

Re: Was the Buddha "FULLY" enlightened?

Postby Sönam » Tue Jun 21, 2011 7:42 pm

you will never convince a woman that leaving your wife and child for the dharma is OK.
They do not consider this enlightened or compassion in action.
They call it cowardly!


and does it means she is right ?

Sönam
By understanding everything you perceive from the perspective of the view, you are freed from the constraints of philosophical beliefs.
By understanding that any and all mental activity is meditation, you are freed from arbitrary divisions between formal sessions and postmeditation activity.
- Longchen Rabjam -

User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
Posts: 5953
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Re: Was the Buddha "FULLY" enlightened?

Postby Astus » Tue Jun 21, 2011 7:43 pm

caveman wrote:Sir, the teaching state that nirvana is just as much an illusion as is samsara.

"But see that it is only pain". DUALITY, DUALITY.

No PAIN no PLEASURE you are talking DUALITY ( :oops: ).

"Then way live in marriage at all" .

You are joking aren't you.


Which teaching state that nirvana and samsara are both illusions? Mahayana, of course. Mahayana teachings also say that the whole life story of the Buddha was only for the education of beings. Mahayana also has the teaching that the Buddha is never born and never begotten a son.

The Buddha says in the Nirvana Sutra (ch. 7),

"Everybody says that Rahula is my son, that Suddhodana was my father and Maya my mother, that I carried on a secular career in my life, that I enjoyed peace and happiness [as a young prince], and that I abandoned all such things and sought the Way. People further say: "The prince of this king, of the great clan of Gautama, renounced worldly pleasures and sought the supramundane." But I had long since been away from worldly love and desire. I merely displayed all such things. Everybody says that I am a man. But truth to tell, I am not. O good man! I manifest myself in Jambudvipa and often enter Nirvana. But in truth I do not enter Nirvana at all. Yet all people say that the Tathagata is now dying. But the nature of the Tathagata, truth to tell, eternally does not die out. So you should know that I am one Eternal and Unchanging."
1 Myriad dharmas are only mind.
Mind is unobtainable.
What is there to seek?

2 If the Buddha-Nature is seen,
there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.

3 Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —
this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.

4 With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,
the six paramitas and myriad means
are complete within that essence.


1 Huangbo, T2012Ap381c1 2 Nirvana Sutra, T374p521b3; tr. Yamamoto 3 Mazu, X1321p3b23; tr. J. Jia 4 Yongjia, T2014p395c14; tr. from "The Sword of Wisdom"

User avatar
conebeckham
Posts: 3857
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
Location: Bay Area, CA, USA

Re: Was the Buddha "FULLY" enlightened?

Postby conebeckham » Tue Jun 21, 2011 7:49 pm

Back in those days, Caveman, lots of people were in arranged marriages. How in the world can you possibly know what they felt, other than by the written accounts (based on oral accounts) that we have now? Namdrol has indicated that Rahula was "pissed." I trust he has read sources that indicate this. I haven't read those sources. but Rahula converted, yes? Does that strike you as the action of one who was unahppy with his father? Perhaps Namdrol can flesh this out a bit more, I'd be interested to hear more....

You impute the feelings and reactions of people long-dead onto them, based on YOUR OWN reactions and judgements. This is natural, and is in fact the nature of Samsara. We all do it. But if we realize we are doing it, at least it allows us some degree of insight into how samsara functions. If, on the other hand, we cling to it, it is like a fetter that leads us to emotional states, and possibly to actions, words, etc.

I know couples, and families, who have allowed members to go into extended retreats. I grant you that this differs from the facts you present--leaving without warning, basically skipping out, some would say--but would you say that such things should not happen??
དམ་པའི་དོན་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ཆེ་བ་དང་།
རྟོག་གེའི་ཡུལ་མིན་བླ་མའི་བྱིན་རླབས་དང་།
སྐལ་ལྡན་ལས་འཕྲོ་ཅན་གྱིས་རྟོགས་པ་སྟེ།
དེ་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ལ་ནི་ལོ་རྟོག་སེལ།།


"Absolute Truth is not an object of analytical discourse or great discriminating wisdom,
It is realized through the blessing grace of the Guru and fortunate Karmic potential.
Like this, mistaken ideas of discriminating wisdom are clarified."

May any merit generated by on-line discussion
Be dedicated to the Ultimate Benefit of All Sentient Beings.

User avatar
ronnewmexico
Posts: 1601
Joined: Fri Dec 25, 2009 10:17 pm

Re: Was the Buddha "FULLY" enlightened?

Postby ronnewmexico » Tue Jun 21, 2011 7:56 pm

Was does this speak of..."



Perhaps the tale of the tape would be a prime consideration...

Shantideva V 87 C9

All form, therefore, is like a dream,
And who will be attached to it, who thus
investigates?
The body, in this way, has no existence;
What is male, therefore, and what is female?

Of what the importance of gender?


How about we turn this..."you will never convince a woman that leaving your wife and child for the dharma is OK."

into this....you will never convince a man that leaving your husband and child for the dharma is OK.

Is this a statement on maleness womanness or a statement on what we consider these things to be?
"This order considers that progress can be achieved more rapidly during a single month of self-transformation through terrifying conditions in rough terrain and in "the abode of harmful forces" than through meditating for a period of three years in towns and monasteries"....Takpo Tashi Namgyal.

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 20013
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Was the Buddha "FULLY" enlightened?

Postby Malcolm » Tue Jun 21, 2011 7:59 pm

conebeckham wrote:
Namdrol wrote:Actually, Rahula was pretty pissed at his father, in fact.

N


Yeah. Initially, right?


Yes, then he calmed down, ordained, and became an arhat, eventually.
http://www.atikosha.org
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://www.bhaisajya.guru
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


So called “sentient beings” are merely delusions self-appearing from the dhātu of luminosity.

-- Ju Mipham

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 20013
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Was the Buddha "FULLY" enlightened?

Postby Malcolm » Tue Jun 21, 2011 8:01 pm

caveman wrote:
As would anyone who was abandoned by the person they thought loved them and married them.


People trapped in samsara have a very narrow view of reality.
http://www.atikosha.org
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://www.bhaisajya.guru
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


So called “sentient beings” are merely delusions self-appearing from the dhātu of luminosity.

-- Ju Mipham

User avatar
Sherab Dorje
Former staff member
Posts: 12132
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Was the Buddha "FULLY" enlightened?

Postby Sherab Dorje » Tue Jun 21, 2011 8:17 pm

caveman wrote:As would anyone who was abandoned by the person they thought loved them and married them.
Sounds like there's a fair bit of projecting going on here.
:namaste:
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

User avatar
ronnewmexico
Posts: 1601
Joined: Fri Dec 25, 2009 10:17 pm

Re: Was the Buddha "FULLY" enlightened?

Postby ronnewmexico » Tue Jun 21, 2011 8:24 pm

Woman leave husbands, husbands leave women, wives leave men, men leave wives, children leave fathers, children leave mothers. Fathers and mothers leave children.

Cousins try to kill other cousins. All sorts of things go on and on.

The buddha was not exempt from reality and its constraints, considered as example or real.
HOw to remove oneself from such, how to find peace in the face of such things that is the teaching.
Perfect was his circumstance for only one thing....to perfectly teach the teaching.
It was far from perfect considered in other manners.

It should not be...otherwise we who have not perfect circumstance would learn little.
"This order considers that progress can be achieved more rapidly during a single month of self-transformation through terrifying conditions in rough terrain and in "the abode of harmful forces" than through meditating for a period of three years in towns and monasteries"....Takpo Tashi Namgyal.

Pero
Posts: 1871
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2010 8:54 pm

Re: Was the Buddha "FULLY" enlightened?

Postby Pero » Tue Jun 21, 2011 8:35 pm

I'm speechless. :rolling:
Although many individuals in this age appear to be merely indulging their worldly desires, one does not have the capacity to judge them, so it is best to train in pure vision.
- Shabkar

User avatar
conebeckham
Posts: 3857
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
Location: Bay Area, CA, USA

Re: Was the Buddha "FULLY" enlightened?

Postby conebeckham » Tue Jun 21, 2011 8:49 pm

caveman wrote:I hope we can have a polite yet critical discussion on this topic.


I especially liked the word "polite" here.....

So there it is, can you be fully enlightened without facing all the challenges that married life in Samsara and Nirvana can throw at you?



Can I? I dunno. But I think we've indicated that Buddha faced "all the challenges that married life in Samsara and Nirvana can throw at you," though I'm not even sure I know what that means anymore!!

"Honey, would you pick up some milk at the store on your way home from work?"

"I CAN'T, Dammit, I've got this enlightenment to get to!!!" :spy:
དམ་པའི་དོན་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ཆེ་བ་དང་།
རྟོག་གེའི་ཡུལ་མིན་བླ་མའི་བྱིན་རླབས་དང་།
སྐལ་ལྡན་ལས་འཕྲོ་ཅན་གྱིས་རྟོགས་པ་སྟེ།
དེ་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ལ་ནི་ལོ་རྟོག་སེལ།།


"Absolute Truth is not an object of analytical discourse or great discriminating wisdom,
It is realized through the blessing grace of the Guru and fortunate Karmic potential.
Like this, mistaken ideas of discriminating wisdom are clarified."

May any merit generated by on-line discussion
Be dedicated to the Ultimate Benefit of All Sentient Beings.

User avatar
conebeckham
Posts: 3857
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
Location: Bay Area, CA, USA

Re: Was the Buddha "FULLY" enlightened?

Postby conebeckham » Tue Jun 21, 2011 8:56 pm

Lesseee, facing the maras and the Lord of Death while under the Bodhi Tree, or the angry wife at the doorstep after I forget the gallon of milk....hmmmm.....


I choose the Maras and Lord of Death.

:thinking: :smile:
དམ་པའི་དོན་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ཆེ་བ་དང་།
རྟོག་གེའི་ཡུལ་མིན་བླ་མའི་བྱིན་རླབས་དང་།
སྐལ་ལྡན་ལས་འཕྲོ་ཅན་གྱིས་རྟོགས་པ་སྟེ།
དེ་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ལ་ནི་ལོ་རྟོག་སེལ།།


"Absolute Truth is not an object of analytical discourse or great discriminating wisdom,
It is realized through the blessing grace of the Guru and fortunate Karmic potential.
Like this, mistaken ideas of discriminating wisdom are clarified."

May any merit generated by on-line discussion
Be dedicated to the Ultimate Benefit of All Sentient Beings.


Return to “Bön”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests