IS enlightenment SUDDEN OR GRADUAL ?

[Danny]

The Buddha taught cause and effect.
Dhammapada.

Long is the night for one awake.

Always loved that line.
It denotes a restlessness for a troubled mind.
Time moves very slowly.
To my mind, it speaks a truth about pondering and worrying about things in the mind that produces an affect of suffering appearing more real than its phantasm appearances.
Any way ... a results based path, reward for conduct..
cause and effect.

Sudden or gradual is such a suffering of a puzzled mind.
Just my 2 cents.

[PadmaVonSamba]

Both suddenly gradual
And gradually sudden

[Danny]

Both suddenly gradual
And gradually sudden

Pairs of opposites, again the Dhammapada.


Dualism.

[reiun]

This sounds like a reference to the “sudden school” and “gradual school” in Zen.

Agree. But the ensuing discussion has been, I'm sure, of worth.

Still, I believe the topic is misplaced, and belongs under Zen.

Sudden and Gradual by Maezumi Roshi

[Danny]

This sounds like a reference to the “sudden school” and “gradual school” in Zen.

Agree. But the ensuing discussion has been, I'm sure, of worth.

Still, I believe the topic is misplaced, and belongs under Zen.

Sudden and Gradual by Maezumi Roshi

No, it’s not about the party, but what’s being celebrated.

[Hazel]

This sounds like a reference to the “sudden school” and “gradual school” in Zen.

Agree. But the ensuing discussion has been, I'm sure, of worth.

Still, I believe the topic is misplaced, and belongs under Zen.

Sudden and Gradual by Maezumi Roshi

I don't think it's clear from what the poster has said where it should be.

[reiun]

This sounds like a reference to the “sudden school” and “gradual school” in Zen.

Agree. But the ensuing discussion has been, I'm sure, of worth.

Still, I believe the topic is misplaced, and belongs under Zen.

Sudden and Gradual by Maezumi Roshi

I don't think it's clear from what the poster has said where it should be.

Yes, quite right.

In zen, insight is sudden, subsequent cultivation is gradual, thus the Maezumi title using "and".

[Pondera]

Realization is gradual:

(1) Just as, Pahārāda, the great ocean slants, slopes and inclines gradually, not dropping off abruptly, so too, in this Dhamma and discipline penetration to final knowledge occurs by gradual training, gradual activity and gradual practice, not abruptly. This is the first astounding and amazing quality that the bhikkhus see in this Dhamma and discipline because of which they take delight in it.

https://suttacentral.net/an8.19/en/bodhi

[reiun]

Realization is gradual:

(1) Just as, Pahārāda, the great ocean slants, slopes and inclines gradually, not dropping off abruptly, so too, in this Dhamma and discipline penetration to final knowledge occurs by gradual training, gradual activity and gradual practice, not abruptly. This is the first astounding and amazing quality that the bhikkhus see in this Dhamma and discipline because of which they take delight in it.

https://suttacentral.net/an8.19/en/bodhi

This would be a good justification for this topic being in Tibetan Buddhism. It is completely different from the later development of Zen practice leading to insight/kensho, which is an intense occurrence, and informs subsequent practice. This may not be the equivalent of "final knowledge", though, especially if that knowledge is intellectual.

[Jangchup Donden]

IS enlightenment SUDDEN OR GRADUAL ?

Gradual until it suddenly happens.

[Budai]

Enlightenment is an instant. Getting there can take as long as you have existed.

[mansurhirbi87]

This sounds like a reference to the “sudden school” and “gradual school” in Zen.

Possibly, but besides Northern vs Southern Ch'an there are several other "subitist vs gradualist" debates in Buddhist history, with no two of them involving quite the same bone of contention. As the OP is posting in the Tibetan forum I would guess that he has in mind either the Samye Debate (aka Council of Lhasa) or else the Indian "sudden breakthrough" (ekābhisamaya) debate.

In the former the subitism was that of Ch'an, represented by Moheyan, and the gradualism that of Indian Mahayana orthodoxy, represented by Kamalaśīla. In the latter the subitists were those Abhidharma schools (e.g., the Dharmaguptaka and Theravāda) who held that penetration of the four noble truths occurs in a single mind-moment, and the gradualists those schools (e.g., the Sarvāstivāda) who held that it took several moments. But if the OP doesn't want to define his terms then the question's a little difficult to answer.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samye_Debate
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moheyan
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamalasila

You're right, brother. As i post in tibetan section i want tô know from this perspectiv. Nice referênces Thanks

[mansurhirbi87]

This sounds like a reference to the “sudden school” and “gradual school” in Zen.

Possibly, but besides Northern vs Southern Ch'an there are several other "subitist vs gradualist" debates in Buddhist history, with no two of them involving quite the same bone of contention. As the OP is posting in the Tibetan forum I would guess that he has in mind either the Samye Debate (aka Council of Lhasa) or else the Indian "sudden breakthrough" (ekābhisamaya) debate.

In the former the subitism was that of Ch'an, represented by Moheyan, and the gradualism that of Indian Mahayana orthodoxy, represented by Kamalaśīla. In the latter the subitists were those Abhidharma schools (e.g., the Dharmaguptaka and Theravāda) who held that penetration of the four noble truths occurs in a single mind-moment, and the gradualists those schools (e.g., the Sarvāstivāda) who held that it took several moments. But if the OP doesn't want to define his terms then the question's a little difficult to answer.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samye_Debate
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moheyan
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamalasila

It is not only a historical/academic debate though, in a practical sense, so perhaps the OP is just asking based on experiences and teachings received.
I think it's accurate to say that functionally the results of that debate did not make Tibetan schools into exclusive gradualists. Since all extant schools of Tibetan Buddhism have as their pinnacle either Vajrayana or Dzogchen, and begin with the Sravakayana and Mahayana, a student will typically be presented with a few views of how enlightenment occurs, and how time is related to it in even their "basic" Buddhist education. In my experience the same teacher will pull from different points of view depending on audience, circumstances, and the relative conservatism or lack thereof in their own teaching style.

As one example, the OP could read Myriad Worlds by Kongtrul, and there are three (or four I guess, thinking about it) different Buddhist worldviews which have differing viewpoints on the temporality and phenomenology of enlightenment.

thank you for the indication. do you know which volume ? i could not find it . i looked for in the last one about the goal

[Pondera]

Realization is gradual:

(1) Just as, Pahārāda, the great ocean slants, slopes and inclines gradually, not dropping off abruptly, so too, in this Dhamma and discipline penetration to final knowledge occurs by gradual training, gradual activity and gradual practice, not abruptly. This is the first astounding and amazing quality that the bhikkhus see in this Dhamma and discipline because of which they take delight in it.

https://suttacentral.net/an8.19/en/bodhi

This would be a good justification for this topic being in Tibetan Buddhism. It is completely different from the later development of Zen practice leading to insight/kensho, which is an intense occurrence, and informs subsequent practice. This may not be the equivalent of "final knowledge", though, especially if that knowledge is intellectual.

I think the origina message of the Buddha was that, after enlightenment, one should remain (to some degree) enlightened.

A single flash of insight is good. But does it ultimately change you in the long term?

[Johnny Dangerous]

Possibly, but besides Northern vs Southern Ch'an there are several other "subitist vs gradualist" debates in Buddhist history, with no two of them involving quite the same bone of contention. As the OP is posting in the Tibetan forum I would guess that he has in mind either the Samye Debate (aka Council of Lhasa) or else the Indian "sudden breakthrough" (ekābhisamaya) debate.

In the former the subitism was that of Ch'an, represented by Moheyan, and the gradualism that of Indian Mahayana orthodoxy, represented by Kamalaśīla. In the latter the subitists were those Abhidharma schools (e.g., the Dharmaguptaka and Theravāda) who held that penetration of the four noble truths occurs in a single mind-moment, and the gradualists those schools (e.g., the Sarvāstivāda) who held that it took several moments. But if the OP doesn't want to define his terms then the question's a little difficult to answer.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samye_Debate
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moheyan
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamalasila

It is not only a historical/academic debate though, in a practical sense, so perhaps the OP is just asking based on experiences and teachings received.
I think it's accurate to say that functionally the results of that debate did not make Tibetan schools into exclusive gradualists. Since all extant schools of Tibetan Buddhism have as their pinnacle either Vajrayana or Dzogchen, and begin with the Sravakayana and Mahayana, a student will typically be presented with a few views of how enlightenment occurs, and how time is related to it in even their "basic" Buddhist education. In my experience the same teacher will pull from different points of view depending on audience, circumstances, and the relative conservatism or lack thereof in their own teaching style.

As one example, the OP could read Myriad Worlds by Kongtrul, and there are three (or four I guess, thinking about it) different Buddhist worldviews which have differing viewpoints on the temporality and phenomenology of enlightenment.

thank you for the indication. do you know which volume ? i could not find it . i looked for in the last one about the goal

Myriad Worlds, Treasury of Knowledge Book 1.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/850 ... dge_Book_1

[Johnny Dangerous]

Realization is gradual:

(1) Just as, Pahārāda, the great ocean slants, slopes and inclines gradually, not dropping off abruptly, so too, in this Dhamma and discipline penetration to final knowledge occurs by gradual training, gradual activity and gradual practice, not abruptly. This is the first astounding and amazing quality that the bhikkhus see in this Dhamma and discipline because of which they take delight in it.

https://suttacentral.net/an8.19/en/bodhi

This would be a good justification for this topic being in Tibetan Buddhism. It is completely different from the later development of Zen practice leading to insight/kensho, which is an intense occurrence, and informs subsequent practice. This may not be the equivalent of "final knowledge", though, especially if that knowledge is intellectual.

Recognition of/introduction to the Nature of Mind is somewhat analogous in Tibetan traditions to something like Kensho, though of course direct comparisons are always questionable, being such different traditions.

[Danny]

Is a good analogy, cultural.
Nosferatu bat blood.
Covid 19 bat blood.

[PeterC]

IS enlightenment SUDDEN OR GRADUAL ?

Yes.

[Dhammanando]

You're right, brother. As i post in tibetan section i want tô know from this perspectiv.

Okay. For a relatively painless guide to a very complicated controversy, see the introductory sections (i.e., 1 and 2) of Jitta's Mipham Gyatso Rinpoche’s ‘Makeover’ of Hwashang Moheyan.

https://www.academia.edu/17893385/Mipha ... o=download

[SilenceMonkey]

Realization is gradual:

This would be a good justification for this topic being in Tibetan Buddhism. It is completely different from the later development of Zen practice leading to insight/kensho, which is an intense occurrence, and informs subsequent practice. This may not be the equivalent of "final knowledge", though, especially if that knowledge is intellectual.

Recognition of/introduction to the Nature of Mind is somewhat analogous in Tibetan traditions to something like Kensho, though of course direct comparisons are always questionable, being such different traditions.

Except in zen tradition, kensho is seen as a form of enlightenment. In Tibetan tradition, isn’t introduction to the nature of mind is just the beginning of Dzogchen and Mahamudra practice?