Is Buddhism a complete path?

[Maddie]

Recent discussions have brought some interesting points for consideration to light. Namely being is Buddhism a complete system for ending suffering permanently aka "enlightenment" all by itself or is it dated and lacking things? 

 

When replying don't just state your opinion, but state the reason that you think so one way or the other.  

Edited February 12 by Maddie

[snowymountains]

Define enlightenment first !

Theravada Buddhism gives 4 levels ( enterer, once returner, never returner, Arahat ), 5 really if you include Buddhahood.

 

Is the definition of enlightenment complete or it misses some some glaringly obvious items?

Glaringly obvious in that after considering them the definition of enlightenment just feels incomplete.

Everything is a matter of definition after all.

 

 

Re ending suffering in some cases of suffering, Pali Canon meditations ( any meditation actually ) are not even recommended, while nothing tangible is provided to alleviate that condition, so can it be called a complete path?

 

 

No path is complete.

Of course all paths claim they're complete in attaining their definition of enlightenment 😁

 

 

This doesn't mean eg the Pali meditations aren't a very good practice, they are a very good practice.

It just means one needs to figure out limitations and look at other places too.

 

 

Is there even a final road sign saying "end of the road, welcome to enlightenment bay, this is the last stop" ?

 

And this is my last contribution in this thread, as in various threads I've discussed limitations and I'd rather not repeat posts to keep the environmental footprint low 😁

[Maddie]

15 minutes ago, snowymountains said:

Define enlightenment first !

Theravada Buddhism gives 4 levels ( enterer, once returner, never returner, Arahat ), 5 really if you include Buddhahood.

 

Is the definition of enlightenment complete or it misses some some glaringly obvious items?

Glaringly obvious in that after considering them the definition of enlightenment just feels incomplete.

Everything is a matter of definition after all.

 

 

Re ending suffering in some cases of suffering, Pali Canon meditations ( any meditation actually ) are not even recommended, while nothing tangible is provided to alleviate that condition, so can it be called a complete path?

 

 

No path is complete.

Of course all paths claim they're complete in attaining their definition of enlightenment 😁

 

 

This doesn't mean eg the Pali meditations aren't a very good practice, they are a very good practice.

It just means one needs to figure out limitations and look at other places too.

 

 

Is there even a final road sign saying "end of the road, welcome to enlightenment bay, this is the last stop" ?

 

And this is my last contribution in this thread, as in various threads I've discussed limitations and I'd rather not repeat posts to keep the environmental footprint low 😁

 

I certainly hope you keep posting. Any sincere exploration needs points and counterpoints. You got me thinking, and that's a good thing lol.

 

I would say the best and simplest definition of enlightenment in my opinion is ending suffering permanently. 

 

Edited February 12 by Maddie

[Keith108]

Can one say whether a path is complete or not, having not completed it. Is Anuttara Samyak Sambodhi possible? I don't know.

 

I have faith in the Three Jewels, and follow the path because I believe it to be a complete one.

 

But belief/non-belief is part of the cause of Dukkha, so in the end, I just practice and see what happens.

 

_/|\_

[Maddie]

4 minutes ago, Keith108 said:

Can one say whether a path is complete or not, having not completed it. Is Anuttara Samyak Sambodhi possible? I don't know.

 

I have faith in the Three Jewels, and follow the path because I believe it to be a complete one.

 

But belief/non-belief is part of the cause of Dukkha, so in the end, I just practice and see what happens.

 

_/|\_

 

I think that is a good pragmatic attitude to have. 

[snowymountains]

23 minutes ago, Maddie said:

 

I certainly hope you keep posting. Any sincere exploration needs points and counterpoints. You got me thinking, and that's a good thing lol.

 

I would say the best and simplest definition of enlightenment in my opinion is ending suffering permanently. 

 

 

Unpopular views need explanations.

 

Explanations cost time and require more explanations as a follow up.

 

More explanations need even more time.

 

There's a way to stop this time-consuming cycle.

 

Just follow the 1-fold path of not expanding on views because only Maddie's reading anyhow 😁

 

These are the 5 Noble Posting Truths and the 1-fold path to save time 😁

Edited February 12 by snowymountains

[Neirong]

1 hour ago, Maddie said:

Recent discussions have brought some interesting points for consideration to light. Namely being is Buddhism a complete system for ending suffering permanently aka "enlightenment" all by itself or is it dated and lacking things? 

 

When replying don't just state your opinion, but state the reason that you think so one way or the other.  

Have you seen or can you show a single living Buddhist practitioner who has reached enlightenment? (a photo will do)
 

I am not criticizing, but I have not seen anyone so far, and we know that many millions practice and follow those teachings worldwide.
 

I think a working (complete) path/tradition should be able to produce at least one enlightened being out of tens of millions of practitioners.

[Maddie]

8 minutes ago, Neirong said:

Have you seen or can you show a single living Buddhist practitioner who has reached enlightenment? (a photo will do)
 

I am not criticizing, but I have not seen anyone so far, and we know that many millions practice and follow those teachings worldwide.
 

I think a working (complete) path/tradition should be able to produce at least one enlightened being out of tens of millions of practitioners.

 

This is one of the things I've considered as well.

[snowymountains]

23 minutes ago, Maddie said:

 

This is one of the things I've considered as well.

 

Bhikkhu Bhikkhu, 1 line responses are the best ( numerical discourses 😁)

[Maddie]

13 minutes ago, snowymountains said:

 

Bhikkhu Bhikkhu, 1 line responses are the best ( numerical discourses 😁)

 

That's a good point though. Where are all the enlightened people? I guess it's really not that different of an argument that the Daoists make that there are immortals out there.

 

Granted Buddhism has helped me improve my mental state as well as a lot of other people and that's great but I would not consider myself nor anyone else I know that practices Buddhism enlightened. 

[snowymountains]

Just now, Maddie said:

 

That's a good point though. Where are all the enlightened people? I guess it's really not that different of an argument that the Daoists make that there are immortals out there.

 

Granted Buddhism has helped me improve my mental state as well as a lot of other people and that's great but I would not consider myself nor anyone else I know that practices Buddhism enlightened. 

 

I've met someone who's on one of the four stages, likely above stream entry.

He never advertised himself as such of course but I'm certain, though I'll follow my forum Nirvana rules and not enter the discussion as to why I'm certain.

 

He's a senior Bhikkhu, decades of monastic life, done multi-year retreats in isolation etc, might explain the scarcity.. but I'm sure there are others too.

He's also very well rounded as a person too, beyond Buddhism.

 

So it's possible, the question is if the above path is for everyone and if combined with other tools it's more effective, especially for non-monastics. Other tools can complement the path's gaps.

 

 

[snowymountains]

Btw to preemptily avoid misinterpretations, clearly I'm not referring to observation of stuff like levitation, mind reading, or other Dragonball stuff.

[Maddie]

3 minutes ago, snowymountains said:

Btw to preemptily avoid misinterpretations, clearly I'm not referring to observation of stuff like levitation, mind reading, or other Dragonball stuff.

 

You're good this is the Buddhist discussion room 😂

[snowymountains]

Just now, Maddie said:

 

You're good this is the Buddhist discussion room 😂

 

Which is sitting on a mountain of Gokuhud 😁

[Maddie]

2 minutes ago, snowymountains said:

 

Which is sitting on a mountain of Gokuhud 😁

Naturally 🤭

[Sir Darius the Clairvoyent]

I agree @snowymountains

1. what is enlightentment? Must be more like a scale and not some state where all is butterflies and strawberries for eternity

2. no tradition/teachings/doctrine can, almost by definition, be complete

[snowymountains]

8 minutes ago, NaturaNaturans said:

I agree @snowymountains

1. what is enlightentment? Must be more like a scale and not some state where all is butterflies and strawberries for eternity

2. no tradition/teachings/doctrine can, almost by definition, be complete

 

A very accessible and reasonable definition I like

 

C.G. Jung - "One does not become enlightened by imagining figures of light, but by making the darkness conscious. The latter procedure, however, is disagreeable and therefore not popular."

[Sir Darius the Clairvoyent]

10 minutes ago, snowymountains said:

 

A very accessible and reasonable definition I like

 

C.G. Jung - "One does not become enlightened by imagining figures of light, but by making the darkness conscious. The latter procedure, however, is disagreeable and therefore not popular."

I have shared this before, but i think it is worth sharing: 

so you think enlightentment is becoming whole? A funny thing about at least germanic languages, is that health, holy, healing etc. all seem to derive from whole

 

[Maddie]

32 minutes ago, NaturaNaturans said:

I agree @snowymountains

1. what is enlightentment? Must be more like a scale and not some state where all is butterflies and strawberries for eternity

2. no tradition/teachings/doctrine can, almost by definition, be complete

 

I'm not saying you're wrong, but why do you think so?

[Apech]

4 hours ago, Maddie said:

Recent discussions have brought some interesting points for consideration to light. Namely being is Buddhism a complete system for ending suffering permanently aka "enlightenment" all by itself or is it dated and lacking things? 

 

When replying don't just state your opinion, but state the reason that you think so one way or the other.  

 

 

I could argue it is, or I could argue it isn't - which would you like?

 

 

[snowymountains]

 

29 minutes ago, NaturaNaturans said:

so you think enlightentment is becoming whole?

 

Correct.

[Maddie]

16 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

 

I could argue it is, or I could argue it isn't - which would you like?

 

 

 

I would like to know what you actually think lol 

[snowymountains]

15 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

 

I could argue it is, or I could argue it isn't - which would you like?

 

 

 

The question is if a view is backed outside the doctrine, otherwise all doctrines claim doctrinal supremacy and completeness.

[Apech]

6 minutes ago, Maddie said:

 

I would like to know what you actually think lol 

 

 

Seriously?

[snowymountains]

3 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

 

Seriously?

 

She'll actually read it ( from the short discourses 😁)