You can’t explain Nibbana in words. It is something to be realise
So if I wrote a post tomorrow that I have reached Nibbana you have no objection ?
fig tree wrote:It seems possible for people to talk themselves into thinking that they are enlightened, and I suspect a lot of phony spiritual mastery is like this.
arijitmitter wrote:There is no exact description of Nibbana in Buddhist texts. Let us take a few words we usually associate with it - pure bliss, wisdom, joy, peace, stillness of mind and so on.
arijitmitter wrote:But there is no way to distinguish phony Enlightenment from real Enlightenment. When the fake cannot be distinguished from the real how do we know which is which ? Is it not better that for the good of all mankind an Anagami at least ( from any religion ) emerges and tells us what exactly he sees, feels, hears, perceives the world.
Bhikkhus, would an untrue man know of a true man: ‘This person is a true man’?”—“No, venerable sir.”—“Good, bhikkhus. It is impossible, it cannot be, that an untrue man should know of a true man: ‘This person is a true man.’ ~~ MN 110 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html ~~
1.“It is by living together with someone, great king, that his virtue is to be known, and that after a long time, not after a short time; by one who is attentive, not by one who is inattentive; by one who is wise, not by a dullard.
2.“It is by dealing with someone, great king, that his honesty is to be known, and that after a long time, not after a short time; by one who is attentive, not by one who is inattentive; by one who is wise, not by a dullard.
3.“It is in adversities, great king, that a person’s fortitude is to be known, and that after a long time, not after a short time; by one who is attentive, not by one who is inattentive; by one who is wise, not by a
4.“It is by discussion with someone, great king, that his wisdom is to be known, and that after a long time, not after a short time; by one who is attentive, not by one who is inattentive; by one who is wise, not by a
dullard.” ~~ SN 3.11 ~~
daverupa wrote:Self-hypnosis is a skill with certain goals to which it is directed, while nibbana is a description of an altogether different goal, with relevant skill sets which largely differ.
It's comparing apples and oranges (or more precisely, apple fruits and orange trees).
santa100 wrote:So, enlightenment cannot be self hypnosis for there's nothing for one to "gain". There're only things for one to "let go". And the cold hard truth is one simply cannot cut corner and expect their greed, hatred, and delusion to disappear..
arijitmitter wrote:But he set out in clear terms... not in so many words but...
arijitmitter wrote:If you were to wander the mountains in Tibet - Nepal border and you met a monk in a cave who told you - do you know last night I became enlightened - will you believe or disbelieve him ?
If you believe - on basis of what
if you disbelieve - on basis of what
daverupa wrote:I can see you've got some doubt about the claim of awakening, but the point is to assess the root of suffering for yourself, here and now. All we have to admit about the Buddha, at first, is that he had an experience he thought was worth teaching others about. You can approach and learn about that, or not, but there's no need to chase around historical phantasms.
Nan-in, a Japanese master during the Meiji era (1868-1912), received a university professor who came to inquire about Zen.
Nan-in served tea. He poured his visitor’s cup full, and then kept on pouring.
The professor watched the overflow until he no longer could restrain himself. “It is overfull. No more will go in!”
“Like this cup,” Nan-in said, “you are full of your own opinions and speculations. How can I show you Zen unless you first empty your cup?”
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest