Enlightment in 7 hard days, anyone done it?

[human1111]

Hi all.

Anyone has done the 7 days of uninterupted mindfulness like from satipathanna sutta? According to that sutta anyone who undergoes that would gain enlightment. Now the procedure is tough and may require months if not years of practice to be able to do ( or atleast inhuman willpower).

Anyone done it? What were the results? Any good experiences yoou can share with us?
Thanks.


http://satipatthana.org/satipatthana_sutta.html

[Awaiting_the_fifth]

If anyone had achieved enlightenment in this world, you would know about it.

[I, Brian]

Curious - why?

[Awaiting_the_fifth]

Because the manifestation of a buddha is no subtle event. Buddha shakyamuni was said to be 10'6'' tall with a body of blue gold. He lit up all the heavens and all the other worlds with light from his brow. Although this may be an embelishment, there was no doubt about his enlightenment, he didnt have any trouble convincing anyone of his elevated state. The ascetics who shunned him for years immediately became his disciples.

Many people today claim enlightenment, but in my opinion (which of course counts for nothing at all) the fact that anyone who sees it doubts it is evidence that it is not so.

[Quahom1]

Hmmm, some of us might (might), receive enlightenment in a very quiet way, and not in seven days or so, but in years, or in an instant.

[I, Brian]

It sounds like a very cultural interpretation that great spiritual understanding must be accompanied by physical signs and wonders - but I guess the concept of "enlightenment" in Buddhism in general is a very technical term and akin to the "return of Christ" in Christianity?

[Awaiting_the_fifth]

In a way, yes. In the entire history of this world system there have been only four beings who have achieved enlightenment within their lifetime. The profecy of the return of Christ is comparable to the coming of Maitreya, the next Buddha to manifest.

Also, I dont think the physical signs are so important, they may be, as I said, just an embelishment, it is the instant acceptance by all peers and onlookers which makes the story of Shakyamuni's enlightenment so believable to me.

[human1111]

Originally Posted by Awaiting_the_fifth

Because the manifestation of a buddha is no subtle event. Buddha shakyamuni was said to be 10'6'' tall with a body of blue gold. He lit up all the heavens and all the other worlds with light from his brow. Although this may be an embelishment, there was no doubt about his enlightenment, he didnt have any trouble convincing anyone of his elevated state. The ascetics who shunned him for years immediately became his disciples.

Many people today claim enlightenment, but in my opinion (which of course counts for nothing at all) the fact that anyone who sees it doubts it is evidence that it is not so.

What I've always read and heard is that enlightment is an INTERNAL rather than external event. You might look at a person and he will look the same whethere he is enlightened or not. He doesn't supposed to grow horns or halo after enlightment. It is like two twisn equally dressed, one knows a lot another does not.

And where does it says that Buddha was 10"6? In all the pictures he was of ordinary size (of those people) and he was just a man who became enlightened.

[Awaiting_the_fifth]

Originally Posted by human1111

And where does it says that Buddha was 10"6?

I really wish that Id never said that. I did say that I did not think that the physical signs were important. To me, the Buddha's identity is validated by the masses of holy men who once shunned him for adopting the middle way but turned to him for guidance immediately when he reached enlightenment. Also when I read the words of the Buddha today I still feel their impact.

But if you really want to know, I got it from the first chapter of the Sutra of Innumerable Meanings. There is a long, poetic description of the Buddha given by the Boddhisattva Mahasattva Great Adornment which goes on for a number of pages and states that his body is,

ten feet six inches in height
glittering with purple gold
Well proportioned, brilliant,
and highly bright.

HOWEVER.

I will not place great faith in this statement's literal value. The Sutra begins with the line,

"Thus have I heard."

What is clear (to me at least) from all this is that to be in the presence of a Buddha is something of a breathtaking experience. People like Nick Roach and Barry Long, while they may well be wise and wonderful people, they have been teaching for many years and the world at large has yet to notice them in the way that Buddha Shakyamuni was noticed. 2500 years from now, who will read their words.

So basically, Im sorry if I made anyone think that I worship a ten foot tall gold statue because I dont. I honestly have no clue what any Buddha looks like other than the statue on my shrine. His enlightenment shook the "known" world, he was called the "world honored one" and while he may or may not have been as impressive a sight as we are told, his was certainly as impressive a teacher.

So I stand by my original assertion. If anyone had achieved enlightenment in this world, you would know about it.

Forever
Awaiting The Fifth

[I, Brian]

"instant acceptance by all peers and onlookers"

Awaiting the Fifth, I'm curious - the physical signs are obviously somewhat preposterous to modern sensibilities, and easily perceived as signs of cultural propaganda. However, how come, despite according the text as obviously misrepresentative, do you therefore accept statements that could otherwise be suggested to be propaganda as absolute fact, rather than considering that these could too be propagandist statements intended to coerce on a cultural level? And why is the fact that other people are told to agree on a decision therefore important to you?

[Awaiting_the_fifth]

why is the fact that other people are told to agree on a decision therefore important to you?

Not totally sure what you mean by that to be honest.

In general though, I find myself squirming a bit on this thread.

Im falling into the old trap of trying to prove my beliefs. I go through these phases, it all makes a great deal of sense to me and I think that I can explain it to other people in such a way that they will say, "Oh, of course, how did I not see that before?!" but of course, they never do.

I think that in essence, this goes back to your earlier point, Brian,

I guess the concept of "enlightenment" in Buddhism in general is a very technical term and akin to the "return of Christ" in Christianity?

That's really where Im coming from here. As my name suggests, I look foreward to the manifestation of the next buddha, and I believe that when it happens, there will be no question of validity, everyone will immediately see the enlightened one and everyone will want to hear the true dharma.

As for the physical signs, I think that they have been exagerated as any event of this magnitude would be over 2500 years, but I believe there may have been some visible effects. 10'6'' and made of gold? I doubt it. When I wrote that I was actually in a hurry as I was on a break at work and it was the first thing I thought of, I only meant to convey the idea that his presence was not subtle.

As for my acceptance of the texts, I do not accept much of it as being perfectly accurate, the writing seems very stylised to me and for some reason everytime the Buddha makes a point he makes up a little song and repeats himself in verse. I do, however, see the underlying points. The concepts in the sutras seem so obvious that when I first read them I was a little bit dissapointed. I almost feel like if I personally sat and thought about it, I would reach these same ideas on my own, except that I never have. That is why I accept what is said. Perhaps it is all cultural propoganda, but it's still a good idea.

[amaravati]

Originally Posted by Awaiting_the_fifth

In the entire history of this world system there have been only four beings who have achieved enlightenment within their lifetime.

Not quite. Althought I'm not exactly sure what you meant by "within their lifetime". According to the Tipitaka there have been many people who have been and can be enlightenment by practicing Buddha's teaching.

Originally Posted by Awaiting_the_fifth

If anyone had achieved enlightenment in this world, you would know about it.

That is partially true. If I remember correctly this only applies to Buddha exclusively. It was either when Buddha is born or have reached enlightenment maybe both, that during those events there will be some sort of phenomena going on in the world.

Because you refers to Buddha as "Shakyamuni" I'm assuming that you maybe reading or have read about Mahayana Buddhism, which is a sect or school of Buddhism that has been developed some time after Buddha's death. Mahayana Buddhism contains distorted views and believes of Buddhism that was not originally taught by Buddha.

[Awaiting_the_fifth]

Originally Posted by amaravati

Not quite. Althought I'm not exactly sure what you meant by "within their lifetime". According to the Tipitaka there have been many people who have been and can be enlightenment by practicing Buddha's teaching.

In my understanding, there are many who have become "Foe destroyers" who have reached a point where they will never again enter this world, i.e this death will be their last and they will be liberated. This is different to manifesting as a Buddha within ones lifetime.

Originally Posted by amaravati

I'm assuming that you maybe reading or have read about Mahayana Buddhism, which is a sect or school of Buddhism that has been developed some time after Buddha's death. Mahayana Buddhism contains distorted views and believes of Buddhism that was not originally taught by Buddha.

I am not simply reading about Buddhism, I am a practicing Mahayana Buddhist, and this is not the way I understand it. My understanding is that Buddha Shakyamuni (Whom I name shakyamuni to distinguish him from the numerous other buddhas) taught three seperate schools of Buddhism, known as the three turnings of the wheel of Dharma. The first teaching was the hinyana, the second was the mahayana and the third was the vajrayana.

I get the impression that you are a buddhist yourself, which school might you belong to?

[amaravati]

Originally Posted by Awaiting_the_fifth

In my understanding, there are many who have become "Foe destroyers" who have reached a point where they will never again enter this world, i.e this death will be their last and they will be liberated. This is different to manifesting as a Buddha within ones lifetime.

Now I understand that you intepreted "enlightenment" only to be accomplished exclusively by Buddha. However I do not know what "Foe destroyers" is exactly, but from your description it seems to be equivalent of enlightenment where those who are enlightened will enter Nirvana after your death.

I guess I have considered myself to practice the way of Hinayana > Theravada, which teachings have been derived from the Tipitaka/Pali Canon (doctrine of Siddhartha Gautama/Buddha's original teachings)

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by Awaiting_the_fifth

In my understanding, there are many who have become "Foe destroyers" who have reached a point where they will never again enter this world, i.e this death will be their last and they will be liberated. This is different to manifesting as a Buddha within ones lifetime.

Please don't laugh, but you piqued my curiosity here.

About 10 years ago, I was dating a woman, who went to psychic (and dragged me along). Now the purpose for the visit was for my lady friend to have a "reading", while I sat in the lobby.

In any event, my lady friend and the psychic (who was also friends with my lady), came out to the lobby, and I got up to leave. The psychic, brushed against my arm, then looked at me with (for lack of a better term), a stunned expression.

She then took my hand, and traced her finger in the palm, while looking into my eyes. She said "Yours is a very old soul...you have been here 11 times before, and this is your final time here". She also mentioned that I was some kind of spiritual warrior or fighter, and mine was to apply all I have learned before, and that I was, but that I must move faster, because there was so much to be done.

The reaason I brought this up is because your statement above refreshed those memories of the woman's words. Does this make any sense in your particular faith? Is this what you are talking about? I'm a little more than curious.

v/r

Q