At the end of the day, How do we know that any of it is true (Awakening - Nibbana)?

[A1Str8]

How do you know? You don't.

[VincentRJ]

One way of finding out might be to advertise for those Buddhist monks who are claimed to be arahants, to come forward and allow their brains to be scanned through the fMRI process, whilst they are in their deepest state of meditation.

I notice that a few studies of Tibetan monks have already been conducted using fMRI scans, which show a clear change in the brains of experienced meditators. If more studies were carried out, it might be possible to identify a specific change in the brain associated with 'what is claimed to be' a state of Nirvana, or ultimate bliss, whatever.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-12661646

[Maailmanmatti]

I'd seriously doubt anyone claiming to be an Arahant actually being one. Which is not to say there aren't any around - I've seen some who are clearly Ariyas, even if maybe not Arahants.

For me the proof is the gradual decrease of my suffering as I practice. It would seem logical to reach a complete end of Dukkha sooner or later as long as one keeps moving in the right direction. I'm not concerned if it'll be within this lifetime as trying to hurry would just be running in the opposite direction.

In the end, the benefit you gain right now is most important.

[trd]

I'd seriously doubt anyone claiming to be an Arahant actually being one.

Why?

[Maailmanmatti]

A new meditation student asks the teacher:"Are you an Arahant? " Teacher replies "If I say no, the new students will walk out. If I say yes, the old students will".

Claiming to be an Arahant would sound like the most un-Arahant-like boasting to me. Everyone who convinced me of their attainments never claimed any of them. One guy put it well; "If a woman is in late stages of pregnancy, there's no need for her to say so. It's obvious to everyone".

[trd]

A new meditation student asks the teacher:"Are you an Arahant? " Teacher replies "If I say no, the new students will walk out. If I say yes, the old students will".

Claiming to be an Arahant would sound like the most un-Arahant-like boasting to me. Everyone who convinced me of their attainments never claimed any of them. One guy put it well; "If a woman is in late stages of pregnancy, there's no need for her to say so. It's obvious to everyone".

What you are saying is that you are making a judgement about someone being an arahant based on their external conditioned behaviour which is the only thing you can perceive. But the arahant is established in the unconditioned state and this can never be apparent to you as an observer.

[rockyysdt]

What you are saying is that you are making a judgement about someone being an arahant based on their external conditioned behaviour which is the only thing you can perceive. But the arahant is established in the unconditioned state and this can never be apparent to you as an observer.

Hi TRD.

Once established in the unconditioned state, can't this influence external conditioning?

[trd]

What you are saying is that you are making a judgement about someone being an arahant based on their external conditioned behaviour which is the only thing you can perceive. But the arahant is established in the unconditioned state and this can never be apparent to you as an observer.

Hi TRD.

Once established in the unconditioned state, can't this influence external conditioning?

Two people are standing side by side. Both are laughing. One is free of dukkha, the other is not.

Two people are standing side by side. Both are looking scornfully and unhappily at the bad behaviour of someone else. One is free of dukkha, the other is not.

The one who is free of dukkha knows his natural state despite what his body does. He does not identify with body. Jesus overturned the tables of the money lenders in a fit of rage. Some serial killers exhibit the most exemplary behaviour. Don't be misled by external factors. It is all maya. The job of the arahant is to direct you to the Buddha nature which is already there, not to demonstrate his attainment by mere behaviour.

[rockyysdt]

Two people are standing side by side. Both are laughing. One is free of dukkha, the other is not.

Two people are standing side by side. Both are looking scornfully and unhappily at the bad behaviour of someone else. One is free of dukkha, the other is not.

The one who is free of dukkha knows his natural state despite what his body does. He does not identify with body. Jesus overturned the tables of the money lenders in a fit of rage. Some serial killers exhibit the most exemplary behaviour. Don't be misled by external factors. It is all maya. The job of the arahant is to direct you to the Buddha nature which is already there, not to demonstrate his attainment by mere behaviour.

What you say make sense, but if the two people standing side by side are both are steeped in unethical behavior, anxiety, impatience, hatred, jealousy, resentment, and fear, wouldn't the one free from dukkha have altered behavior?

[trd]

I am not saying that one free from dukkha doesn't show different behaviour from someone who is trapped and overwhelmed by fear and suffering. The problem comes when you try to quantify it, particularly if you are using behaviour as some kind of yardstick to determine if a teacher is genuine. There have been many examples of gurus who have demonstrated the kind of behaviour and general demeanor that most people expect from an enlightened being, but sadly it has often emerged later that it was a sham when stories of sexual abuse, hoarding money and other abusive and manipulative actions are revealed.

It can be very difficult for people to make decisions when all they have are the externals to rely on. The real guru is the guru within everyone. But often it needs an external guru to help with this realization. The most reliable indicator as to whether someone is genuine lies in the silence, not actions or words. The natural state is peace. So feeling peace in the presence of a guru is a good indicator, regardless of specific traits, mannerisms, likes, dislikes etc. Of course it is possible to put on a pretense of some kind of super cool image of peace, but it is easily seen through by the sincere seeker.

[Brucenkhamen]

I agree with trd, there is no way that we can judge with certainty that this person or that person is an arahant or any other attainment. I think we can tell when meeting someone that they've "got something" but we can't really judge what exactly that is. I've certainly met people I believe have "got something" that is the fruit of dedicated practice.

However I don't think that was what Maailmanmatti was saying, his main point being that an arahant has no need to blow his own trumpet (and of course if he/she is a monastic the vinaya prohibits it), so blowing his own trumpet is a strong indicator someone is not the real deal.

I can't say I've ever heard anyone make such a claim. I've encountered flakey types on the internet claiming to be enlightened or a Buddha, but arahant is a term not generally known outside of Buddhism so to use it someone will know a bit about Buddhism hopefully how such claims would be received.

Edited January 25, 2015 by Brucenkhamen

[MAJIC]

"Truth" is only what we wish to believe? At the end of the day, how about just being a good person toward your fellow humans? And stop worrying about some "supposed" future life - that smacks of being, somewhat, self-centered!

I'm not scared of death, only of dying.

Or non existant?

[VincentRJ]

Claiming to be an Arahant would sound like the most un-Arahant-like boasting to me.

That's why I framed my statement along the lines, "those Buddhist monks who are claimed to be arahants", rather than "who claim to be". In other words, those monks who have a highly regarded reputation among their followers, for having achieved perhaps the highest state of awareness.

I think the original question posed by Rocky, "How do we know any of it (Nibbana - end of Dukkha) is true?", is too difficult to answer. We're perhaps into the Lao Tzu territory of, "Those who speak don't know. Those who know, don't speak."

[CapeCobra]

"Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent!"

Final sentence of Ludwig Wittgenstein's Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus.

[rockyysdt]

I agree with trd, there is no way that we can judge with certainty that this person or that person is an arahant or any other attainment. I think we can tell when meeting someone that they've "got something" but we can't really judge what exactly that is. I've certainly met people I believe have "got something" that is the fruit of dedicated practice.

However I don't think that was what Maailmanmatti was saying, his main point being that an arahant has no need to blow his own trumpet (and of course if he/she is a monastic the vinaya prohibits it), so blowing his own trumpet is a strong indicator someone is not the real deal.

I can't say I've ever heard anyone make such a claim. I've encountered flakey types on the internet claiming to be enlightened or a Buddha, but arahant is a term not generally known outside of Buddhism so to use it someone will know a bit about Buddhism hopefully how such claims would be received.

Ven Maha Boowa & Mai Chei are two.

[Brucenkhamen]

Ven Maha Boowa

So rumour would have it, I've yet to see convincing evidence.

Mai Chei are two.

I googled "Mai Chei arahant", the top results are in Romanian.

[trd]

Buddha didn't make such claims either. So where does that leave you?

[rockyysdt]

Ven Maha Boowa made his claim in his Dharma talks which were published in his book.

He clearly described his awakening including his countless previous lives.

Sorry about the other name.

I'm out and about and don't have the correct spelling, but she was a nun under Maha Boowa's tutoring.

Edited January 29, 2015 by rockyysdt

[trd]

It is not necessary for Maha Boowa to proclaim explicitly "I am an Arahant". It is clear from his writings in describing his state that this is so.

[Brucenkhamen]

Ven Maha Boowa made his claim in his Dharma talks which were published in his book.

He clearly described his awakening including his countless previous lives.

Ven Maha Boowa has a lot of books, if you have time to dig out a quote that would be appreciated, remembering past lives is supposed to coincide with 4th jhana.

If you are referring to the excerpt trd posted some time ago then I didn't find that to be about what it was purported to be.

[Brucenkhamen]

It is not necessary for Maha Boowa to proclaim explicitly "I am an Arahant".

No, but I think it needs to be unambiguous, a smoking gun, not something open to interpretation or mistranslation.

[trd]

It is not necessary for Maha Boowa to proclaim explicitly "I am an Arahant".

No, but I think it needs to be unambiguous, a smoking gun, not something open to interpretation or mistranslation.

What would be acceptable to you. He talks extensively about his realization. Have you read his books. Quite a bit of smoke I would say.

[trd]

It is not necessary for Maha Boowa to proclaim explicitly "I am an Arahant".

No, but I think it needs to be unambiguous, a smoking gun, not something open to interpretation or mistranslation.

If it's not open to interpretation, how would you recognize it?

[Brucenkhamen]

Buddha didn't make such claims either. So where does that leave you?

...dredging up quotes outlining quite basic Buddhist concepts again.

But as soon as this my three-round, twelve-permutation knowledge & vision concerning these four noble truths as they have come to be was truly pure, then I did claim to have directly awakened to the right self-awakening unexcelled in the cosmos with its deities, Maras & Brahmas, with its contemplatives & brahmans, its royalty & commonfolk. Knowledge & vision arose in me: 'Unprovoked is my release. This is the last birth. There is now no further becoming.'" SN 56.11

Avoiding both of these extremes, the middle way realized by the Tathagata producing vision, producing knowledge leads to calm, to direct knowledge, to self-awakening, to Unbinding. SN 56.11

For I am an arahant in the world;

I, the unexcelled teacher.

I, alone, am rightly self-awakened.

Cooled am I, unbound. MN 26

"Then how is this, Sariputta? Of me, who am at present the Arahant, the Fully Enlightened One, do you have direct personal knowledge as to my virtue, my meditation, my wisdom, my abiding, and my emancipation?" DN 16

"There was a time, Ananda, when I dwelt at Uruvela, on the bank of the Nerañjara River, at the foot of the goatherds' banyan-tree, soon after my supreme Enlightenment. DN 16

Then the Blessed One said: "Do you have faith, Ananda, in the Enlightenment of the Tathagata?" And the Venerable Ananda replied: "Yes, O Lord, I do." DN 16

[Brucenkhamen]

What would be acceptable to you. He talks extensively about his realization. Have you read his books. Quite a bit of smoke I would say.

A few,

Quite a bit of smoke I would say.

... and a few mirrors

[Brucenkhamen]

If it's not open to interpretation, how would you recognize it?

As per the normal process of recognising meaning from English text, unfortunately I read very little Thai if at all.

[trd]

So I repeat. What specifically would convince you that someone is arahant? Would they have to say it in the terms you quoted from SN 56 et al. And how would you know they spoke the truth.

[rockyysdt]

However I don't think that was what Maailmanmatti was saying, his main point being that an arahant has no need to blow his own trumpet (and of course if he/she is a monastic the vinaya prohibits it), so blowing his own trumpet is a strong indicator someone is not the real deal.

I can't say I've ever heard anyone make such a claim. I've encountered flakey types on the internet claiming to be enlightened or a Buddha, but arahant is a term not generally known outside of Buddhism so to use it someone will know a bit about Buddhism hopefully how such claims would be received.

If an Arahant indicates he is Awakened in a teaching context then I don't think this is "blowing a trumpet" or being egotistical.

Quote: Ven: Maha Boowa.

No one sat in judgment at that decisive moment. That natural principle arose on its own and passed its own judgement. The universe then collapsed on its own. Originating from a neutral state of the citta, the happening took place all so suddenly: in an instant the entire cosmos seemed to flip over and disappear. It was so brilliant! Oh my! Really and truly magnificent! Too extraordinary to be captured in words. Such is the amazing nature of the Dhamma that I now teach. Tears flowed when I experienced it. Look at me even now! Even now my tears are flowing at the recollection of that event. These tears are the work of the khandhas.

Please understand that they do not exist in the natural state of purity that appeared at that moment. That natural state appeared suddenly, in all of its incredible magnificence. I want all of you who are so complacent to realize what the Dhamma of the Lord Buddha is really like. Oh! So truly, truly amazing! My goodness, the tears came streaming down my face. Utterly astounded, I exclaimed: “Is this how the Lord Buddha attained Enlightenment? Is this how he attained Enlightenment? Is this what true Dhamma is like?”

In this Dharma presentation doesn't the Ven: Maha Boowa clearly indicate his Arahantship?

Edited January 29, 2015 by rockyysdt

[trd]

There is no trumpet to be blown. Where is the ego of the awakened that would do this.

[trd]

What I find interesting is that there are many seekers, not necessarily all Buddhists, who will always be in a state of denial. The ego mind becomes engaged in a search for truth by adopting a set of instructions and beliefs which if followed and practiced diligently, will, it is believed by the seeker, lead to progress on the path to knowledge and with a final destination in mind. The final destination of Buddhism is nibanna. But without having reached it there can only by an idea, an imagining by the mind of what it is. And that is the problem. Awakening has nothing to do with the mind, that same mind which imagines what awakening must be like.

So if someone comes along and claims to be awake, it immediately presents the seeker hearing or reading those words with a stark choice. Is this for real or not. Nothing wrong with treating such claims with caution, but what often happens is interesting. The mind has developed a certain comfort and familiarity with being on a path and the more unattainable the goal appears, the more likely you will adhere to it because this vast distance, or so it appears, grants a level playing field of comfort where you see all around you are in the same ignorant state, but at least you have a head start on those who have no familiarity at all with the teachings. As long as this status quo is preserved, all is well.

Not a problem with accepting the Buddhas claim. It's safe. He's long dead and gone. But if someone living pops up with such a claim it upsets the apple cart, it forces the seeker to examine all kinds of presumptions and ideas about dovetailing the veracity of what he may have learnt over a considerable amount of time with the messy dynamics of someone who may express this awakened state in very different terms from what he is used to. That can be uncomfortable and there will be many seekers who for that reason will always be in a state of denial. Because it's safe and predictable.

Much harder for Christians though, who have been told they were created by God but are separate from him and not only that, but your are born with original sin. Get out of that!