The Buddhist Paradox

The Buddha achieved enlightenment, and he went on to say that in order to reach enlightenment, you must get rid of attachment.

The question I bring forth is this: How could the Buddha achieve enlightenment when he was so attached to achieving enlightenment?

Interesting note: Buddha's death was caused by the consumption of bad pork and mushrooms. Because he adhered to a strict vegetarian diet, his students asked why he ate the bad pork and mushrooms served by the person that was housing him.

Discuss.

reply to post by DelayedChristmas


Attachment to the physical is what he meant... Enlightenment is gained knowledge from the spiritual world...

Jesus said it best

Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal:

20 But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal:

21 For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.

reply to post by DelayedChristmas


Maybe it had something to do with free will.

reply to post by Akragon


Yes, many people interpret attachment as being attached to the physical. Some people say that in order for there to be attachment, there needs to be two things: the attacher and thing to be attached to. buddhism.about.com...

Following this perspective, the Buddha was the attacher and the thing to be attached to is Nirvana. We can see this attachment to achieving Nirvana through the abandonment of his wife, although I do believe that he kept in touch with her, heavy meditation, and fasting.

I see a paradox, but if there is no paradox, why did the Buddha adhere to a strict vegetarian diet until his death bed?

Originally posted by BrokenAngelWings33
reply to post by DelayedChristmas

 

Maybe it had something to do with free will.

Oh you!

reply to post by DelayedChristmas

I see a paradox, but if there is no paradox, why did the Buddha adhere to a strict vegetarian diet until his death bed?

He felt there would be a Karmic debt created from eating the flesh of another living creature...

That can't really be considered attachment... after all that would be giving up something...

reply to post by Akragon


So he feared Karmic debt thus staying away from eating the flesh of a soul, but at his last meal, the Buddha was not so worried about consuming the bad pork and mushrooms.

My professor said that Buddha told his students that being a caring, compassionate person is the most important thing, hence why he did not refuse the poor, housing blacksmith's offer.

Originally posted by DelayedChristmas
The Buddha achieved enlightenment, and he went on to say that in order to reach enlightenment, you must get rid of attachment.

The question I bring forth is this: How could the Buddha achieve enlightenment when he was so attached to achieving enlightenment?

Interesting note: Buddha's death was caused by the consumption of bad pork and mushrooms. Because he adhered to a strict vegetarian diet, his students asked why he ate the bad pork and mushrooms served by the person that was housing him.

Discuss.

edit on 18-12-2012 by DelayedChristmas because: (no reason given)

Buddha made an error with suffering. Can suffering be eliminated? He made the choice to become a neutral. There are two directions to suffering, but there is also a neutral. Let me explain with a simple analogy.

If you smoke, you get cancer. This is because you take a reward that is not earned first. Taking makes us a thief so we SUFFER that result. Flip this. If we work out in the gym, we gain health. Why? We SUFFERED for the reward rather than suffering due to the debt of the thief. What did Buddha choose? Walk away from suffering. What can be produced positive if we simply stop the negative and positive motion? Buddha lacked an unbalanced force.

I. Every object in a state of uniform motion tends to remain in that state of motion unless an external force is applied to it.

God operates by his own law.

III. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

We reap what we sow. What if we fail to sow? What if we reap apart from sowing? You have your answer.

Buddha's at rest tends to stay at rest, and a Buddha in motion tends to stay in motion, with the same direction and speed unless acted upon by an unbalanced force.

Buddha was the way and eight-fold path of righteousness.

Philosophy is the Truth of Virtue.

Live is Christ and Suffering.

John 14:6

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

Buddha must be born again. Baptism is our immersion into the waters of life to repent. We must bear fruit to repent and suffering is required. If not, we face the unbalanced force of the flaming sword that protects the tree of life.

Genesis 3

23 So the Lord God banished him from the Garden of Eden to work the ground from which he had been taken. 24 After he drove the man out, he placed on the east side[e] of the Garden of Eden cherubim and a flaming sword flashing back and forth to guard the way to the tree of life.

Catch that? WOOOOORK

ALSO. Toil is suffering.

17 To Adam he said, “Because you listened to your wife and ate fruit from the tree about which I commanded you, ‘You must not eat from it,’

“Cursed is the ground because of you;
through painful toil you will eat food from it
all the days of your life.
18 It will produce thorns and thistles for you,
and you will eat the plants of the field.
19 By the sweat of your brow
you will eat your food
until you return to the ground,
since from it you were taken;
for dust you are
and to dust you will return.”

What did Buddha have to say on the topic:

Dhammapada Choices

We are what we think.
All that we are arises with our thoughts.
With our thoughts we make the world.
Speak or act with an impure mind
And trouble will follow you
As the wheel follows the ox that draws the cart.

Buddha is still pulling the cart and the wheel of life is turning. The burden continues. An ox is an ox because it pulls the cart.

The OX is the Aleph (Father) pulling the burden of the family.

Originally posted by DelayedChristmas
reply to post by Akragon

 

So he feared Karmic debt thus staying away from eating the flesh of a soul, but at his last meal, the Buddha was not so worried about consuming the bad pork and mushrooms.

My professor said that Buddha told his students that being a caring, compassionate person is the most important thing, hence why he did not refuse the poor, housing blacksmith's offer.

edit on 18-12-2012 by DelayedChristmas because: (no reason given)

From what i recall that was a mistranslation in the texts... The "bad pork" was actually "the food of pigs"... which is a truffle/mushroom...

Originally posted by EnochWasRight

Originally posted by DelayedChristmas
The Buddha achieved enlightenment, and he went on to say that in order to reach enlightenment, you must get rid of attachment.

The question I bring forth is this: How could the Buddha achieve enlightenment when he was so attached to achieving enlightenment?

Interesting note: Buddha's death was caused by the consumption of bad pork and mushrooms. Because he adhered to a strict vegetarian diet, his students asked why he ate the bad pork and mushrooms served by the person that was housing him.

Discuss.

edit on 18-12-2012 by DelayedChristmas because: (no reason given)

Buddha made an error with suffering. Can suffering be eliminated? He made the choice to become a neutral. There are two directions to suffering, but there is also a neutral. Let me explain with a simple analogy.

If you smoke, you get cancer. This is because you take a reward that is not earned first. Taking makes us a thief so we SUFFER that result. Flip this. If we work out in the gym, we gain health. Why? We SUFFERED for the reward rather than suffering due to the debt of the thief. What did Buddha choose? Walk away from suffering. What can be produced positive if we simply stop the negative and positive motion? Buddha lacked an unbalanced force.

I. Every object in a state of uniform motion tends to remain in that state of motion unless an external force is applied to it.

God operates by his own law.

III. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

We reap what we sow. What if we fail to sow? What if we reap apart from sowing? You have your answer.

Buddha's at rest tends to stay at rest, and a Buddha in motion tends to stay in motion, with the same direction and speed unless acted upon by an unbalanced force.

Buddha was the way and eight-fold path of righteousness.

Philosophy is the Truth of Virtue.

Live is Christ and Suffering.

John 14:6

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

Buddha must be born again. Baptism is our immersion into the waters of life to repent. We must bear fruit to repent and suffering is required. If not, we face the unbalanced force of the flaming sword that protects the tree of life.

Genesis 3

23 So the Lord God banished him from the Garden of Eden to work the ground from which he had been taken. 24 After he drove the man out, he placed on the east side[e] of the Garden of Eden cherubim and a flaming sword flashing back and forth to guard the way to the tree of life.

ALSO. Toil is suffering.

17 To Adam he said, “Because you listened to your wife and ate fruit from the tree about which I commanded you, ‘You must not eat from it,’

“Cursed is the ground because of you;
through painful toil you will eat food from it
all the days of your life.
18 It will produce thorns and thistles for you,
and you will eat the plants of the field.
19 By the sweat of your brow
you will eat your food
until you return to the ground,
since from it you were taken;
for dust you are
and to dust you will return.”

What did Buddha have to say on the topic:

Dhammapada Choices

We are what we think.
All that we are arises with our thoughts.
With our thoughts we make the world.
Speak or act with an impure mind
And trouble will follow you
As the wheel follows the ox that draws the cart.

Buddha is still pulling the cart and the wheel of life is turning. The burden continues. An ox is an ox because it pulls the cart.

I am going to bust your analogy of getting cancer from smoking cigarettes and hopefully, this would shed some light on my thought process.

books.google.com... 0vcRmFXGlQ&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=10&ct=result#v=onepage&q&f=false

PG 134-135 entails that smoking tobacco actually promoted health benefits to the Native Americans.
PG 137-138 entails the research conducted by Dr. Richard Passey of the correlation between lung cancer and flue dried tobacco and pure air dried tobacco. There was no correlation between lung cancer and pure air dried tobacco, but a correlation existed with lung cancer and flue dried tobacco.

Originally posted by Akragon

Originally posted by DelayedChristmas
reply to post by Akragon

 

So he feared Karmic debt thus staying away from eating the flesh of a soul, but at his last meal, the Buddha was not so worried about consuming the bad pork and mushrooms.

My professor said that Buddha told his students that being a caring, compassionate person is the most important thing, hence why he did not refuse the poor, housing blacksmith's offer.

edit on 18-12-2012 by DelayedChristmas because: (no reason given)

From what i recall that was a mistranslation in the texts... The "bad pork" was actually "the food of pigs"... which is a truffle/mushroom...

Yes I see that observation from others. I've also heard that it is not known whether the pork is to be translated into pig or pork as in the fungi. Perhaps if you could send me a link to that source that would help clear things up?

reply to post by DelayedChristmas

I am going to bust your analogy of getting cancer from smoking cigarettes and hopefully, this would shed some light on my thought process.

More than 2,500 American Indians/Alaska Natives died of cancer in 2007

LINK

Did your distal phalanges really type that sentence with a straight face? Heart disease? High blood pressure. Asthma in children?

Answer me this: What is in the hand of 99% homeless person holding a sign, "Will work of for money?" What makes this true? The sign is a symptom of taking reward and incurring debt. Why do people end up on the road with a sign instead of with savings in the bank, bridges to family and opportunity from effort? They took reward instead of earning it by suffering first. Are there exceptions to the rule? Sure. A few will smoke and die of the diseases later than expected.

Life is found in taking the name of Christ. The name can be taken in vain. Suffering is the character of Christ. The name is the character.

reply to post by DelayedChristmas


Google is your friend brother

Im just wondering why you're fiddling with buddha?

Arn't you Christian?

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
reply to post by DelayedChristmas

 

I am going to bust your analogy of getting cancer from smoking cigarettes and hopefully, this would shed some light on my thought process.

More than 2,500 American Indians/Alaska Natives died of cancer in 2007

LINK

Did your distal phalanges really type that sentence with a straight face? Heat disease? High blood pressure. Asthma in children.

Answer me this. What is in the hand of 99% homeless person holding a sign, "Will work of for money?" What makes this true? The sign is a symptom of taking reward and incurring debt. Why do people end up on the road with a sign instead of with savings in the bank, bridges to family and opportunity from effort? They took reward instead of earning it by suffering first. Are there exceptions to the rule? Sure. A few will smoke and die of the diseases later than expected.

Ah you see, I advise not seeing things as so black and white. I am trying to provoke people to think from all perspectives, just as you said that are exceptions to rules. The reason why I was serious when typing my thoughts regarding cancer and cigarettes is explained by the following:

Tobacco use was promoted to be beneficial for health prior to the 40's. Around this time, everyone smoked cigarettes everywhere and anywhere. It was also easier for everyone to quit unlike today. Also, around this time, the first use of DDT and other synthetic organic (Carbon compound containing) pesticides on crops started taking place. After this took place, there were scientific studies that hinted at a correlation to tobacco in cigarettes and lung cancer. After spraying of DDT was used, everyone started getting sick. Is this a coincidence that once everyone started smoking tobacco and the general consensus was that it was healthy, DDT was being sprayed?

Enlightenment is a hoax...

Enlightenment is just one of MANY lies that religion will tell you:

The concept of Lucifer as the “light-bearer” for the purpose of “enlightenment” is also inspired by ancient Egyptian mythology, Roman mythology, Greek mythology, Gnosticism and Western occultism, with a primary focus of the realization of “esoteric” or intuitive knowledge, while being attributed as the true way to salvation of the soul from the impure material world and eventual goal of ascension to the “divine being”.

Likewise, although the name itself or similar terminology of “Lucifer” is not used, this is also the fundamental spiritual belief and foundational premise for most all “Eastern” religions, such as Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism, etc.

The GREAT DECEPTION

Rajneesh admitted, while under the influence of nitrous oxide, that there is no such thing as enlightenment. I cannot confirm this event through other contacts, but I assume Rajneesh was simply stating what U.G. Krishnamurti has said all along; that the storybook fiction we accept of a perfect enlightenment, full of infallible wisdom, is a big lie.

Osho, Bhagwan Rajneesh, and the Lost Truth

True enlightenment only comes from God through Jesus Christ.

TRUE enlightenment cannot happen without LIGHT, the light of god.

Even though we are made to feel that the so called "enlightenment" illuminates and enlightens us, it reveals little or nothing about God.

Originally posted by DelayedChristmas

How could the Buddha achieve enlightenment when he was so attached to achieving enlightenment?

The ego-self of the individual doesn't acheive enlightenment on its own. The ego-self that we all know and love and indentify with is only a tiny part of the psyche.

Non-ego forces of the psyche, such as the archetypes of the collective unconscious, must step in to help. Whether those archetypal forces and patterns are projected onto an external, such as the Morning Star, or whether projections are withdrawn and internalized doesn't matter.

'It is told that sitting meditation in the predawn hours of the morning the Buddha looked up and saw the morning star, a sight that occasioned his enlightenment'

THE WORM'S WAKING

'This is how a human being can change:

there’s a worm addicted to eating
grape leaves

Suddenly he wakes up,

call it grace, whatever, something
wakes him, and he’s no longer

a worm.

He’s the entire vineyard,
and the orchard too, the fruit, the trunks,
a growing wisdom and joy
that doesn’t need to devour.'

-Rumi

Originally posted by DelayedChristmas
The Buddha achieved enlightenment, and he went on to say that in order to reach enlightenment, you must get rid of attachment.

The question I bring forth is this: How could the Buddha achieve enlightenment when he was so attached to achieving enlightenment?

Interesting note: Buddha's death was caused by the consumption of bad pork and mushrooms. Because he adhered to a strict vegetarian diet, his students asked why he ate the bad pork and mushrooms served by the person that was housing him.

Discuss.

edit on 18-12-2012 by DelayedChristmas because: (no reason given)

Enlightenment cannot be 'achieved'. Buddha means enlightened one. The man who realized Buddhahood was not attached to 'achieving' enlightenment, it just happened.
Enlightenment is a realization, it is realized 'what is' and 'what is not'.

reply to post by DelayedChristmas

Originally posted by DelayedChristmas
The question I bring forth is this: How could the Buddha achieve enlightenment when he was so attached to achieving enlightenment?

First we would have to define what enlightenment is, in order to determine if it’s a thing of attachment or detachment…

I imagine that most people would say, that to become enlightened (What ever that may be) you have to detach yourself from worldly things in order to achieve it.

From what little I know of Buddhism, it is the letting go of oneself, which is the general mechanism of achieving enlightenment. So in one sense there is this striving to become detached, but it is not the same as striving or trying to achieve something in a selfish manner.

Thus there seems to me to be 2 types of attachments. One attachment is achieving something outwardly (of the world) and the other attachment is achieving something inwardly (Spiritually)


- JC

reply to post by DelayedChristmas

Buddha was a human like me and you he tried to reach the whole truth just with wisdom, but wisdom is not enough!
how can we step in an unknown world without any guidance, any light !!!
suppose that we reach something then how can we test that it is the truth !!!!

whoever look at the world, will Stray. whoever looks by the world, will reach the truth.
--Ali Ibn Abitalib

Wanting something, even enlightenment, is seeking for something that is not here. The belief is that it is somewhere else or in the future or in material things. Only when the seeking stops will 'enlightenment ' happen.
The seeking is the person who feels lack and that lack can only be filled with what is present because in reality (in all honesty) that is all that is available. But the noise of thought and desire and need acompany the present moment and it makes us feel uneasy and this clouds the pure sky that we are.
All the practices that people use to 'achieve' enlightenment, all the ideas people have like compassion and love and giving up this or that, renouncing the world, won't work. All of this comes after the awakening, after it has happened.
Nobody can 'achieve' enlightenment. It just happens. It is like getting a joke.

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
Wanting something, even enlightenment, is seeking for something that is not here. The belief is that it is somewhere else or in the future or in material things. Only when the seeking stops will 'enlightenment ' happen.
The seeking is the person who feels lack and that lack can only be filled with what is present because in reality (in all honesty) that is all that is available. But the noise of thought and desire and need acompany the present moment and it makes us feel uneasy and this clouds the pure sky that we are.
All the practices that people use to 'achieve' enlightenment, all the ideas people have like compassion and love and giving up this or that, renouncing the world, won't work. All of this comes after the awakening, after it has happened.
Nobody can 'achieve' enlightenment. It just happens. It is like getting a joke.

edit on 19-12-2012 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)

You see, I think the Buddha was carrying a big burden with him until the day he died. I think he was carrying the burdens, one which I think was leaving his wife, just to pursue to combat a flaw he saw in the religion of Hinduism and its worship of multiple gods and goddesses. I don't think he achieved full enlightenment or total non attachment as he is ascribed to do. This theory is supported by the consumption of bad food offered by the blacksmith that was housing him. He said being a caring, compassionate person is the most important thing to be in the world to his students when they asked him why he ate the food although knowing it was poisonous.

I don't know all about the "awakening." Enlightenment does exist, but it's not what everyone thinks it to be. And love is the start of enlightenment, imo, that is, true love.