>> well, it depends on
whether one believes in the presence of Enlightened Beings to make
this comparison valid
Of course all Buddhists must believe in the existence of
enlightened beings otherwise what's the whole point of having
Buddhism and practicing Buddhism if not to get enlightened?
In fact enlightened beings are more common than people might
think. I have known many enlightened people around me -- leading
seemingly ordinary lives. Some are in this forum. Of course, I'm
not saying me.
Because Enlightened Beings is
deemed as perfect and way above of great men. But because of this
huge gap in characteristics, no one will ever think that they are
near or able to become Buddha.
As I have said, in modern times there continue to be many
bodhisattvas and arhats who have realised ultimate truth, even
though a full Buddha like Shakyamuni is more rare. In other words:
it is definitely possible to get enlightened in this lifetime, many
people have done that. That means they are enlightened, but not yet
at the level of Buddhahood which they still have to perfect their
wisdom and all the other paramitas over lifetimes before attaining
Buddhahood. Nevertheless, although these Bodhisattvas and Arhats
may not have perfected all virtues but they are certainly
inspirational and have become liberated from samsara/all sufferings
and realised ultimate reality. The Bodhisattvas having been
liberated from samsara or uncontrolled rebirth nevertheless does
not enter into his personal nirvana like the Arhat and continues
carrying his vows, benefiting/saving sentient beings and continuing
his path to Buddhahood.
When I say 'enlightened beings' I'm refering to all kinds Aryas
-- whether Arhats (and even stream enterers, once returners, non
returners), Pratyekabuddhas, Bodhisattvas (starting from the 1st
bhumi), and Buddhas.
But because these great men
possess the great characteristics of human that it becomes an
inspiration to those of the commoners like us
Of course. It is an inspiration to everyone, not only in
Buddhism. But many of these great men who are not enlightened
possesses mundane virtues and there is no need for Buddhism if one
just wants to cultivate these mundane virtues.
It is in Buddhism alone that we can realise the true nature of
reality and attain liberation.
, because we live in this world
and not those worlds of the "Enlightened Beings".
Enlightenment does not change the world/conditions a person
lives in, it simply removes the ignorance the person have of
himself and the world that causes samsara, clinging, sorrow and
suffering. (i.e. the illusion of being a separate self, the
illusion of subject and object, the illusion of inherent existence
of phenomena)
As David Loy says:
"Nothing of
saṁsāra is different from nirvāṇa, nothing of nirvāṇa is different
from saṁsāra. That which is the limit of nirvāṇa is also the limit
of saṁsāra; there is not the slightest difference between the two."
[1] And yet there must be some difference
between them, for otherwise no distinction would have been made and
there would be no need for two words to describe the same state. So
Nāgārjuna also distinguishes them: "That which, taken as causal or
dependent, is the process of being born and passing on, is, taken
noncausally and beyond all dependence, declared to be nirvāṇa."
[2] There is only one reality -- this
world, right here -- but this world may be experienced in two
different ways. Saṁsāra is the "relative" world as usually
experienced, in which "I" dualistically perceive "it" as a
collection of objects which interact causally in space and time.
Nirvāṇa is the world as it is in itself, nondualistic in that it
incorporates both subject and object into a whole which, Mādhyamika
insists, cannot be characterized (Chandrakīrti: "Nirvāṇa or Reality
is that which is absolved of all thought-construction"), but which
Yogācāra nevertheless sometimes calls "Mind" or "Buddhanature," and
so forth.
Buddha's teaching is deeply rooted
into this world, the world where we are living and to teach all of
us that all sufferings, pain are bound into this world where we
draw our first breath and end with our last one. But the key to not
to accept defeat and challenge our obstacles that differentiate a
"Buddha" and a "non-Buddha".
Buddhism is deeply rooted in our lives -- before we attempt to
change others or the world, an inner transformation must first take
place. Buddha is most concerned about the suffering and liberation
of suffering of all sentient beings. But liberation is not through
cultivation of mundane qualities (like loving kindness, generosity,
and so on) or performing virtuous deeds alone. These things are
important, can result in very good karma, rebirth in higher realms,
but not liberation.
Rather, it is through momentary observation/mindful-awareness of
our ordinary sensate reality we are experiencing moment to moment,
that we can gain insights on the nature of reality and thus attain
liberation. This is done through insight practices like Vipashyana
or Vipassana. This practice is not in any way 'other worldly' and
is very practical. Though sitting meditation is still important,
mindful awareness can and should be practiced at every moment in
our lives.
This is something very practical and we can see benefits in our
lives. This is a well written article about the practice: http://www.urbandharma.org/udharma4/mpe13.html
