Buddhists, does one become omniscient after reaching Enlightenment

[Ben_Sinner]

Do people like Buddha and other people throughout history become omniscient after reaching Enligthenment?

Do they now know everything when they reach that state?

 

[Polycarp1]

You do realize Catholics don’t believe Buddha was anything but a man and therefore his followers don’t reach any real enlightenment or omniscience.
But maybe you were questioning what Buddhist believe?

 

[Ben_Sinner]

You do realize Catholics don’t believe Buddha was anything but a man and therefore his followers don’t reach any real enlightenment or omniscience.
But maybe you were questioning what Buddhist believe?

I was questioning what Buddhists believe.

 

[Bookcat]

Do people like Buddha and other people throughout history become omniscient after reaching Enligthenment?

Do they now know everything when they reach that state?

no.

 

[Bookcat]

I was questioning what Buddhists believe.

Never heard any even make such a claim either…

no to fact.

and no claim.

 

[rossum]

Do people like Buddha and other people throughout history become omniscient after reaching Enligthenment?

Do they now know everything when they reach that state?

No. They know more than the average person, specifically about enlightenment, but they are not omniscient.

rossum

 

[rossum]

You do realize Catholics don’t believe Buddha was anything but a man and therefore his followers don’t reach any real enlightenment or omniscience.

Buddhists believe that the Buddha was a man. That is the point: what one man did, other men can do as well.

Everyone will eventually attain enlightenment. You don’t even have to be a Buddhist to do so (though it does help):

[At Polonnaruwa] I am able to approach the Buddhas barefoot and undisturbed, my feet in wet grass, wet sand. Then the silence of the extraordinary faces. The great smiles. Huge and yet subtle. Filled with every possibility, questioning nothing, knowing everything, rejecting nothing, the peace not of emotional resignation but of sunyata, that has seen through every question without trying to discredit anyone or anything – without refutation – without establishing some argument. For the doctrinaire, the mind that needs well established positions, such peace, such silence, can be frightening.

I was knocked over with a rush of relief and thankfulness at the obvious clarity of the figures, the clarity and fluidity of shape and line, the design of the monumental bodies composed into the rock shape and landscape, figure rock and tree. And the sweep of bare rock slopping away on the other side of the hollow, where you can go back and see different aspects of the figures. Looking at these figures I was suddenly, almost forcibly, jerked clean out of the habitual, half-tied vision of things, and an inner clearness, clarity, as if exploding from the rocks themselves, became evident and obvious. The queer evidence of the reclining figure, the smile, the sad smile of Ananda standing with arms folded (much more “imperative” than Da Vinci’s Mona Lisa because completely simple and straightforward).

The thing about all this is that there is no puzzle, no problem and really no “mystery.” All problems are resolved and everything is clear, simply because what matters is clear. The rock, all matter, all life is charged with dharmakaya … everything is emptiness and everything is compassion. I don’t know when in my life I have ever had such a sense of beauty and spiritual validity running together in one aesthetic illumination. … I mean, I know and have seen what I was obscurely looking for. I don’t know what else remains, but I have now seen and have pierced through the surface and have got beyond the shadow and the disguise. …

It says everything, it needs nothing. And because it needs nothing it can afford to be silent, unnoticed, undiscovered. It does not need to be discovered. It is we who need to discover it.

– The Asian Journal of Thomas Merton

rossum

 

[Ben_Sinner]

Everyone will eventually attain enlightenment. You don’t even have to be a Buddhist to do so (though it does help):

Is that why many Buddhists claim Jesus to be an enlightened master?

Also, the reason I asked the OP question was because Buddha is always talked about becoming one with the Dharma. I figured that would mean he becomes omniscient since he is becoming one with the Truth. I’ve also seen some Buddhists claim he is omniscient, so I’m not really sure what to believe about it.

 

[rossum]

Is that why many Buddhists claim Jesus to be an enlightened master?

He is usually considered to be a Bodhisattva, not a Buddha. The precise meaning of Bodhisattva varies between the Theravada and Mahayana. The Theravada version is closer to a very holy man. The Mahayana version has many of the attributes of a god. Of course, gods can be Buddhists and themselves attain enlightenment.

Also, the reason I asked the OP question was because Buddha is always talked about becoming one with the Dharma. I figured that would mean he becomes omniscient since he is becoming one with the Truth. I’ve also seen some Buddhists claim he is omniscient, so I’m not really sure what to believe about it.

I have seen that too. I have also seen a text which says that the Buddha did not know everything, but he did know whatever he needed/wanted to know. Being a Buddha he was not interested in useless knowledge, only in useful knowledge. He had all useful knowledge available to him.

This from the Pali Canon:

[Vacchagotta said:] I have heard it said that the recluse Gotama is allknowing and all-seeing, with nothing outside his ken and vision, and that he claims that, whether he is walking or standing still, whether he is asleep or awake, his ken and vision stand ready, aye ready.

Pray, sir, is this witness true, not misrepresenting the Lord and not mis-stating the gist of his Doctrine?

[The Buddha said:] The witness, Vaccha, is not true; it imputes to me what is false and untrue.

[Vacchagotta:] Well, sir, what account ought we to give of the Lord, so as not to misrepresent him or misinterpret the gist of his Doctrine or entail the censure of an orthodox expositor thereof?

[Buddha:] He would bear true witness, neither misrepresenting me nor misinterpreting the gist of my Doctrine nor entailing the censure of an orthodox expositor thereof, - who should say:

The recluse Gotama has the threefold lore (te-vijja).

For, Vaccha,

(i) as long as I please, I can call to mind all my own past existences, from a single one onwards, in all their details and features,

(ii) As long as I please, I can see - with the Eye Celestial, which is pure and far surpasses the eye of man - creatures in act to pass hence and re-appear elsewhere (etc., as in Sutta No. 4),

(iii) By destroying the Cankers, I have won that Deliverance of heart and mind in which no Cankers are; here and now have I entered on and abide in this Deliverance, which of and by myself I have discerned and realized.

So it would be a true witness, Vaccha, to say that I have the threefold lore.

– Tevijja Vacchagotta Sutta, Majjhima Nikaya 71.

My apologies for the old translation, I could not find a more recent one on the web.

The Buddha had much knowledge, but he was not omniscient.

rossum

 

[TruthBearer]

Is that why many Buddhists claim Jesus to be an enlightened master?

Also, the reason I asked the OP question was because Buddha is always talked about becoming one with the Dharma. I figured that would mean he becomes omniscient since he is becoming one with the Truth. I’ve also seen some Buddhists claim he is omniscient, so I’m not really sure what to believe about it.

**Enlightenment **is similar the catholic statements of sanctification or theosis.

As the early church fathers, St. Athanasius explained,** "God became man that man might become God.”**

In the words of Peter, **“you might be partakers of the divine nature,” **(2 Peter 1:4)

So when Jesus said, to the Jews,“ Is it not written in your law, ‘I said, “You are Gods” ’? If He called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken),” (John 10:34)

Jesus was referring to the words of King David,** “You are Gods,** and all of you are children of the Most High.” (Psalm 82:6)

So, one doesn’t become All-knowing or omniscient, when one reaches such states, but they become knower of some or many things, seen and unseen. As Paul once said, after reaching the third heaven,** “How that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter.”** (2 Corinthians 12:4)

There are so many other references. Moses was called God in the old testament, Exodus 7:1. The same Hebrew used for god in Exodus 7:1 is the same Hebrew used for God who created the Heavens and the Earth, Genesis 1:1. ELOHIM… But Moses wasn’t considered** All-knowing or omniscient.**

 

[Thomas_White]

I cannot recall the reference, but I remember reading that Buddhism teaches that upon attaining Enlightenment a person remembers all their past lives.

 

[rossum]

I cannot recall the reference, but I remember reading that Buddhism teaches that upon attaining Enlightenment a person remembers all their past lives.

Correct. See (i) in the Buddha’s reply to Vacchagotta in my post #9:

(i) as long as I please, I can call to mind all my own past existences, from a single one onwards, in all their details and features,

rossum

 

[Ben_Sinner]

(ii) As long as I please, I can see - with the Eye Celestial, which is pure and far surpasses the eye of man - creatures in act to pass hence and re-appear elsewhere (etc., as in Sutta No. 4),

What does this mean?

 

[rossum]

What does this mean?

A fully enlightened Buddha can apparently see things at very long distances. Such as seeing all the kingdoms of the world from the top of a high mountain.

rossum

 

[Techno2000]

Correct. See (i) in the Buddha’s reply to Vacchagotta in my post #9:

(i) as long as I please, I can call to mind all my own past existences, from a single one onwards, in all their details and features,

rossum

Where did the souls of the first Man and Woman come from, and also the souls of their offspring, which are in the billions now ?

 

[rossum]

Where did the souls of the first Man and Woman come from, and also the souls of their offspring, which are in the billions now ?

A soul is a Christian concept, not a Buddhist one:

“All the elements of reality are soulless.”
When one realises this by wisdom,
then one does not heed ill.
This is the Path of Purity.

– Dhammapada 20:7

You need to ask your question of a Christian, not a Buddhist.

rossum

 

[anon99031074]

I cannot recall the reference, but I remember reading that Buddhism teaches that upon attaining Enlightenment a person remembers all their past lives.

It depends on how you obtain enlightenment. In the Pali suttas (the earliest Buddhist texts), at least two ways are mentioned. Being liberated by concentration & wisdom and being liberated simply by wisdom. Those who have been liberated by the former have access to past life memories [and other special powers], those liberated by the latter do not, but are no less enlightened. At the first Buddhist council, where 500 fully enlightened monks are said to have participated, a significant portion was liberated by wisdom only. The quality of their enlightenment was not different. It is not like one group was greater or lesser than the other, but remembering past lives is a fruit of very deep concentration states and it is possible to be fully liberated from all the taints without becoming that skilled at doing concentration practices.

Enlightenment in the early Buddhist texts is synonymous with the destruction of fetters or chains that bind us to the round of rebirth. It is not about becoming an all knowing god-like figure. It happens in four stages. The first stage of enlightenment is when the three first fetters are broken, made like a palm stump, eradicated, not subject to future arising. In the next stage, two more fetters are severely weakened but not entirely eradicated. The third stage means the first five are broken, and finally in the fourth and last stage all ten fetters are broken. They number as follows:

1. Identity/personality view. Belief in a self, whether a permanent inner essence that confers identity, the “master of the house” that controls the body, the “feeler of feelings and thinker of thougts”, a “supreme divine self” that is identical to the divine consciousness, etc. etc. Humans have concocted many ways of selfing.
2. Skeptical doubt (of the kind that destroys ones spiritual practice).
3. Overconfidence in the efficacy of rites and rituals.
4. Sensual desire, including greed and sexual lust.
5. Ill will/aversion, including anger and hatred.
6. Lust for material existence.
7. Lust for immaterial existence.
8. Conceit, which means both the fuzzy feeling that “I exist” which remains even after the first fetter has been broken, and also the idea that “I am better”, “equal” or “lower” than other beings.
9. Restlessness (for instance impediments to right mindfulness/concentration during meditation due to temporal stains of sin, to adopt catholic language).
10. Ignorance.

 

[office]

Where did the souls of the first Man and Woman come from, and also the souls of their offspring, which are in the billions now ?

You’ve got to remember that Buddhist cosmology is cyclic rather than linear. The simple answer is that they came from “the World of Radiance.” For the full explanation, see the passage dubbed “the Buddhist Genesis” in Aggañña Sutta DN 27.

 

[Techno2000]

You’ve got to remember that Buddhist cosmology is cyclic rather than linear. The simple answer is that they came from “the World of Radiance.” For the full explanation, see the passage dubbed “the Buddhist Genesis” in Aggañña Sutta DN 27.

Our forum friend rossum said Buddhist don’t believe in a soul that is a Christian concept.

 

[rossum]

Our forum friend rossum said Buddhist don’t believe in a soul that is a Christian concept.

I suspect that office is assuming that you are talking about a gandhabba/gandharva which shares a few similarities with a soul: it is one of the non-material components of a human being involved in reincarnation.

As stated in the Aggañña Sutta, a human may be reborn as an immaterial being in one of the immaterial heavens, the “World of Radiance”. When their life in that heaven ends then they may be reborn again on earth. The gandhabba is what carries accumulated karma from the earlier life to the subsequent life.

In Buddhist cosmology the material universe undergoes cycles of construction and destruction: Big Bang followed by Big Crunch followed by Big Bang… When the material universe is destroyed, all living beings are in one of the immaterial worlds: heavens or hells. As the material universe re-establishes itself it becomes possible to be reborn in the material world again. This is where the “first Man and Woman” part of your question applies.

rossum