How were people like Buddha able to achieve perfect happiness without God?

[Sophie111]

What lack of charity? I simply do not believe in the Buddhist way that says perfect happiness can be found in this life

Its not hard to understand.
That may not be a Buddhist teaching.
If you believe it is prove it before demolishing it.

 

[Odilon]

According to a previous poster and various sites on the internet, Buddha received enlightenment under a tree at age 35. True or not?

 

[Sophie111]

The issue is clearly whether that means perfect happiness.
My understanding is that there is Buddhist academic dispute on this point and whether such enlightenment in a world of actual suffering can constitute perfect Nirvana.
As you know Nirvana means no more rebirths precisely because suffering (and hence imperect happiness) is intrinsic to temporal existence.
Like I say, its as subtle a point as Protestants trying to understand that Catholics dont worship Mary. It may be impossible for outsiders to grasp the subtleties. Perhaps it is more charitable not to pretend we can fare any better with true Buddhism and we need to humbly recognise the intellectual and cultural barriers … especially for somewhat black and white thinking Americans?

I am very aware how great the divide is between an academic euro understanding of Buddhism and Buddhism as it is actually lived by those born into it both culturally and religiously. My partner of 20 years is Malaysian Chinese Buddhist. Frankly we do not understand this religion well at all despite the Wiki articles.
Be humble.
Be charitable.
We may have it all wrong.

 

[rossum]

Excuse me if I ask you simply supply standard Buddhist texts or respected Buddhist commentary that perfect happiness can be had in this life.

This is from the Tripitaka:

[The Buddha said:] “The religious life, Malunkyaputta, does not depend on the dogma that the universe is eternal, nor does it depend on the dogma that the universe is not eternal etc. [many dogmas omitted here] Whatever dogma obtains there is still birth, old age, death, sorrow, lamentation, misery, grief and despair, of which I declare the extinction in the present life.”

– Cula-Malunkyovada sutta, Majjhima Nikaya 63

The word “extinction” refers to nirvana, which is the extinction of suffering. The list, “birth, old age, …” is a standard list of what constitutes suffering (dukkha) as in the four Noble Truths:

[TheBuddha said:] “The Noble Truth of Suffering (dukkha), monks, is this: Birth is suffering, aging is suffering, sickness is suffering, death is suffering; sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief and despair are suffering; association with the unbeloved is suffering; separation from the loved is suffering; not getting what is wanted is suffering. In short, the five clinging-aggregates are suffering.”

– Samyutta Nikaya, 56.11

rossum

 

[Sophie111]

of which I declare the extinction in the present life.”

I am familiar with this. The issue is the ambiguity or the original sanskrit (Parli?) and how different schools interpret this. Do you have any commentzries?

For example, it may well be like what Biblical scholars refer to in the Gospel of Jn as Realised Eschatology. That is, because Jesus has already sacrificed for us, and because the HS already dwells within us then we are already living heaven in this life.

Clearly that is a true, but equally clearly it is not yet the Beatific Vision.

Likewise for alleged extinction of suffering in this life by Enlightenment. It seems some Buddhist schools argue likewise, it is an extinction now in so far as rebirth is now guaranteed not to occur at death. Yet it is also clearly not the same state of nirvana now as it will be after death.
Perhaps I am mistaken?

 

[rossum]

I am familiar with this. The issue is the ambiguity or the original sanskrit (Parli?) and how different schools interpret this. Do you have any commentzries?

The Buddha probably spoke Maghadi, a local dialect. Pāli (with a long ‘a’) is the formal version of Maghadi, and other similar local dialects – with expressions like “y’all” and “ain’t” taken out. Some schools translated the Maghadi into Pāli, others into Sanskrit.

Different schools, as you say, have different interpretations, and there are far too many commentaries to read them all. Some of the Tibetan commentaries are very long.

For a standard summary of the Theravada commentaries see the Visuddhimagga (PDF), though it is not an easy read. Chapter XVI discusses the Truth of Suffering.

rossum