That Buddhist Paradox is this: to attain Buddhahood, you must be a Buddha.
Ouch, how that even possible? Here's the answer:
Thousands of years ago, gifted sages had possessed extraordinary intuitive sensibilities with which they crossed the horizon of consciousness into unexplored territory. With their mind’s eye they saw beyond the boundaries of earthly forms and observable distances into exotic heavenly domains where deities and celestial spirits resided. The sages observed that gods governed the cosmology of Nature with a set of absolute laws. Accordingly, mortals who honored the universal precepts acquired beneficence and protection from spirit-world forces dedicated to the sustenance and perpetuation of existence. Conversely, those who disregarded the supreme sanctity of divine law were destined to suffer the chaotic consequences of their ignorance.
When the mystics returned from trance, they conveyed their findings to the residents of the mortal world in parables, metaphors and symbolism. Through richly poetic languages, they described a universe apportioned into two parallel worlds — one a mortal, physical existence and the other an immortal, spirit realm. They further concluded that two distinct entities fused to form the human being. One component was corporeal and the other metaphysical. The model of a twofold human — fusing body and soul — mirrored the duality ascribed to the large-scale cosmos.
The doctrine of duality preceded the establishment of human civilization and the institutionalization of religion. Tribal shamans already had linked the soul and creation to the will of gods. Accordingly, sentient beings lived in a god-created material world until their earthbound presence extinguished in death. Thereafter, their soul passed on to a higher spirit realm. The end of the mortal body coincided with the release of the spiritual entity into an eternal place — where deities and spirits ruled, and birth and death were unknown. Ancient sages had reasoned that before mortality began the spirit realm already existed. Therefore, they decreed that the place of beginnings and ends — was the lower world.
According to the doctrine of a dual cosmos, the initiative for the commencement of the mortal world came from the higher immortal realm where from a powerful god created the mortal world through a sudden, unprecedented, spontaneously generated event — a “first” cause — independent of any preexisting condition.
The doctrine of duality also provided early societies with the foundation for communal order. Human values came to be sanctified as divine laws envisioned as the wishes of the immortals. Moral codes and social rules were cloaked in divine significance and relevancy. The sacred laws governed the individual’s place in the family, clan, tribe and nation. Respect for the laws led to paradise in the afterlife, while their defilement conjured the specter of dire consequences. Judgment came when the soul of the dead crossed to the realm of the spirits. There, one’s eternal fate would be adjudicated from evidence gathered in a single mortal existence.
Upon a cosmic scale the mortal’s virtues would be weighed against any misdeeds. At length, an incongruity developed within the doctrine of dualism, perhaps in some measure because of the discrepancy in logic between the creation and the judgment scenarios. On the one hand, judgment in the afterlife rested solely upon the mortal defendant’s earthbound performance — accountable for his self-willed thoughts and actions. On the other hand, the doctrine of creation transcended cause and effect by relying solely on the absolute will of gods (heavenly deities).
Ancient sages disagreed over the basis for final judgment. Those who saw deities as omnipresent imperial sovereigns deemed human will to be valid only as a confirmation of the immortal will. Conformity to the sanctified laws set the standard for judgment. Other sages preferred less imposing deities and a freer human will. Their gods judged the human soul on choices made in the mortal realm. The doctrinal deviation between the wills of gods and man eventually led to a theological divergence — characteristic of Western and Eastern religions.
The Occident preferred a creationist model founded upon the supremacy of an omnipotent, omnipresent God whose will and authority superseded natural law. By contrast the Eastern Practitioners made natural law supreme and assigned its management to a hierarchical pantheon of gods. Among them, one god had initiated the beginning of mortality by setting the great wheel of universal cause and effect into motion, while a pantheon of gods served in advancing the continuous forward rolling of existence. On a personal level each mortal being had to contend with a similar wheel. One’s fate was determined by how well the individual’s own cycle of cause and effect synchronized with the larger universal wheel of laws rolled by the gods.
Subsequently, Western and Eastern dualists crafted differing doctrines regarding the aftermath of death. The West believed in an afterlife, while the East proposed a next life. At length, two contrasting doctrines developed on the subject:
1 The Doctrine of Eternal Afterlife — Living beings experienced only a single mortal lifetime — one birth, one death. In the afterlife, the court of the immortal realm decreed judgment on their souls based upon the merits or demerits they accumulated during existence. Thereafter and forever more, their souls would reside in a dimension of the spirit realm, either damned to serve a sentence of eternal punishment in a hellish netherworld, or forever enjoying the heavenly realm in blissful peace.
2 The Doctrine of Rebirth — The spirit realm served as a between-lives court. Its justices decided the fate of mortals based on past performance. They determined where and under what circumstances a mortal would be born in the next life. The sentence could either return one to Earth as a human or animal, or cause the soul to incarnate as a tortured creature in a hellish netherworld. The destined place and circumstance of the next birth reflected the progressive stage of one’s spiritual evolution.
Bridging the two doctrines, sages of ancient India developed the concept of emancipation from the cycle of rebirth. Accordingly, mortal temptations caused one to be reborn. By severing oneself from earthly desire one could bring an end to this indeterminate recycling. They reasoned that attachment to gratification of the senses bound mortals to a fate of repeated physical forms. They resolved that rejection of earthly desire freed the spirit-self from the causal bond that drew it back to the mortal plane. A successful aspirant would in death ascend to the heavenly realms and enjoy the rest of eternity in a state of bliss. A spirit emancipated from the birth cycle joined the gods in eternal and immortal formlessness.
In the first millennium B.C.E. in India a sage of the Sakya clan (Skt Sakyamuni) succeeded in achieving a clear, unobstructed view of all existence. The Enlightened One (i.e., Buddha), a title chosen in honor of his supreme wisdom, introduced a new vision quite different from the traditional doctrine of dual dimensions and dual-natured beings. He proposed that fundamentally all states of existence were facets of one indivisible cosmology. In the Buddha’s world-system, a single identity encompassed everything — including humans, spirits, gods, universe, eternity. All existence was one Reality of Life. The purpose of his teachings was to define the scope and essence of this singularity.
According to the Buddha, the Reality of Life was boundless, everlasting and absolute, and simultaneously finite, mortal and ever-changing. The Buddha explained that the infinitely multifaceted scope and essential singularity of Life transcended relativist thinking and comprehension. His view of Life was profoundly ironic. While it was not itself a substance, without it substance could not exist. Although it had no actual form of its own, it could not be described as nothingness.
Moreover, the singularity of Life could not be proved at all, although the existence of sentient mortal beings testified to it. Sakyamuni compared the boundless entirety of Life in the universe to an ocean, and likened individual mortal manifestations of Life to the drops that composed it.
Through this metaphor the Buddha illustrated that no actual distinction can exist between individual life and the universal life-singularity. Just as no distinction exists between the ocean and its component drops, there is no distinction between existence and death, spirit and form, person and environment, mortality and immortality. He proposed that the mortal mind creates the illusion of segmentation causing the eye of human perception to conjure a divided cognitive reality.
According to Sakyamuni’s metaphysical teachings, the physical senses caused one to discriminate. Sentient beings discerned their world through mental markers, such as substance, shape, size, color, age, origin, distance, destination, movement, speed, direction and so on. Thus, the senses triggered the perception that the external world was separate and distinct from the subjective self. As a result of this false sense of separation, Sakyamuni asserted, it would appear natural that a dual-self of body and soul co-existed. However, he declared, at the very core of both form and formlessness was one Reality.
The Buddha viewed apparent distinctions as nothing more than superficial designations — relative and temporary boundaries. By contrast he advanced a Doctrine of Non-differentiation wherein he proposed that all of existence was one indivisible singularity — a cosmic essence which all mortal entities arose from, eventually receded to and were composed of. He saw a transcendent, infinitely boundless field of Life conjuring countless objects and subjects all sharing a single inseparable quality. According to his Reality, there were no dual worlds of spirit and substance, no physical form could ever be immortal, no soul could exist as an independent entity separate from a body, and as all effects required a cause neither the universe nor any single phenomena could be born by spontaneous origination.
The Buddha’s teaching regarding the boundless singularity of Life was the overarching theme of his Dharma — a Sanskrit word that simultaneously meant Cosmology, Reality, Truth and Law. The Buddha’s Dharma represented a single, integrated Theory of Everything. His Cosmology encompassed a view of the universe that encompassed phenomenal as well as spiritual facets. The reference of the Buddha’s Dharma to Truth meant that it revealed both the observable and hidden truths of existence. In reference to it as the “Reality of All Existence,” the Dharma included tangible, as well as intangible realities. Wherein the Dharma also meant Law, it referred to universal laws governing all natural functions affecting matter, energy, space, time, as well as the laws of life and death, and social/moral laws. Hence, the Buddha’s Law encompassed all the laws of existence, including natural, metaphysical and human laws. In all the Buddha’s Dharma interchangeably conveyed his views regarding the configuration of the universe, natural laws and forces, and the role of human beings within the grand cosmos of existence.
As the Buddha’s sutras provided the vehicle for unveiling his Dharma, the word Dharma also came to be synonymous with his teachings. In that context, Dharma referred to the Buddha’s sermons on the purpose and function of Life.
The sutras described a super-cosmos. It encompassed the present large-scale universe and all mortal subjects within it . The absolute singularity they recounted spanned an infinite and eternal field, yet these teachings deemed it to be actively ever-changing relative to mortal existence. Within the framework of the Buddha’s cosmology, everything that was mortal manifested in the mortal realm repeatedly.
This applied to universes as well as human beings. It was easy to see that birth ended in death, but to propose the reverse as viable required the configuration of a cosmic dynamic that tied together a string of mortal existences. From Sakyamuni’s vantage, the True Reality of All Existence was the cosmic ocean from which the waves of mortal transmigration repeatedly arose and to which they receded.
This doctrine was deemed to be of such profound scope, nature and essence that only a Perfectly Enlightened being could fathom it. Nevertheless, the Buddha declared that those who would choose to follow his teachings in due course would accomplish Perfect Enlightenment — a state-of-being equal to his own. Thus, he set forth to describe a new cosmology in carefully crafted stages guided by the capacity of his to absorb it. As they honed their abilities to learn it, Sakyamuni advanced his Dharma. As they grasped each progressive stage of his Cosmology, they awakened within themselves a greater capacity to fathom it.
Sakyamuni’s disciples embarked on the journey toward Perfect Enlightenment — some by learning through listening, others by using exceptional intuitive and meditation skills to realize the truth of his teachings. Yet, from the start of his discourse he presented them with a seemingly irreconcilable dilemma concerning this lofty state. Accordingly, Perfect Enlightenment was infinitely profound. Hence, Perfect Enlightenment was beyond the grasp of one’s mental processes, whether it be pursued by learning or realization. Therefore, it was impossible for any of his disciples to fathom the ultimate Dharma unless they were already Buddhas.
Nevertheless, if they are to fathom that which the Buddha teaches, they must never forsake their desire for Perfect Enlightenment. The paradox of attaining Perfect Enlightenment was defined as follows: Perfect Enlightenment cannot be attained, because only a Buddha can fathom Perfect Enlightenment. Yet, the teachings of the Enlightened One cannot be fathomed unless one desires to fathom Perfect Enlightenment. The caveat appears to say that one must pursue that which one cannot hope to gain.
To the many learned and spiritually skilled disciples who chose to follow the Buddha’s course, this Paradox of Attainment placed the achievement of Buddhahood beyond reach. Awestruck by the majesty of his supernaturally august appearance they deemed Perfect Enlightenment to be the crown worn by the king of all wisdom — the Enlightened One who has deciphered all the secrets of the universe.
When asked how he had achieved such a state, Sakyamuni replied that for countless eons of past lives he selflessly devoted himself to the salvation of others. He urged his followers to similarly turn their focus away from pursuing enlightenment for their own sake. Vowing to aid the Buddha in his effort to lead people toward the liberating teachings of the Buddha’s Law, many of his disciples chose to apply the practice of Selflessness (Skt bodhisattva) by devoting their lives to aiding the welfare of others.
While the practice of Selflessness equated the path of Perfect Enlightenment with action rather than reflection, Sakyamuni still impressed upon them another version of the Paradox of Attainment. In their case he had described a lengthy journey across many existences during which a devout bodhisattva would undergo 52 stages of advancement to be climbed one step at a time. After an incalculable span of time one would reach the threshold of the summit — the fifty second stage of enlightenment. Nevertheless, the Buddha advised, it did not necessarily follow that one who reaches the fifty-first (non-regression) will be able to find that it provides access to the fifty-second step (Buddhahood). On the contrary, he cautioned, even the most selfless being would not be able to ascend the top to the level of Buddhahood from a stage below. Once again, Sakyamuni declared that only a Buddha could ascend the fifty-second step (buddhahood), as only a Buddha can know the way to Perfect Enlightenment. For the practitioners of Selflessness, he provided the following Paradox of Attainment: one who climbs the stages of Selflessness cannot reach Perfect Enlightenment, because the final rung to Perfect Enlightenment can only be ascended by one who is already a Buddha. As only a Buddha can access Buddhahood, one who ascends Perfect Enlightenment must be a Buddha who is returning to that level. Thus, through the Paradox of Attainment Sakymuni placed those who practiced Selflessness in the same quandary as the practitioners of Learning and Realization. Ironically, from the start of his teachings, Sakyamuni harbored a Dharma which would allow his followers to know the secret of Perfect Enlightenment and in so doing overcome the Paradox of Attainment. Nevertheless, until they were ready to receive this gift, the Buddha forestalled his revelation of his ultimate Cosmology wherein he would reveal the “Truth of the Reality of All Existence” — for in their ignorance they might reject it.
To protect them from premature misunderstandings, the Buddha spent over 40 years imparting the depth of his Dharma in progressive stages before leading his followers to the portal of Buddhahood. Gradually, he taught them increasingly sophisticated principles probing the theoretical underpinnings of his Cosmology.
Eventually, he completed his provisional teachings and led them into the Dharma of the Lotus Sutra wherein he resolved the enigma that stood in the way of Perfect Enlightenment. And that enlightenment was further defined by Nichiren Daishionin, The Buddha of the Later Day of Law in the form of chanting Nam-myoho-renge-kyo.
It's really simle.
