What if The Buddha had no followers?

[belian78]

Just a question that has been stuck in my mind for the longest time now. Not that I particularly want to know about The Buddha specifically, but more whether or not being enlightened to our reality means anything at the end of the day, if you are the only one around you who sees reality this way? Let's say hypothetically you find out the actual, real truth behind our reality and the secrets are now yours. Now lets say that no one in your world will listen, and you live out the rest of your life knowing all these great things but with no one else to share in their existence. When you die and move on, what would having that knowledge have meant in the end? What if Buddha had no followers, and died a lonely old man that prattled on about this and that his whole life? What would his enlightenment really have meant?

[oyarde]

No real way of knowing for others but there is a certain personal contentment that may be achieved once you understand the order of things. I dont think you have to hsve followers or teach to those who most likely wont learn to enjoy it . Is it going to pass when you do ? Yes but the example you lived for others may or may not. I dont let it detract from my joy.

[belian78]

Sure, personal happiness has nothing to do with any one else. But aside from that, what I mean is, what's the point of going through the process of seeing beyond the material aspect of our reality if you're the only one around thats willing to see it? Eventually, seeing the beauty of the world in a blade of grass is going to get stale. Without another soul to connect with on a non superficial level, what is the point?

[oyarde]

Hasnt gotten stale for me I guess. I am very old . I have little expectations from other humans

[Working Poor]

"If" is not.

[belian78]

"If" is not.

huh?

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

buddha, you fat $#@!

[Working Poor]

huh?

Doesn't the title of your post say What "IF"?

[belian78]

Doesn't the title of your post say What "IF"?

You're trying to be witty here and unfortunately it's too witty for me I guess. All I'm asking is a speculation, same question I've asked Christian leaders, Buddhist leaders, spiritual leaders and have yet to get an answer. I get 'funny little quips' as you see here, but no one is willing to actually engage in the question that I'm asking.

[Working Poor]

You're trying to be witty here and unfortunately it's too witty for me I guess. All I'm asking is a speculation, same question I've asked Christian leaders, Buddhist leaders, spiritual leaders and have yet to get an answer. I get 'funny little quips' as you see here, but no one is willing to actually engage in the question that I'm asking.

I am witty I am not trying. Listen Buddha and Christ both have followers. If they did not exist they would be invented because people need guidance. If they did not have followers people would find someone else to follow. Consider this people are following Hilary and Trump because they do not follow Christ or Buddha. Look at the results of that....

[pcosmar]

I wonder where his followers are following him to.

What if the state had No Followers?

[belian78]

And I still have no answer to my question.

[Intrepid]

If the Buddha had no followers he would not have been called the Buddha.

He was given the title of Buddha a couple of centuries after his death because he had acquired a large following, not the other way around.

You are confusing "enlightenment" with what in these forums we might call "finding out what is really going on".

"Enlightenment" is defined as:

• the action or state of attaining or having attained spiritual knowledge or insight, in particular (in Buddhism) that awareness which frees a person from the cycle of rebirth.
  
• Buddhism: a final blessed state marked by the absence of desire or suffering

If the Buddha ended up a lonely old man and had spent his whole life prattling on about this and that, my conclusion would be that he had not attained enlightenment at all.

You are getting unsatisfying answers because you are asking poor questions.

[pcosmar]

And I still have no answer to my question.

likely never will

You will reject any metric that does not stroke your ego enough.

[belian78]

likely never will

You will reject any metric that does not stroke your ego enough.

You're such an angry man, I'm so sorry the road you've walked has made you this way.

[A Son of Liberty]

Just a question that has been stuck in my mind for the longest time now. Not that I particularly want to know about The Buddha specifically, but more whether or not being enlightened to our reality means anything at the end of the day, if you are the only one around you who sees reality this way? Let's say hypothetically you find out the actual, real truth behind our reality and the secrets are now yours. Now lets say that no one in your world will listen, and you live out the rest of your life knowing all these great things but with no one else to share in their existence. When you die and move on, what would having that knowledge have meant in the end? What if Buddha had no followers, and died a lonely old man that prattled on about this and that his whole life? What would his enlightenment really have meant?

It doesn't mean anything. It never has.

I've found myself in a position, in my mid-40's, that I didn't expect to find myself - I'll have nothing to pass to future generations. For a while, that bothered me. But ultimately, I've come to realize that after a few hundred years, plus or minus, nothing I would have passed on would really have endured anyway. We live for a time, and then we die. Our time is fleeting and there is nothing that we can do - not even the most remarkable amongst us - to make it eternally meaningful.

I live by God's guidance to the best of my ability. I speak what I have discerned to be the truth, and I put the rest to God's providence. Ultimately, there is nothing else.

[Occam's Banana]

What if The Buddha had no followers?

What is the sound of one hand clapping?