How to tell if someone is enlightened

Source: Ajahn Brahm, “Mindfulness, Bliss, and Beyond” (2006)

How to tell if someone is enlightened

An often-asked question is, how can one verify that someone is enlightened? The answer is that one cannot know for sure. Only the buddhas have that ability (AN VI,44),[1] for it is the sixth of the ten powers of a buddha (AN X,21).[2] In the time of the Buddha, only he would confirm another’s attainments. Even great arahants like Ven. Sāriputta had to ask the Buddha on this matter (SN 35,87).[3]

However, even though one is unable to know for sure that someone is enlightened, it is possible to know for sure that certain types of people are not enlightened. The four stages of enlightenment are each defined by clear signs, so, if any of the essential signs are missing, then one can be certain that they have not reached that level.

The Essential Signs

For stream winning, the essential signs begin with the “four characteristic qualities of a stream winner.” They are as follows: unshakable faith in the enlightenment of the Buddha; unshakable faith in the excellence of the Buddha’s teaching, the Dhamma; unshakable faith in the worthiness of noble ones in the monastic Sangha; and a high level of moral conduct that is “dear to the noble ones” (DN 16,2,9; SN 55,1). The Kosambiya Sutta (MN 48) gives more detail on what that level of conduct is: Should they break a precept then, by nature, they will always reveal it to their teacher, or to a fellow student, and restrain such misbehavior in future.[4] Furthermore, the stream winner has eradicated sakkāya ditthi, “personality view,” meaning that they never regard any of the five khandhas (body, feeling, perception, mental formations, and consciousness) as a self, as a possession of a self, as containing a self, or as being contained in a self (MN 44,7; SN 22,1). Since it is such personality view that creates all sixty-two of the wrong views listed in the Brahmajāla Sutta (SN 41,3), the stream winner can hold none of those views (DN 1). This is why the stream winner is called “one complete in right view” (ditthi isampanna) (AN VI,89-95). Therefore all stream winners necessarily hold the view that rebirth exists (MN 60,11) and kamma exists (MN 60,19). Lastly, stream winning is an event (AN III,12), so the stream winner should be able to point out the time and the place that it occurred.

So, for example, if someone has no respect for the Sangha, or claims not to believe in rebirth, or holds the view that the mind (citta) or mentality (mano) or consciousness (viññāṇa) is everlasting (wrong view number eight in the Brahmajāla Sutta, DN 1,2,13), then one can know for sure that this person is not a stream winner.

This standard is based on clear statements in the suttas. If someone objects to this standard, saying that they do not respect what the suttas say about stream winning, then that is another sure sign that they are not a stream winner; for all noble ones respect the Buddha’s teaching and receive inspiration therefrom (MN 48,13-14).[5]

For once-returners, all the signs of stream winning must be present, plus a lessening of sensory desire and ill will. This stage is so hard to define precisely that I have said little about it in this chapter. For instance, in the Aṅguttara Nikāya (AN VI,44) there is a story of two brothers, Purāna and Isidatta, who were both declared as once-returners by the Buddha, although the former was celibate and the latter was sexually active.[6] It was a case in point, showing that only a buddha has the ability to know for certain the attainments of another.

For nonreturners the signs are much clearer. All the qualities of the stream winner must be present, plus a complete absence of sensory desire and ill will. Thus a nonreturner is incapable of even fantasizing about sex (inferring from AN VI,63),[7] let alone performing any sexual act. So someone who is sexually active is certainly not a nonreturner, and the same goes for someone who is obviously angry.

For the arahant, the signs are clearer still. All the qualities of the stream winner and the nonreturner must be present, plus qualities such as the nine things that an arahant is incapable of doing, such as storing up possessions (AN IX,7).[8] The arahant also has a natural humility due to the absence of the three “I am” conceits (SN 22,89). Another unique quality of the arahant is their fearlessness in the face of death (such as in the story of Adhimutta Thera – Theragāthā, verses 705-725). So if you see someone who has many possessions, is proud, or fears death, then you know that person is not fully enlightened.

That is how one can know that someone is not at this or that stage of enlightenment. However, just because certain wrong views or behaviors are not apparent does not mean that they are eradicated. Sometimes they are suppressed by jhāna, sometimes by will. For example, if one could read another’s nonenlightened mind just after it emerges from jhāna, then it would appear so clear of defilements as to be indistinguishable from the normal mind of an arahant. That is one of the reasons why only a buddha can know for certain the attainment of another. Everyone else can only know for sure that certain types have yet to reach such and such an attainment.

The Two Temple Boys

A helpful story on this point concerns an incident that occurred two decades ago to one of the most highly regarded meditation teachers of our time. Two temple boys with little education asked this famous teacher for some instruction in meditation. Every few days the young boys would report their progress, which was outstanding. In a very short time, these two youths from a poor village had outstripped all the monks. Those who were there at that time later told me that the atmosphere in that monastery was electric. Two boys of exceptional spiritual ability had come to their forest monastery, as if by chance, and were now well on the way to fulfilling their brilliant karmic potential. The monks’ inspiration soon reached a rare peak when their learned meditation master solemnly confirmed that both boys had reached full enlightenment. The monks were thrilled to hear that two new arahants had appeared in the world. It is understood in the Theravāda tradition, with some justification (Miln 7,2), that should a layperson attain to full enlightenment, then they must quickly join the Sangha or else they will pass away in a matter of days. So certain was this great teacher of the boys’ attainments that he had them both ordained that very day. Sometime later, one of the boys was taken to see a doctor about some minor ailment. The doctor prescribed surgery. Not understanding that surgery was done under an anesthetic, the boy “arahant” became alarmed. He was clearly afraid. As mentioned above, genuine arahants have no such fear. Thus it became clear, first with one boy and then with the other, that they were not fully enlightened after all. One of the most accomplished meditation masters in his country had been completely mistaken. If such a learned and competent teacher can make such an error, so can we.

Some people assume that persons with psychic powers must be at some high stage of enlightenment, but they are misinformed. The Buddha’s cousin, Devadatta, had amazing psychic powers, but he wasn’t even a stream winner. Later, he lost his powers and tried to kill the Buddha (Vin 2,7,2,5). Psychic powers are not a reliable sign of enlightenment.

In the Sunakkhatta Sutta (MN 105), a layman asked the Buddha about the monks who, he heard, had claimed full enlightenment in the presence of the Buddha. He wanted to know whether or not all those monks were arahants. The Buddha replied that some of them were arahants; some were not.[9] Thus, what someone claims about their own attainments was unreliable even in the time of the Buddha. In fact, it is an offense against the vinaya (the monastic precepts) for a monk or a nun to claim a stage of enlightenment to a layperson (pācittiya 8). So a person in robes who makes such a claim in public is deliberately breaking their precepts, making their claim even more dubious.

When establishing the monastic precept, the Buddha had recognized how easy it was to overestimate one’s own attainments. So it is best to keep quiet about them, except to one’s teacher. As one nun said,“If you become enlightened, don’t tell anyone, or else you’ll spend the rest of your life having to prove it!” When assessing one’s own progress, it is advisable to know the signs of each stage of enlightenment first and then investigate, without vanity and over a long period of time, to see which signs are there and which signs are missing. One should not rush into claiming any stage of enlightenment; rather, one should wait, perhaps for years, before one is sure. One should let ongoing experience test the attainment, as shown in the following story.

The Monk Who Was Unafraid of Tigers

In late 1980 in the remote Thai mountain monastery of Poo Tork, the great forest monk, Tan Ajahn Juan, related this monk’s tale to me.

Late one afternoon, a forest monk entered a poor village in the middle of a jungle. It was the custom then for monks who wandered in search of solitude to announce their arrival in the nearest village, so that the devout Thai villagers could expect them for alms round on the next morning. The villagers promptly warned the monk of a ferocious tiger roaming the surrounding jungle that had already killed and eaten many of their water buffalo and even some of the villagers.

“I am no longer afraid of death,” boasted the monk. For he sincerely thought that he was already enlightened.

The villagers didn’t believe him.

“Show me where the tiger track is,” said the monk defiantly. “I will meditate there all night.”

The villagers led the monk deep into the jungle to a place where the tiger’s track crossed one of their own paths. It was a long way from the village. The confident monk calmly set up his monk’s mosquito net and umbrella, and then shooed away the villagers so that he could meditate in quiet. The villagers were impressed.

In the forest tradition of Northeast Thailand, many monks meditate using the mantra “buddho.” As one breathes in, one mentally notes “bud,” then as one breathes out one notes “dho”: “bud-dho, bud-dho,” along with the breath. Once the darkness settled most of the jungle insects, the monk became very peaceful. “Buuuuuud—dhoooooo,” he noted as his breath grew smooth, slow, and refined. Then he heard a sound of some animal moving in the jungle. As he paid attention to that sound, he noticed his breath get a little shorter, “buuud—dhooo.”

The sound increased. Not daring to open his eyes, he mentally assessed that the sound must be from a largish jungle animal coming in his direction. His breath was now very loud and very short, “bud-dho, bud-dho, bud-dho.”

The sound increased. This must be a huge animal. So he opened his eyes. In the place of “bud-dho, bud-dho,” he found his mantra automatically change to “ti-ger, ti-ger”! Not far away, and coming straight toward him was this gigantic monk-eating tiger. Losing all of his mindfulness, except for his new mantra, he leapt out from under his mosquito net and began running to the village. “TI-GER! TI-GER!” His new mantra grew louder the faster he ran.

Now, it is against the monastic rules for a monk to run, and there is a good reason for this. The reason is that a monk’s robes have no buttons or zips but are held together only by ingenious folding and lots of mindfulness. When a monk runs, robes are apt to become undone. Then they slip down, trail behind on the ground, and eventually fall off completely. And this is precisely what happened to that monk who thought he was so enlightened that he had no fear of tigers.

He arrived in the village shouting his mantra at the top of his voice, “TI-GER! TI-GER!” and woke everyone up. He was by this time as bare of robes as his head was bare of hair. Those villagers never forgot that forest monk whose claim to be fearless was exposed, along with other embarrassing things, that night.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] See also Nyanaponika and Bodhi, Numerical Discourses, p. 162.
[2] See also ibid., p. 243.
[3] See also Bodhi, Connected Discourses, p. 1167.
[4] Ñānamoli and Bodhi, Middle Length Discourses, p. 422.
[5] See also ibid., p. 423. 43 Nyanaponika and Bodhi, Numerical Discourses, pp. 159ff.
[6] See also Nyanaponika and Bodhi, Numerical Discourses, p. 171.
[7] See also ibid., p. 2 31.
[8] Ñānamoli and Bodhi, Middle Length Discourses, p. 861.
[9] Here I am using Bodhi, Connected Discourses, p. 1859.