Prior to Shakyamuni Buddha there were many other Buddhas. What was Buddhism called during those times prior to Shakyamuni Buddha? Inspired by Lotus Sutra and Diamond Sutra，I have an opinion (By the way, I am not a so called Buddhist. And I am not a believer of other religions or any schools of thoughts which claim they know the ultimate truth. If you're not comfortable with reading something different from what they've taught you, don't read.) that since any human being and any life being who has interior or inner light will be enlighten or awaken eventually, you could call them a Buddha or at least call them a Buddha-to-be. （By the way, what make us see is not only lights but also darkness. When you see the darkness, don't forget that the inner light what make you see this darkness could be the darkness itself. Lights could be the dreams which are blinding us. ) Although they've not yet awakened completely or totally enlighten, the inner or interior light and the awakening are the true nature of ourselves, we certainly are aware of it in a certain way or a certain extent. Even if we've never thought about in this life yet, we still know it subconsciously. And actually I don't think there is a state could be called completely perfect. No matter how you are aware of your true nature, you're still having to deal with so many words, concepts, notions, which are usually based on images or phenomena that are indeed the blindfolds or dreams. Since not all of the people who used those words communicating with you are completely awake, it is hard for you to be totally enlighten. In my opinion a completely enlighten or totally awake Buddha is a legend or fairy tale. Don't be fooled by a title, a name, a concept, a notion, a word. A person who called himself an awakened or enlighten Buddha might be not awake at all, especially when they're still in a dream of nothingness or blinded by an emptiness. Including awakening and enlightenment, all of them can easily be used to blind or bind you. Because we can never see "the mirror""the TV set", the stage, the platform, all that we can see are shows, images, phenomena. It is impossible for us to point out the ultimate truth or true nature. We have to use metaphor. In my other answer, I have mentioned emptiness or nothingness is mere a metaphor. And regard to the word awakening or enlightenment, they are also mere metaphors. Please refer to my other answers, if you really understand me, you will find anyone who treat these words as slogans instead of metaphors is a blinder who is trying to direct other blinders, no matter how many people treat them as a Buddha or a master. Min John Zhou's answer to What is Buddha’s realization? https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-Buddhist-notion-of-emptiness/answer/Min-John-Zhou https://www.quora.com/Can-enlightenment-be-lost/answer/Min-John-Zhou
-
minjohnz 实在太忙，恕不回复，我不认为现代文明或传统文化是完美的 First, I am not a so called believer of any so called religion, and I don't believe any school of thoughts who thinks they know so much that others should follow their teachings. Therefore, if you're not comfortable with reading something different from what they've taught you, don't read.
Second I've answered a similar question before (refer to Min John Zhou's answer to Can you offer an explanation of the Buddhist concept of emptiness/sunya and why it's important for Nirvana? Any way and school is fine. ), "emptiness" is an overvalued notion. Especially if someone told you emptiness means nothing exist, there is no meaning in life, and nothing worth of putting any emotion. No matter how famous this teacher or so called master is, he is actually a blinder who are directing other blinders.
They've been blinded by an emptiness or nothingness no matter how spiritual or special their experiences are.
Not all of Buddhists are like this. According to Platform Sutra，emptiness is just a metaphor （not a notion). In ancient Chinese, emptiness and space is the same word: 空. Thus, some zen master such as Dajian Huineng, use the empty space as a metaphor not to talk about "nothing exists" but to talk about the thing which does really exist and truly there. The images on a screen is just a dream or show which could be an illusion, but "the TV" "the stage" "the platform" is the thing really exist and truly there. Although we can never see or hear or sense or know what is this TV or stage or platform. So, what is really empty is your knowledge. The platform is like the empty space, so vast and unlimited just like all so many things you don't know. What we don't know is so much and vast, and your imagination about the unknown could be unlimited. We should admit our ignorance, admit that there always is a dream or show (including any spiritual experience such as so called emptiness) which is trying to blind us from our true nature. They are tempting us. Once you project yourself into a character in that show, such as the body, a thought（or a name, a concept, no matter how holy it is) , a state of no thoughts, or any other special state or experience such as so called emptiness or nothingness or oneness, etc,
you've lost yourself. You may talk about a nonsense such as no self.
Nobody can raise his own body by pulling his own hair. No one can reach a so called "no self" by himself. If there is no him or you and me at all, who is there blah-blah-ing "no me", and who are there listening?
From my view, without Chinese zen, Buddhism could be a joke.
A so called, so self declared "Buddha" may not have really awakened at all. If you've really waked from all kinds of dreams, and if you're not mistaking a new special even unique dream (such as so called emptiness ) as the ultimate truth, you should have faith in yourself. The real you is same as the empty space, always there and contain everything (and contain every and any dreams). It could be a bad dream, but doesn't matter. Anyone who are trying to escape from suffering is like my son who is still a little boy that can't stand horror movie.
-
minjohnz 实在太忙，恕不回复，我不认为现代文明或传统文化是完美的 In my opinion, which may be different from any school, Śūnyatā / emptiness is a beautiful misunderstanding, or a dazzling over-interpretation.
You are probably wondering why a thing so simple as emptiness or nothingness can be too much.
As I know, when people are adventuring in meditation or drugs, they can get all kinds of special even unique experiences which could make them believing they are reaching the core nature of truth or reality.
From my view, what they are near is the unknown (the ultimate secret hidden or concealed by what we see or sense or experience, including by the sensed emptiness or nothingness like space), the ignorance.
Zhuang Zhou once said that what we know is limited, no matter how much you know, what we don't know is always unlimited.
Actually we are so ignorant, even a guy so smart like Zhuang Zhou seemed that he didn't realize that he doesn't know what we don't know is limited or unlimited.
What is really unlimited is our imagination.
When we're facing The Unknown due to some drug or meditation or other stuff, it is like we're facing darkness.
It is easy for us to imagine there is an unlimited emptiness or nothingness like space our there or in that darkness.
And because of the drugs we took or we produced ourselves naturally in our bodies, we could magnify this imagination to some extension. So much so that we lose the distinction between imagination and reality.
There is no shame in it. Because nearly all of us are doing the same things, with or without the drugs. For example, none of us has ever actually seen the space or universe, what we are seeing is always a flat two dimension picture, moving or not moving, we're using our imagination to create a three dimension "reality" in our mind, in this "reality", all lights （optical lines） are straight. Seldom of us realize what is really straight or simple is our logic (Logic is imagining with reason. Reasons are straight, simple rules some people loves to follow like fools, they are so foolish that they call these mind bindings or blinders as intelligence.)
In my view, Nirvana is so tempting because people are eager to grab a liberation from anxieties and other sufferings.
And in our imagination, with or without logical reasons, emptiness means we can finally escape from our selves.
But is it really a non-self? If there is no self, no you, who is there? Who is there admiring this emptiness?
What you lost is not you, but body, thoughts, or other id.
They are not the real you, the true you. Neither are the special spiritual experiences including state of no thoughts, state of no senses, emptiness, nothingness, others whatever they are.
None of the things before you are the real you. The true you is always there, but you can never make it show itself before you. It is like you can never lift yourself by pulling yourself 's hair.
Thus if Nirvana means you can see the true core nature or the real source of every things, it is a legend, or fairy tale.
If Nirvana means you can get the great escape from yourself, it is an impossible mission.
It maybe seems too cruel. Not all of people are grown up, a lot of people need a shelter, (Even a grownup cannot appreciate all the dark moving pictures.) so all kinds drugs (both physical and spiritual) are still popular.
-
minjohnz 实在太忙，恕不回复，我不认为现代文明或传统文化是完美的 Anything that can be obtained can be lost.
If enlightenment means you can obtain something like light, you can also lose it.
Light is important, because it symbolize something can make you see.
But we can also see darkness.
With or without outer lights, we can see.
Because we are lives who all have inner lights.
The inner light is always there,
not something we gain from some special experiences which we call them enlightment,
so it can never be lost.