I'm guessing everyone reading this has seen someone who has claimed they're enlightened, and doubted their claim. I've had a lot of trouble with this throughout my adulthood - discerning who's real and who isn't.

How does your tradition protect you from deluding yourself, or being deluded by others?

If I were to go and read a ton of spiritual philosophy, it wouldn't be hard for me to build a framework of what an enlightened person 'should be'. If then, lacking self-honesty, strength of character (or possibly just good information) it wouldn't be much of a leap for me to qualify some aspect of an experience as me 'becoming enlightened'.

Let's pose the question like this - if I were to tell you that I had achieved enlightenment according to the definition provided by your tradition (to be clear, I'm not actually claiming this), how would you know if I was full of shit or not? Is this something that's possible to discern over a forum, or would a practical demonstration be required?     For clarity, it would help if you could at least allude to your tradition's definition of enlightenment.  No need to define it outright and start arguing over who is correct, I would just very much appreciate your perspective from within your own tradition.  Thank you!   Summary:    1. How does your tradition protect you from deluding yourself, or being deluded by others? 2. if I were to tell you that I had achieved enlightenment according to the definition provided by your tradition (to be clear, I'm not actually claiming this), how would you know if I was full of shit or not? 3. Is this something that's possible to discern over a forum, or would a practical demonstration be required?