Lord Buddha, they say, attained enlightenment about 2500 years ago. The name itself means it. However, this enlightenment neither came from some supernatural entity nor the Buddha was guided by any agent of God / gods. How he got it would be difficult to ascertain but what he got is known to us.
He concluded that there was no soul / self, no god / gods, and no destiny per se. He, however, told us that rebirth was a reality and what got reborn was not an immortal soul but the Karmic energy which materialised in a life form. This Karmic energy, according to the Buddha, was nothing but our consciousness which was like a stream in eternal spate. Many individual consciousness streams (subjective by nature) flowed into an ocean of consciousness which was objectively universal in nature.
To me the Buddha was more of a psychology teacher than a mere spiritual master. He spoke of human mind and rightly concluded that all was in the mind only. It was a tremendous feat to achieve in that age 2500 years back. Some Buddhists claim that science now is saying the same about the mind what Buddha had then said. It would be remarkable if it were like that. Science, though moving fast, is yet at a nascent stage of studying consciousness. But the portents may well not go with the concepts like 'stream of consciousness' or something non-material / immaterial materialising so as to start a life (birth / rebirth).
The Buddhist thought appears to be least rigid of the Eastern thoughts. Will it accept / adapt science as a tool for proving or disproving the Buddhist concepts of human mind and consciousness?
PS: I don't agree with para 2 above.