The following seems to make sense, but I'd have to be enlightened to be sure!
"Because of the nondual nature of Enlightenment, the only person whose Enlightenment you can be absolutely certain about is your own. And even in that case, it is not even “your” Enlightenment that “you” are certain about. There is no “you”. There is no “thing” to be certain about. There is just Enlightenment." http://integralscience.wordpress.com/20 ... lightened/
Unfortunately it doesn't get us very far in recognising who "might be" enlightened. This, perhaps, might help:http://www.budakoda.ee/en/a-selection-o ... lightened/
"In the Canki Sutta the Buddha advises that the proper test of the truth of someone’s claim to be enlightened is an examination of their conduct for any evidence of greed, hatred or delusion... A person’s actions of body and of speech are a decisive indicator of the extent of their spiritual attainment. In the Vimamsaka and Thana Suttas the Buddha gives some detailed advice on how to go about testing the ethical conduct of a teacher. Is the appearance of ethical purity a recent phenomenon or has it been consistently evident for a long time? Here the Buddha ... even suggests that one of the ways to examine a person’s behaviour is to get close to them and to live next to them. A person’s behaviour should then be carefully examined in a variety of circumstances, watching not just for initial responses but paying attention to what might happen later. How does the person respond when faced with adversity? If suffering the loss of a relative or of wealth, or becoming ill, does the person respond with equanimity? Do they reflect that suffering happens when one clings to the self, or do they become afflicted with sorrow and grief? If they become a popular and even famous teacher, how do they respond to such popularity and fame? In their dealings with other members of the sangha, do they say one thing to one person and something else to another? Are their later dealings in harmony with their earlier dealings? Do they publicly rubbish some members of the sangha whilst praising others? Do they make false claims in their conversations and teachings, saying that they know or see things when they don’t? Do they avoid indulging in sensual pleasures out of fear of the consequences, or because they are truly without lust? When teaching or in discussion how does a person respond to an issue? How do they apply reasoning? Are they dull? Can they make the meaning plain and clear?... And, of course, it would also be expected of an enlightened person that they were unfailingly compassionate and kind."