The Myth of Enlightenment

Lhasa rules don't apply here. Click this link, and catch a breath of the fresh air of psychic freedom from Buddhist authority. If you haven't tried breathing outside the sterile domain of orthodoxy, step inside. It'll clear your head and free your mind.
Post Reply
Admin
Posts: 103
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2019 4:56 am

The Myth of Enlightenment

Post by Admin » Mon May 27, 2019 8:48 pm

Anyone attempting to research the concept of Buddhist Enlightenment using the Internet will run into a small problem – the term “Enlightenment” is already owned by the Western Europeans, who so christened their culture’s emergence from the Dark Ages of Catholic scholasticism into the bright day of Deistic Scientism. This is no mere search-engine quirk. English translators chose the term “enlightenment” as a synonym for “bodhi,” a Sanskrit word with a variety of meanings, including “perfect knowledge,” “a learned one,” “a mythical elephant,” or “one who awakens another,” including a “cock.”

Image

The 19th Century German Orientalist Max Muller is credited with choosing the English word “enlightenment” to translate “bodhi” when he published the Sacred Books of the East, a 50-volume set, from 1879 - 1910. The Sacred Books of the East “has become a landmark in the … study of religion and language [and] contributed significantly to the Western perception of the ‘religious’ or even ‘mystic’ East…” In Muller’s day, the Enlightenment had delivered Europe into a new world where the nightmares of the Inquisition had been put to rest, and the adventure of scientific discovery had become part of everyday life. Muller, and many other European philosophers, like Schopenhauer, saw the Buddha as an ally in the European struggle to overthrow the Catholic empire of faith using the tools of reason. Skeptical European thinkers, Schopenhauer in particular, embraced Buddhist thought as a “religion of reason”. So Europeans, having just seen their culture lift itself out of the imposed darkness of the Middle Ages, their eyes each day wakening to the discovery of new marvels in the natural world, were not surprised to discover that in the ancient East, the Buddha had used the power of reason to illuminate the mystery of human existence itself. This discovery surely merited the use of the term, “enlightenment.”

A problem for English-speaking Buddhists arises from the use of this word, however, because “enlightenment” connotes instantaneous achievement of total understanding. As people who have grown up with electric light, we have greater control over electrons than any prior generation of humans, and when we flip a light switch, we expect instant illumination to follow. This is quite a different picture from the one I get when I think about “awakening” because “the cock crowed,” and the light of dawn is brightening the sky over the eastern shore of the Ganges.

Image

You will recall that the Buddha “awakened” when he saw the morning star after spending the night under a fig tree (Ficus Religiosa) that is now called the Bodhi Tree. Since he was in India, it is quite likely he also heard some roosters crowing.

Image

My lama, Gyatrul Rinpoche, was fond of the American term “push-button,” which he pronounced “poojsh-botton,” while extending his index finger. Americans, he observed, are accustomed to getting results at the push of a button. Unfortunately, he informed us on many occasions, Buddhist practice doesn’t work that way. “Slowly, slowly,” he would often say, is the way to change the direction of the mind. Dramatic changes were not what he was hoping to see in his students. He counseled steady effort in the right direction.

Self-development, however, is an important project for those who become dedicated to it, and the most popular paths seem to be the quick ones. We want weekend intensives, life-changing seminars, short practices that accomplish miracle results. We also tend to view our mental dissatisfaction as the consequence of some type of pathology that needs to be rooted out. When I was young, we had a whole spate of quick-and-pricey paths to liberation. We had “rebirthing,” where therapists simulate a better birth than we got in the stainless-steel birthing room where many of us were obstetrified into existence. We had Arthur Janov’s “primal scream,” where people found that nugget of agony and wrenched it out with a spasm of relief. We had Erhard Seminars Training (EST), where three days of abuse would produce a lifetime of release. We have Rolfing, Holotropic Breathwork, and endless other therapies, including boring old Freudian and Jungian psychotherapies, focused on getting to the heart of your pain and releasing it. It might be fair to say that, as a people, we worship catharsis, and impute tremendous benefit to the release of past trauma.

Buddhist practitioners laboring under the belief that they are going to “achieve enlightenment” adopt a similar strategy for finding life-fulfillment through meditation. They are hoping for “insight” into their problems, a “samadhi” that will leave them cleansed of anxiety, a “satori” that will unveil the truth, a “kensho” that will reveal their “original face.” Perhaps they hope for something really big, a “turning about at the deepest seat of consciousness,” as Alan Watts was fond of chattering about. However they put it, they are looking for a “new self” to take the place of the old one that causes all of their problems.

Would it be heretical to suggest that this is not what the Buddha had in mind when he taught the Eightfold Path to Bodhi?


Image

Tara
Site Admin
Posts: 45
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2019 3:07 am

Re: The Myth of Enlightenment

Post by Tara » Sat Oct 19, 2019 12:35 am

The myth of enlightenment is one of the most diabolical creations ever. What better way is there to mentally enslave people than that? Under the cover of “desirelessness”, people’s desire to find meaning in a life where there is no meaning, is magnetized, a situation so dire and existential, that anyone would want to get away from it. Except that there’s no getting away from it! Every statement to the contrary is a con and a lie. The Buddha was right. We live in a world of suffering. What are we going to do: turn the world upside down and make it something it isn’t? Try to conform ourselves to the ever-pervasive and dominating Christian view that our lives have purpose blessed by God, and ignore the evidences of our senses that life is a place where creatures do practically nothing but eat, manipulate and exploit each other? Any expression of happiness a creature might have is destroyed in the next moment by negative forces.

Life is a hell realm, but it doesn’t have to be this way, at least for humans. Even some animals have decided for a better life. Herbivores made the choice for a more peaceful existence by not eating other creatures. And we humans could make a better life for ourselves by not killing each other, by not eating other creatures, by creating a world of peace, comfort and pleasure for ourselves. But apparently there is no group will for this type of existence. Or rather, the dominant male species among us would rather live in hell, and the rest of us are forced to live with them with their degraded barbarian views, due to the strength of their neverending threats and terrorism.

It is very sad to see people yearning for a state of enlightenment that can never be achieved. I know it’s hard to face reality the way it is in all its real horror. But thrashing around on our meditation cushion is not going to help anything at all. Things are the way they are, and that’s that. We’d be far better off in my opinion facing our harsh realities, which means absolutely getting rid of this all-pervasive Christian view that life is good and has meaning, and trying to change life in real ways for the better. We’re going to get nothing but torment by imagining that if we can get our minds in the right place, everything will be groovy. There is no place to get our minds to that is going to overcome our physical limitations. How could we possibly achieve happiness in a world of suffering? It’s a complete contradiction. How can we be happy when others are suffering, no matter whether they are people or animals or insects or fish?

Buddhism as it has been designed with this myth of enlightenment is a negative philosophy in this world. It would be far better to sit on our meditation cushion and simply do no harm, than to imagine that we’re putting our mind in some delusory enlightened space. Sure, go ahead if you want, and imagine better worlds than this one, and work to create a better world in real life. But we need to realize that the important forces of our existence are external, not internal. For thousands of years conservative forces have been selling us this lie that it’s the other way around, that we can do nothing with the external world, and the power we have is only in our minds. But that’s just not true. We have no power over our minds whatsoever. The world has power over our minds, and that’s that. Our choice, or rather the dominant-males-among-us’s choice, is to either make a better world in real life, or we’re never going to have a better world, because it’s not going to exist in any of our imaginary places.

The real job for us as humans is to convince the males among us that they need to change their ways for the benefit of us all. But how to overcome all their negative male biology? There’s a catch-22 for all us. Maybe there’s no hope for us humans after all.

Post Reply