Discrimination between Enlightenment and Awakening

anataman

So...

For me 'Enlightenment' is a period of European history - 17th to 18th century, where intellectuals started seeing through religious dogma and made a stab at establishing a 'real world' which could be reasonably examined and understood - much like the buddha had done centuries before...

'Awakening' - isn't this just being present in the 'here and now'.

I find that these terms are used interchangeably in western buddhism - but shouldn't there be a conensus of opinion as to what each represents for buddhist practitioners?

BhikkhuJayasara

heh, thats exactly what John peacock says about the term enlightenment.

Awake is a good term I think, because its being "awake" to reality as it truely is, aka seeing the four ennobling truths through your own insight via experiential knowledge.

anataman

I agree.

Awakening enables you to come out of a slumber and 'crystalise'

Enlightenment is tainted with a 'big bang!' - 'all or nothing'...

Jeffrey

I think different people have different appreciations of these terms. My lama in school was interested in the differences of words in language and meaning for the individual. You get the same split with 'heart' and 'mind'.

anataman

That is funny @Jeffrey - I have always seen the terms heart and mind as separate and not as indistinguishable - I suppose it is how you personally use and define those terms.

Jeffrey

It's (heart/mind) actually the same, anatman, in Tibetan culture but as a westerner I think of mind as intellectual and heart as emotional. And then there is cultural associations between intellect and emotions. Both are important parts of us.

BhikkhuJayasara

I know the "heart" thing is much more significant in Mahayana, but for me "heart" means nothing.. it is a muscle that pumps blood, it all comes from the mind. I don't think the Pali suttas talk about a "heart" either, I could be wrong though and would love to be educated if so.

Jeffrey

@Jayantha, even a muscle is a starting point. What if I asked you 'what is important in your heart of hearts'? A lot of times people can feel something from that phrase. Another is 'the heart of the city'... what is that? Or 'dear heart'. We all have our own responses to language so I am not saying heart has to be anything more than a muscle or valentine cookie. Many people can take the intuition of heart language very deeply into the tathagarbagotra. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddha-nature

anataman

@Jeffrey I never really got the heart/mind thing when I studied Tibetan buddhism, but my experience and study of the physical human being has lead me to conclude heart is separate from mind, but happy to admit that 'Language is the boundary and limit of our understanding'

Sabre

Jayantha said:

I know the "heart" thing is much more significant in Mahayana, but for me "heart" means nothing.. it is a muscle that pumps blood, it all comes from the mind. I don't think the Pali suttas talk about a "heart" either, I could be wrong though and would love to be educated if so.

The suttas talk about citta, often translated as mind, but sometimes also as heart. I'm not sure how accurate this is. I think it's just a question of where your heart lies.

To the first post: I'd say the two are the same.

DairyLama

anataman said:

'Awakening' - isn't this just being present in the 'here and now'.

Maybe nibbana / nirvana is best left untranslated?

David

They seem like differing terms to me.

To be awakened is to see.
To be enlightened is to be seen.

how

Being neither, I recuse my self.

..is my enlightenment awakening
or my awakening enlightenment?

DairyLama

how said:

..is my enlightenment awakening
or my awakening enlightenment?

..or neither, or both?

David

how said:

Being neither, I recuse my self.

..is my enlightenment awakening
or my awakening enlightenment?

I'd say your awakenment is enlightening.

Dennis1

The heart chakra is very relative to the great vehicle. Enlightenment is like a river when you are in it you are wet, when you get you are still wet a little-for a while. Opening the heart helps you stay wet longer. Dissolving the winds in the central channel makes you wet all over. The heart is important because it's hard to realize your enlightened presence when you are self absorbed. Opening the heart channels causes an opening up to others. The heart represents the major obstruction to new practitioners. It's hard to rise above the small self so you hit the knots at the heart. The channels are real and they have real physical consequences.

Awakening is simply experiencing the cessation of discursive thought and being aware.
If you continue in an awakened state you experience enlightenment more. They are different, much as your eyes and your understanding are different. Best, Dennis

Dennis1

anataman said:

That is funny @Jeffrey - I have always seen the terms heart and mind as separate and not as indistinguishable - I suppose it is how you personally use and define those terms.

I wanted to say: Of course the heart and mind are different. However there is a meditation on the indestructible drop, where you consider the drop
(which is at the heart), the location of your mind and thought processes. This is a difficult meditation and I am not recommending it. But, I wanted to point out that there is some connection between mind and heart. There are four channels at the heart.
One goes to the eyes and I believe one goes to the mental faculty. The throat is also involved with the reasoning facility. The body is complex and there are many exchanges and connections. Like a chariot and it's axles the thing works together
and manages to get down the road in some mysterious way. Best, Dennis

Jeffrey

I don't know @Dennis1 my teacher says that heart and mind are words that both are citta in Tibetan Buddhism. They reflect different aspects of citta. For example heart is associated with sentimental whereas head/mind is associated with thinking and figuring. These are just the language we westerners have. When a Tibetan points to their citta they point to the chest. My teacher says that a lot of westerners are too much in their heads.

anataman

Thanks to everyone who has contributed in the discussion - - It has made me look at things differently. I still have a problem with channels and such ideas; e.g. I really don't get the Chakras in the way they are often presented - you know like the image below, because I don't find I can clearly identify with them - probably 'because I'm a western buddhist' I hear you say:




But I get PRANA! Oh Yes… Do I so get PRANA ! - - !

Jeffrey

Have you read a book about chakras? I think the Tibetan system has only 4 btw. It combines some.

anataman

No I don't want to waste my time, as you have made my point - 4 5 6 7, lets invent one the keyboard chakra - after all it is just another area where energy flows!. Chakras are not entities that I can realise or relate to, maybe because I'm a modern buddhist:-)!

Jeffrey

Chakras are not entities. But that doesn't mean we cannot feel them in our own experience. For example root has to do with natural beauty. You can view a river or lake and something happens to your body/mind. When you are at your keyboard a number of chakras are at work.

If you don't like working with them then that is fine. They are not one of your 84,000 dharma gates.

anataman

You are correct in that assertion Jeffrey, mine is the gate of tears.

Dennis1

anataman said:

Thanks to everyone who has contributed in the discussion - - It has made me look at things differently. I still have a problem with channels and such ideas; e.g. I really don't get the Chakras in the way they are often presented - you know like the image below, because I don't find I can clearly identify with them - probably 'because I'm a western buddhist' I hear you say:




But I get PRANA! Oh Yes… Do I so get PRANA ! - - !

Hi. There are two main lines of teachings on the Chakras. The oldest is the Vedic teaching. Since we are Buddhists here Let me say a little. The one I mostly know is the Dummo practice-or Tummo. This is meditation (to start on the solar Chakra (about 4 fingers below the navel. Imagine a small flame etc. You can find plenty on this on the net and many fine books. The meditation purpose is to increase psychic heat and melt
the drops (at forehead between the eyes). This precipitates bliss and when properly
done you can use this bliss to meditate on emptiness and bring the winds to dissolve in the central channel. This creates powerful changes.

I said that in one paragraph but there is a lot to it. You should read up on it if you are interested. In the beginning you can do the Tummo and gain awareness of your central channel. I think the double knots at the heart are the first difficult barrier and you will have to lessen self grasping and increase care for others in order to even approach the difficult knots at the heart. Much merit and understanding needed. When you open the heart chakra it is usual to want to gain equanimity to protect yourself from pain you see in others. I don't think that is necessary-opinions vary but sometimes tears are joyous fire. After the heart chakra the throat and back of head are more a matter of developing meditative skillful means. Driving through to the forehead and up is the great understanding. The goal which drives the process is the elimination of obstructions.
The first obstruction is self cherishing and the thought which rises from that.

If you quiet the mind and experience pristine cognition you may experience some bliss.
If you do, this is the time to meditate on emptiness. The bliss will evaporate if you have thoughts of self or concern for others (in my experience). Being alone helps in this stage-during the practice.

The significant aspect is melting the drops and bringing the winds to dissolve in the central channel. You should not go into this expecting some quick fix. Self grasping is a big barrier to these practices. If you are still interested I will happily refer you to a few books. There may be a guru near you who can give you guidance. A guru is best.
This short intro should only be thought of as a spur to interest and not as an authoritative or definitive statement. A whetting only. The Chakras are real just as
Prana is real. Look for Tummo practice or Kundalini or the melting bliss in order to discover more. Good luck on your adventure. Best

Dennis1

Hi Jeffrey: I completely agree. Thank you for your awesome comment. Best

Dennis1

Jayantha said:

heh, thats exactly what John peacock says about the term enlightenment.

Awake is a good term I think, because its being "awake" to reality as it truely is, aka seeing the four ennobling truths through your own insight via experiential knowledge.

Doesn't Bodhi mean awakened?

Hamsaka

You guys really got off into some interesting territory, so what I have to say about enlightenment versus awakening is going to be boring.

The Buddha didn't use two different words for his "********" (insert either term here), did he? "********" became two words from different translators, and those two words happen to mean subtle but different things to us, the receivers of the translations.

So, should we just choose which one 'floats our boat'? This is an uncomfortable idea, if we are oriented toward exactitude in our doctrine. Already we can't decide if Awakening/Enlightenment can legitimately happen here and now, or in twelve to twenty five years of meditative practice, or to monks not laypersons, or over three lives or between the lives. Buddhist scripture doesn't contain the edict the Christian bible does, that no word may be added or removed from the word of God (biblical scripture) lest you be cast into Hell, so be sure we don't have Scriptural Authority to guide us . . . it can all be soooooooo confusing, even faith-damaging.

On another forum, we were discussing anatta and how we experience it in our lives. One fellow responded to my post by telling me that I could not possibly experience anatta unless I'd achieved at least third jhana in meditation. I haven't responded in turn to him because Wise Intention is nowhere in sight, much less Wise Speech I want to ask him "WHO couldn't achieve anatta without achieving third jhana?" but I can't do it without feeling like I 'won'. So much for anatta . . .

Gassho

anando

Hello,
in my german edition of Pali-Canon there is not one word like enlightenment. It just says Awakening. The word enlightenment ist leading into speculations.

sakko

anataman

@Hamsaka I do not find your comments boring. We are all here for the same thing.


Seriously, though we are often mislead by the terms that we use to reference the world as we perceive it. Conceptuality, helps me 'point' to 'something' but it is not what I am. Give me a functional MRI scan when I am meditating and I'll tell you this - 'thats a really nice picture of my functional corporate brain, with some lovely highlights in the amygdala and hypothalamus but where am I to be found in the picture?'

The buddha said we could achieve an end to suffering - let not the path to cessation become one of suffering because we have not satisfactorily achieved the goal - first, end suffering, then look at what arises. This is an awakening...

Dennis1

anando said:

Hello,
in my german edition of Pali-Canon there is not one word like enlightenment. It just says Awakening. The word enlightenment ist leading into speculations.
sakko

Well, I Think the Pali Canons were originally just a sort of redo of the Buddha's teachings spelled as they would be pronounced in English. That way an English speaker could just read the English words and he would be reading or mentally thinking the right sounds.
Since Sanskrit is beyond me-except for a few key terms I don't know the Buddha speak
or did he even use Sanskrit-or should I spell Sanscrit?

However, my view is that enlightenment is different than awakened. I think Bodhi is awakened and enlightened comes from various realizations and or changes and grows and expands. It is not some constant condition you achieve-even though you may achieve constant realizations or changes-like the Chakras can produce. Or like experiencing Pristine Cognition. After Pristine Cognition some things are different
e.g. Maybe you think your personal life and death is a matter of no concern and little importance. But pristine cognition isn't enlightenment. Bliss isn't enlightenment.

Anyway, when you are enlightened you are enlightened and then maybe not so much.
Being a Buddha, experiencing the union of bliss and emptiness and achieving the path of no more learning is more of a constant thing I think, but that is not enlightenment.
Those things extend from enlightened activity and realizations coupled with the elimination of obstructions. Enlightenment is more like Bodhicitta in use. When you are motivated by the Paramitas and working for the benefit of others that is enlightened living but then next moment-not so much. That is why we have Lamrim (the stages) and the generation and completion stages. Those processes guide you in your enlightened way. So does a Guru and the lineage. If you have an idea of what enlightenment is-be that now. And keep right at it right down the road. That way you will be useful in your life and that will be an awakened life full of enlightenment.
'I recommend the Avatamsaka Sutra aka 'The Flower Ornament Scripture' circa 100 BC. for learning about enlightenment. mtgby

anando

Hi,
it´s hard to define enlightenment or awakening. I do prefer awakening, because it´s nearer to this experience, i already experienced.
But there is some better criterum. It´s some steps ahead of awakening, but every one
being on the path, will meet him, Maro Dusi.
By meeting him you have a hard criteria, that you are on the right way.

sakko

anataman

… and when you ask Maro Dusi about these ideas what does he say?

Jeffrey

To me an enlightened being is kind of supra beyond everyone else. They are beyond human. They subsist on a single thimblefull of dew each day.

Whereas an awakened person has been sleepwalking with the rest of us, but then day by day they begin to discover a higher truth.

lobster

When the Buddha wandered around India shortly after his enlightenment, he encountered several men who recognized him to be a very extraordinary being.
They asked him, "Are you a god?"
"No," he replied.
"Are you a reincarnation of god?"
"No," he replied.
"Are you a wizard, then?"
"No."
"Well, are you a man?"
"No."
"So what are you?" they asked, being very perplexed.
"I am awake."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dona_Sutta

Dennis1

Jeffrey said:

To me an enlightened being is kind of supra beyond everyone else. They are beyond human. They subsist on a single thimblefull of dew each day.
Whereas an awakened person has been sleepwalking with the rest of us, but then day by day they begin to discover a higher truth.

Jeffrey: We have been here before. Being enlightened is not being a Buddha.
Let me refer you to my last comment on this same subject and cut to the chase.
In Chan (old Chinese), they used to distinguish between enlightenment and great unsurpassed enlightenment. Even GU enlightenment is not Buddhahood.
Relax and enjoy the trip. Best