Enlightenment Redux

Before going on to the Second Noble Truth and discussing the cause of suffering, we should talk about what it is that suffers. But before that, a very good question by the ever-perceptive Greensmile reminded me that there were things about enlightenment that still need to be said.

Concerning enlightenment, Greensmile asks, "It seems these realizations, presuming greatly that I understand them at all, are universally available to selfconscious beings. Have others worked their way to or stumbled upon enlightenment more of less of the flavor the Buddha tried to share?"

Not to be too picky, but I need to re-frame the question a little bit before answering. First, these realizations are not universally available to all sentient beings. Animals, at least other that h. Sapiens, simply haven't evolved enough brains to be aware of the mess that our big brains got us into in the first place. Animals, other than us, cannot realize enlightenment. At this point, many Buddhist students smugly state, "Well, I know that my cat/dog/iguana is clearly enlightened." Pets don't seem to let self-consciousness interfere with their actions - they eat when they're hungry, sleep when they're tired, and show affection without discrimination. That's like a Buddha, right?

I hate to be a killjoy, but no. Your pet's great, but it's also in a deep state of ignorance. Animal's brains simply don't have the capacity to grasp the bigger picture, and they only think along the most primal levels: "Eat. Sleep. Defecate. Fornicate. Sleep." And even though dogs display behaviors that we associate with noble emotions like loyalty, protectiveness, and affection, we're just projecting our emotional states onto pack/survival behavior. A dog is "loyal" to its master only because the master feeds it, and the dog wants the master to keep feeding it; its survival strategy, evolved at least since domestication first began, is to please and obey humans in return for food and shelter. Don't get me wrong - I love dogs (cats too), but I'm not going to confuse one with an enlightened Buddha. And if not dogs and cats, so much more reptiles, insects, invertebrates, trees and grasses.

An interesting thought though, to get us almost completely off-topic, are the problem-solving skills that were formerly thought to be solely human attributes but recently observed among certain higher primates, and certainly Koko the gorilla, who was taught to speak by sign language and communicated some evidence of abstract thought. We may have to expand our definition of "human," at least for spiritual purposes, beyond a strict biological definition based on our DNA, and regard spiritual humans as a continuum across species, including at least some members of some of the other "higher apes." I'm not a speciesist, and there have been times that I've looked into the eyes of monkeys and could swear that a person was looking back at me.

But, anyway, animals can be self-conscious, and certainly self-aware (I once heard the term "sentient" defined as "If you try to kill it and it runs away, it's sentient."), but not enlightened. Although it's not what I think Greensmile meant, I just wanted to be clear on that.

The realization of enlightenment is certainly possible for all humans. But I would not use the term "selfconscious being," since conception of a separate ego-self is one of the biggest hindrances in the way of achieving enlightenment.

Now, I often feel uncomfortable discussing enlightenment for a couple of reasons. First, saying too much about it implies that I understand it, that I've experienced it. Shunryo Suzuki hardly mentions it in what is arguably the best book on Zen in the English language, Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind. When asked about this, his wife chimed in impishly, "It's because he hasn't had it." But more to the point, when the laughter subsided, Suzuki said "It's not that satori (the Japanese term for nirvana) is unimportant, but it's not the part of Zen that needs to be stressed."

I don't like talking about it because it creates the concept that there's a goal out there that needs to be achieved. And striving toward that goal creates dualistic concepts, such as "There is enlightenment and non-enlightenment," and "Things would be better than their present state if only I was enlightened." The striving increases our suffering ("Not to get what one wants is suffering") not relieve it, and reinforces the delusion that our self is somehow separate from everything else ("I will become enlightened," rather than "All things are enlightened").

The Buddha was quite clear that we are all already enlightened. We just need to awaken to our own enlightenment. The Eightfold Path was his prescription for this awakening.

So, if he was able to awaken by his own, human efforts, without divine or supernatural intervention, have other people been able to do this? That is how I would like to (finally, at long last) re-frame Greensmile's question.

Sure. Of course. The Chinese patriarch Huineng (I'll get to him sooner or later in this series of postings if I stick to the syllabus in my head, although that's becoming increasingly unlikely with each successive post) became enlightened without a teacher upon hearing a monk chant a single line of the Diamond Sutra (". . . the mind that sticks to nothing . . ."). However, Huineng was unsure just what it was he had just experienced, and entered a monastery and formally worked with a teacher in order to clarify his experience.

Contemporary Zen Master John Daido Loori once said "Not only did Huineng gain realization without zazen, but so did Teresa of Avila, John of the Cross and probably Walt Whitman." There are probably numerous examples of people awakening, gaining realization, becoming enlightened, or whatever you want to call it, in addition to Sakyamuni Buddha, but many probably just simply did not know what to do with their realization, or retreated from the world to, say, some mountain top, or have just been misunderstood or even persecuted before their teaching could be established. I personally have a suspicion that Jesus of Nazareth fell into the latter category.

History is full of characters who have had epiphanies of one sort or another and who then wandered off as substantially changed individuals. Some of these characters may have had the same experience as Sakyamuni. The Buddha even said that there have been many other Buddhas in the past, and that future Buddhas will appear.

What is unique about Sakyamuni is that he was successful in understanding his realization, developing a system to pass it on to others, and his realization has been transmitted from teacher to student in an unbroken lineage for over 2,500 years. John Daido Loori says, "Realization can occur in many ways. But the odds are in your favor if you engage a formal practice. Thousands of people realized themselves while practicing. Only few have done it without disciplined training. If you are looking to realize yourself, there is a process and I suggest you try it."