Articles Duncan's Blog: Christianity doubt emptiness enlightenment fourth path
by Duncan
42 comments
Doubting Thomas
Hearing that I’d set myself the goal of enlightenment, someone quipped: What if you get enlightened and then realise you don’t like it?
At the time I thought this was stupid. Now, I’m not so sure.
It was March 2009 when I broke through into fourth path – or ‘full’ enlightenment, according to the Therevada model. Beforehand, I could see emptiness pretty much constantly, but it seemed to occupy a particular region in the field of awareness; ‘it’ and ‘me’ appeared distinct. On the commencement of fourth path, this sense of separation collapsed. Emptiness expanded within awareness to include self. In every direction I discovered emptiness. ‘Inwards’ was just another direction; there was no longer anything special about what appeared to be ‘internal’ sensations.
At first it was difficult to put a finger on quite what had happened. Enlightenment is not an act of will – it happens regardless – so with it comes no implicit realisation of what it is. Enlightenment isn’t like putting a hat on your head; it’s like having a hat drop on you. You feel it and wonder: ‘Hey! What the fuck is this?’
Most immediately, enlightenment presented itself as having nothing to do with any of the practices I’d been engaged in. The idea that meditation – or any activity whatsoever – had any bearing upon it was laughable. So this was how I spent the first few days, walking around, seeing emptiness everywhere and realising there was nothing to do and nowhere to go because ‘just this’ was ‘it’ all along.
Alan had been there a couple of weeks already. ‘Now try some Ramana Maharshi self-inquiry,’ he suggested. ‘It’s mental!’
I took his advice and recoiled from the profound shock of it. When I asked ‘Who am I?’ formerly the answer was always in the shape of an idea or sensation. But now the answer was crystal clear and returned in the form of an experience: emptiness. That ‘thing’ beyond awareness, which was neither an idea, sensation, feeling, thought or perception, which was infinite, eternal, changeless and unconditioned – well, that was ‘me’. And I could see also how this realisation of ‘I am that‘ is available right now to everyone on the planet.
But this is where the warm and fuzzy part of the story ends, because the past six months have been more of a struggle than I ever expected. That quip about ‘what if you get enlightened and discover you don’t like it?’ has returned to haunt me.
Here are some words describing how I’ve felt since that big special moment back in March: doubtful, depressed, frustrated and pissed off.
‘You can’t be enlightened, then,’ is the obvious rejoinder, in which case I point the reader back to what I’ve written above. None of that recognition of emptiness in all things has ever gone away or faded since the moment it first reared up. Abiding non-dual awareness has taken up home in me and seems resolved to stay. It’s unaffected by anything I do or not do. If I’m happy, I see it; but so too if I’m miserable, bored, being stupid or acting like a git. Becoming kinder or happier, therefore, does not depend on my gaining some supposed ‘deeper insight’ into the nature of reality. How can you go ‘deeper’ into something than realising it doesn’t exist? Being kinder and happier depends simply on practising those behaviours.
It’s doubt that has been my biggest tormentor. The commentator in my head continues to insist: ‘This can’t be real. This can’t be it. You’re going to lose it, aren’t you? Is it still there? Go on, check! You’re deluding yourself.’
But every time I check I see the same. Yet this constant checking fails to abate the need to check again and test and console myself with the proof of it, which is then immediately doubted all over again.
It’s stupid. I see it clearly, but that doesn’t prevent it from happening. It reminds me of the friend of a friend who was diagnosed as schizophrenic: ‘I know the voices aren’t real,’ this person reportedly said, ‘but it doesn’t stop me hearing them.’
I don’t have schizophrenia; just an acute case of karma. When I meditate now, the focus has shifted slightly from the nature of stuff arising to its nature as arising stuff. It comes, persists, insists, impermanent, without essence and unsatisfactory, but it arises nevertheless – according to some configuration that lies far beyond my personal awareness.
We generally label this unacknowledged configuration in the way our thoughts and impulses arise with the word ‘habit’. I never dreamed that one of the main lessons of enlightenment is how deep and intractable the grip of habit is upon our lives.
Habit is empty, of course. It’s not a thing in itself but, like everything, phenomena created from a circumstantial pattern of other phenomena, passing itself off as something distinct. But habit doesn’t need to be absolute (impossible, naturally) in order to exercise an iron grip; it’s the position where it sits that gives it its power. In the realm of the senses, whatever presents to awareness comes via the sense organs. Analogously, in the realm of the mind, arising thoughts and ideas seem first to have been filtered through a layer of habit.
Looking back across my life and considering the habits of thought I’ve acquired from education and experience, it’s clear that doubt and negativity have always been my trusty friends.
I test ideas by attacking them and doing my best to rip them down until there’s nothing standing. If anything remains, then I take this as a sign it might be true. It’s my rule not to take on trust anything I haven’t first tried to tear apart.
This hasn’t been an intellectual choice. (I doubt that such a thing is possible.) Early upbringing and character have determined how I approach ideas. I’ve never adopted a philosophy that I haven’t seen through and grew sick of in time. This has led to dark episodes of disillusionment and confusion – but I don’t altogether regret them. I couldn’t have arrived at the insights I’ve accumulated without this attitude, for the good reason that I’ve never spared myself or my own experience from this same urge to tear things apart.
Skepticism gets things done. Negation is probably our most powerful intellectual tool. Think, for instance, of how vipassana depends upon rejecting every single notion or idea and proceeding on the basis of immediate experience alone. Or think of how the conceptualisation of God, the Absolute, only gets anywhere when approached in the apophatic mode – i.e. in purely negative terms.
The Vimuttimagga categorises people into three basic types: the walker in passion, the walker in hate, and the walker in infatuation. My type, the one that ‘is given to fault-finding’ and ‘does not cleave (to what is good)’ (p. 56) is the walker in hate.
Each type works toward self-realisation at a particular speed and finds the going more or less difficult. The walker in passion gets there quickly, because he or she is accepting, intent on good and faithful to their ideals. Well, good for him! Yet, surprisingly, the walker in hate gets there quickly too, because ‘hate and intelligence are alike owing to three traits: non-clinging, searching for faults, repulsion’ (p. 56).
Being of a destructive cast of mind is helpful on the path to enlightenment. But – as I’ve realised – those same habits may not prove so helpful afterwards, because you cannot tear down emptiness. When emptiness is apparent in everything, the capacity to negate is pointless, self-contradictory. And equally, you cannot doubt the absolute; doubt is relative when set against the absolute, and is rendered futile.
Yet my habits of a life-time are not going to vanish overnight. Especially not when they’ve proved so helpful and successful in the past.
The Incredulity of Thomas (Caravaggio).
I take consolation in the story of St. Thomas, the one who doubted the resurrection until he’d personally seen the risen Christ and stuck his fingers in Christ’s wounds. ‘Do you believe because you see me?’ says Christ to Thomas. ‘How happy are those who believe without seeing me!’ (John 20: 29).
Exoteric Christianity is big on the notion of belief, so it’s easy to read this as Jesus admonishing Thomas for his lack of faith. But I think Christ is simply pointing out that Thomas might be less miserable if he didn’t keep constantly testing the fuck out of everything.
The risen body of Christ is not an animated corpse, but a metaphor for the body post-enlightenment. (The dharmakaya, it’s called in Buddhism.) To stick your fingers in the wounds of Christ is the pointless attempt to probe or grasp at absolute emptiness with the relative mind. Is it still there? Is it truly real? Is He truly resurrected? These are futile attempts to establish a proof beyond that which is proof already.
Indeed, happy are those not stupid enough for this!
Reference
Upatissa (1995). Vimuttimagga (‘The Path of Freedom’), trans. Rev. N.R.M. Ehara, Soma Thera, Kheminda Thera. Kandy, Sri Lanka: Buddhist Publication Society.
Duncan,
awesome. very interesting. thanks for sharing your first-person experience of ‘full’ enlightenment.
i especially like your closing: “The risen body of Christ is not an animated corpse, but a metaphor for the body post-enlightenment.” word.
however, as much as i would like to riff on this, i’m afraid that whatever i say here is only speculation and second-hand information on my part since i have no conscious experience of enlightenment, yet, at least from the first-person perspective of this bodymind. that said, allow me to riff on this by pointing out to the words of people who i believe already inhabit the “territory” of post-enlightenment (relatively speaking that is).
i’ve once heard someone Adyashanti what’s the difference between before and after enlightenment as far as thoughts are concerned. Adyashanti said that there are still thoughts, the only difference is that he doesn’t believe them any longer. however, once in a while he is still get carried away by some of those thoughts. he calls them “velcro” thoughts. for more context, check out this excerpt from “The End of Your World” – http://www.soundstrue.com/news/ADYAA/interview.php?utm_campaign=ADYAB_20090609_Adyashanti-Interview
another interesting perspective on this is from my teacher, Shinzen Young (yep, i’m a Shinzen pimp alright 
). check out this talk wherein he talked about “The awkward period between the Self-Self and the No Self” – http://ticokid.blogs.com/shinzen_young/2004/06/the_awkward_per.html – here’s a relevant excerpt on his description of post-enlightenment.
“It’s like a whole process of being born again, but you’re being written with a different ink. It’s a new substance, but it’s not a substance, you are being born as spirit. I know we talk about the spiritual path and it sounds great. “Oh yeah, I’d like to be spiritual”. Okay, take shard of ice and melt it, it turns into fluid water, and they you vaporize it. And that vapor is what in Latin is meant by Spiritus. It’s still H2O, but in some ways it’s a very different critter, not chemically different, but it behaves in a different way.”
so based on the above references and your description of your experience, i speculate that your version of “full” enlightenment is not that full (at least from the model of enlightenment that i subscribe to). imho, compared to the teachers i have quoted above, the bodymind that is Duncan has some ways to go )
having said that, i really appreciate your honesty and integrity for putting this out in the open and inspiring people like me for whom enlightenment remains an illusory concept.
my two cents,
~C
“Knowing clearly that life has the nature of being unborn, why is one held by life?” -Shizan
I was reading that before reading your post. I think it’s relevant. Then I read a quote a by the Buddha, referring to karma creating as an artist does. Sometimes all I can do is observe the creation even when it is painful. But just being able to be aware of the reality being created is enough, not judging, when possible, is enough.
I am not enlightened but still I test everything, every idea, thought, realization and not only that, but every relationship too. Karma creating as an artist does. And when the relationship can’t stand the test, I am left hurt not realizing it was me testing, testing, testing. Why? I don’t know? Karma creating as an artist (or is destroying?)does.
But now I can see that …
I also just wanted to say thanks for the clarity and honesty. I’d give it a few more months and if Buddha doesn’t deliver you should try Allah for those virgins instead.
I remember Ingram or someone writing something on DhO a while back, something to the effect of: Even when the Sun is shining perfectly, it can still take a while for the snow to melt.
“those same habits may not prove so helpful afterwards, because you cannot tear down emptines”
Yes. Agreed.
Thank you Duncan for this fascinating blog entry.
I loved your description of “that thing beyond awareness, which was neither an idea, sensation, feeling, thought or perception, which was infinite, eternal, changeless and unconditioned – well, that was me”.
I am not there yet, but I wonder if you have tried to act from the ‘That’. In other words, instead of enquiring into “Who am I?” (you know that very well already), the next step is to turn around and see how you can move your arms, blink or think from ‘That’. Can you see how ‘That’ is not only empty, but is also pure activity ‘in potens’, animating your body like a puppet, manifesting the entire universe moment-by-moment?
Kind regards,
Huanshen
@Dan: From where I’m sitting, it’s definitely a case of ‘grapes’ rather than ‘virgins’…
@Huanshen: Interesting, but I doubt I could see this… All I can see is my intention to see it – that’s how rubbish I am!
@C4: Just you wait, you’ll be asking Shinzen for your money back one day… If you haven’t moved in and had his babies by then… 
You are too humble Duncan. It can sound very abstract, but after waking up from the dream (enlightenment), the idea is just to take control of the dream of everyday reality. My senior Zen friends tell me that life then becomes like a wide aware lucid dream.
You can see your intention to see it and your intention triggers thoughts and movements. Now what is the source of your intention? Who is intending to see? It is ‘That’ – obviously. Now, if you voluntarily intend to think a thought, ‘That’ necessarily triggers the intention to think.
This intention stirs the mind stuff and creates a ripple or a wave that is seen or heard as a thought. Something was born out of nothing. Our Mind (‘That’) has created a thought that appears solid. When other similar thoughts connect to other thoughts, ordinary mind is born and we get identified to our psychological inner world.
It is a bit like Narcissus falling in love with its own image. But when we eventually see that it is an image and that the whole world that we naively saw as reality is just a wavelike creation of the Mind, it becomes great fun fun – even better than those virgins testifying that Allah is great.
@Duncan: LOL. fortunately i haven’t given Shinzen any money. and i don’t plan to (except for the phone-based retreats, which are worth every penny)
on a serious note, i’d like you to respond to the transcript of Shinzen’s talk i linked to and let me know what you think about it because it directly riffs on the context of your post here.
~C
thanks for this! the saying old habits die hard gets a whole new level of meaning, i don’t think enlightenment solves anything as much as it reveals something,
a new basis from which to live life. a life sans confusion, doubt and fear. which is a great relief in itself. but that’s about it.
Hey Duncan,
Thanks for opening up in this article. I really digged your description,
“verywhere and realising there was nothing to do and nowhere to go because ‘just this’ was ‘it’ all along.”
Resonated with a lot of what you wrote here, especially about adopting philosophies and eventually just wearing them down (and out). Definitely have done that in my own life. In my own experiences, I’ve noticed that depression, anxieties, habits just don’t die once you’ve had an enlightenment experience (and the varying degrees). They stick. To some degree it’s totally disheartening, because you feel at the moment of the experience like an entirely different person, born anew or perhaps just laughing at yourself, because you had forgotten who you were all along. The next few days might be spent like that, and then, whoops, an old grudge here, an old habit there, etc.
I guess the practice of enlightenment is an on-going thing, where we may have to give up our last stronghold–doubt. It’s very helpful, but I guess sometimes being vulnerable to the experience is something the heart must do ultimately. Something I’m always learning and relearning.
Anyway, great article here (as always)!
-shamansun
Thank you for this, Duncan. Unfortunately I have not been able to track my progress on any map and therefore cannot claim any attainments, but I have been having a similar experience for about a year as well. Thanks for keeping enlightenment open.
C4 said: …on a serious note, i’d like you to respond to the transcript of Shinzen’s talk i linked to and let me know what you think about it because it directly riffs on the context of your post here.
Sure, C! It was a nice link and I found it very helpful. Of course, the experience of emptiness cannot leave a person unchanged. I imagine there may be other transformations to go through – but I still can’t see how these can involve deeper insights into the nature of reality. Shinzen in the article, for instance, talks about paying attention to feedback from other people as the primary means of working out how you should modify your behaviour after realising ‘non self’. That doesn’t sound like insight. That sounds like listening to people and deciding not to act like a prat. Whether you do that or not will depend on inclination, not on understanding. I imagine, though, that emptiness over time proves an ever greater spur towards overcoming one’s karma and giving up acting like a prat.
Hi Duncan
Thanks for being so open and honest about this stuff, I think it’s useful for people to know what they’re getting themselves into
These days I like to think of enlightenment as a beginning (of a life led in authenticity) rather than an ending (of all our problems).
If you haven’t come across them already I’d recommend checking out the following books that deal with post awakening/enlightenment issues in what seems to me to be a really well balanced way.
“The End of Your World” by Adyashanti
“Eyes Wide Open” by Mariana Caplan
On a very different tack, I can recommend “What Is Self” by Bernadette Roberts. In case you have not come across her before, she describes a “no self” stage that she came across much later than the “no ego” stage (which is typically considered to be the final goal of the spiritual path). Her No Self stage should not be confused with the typical understanding of no self in buddhism – it’s something quite different. She also approaches things from a Catholic contemplative point of view, which is interesting for a bit of variety. I should warn you though – most people find her teaching pretty challenging. But I like a challenge.
Duncan, I appreciate your honesty. I’ve often wondered what happens to emotions after enlightenment, and I found the first “Jed McKenna” book unsatisfactory in that regard. Seems that the false core / false self we develop as a result of that first separation from our mothers, plus all the subsequent incorrect learning/adapting, before we see the first glimmers of Truth — all that samskara stuff can’t just disappear in an instant, as long as we still walk in this body, through this illusion. So I’m working on those issues in a therapy group while also furthering my nonduality studies. Thanks for your generosity and courage.
Nice article Dunc!
I have to agree very much with Alex here. I see the only antidote to the karma is to *consciously* act from original nature, or the habits will simply persist in all their glorious emptiness, with no reason for them to ever change.
Personally, I feel as if I’m making some head way. My whole outlook or approach to life is slowly changing as a result of consciously applying my new understanding to my habits and behaviours. I don’t feel as anywhere near as bad as I did when my enlightenment first happened. But then, I suppose I’m one of those annoying ‘walkers in passion’
I do feel at times that your doubt does you a disservice Dunc. How about turning that doubt on itself?
Duncan said: “Shinzen in the article, for instance, talks about paying attention to feedback from other people as the primary means of working out how you should modify your behaviour after realising ‘non self’. That doesn’t sound like insight. That sounds like listening to people and deciding not to act like a prat.”
i disagree with our assertion. if you’re familiar with integral theory, Shinzen was talking about the Right Quadrant (objective, behavoiral)– the way people see you from their own subjective view point.
i think Shinzen just basically says that you may be uber-enlightened from the first-person perspective (e.g. your own subjectivity) but you can still be an ass from the view of other people. didn’t Alan riff on this topic when he honed in on Andrew Cohen. i still remember that post.
what i take from Shinzen is that people should be able balanced the two (subjective, objective) at post-enlightenment — the self and the No Self — because ultimately, no matter how enlightened you are if you are not an island unto yourself (ie. interdependence) unless of course you choose to live in a cave by yourself all your life where the only sentient beings that could give you feedback are wild animals and bugs.
~C
But I’m wondering if I’m not actually starting to find my voice with this stuff at last!
A walker in passion is merely someone drawn towards things, whereas the walker is hate is someone repelled by them. Neither has an advantage over the other. The opposite of doubt is faith, which is just as distorted… Neither doubting nor believing has any special claim on Original Nature – as far as I can see…
I’m rather happy to discover that enlightenment doesn’t oblige us to become Princess Diana! What a relief! Negation and cynicism both have a place as powerful and transformative expressions of Original Nature…
I’m reading U.G. Krishnamurti at the moment and it seems he really had a handle on this… Profoundly enlightened and a unique and subtle teacher… More on this soon, no doubt!
i like U.G.. i consider him as one of my teachers early on the path. here’s my old post as my tribute to U.G. http://www.c4chaos.com/2006/03/c4chaos-says-enlightenment-is-a-myth-hah/
but when it comes to expression of enlightenment, he’s too grumpy for my taste his expression was not optimal in liberating other people of their suffering. he was an awesome negator of enlightenment, but he was not an effective communicator of the other facet of enlightenment.
in a sense Adyashanti is similar to U.G. in terms of negation (e.g. the Advaita Vedanta style). but i find Adyashanti to be a more effective communicator. he’s not that grumpy as compared to U.G.
Duncan, thank you for entertaining me and riffing on the Shinzen article i linked to. when you get a chance, i would like to hear your take on Adyashanti’s take on enlightenment – here’s the link again. it’s an excerpt from “The End of Your World” series (highly recommended) – http://www.soundstrue.com/news/ADYAA/interview.php?utm_campaign=ADYAB_20090609_Adyashanti-Interview
keep it flowing.
~C
@~C4Chaos: I am not saying that there’s no development possible after enlightenment, or that none is necessary! What I am saying is that you don’t get enlightened again. The challenge of personal development and finding the means to express the Absolute within one’s life continues… And I think Shinzen is a wise and lovely, wonderful, brilliant, kind and fabulous and very sweet man… (If you like that sort of thing…)
Your post here inspired me to write about being with Steve Armstrong recently who gave a great overview of all kinds of different karma. This dharma really points out the necessity for mindfulness always, not matter what, no matter how enlightened you are or not.
I can appreciate the difficulty now of walking in beauty, thank you for sharing.
Hail Duncan, the man who believes nothing but his doubting nature! Seriously, well done for another honest, veil-tearing account. Much respect, brother.
Hi, Duncan. If you could snap your fingers and erase everything you’ve attained to date — would you?
Alan, how about you?
Curious…. and thanks for this blog and this latest post.
- Chris
Duncan said: “What I am saying is that you don’t get enlightened again.”
that depends on one’s definition and/or conceptual/developmental model of enlightenment. for example, in Ken Wilber’s model there is a vertical and horizontal enlightenment.
http://personallifemedia.com/podcasts/236-buddhist-geeks/episodes/20574-horizontal-vertical
in Wilber’s model, i think you’re talking about *horizontal enlightenment* (which is the nondual realization of what is).
but generally i subscribe to this maxim from one insightful sage: “Today’s enlightenment is tomorrow’s mistake.”
~C
@Chris: I’d probably put it in terms of ‘putting the clock back’ rather than ditching something that has been obtained, but the answer is the same in either case: NO WAY!
@C4: Yes, ‘horizontal enlightenment’ is what I mean – in terms of Wilber’s model. That model is okay and has some value, but it’s fundamentally and obviously screwed. The vertical axis has its uses (although I’ve heard Alan on occasion argue against even this), but I don’t think it’s helpful to apply the word ‘enlightenment’ to the transition from one vertical stage to the next. I would indeed by enlightenment mean ‘non-dual realisation of what it’. Yet this is evidently not what is realised by a transition from one vertical level to the next. If you’re calling that ‘enlightenment’ then I’m interested to know why…
I don’t want to start a discussion about the merits of this model, though, because the questions it raises are Wilber’s problem, not mine. I’m not interested in sorting them out for him (and if we do that, he’ll only take the credit anyway – poor old Mr. Coombs!)
Today’s enlightenment is tomorrow’s mistake.
Providing I realise my mistake, you can count on me to blog all about it, just as I did when I mistook third path for fourth… It’s all good!
@Chris: Go back to ignorance? Never in a million years!
But then I wouldn’t undo any of the suffering I’ve been through in my life either, nor would I try to avoid the undoubtedly difficult events that lay ahead.
Hi Duncan, just happened upon this blog and post by way of Vince Horn by way of Buddhist Geeks, which I just discovered within the last week. Let me just say that this kind of discourse is great to read for an absolute neophyte such as Yours Truly. A few thoughts that came up when I read this:
- I am of the same inclination to doubt and tear down everything; interesting to read that such an attitude can be both good to attain enlightenment and ultimately become a curse
- In regards to habit, I just came across an old daoist quote that may be relevant: “Beware your thoughts as they become your words. Beware your words as they become your acts. Beware your actions as they become your habits. Beware your habits as they seal your fate.”
- I just listened to episode 6 of the BG podcast in which Daniel Ingram talks of the “Dark Night” that follows enlightenment… sounds like you may be experiencing this?
http://personallifemedia.com/podcasts/236-buddhist-geeks/episodes/3720-do
Again, thanks for sharing, and I’ll be following
Thanks everyone for this fascinating discussion.
I’ve recently begun to… dread… enlightenment. But I feel pulled toward it nonetheless. Is this just me (limited self) transferring my fear of bodily/mental dissolution onto something I don’t understand?
@Alan: “I don’t feel as anywhere near as bad as I did when my enlightenment first happened.”
At one point in a past post, Alan, you said you were going to write about how your experience of enlightenment and post-enlightenment were difficult. Can you go into some more detail on what your experience was (or can you point to where you have gone into it, if you have)? In what ways did you feel bad?
Nathan
Hey, I might sound naive, but… can therapy help? By your description of your problems, I’m thinking that something like gestalt or bioenergetic therapy can be of help. At least if they work on enlightened people in any way similar to how they work on the unenglightened!
Therapy?! I’ve already had more therapy than you’ve had hot dinners, matey!
It had crossed my mind – but the kind of misery and suffering that originally caused me to seek therapy (some years ago) isn’t there any more. It takes my breath away when I consider the effect of the liberating surge of insight I’ve gained through the practices over the past few years, compared with the marginal adjustment to my sense of well-being that therapy used to provide.
That’s not to disrespect therapy, however. ‘Marginal adjustment’ is often exactly what is needed with respect to discrete-life issues. And the alternative – i.e. *no* therapy – generally leads to no adjustment at all…
@Nathan: You can read more about my ‘bad time’ here:
http://openenlightenment.org/?p=127
I know Duncan and I are talking openly about some of the uncomfortable aspects that have come with enlightenment (in our experience anyway), but I would like to stress that there is no one here to suffer with or from these bad experiences as a result of enlightenment! Yes, it hurts, yes it is just as important (maybe more so) to tackle pain post-enlightenment as it was pre-enlightenment, but this pain has no beginning, no end, and is not an issue.
Alan,
Glad to hear that I don’t sound like a complete alien for Mars here. As I understandn it there is nothing higher than enlightenment, but the next step is to embody it. No need to become a saint. On the contrary, the purpose is to remain as ordinary as possible, but to act from ‘That’ with intention.
From a practical point of view, the focus of formal pracice changes. As an example, a friend of mine -with about 40 years of Zen practice- started it by shifting his focus from following the breath, to being ahead of the breath. What you do is to first spot the gap between the in and out breath. Then, you start merging with this empty gap. When you get the trick, breathing becomes a form of conscious action similar to the opening and closing of your hand. Gradually, the whole body becomes a kind of puppet animated by ‘That’. You will also feel your body energized as a result. Same applies to body movements and thoughts. Life should gradually feel like living in a lucid dream.
If sudden enlightenment is liberation from the Matrix to find our true nature (Dharmayaka), gradual cultivation after enlightenment is more like going back to the Matrix to perfect our astral (Samboghakaya) and physical avatar (Nirmanakaya).
-Alex
I suspected as much
I think that it’s kind of funny that as soon as Duncan posts something about having a hard time post-enlightenment and learning from it on here, everyone comes in with advice, under-researched analysis and other well intentioned but bizarre commentary.
I guess that it shows fairly clearly what most of us expect and wish from enlightenment and why we find ourselves in ‘the game’ to begin with. Me included
But it would be pleasant if some of the commentators first read through the rest of the blog, had a look on dharmaoverground and other such places. I have always been of the belief that I can only advise (let alone help) if I have better (or at least equal) experiential understanding, or better information than the recipient. Otherwise it’s hardly going to be helpful.
Thank you very much Duncan and Alan for creating this place.
Maybe my comment fits into “well intentioned but bizarre”. But this therapy stuff stuck in my head since I’ve read MCTB by Ingram; he states that therapy has done more for his psychic adjustment and functioning in the world a lot more than englightment. And as far as my humble understanding of this stuff goes, getting englightened doesn’t cure you of your neurotic, let us say, karma. It may empower enormously your skill to see through it and cut it, but it still takes libidinal investment to cut the karma chains.
I mean. I believe that the ordinary biological feeling of our body is joy. There’s a will to live encoded inside here, a joyful will to create and destrouy (both are acts of aggression). And neurosis – I’m drawing on Reich and Nietzsche and a little on Deleuze & Guattari – is encoded in our body/minds socio-historically; it twarths this will to live, takes it against itself. It’s all causal phenomena, it’s all in the level of karma, thus I don’t think englightment automatically changes this stuff and makes you less neurotic. Even because I think you need to take content into consideration to deal with it, it’s a whole different approach.
But I dunno. I’m not really versed in buddhist stuff. I remembered that ocidental esoteric groups used to demand that aspirants got through psychoterapy during the tutoring in the order. Wich means that englightment only is not enough? Being englightened makes you aware of the unconscious stuff? Even if it made – I don’t think so, but I admit I don’t know – we’re talking about systemic stuff. Your unconscious assemblages are not “just inside your head”; they’re in connection with the entire environment. Regarding this assertion, I like to bring the antipsychiatry methods of curing early psychosis: you have to work with the family, job, friends… All the system that sustains a certain mindstate and structure. I’m just digressing here. It would be cool, though, if Alan or Duncan approached this thematics. (:
Thanks Alan,
Shortly after my comment above, I went for a long bike ride and my dread died a peaceful death. I guess I’d been reading too many zen stories about monks cutting their arms off and jumping off cliffs.
Looking at the post you link to, I realize that I too have been holding onto this secret expectation: “Enlightenment – an event so incredible it cannot even be imagined – could be absolutely terrifying, and once it happens there is no stopping it. Will it feel like dying?”
Thanks again. I really appreciate what you guys are doing here.
This topic of “Doubt” is wonderful and important.
Metaphorically: we use our bodies during the day, and they naturally accummulate dirt. Then we shower with soap and water, removing the dirt, so our bodies are fresh and clean again.
Likewise with thinking. As we use our minds, we accummulate concepts, opinions, and dogmas. Ideas/beliefs like: “According to the Bible, I’ve been saved by Jesus.” Or “According to my interpretation of a Theravadin model, I got Enlightenment.” Etc, etc… whatever the particulars, these I/my/me concepts cloud the clarity of our perception.
Doubt and questioning is like the soap that helps us discard those superfluous concepts, and return to original clarity. Resisting doubt and questioning of beliefs is like neglecting to shower. It’s OK for a while, but eventually the gunk builds up and starts to smell. It’s no wonder that if you neglect doubting and questioning, the effect isn’t warm and fuzzy; it’s suffering and struggle.
Stuart
http://stuart-randomthoughts.blogspot.com/
http://home.comcast.net/~sresnick2/booboo.htm
Funny that, considering Dunc is all about doubting and questioning, and yet this is *the source* of his suffering and struggle.
As a fellow doubter, I’d say stick with your doubts. One of the blessings of this is that it becomes easier to accept whoever and whatever you might be, at whatever time, from whatever POV.
UG had the right idea, “If you knew what this was you would not want it”
A brilliant, forthright and grumpy old man.
And kudos for mentioning Thomas, a much maligned critical thinker. Poor chap has had a millennia of bad press for just doing what came naturally.
Alan wrote…
> Funny that, considering Dunc is all about
> doubting and questioning, and yet this is
> *the source* of his suffering and struggle.
This blog is titled “Open Enlightenment,” and posts use this word “enlightenment” over and over and over. If Duncan really does doubt and question meticulously… wouldn’t there be somewhere where he questions and examines *why* he’s embraced his particular ideas about enlightenment?
I’ve never seen such a thing, but perhaps I’ve missed it. Maybe you could point me to the place where Duncan has doubted and questioned his ideas about enlightenment, and his motivation for holding them?
Stuart
http://stuart-randomthoughts.blogspot.com/
http://home.comcast.net/~sresnick2/booboo.htm
Oh Stuart, you tedious, monomaniacal rascal, you!
I don’t insist that everyone should have read everything I’ve written, but in your case I make an exception. I have very little faith, however, that you’re more interested in what I’ve written than trolling this website… But here goes: On this website you should check out The Dialogue of Eris and Angelos, Part One and Part Two. (Clue: ‘Eris’ is my doubting part; ‘Angelos’ is my argument for pursuing enlightenment.) And there is the full record of my magical work (with Alan) that put me on my present path. As luck would have it, a good proportion of this is now available from all good bookshops in The Blood of the Saints and The Urn.
I trust you’ll be putting some money where your mouth is!
Duncan, although there is doubt, your descriptions here have a wonderful clarity to them. Thanks for sharing how this thing is unfolding.
And for those who might not have a copy of the Vimuttimagga on hand: http://buddha.co.il/article_eng01.htm