Open Enlightenment

Direct vs. Developmental Awakening

In this video response I explore the extreme examples of both direct and developmental views of enlightenment.

Note: I mention some traditions, but not all sub-sets or lineages within those traditions ascribe to the same direct or developmental view that I discuss.

Direct vs. Developmental Awakening from Alan Chapman on Vimeo.

Bookmark this article

States, Stages, Powers

In this weeks video installment, I tackle the question, ‘What is the relationship between spiritual states, stages, powers and enlightenment?’ asked by OE reader/watcher, Pied Piper. Enjoy…

States, Stages, Powers from Alan Chapman on Vimeo.

Bookmark this article

Being Ordinary Interview: Life, the Universe and Everything

I recently had the pleasure of chatting with Being Ordinary‘s Tom Buckley-Houston. Tom has done a wonderful job in editing down our very long discussion into a listenable interview. Although I talk about some of things I already touch on in this video, we end up discussing a diverse range of topics including astronauts, direct vs developmental paths and even the future of the human species. Check it out here!

Bookmark this article

The End of Open Enlightenment?

Bookmark this article

What is enlightenment?

Enlightenment is the recognition of original nature.

It is called original nature only because it has been forgotten. It was never lost, because it is the nature of even our forgetting.

Original nature is recognised as whole, complete, satisfied, peaceful, free, unbounded, unified, perfect, over-abundant, clear, divine, good, just, loving, compassionate, beautiful, untainted, unconditioned and true. Original nature – being Whole – is its own self-negation, manifest as the phenomenal world; and so only original nature is.

Enlightenment is the recognition that you are not this self, in a world of others, and never were. You were never born, and will never die; original nature is both birth and death, because only original nature is.

Enlightenment is the recognition of complete and absolute non-relation between any one thing and any other thing, because where there is no separation, no relationship can exist. How can original nature be reached, and by who, when only original nature is? Original nature is the subject that searches for original nature.

Enlightenment means there are no such things as ignorance and enlightenment, and the path and the purpose are one. Because there is no such thing as time, everything has always been this way and always will be. Only original nature is.

Enlightenment means all things have no beginning, no end, and are a non-issue. Enlightenment is not the beginning of anything or the end of anything, nor was ignorance ever a problem. Enlightenment is not an escape but an intimacy with all things, because only original nature is.

Enlightenment neither means life is not worth participating in, nor that life continues as it always has unchanged; recognition of original nature manifests as the expression of the good, and the actions of the person who has experienced enlightenment reflect this, because only original nature is. A person that has no beginning, no end and has no issues is a perfect expression of original nature: boundlessly compassionate and peaceful.

Enlightenment creates a better world for everyone through an open mind and an open heart, even though there is no world to improve, no one to improve it or anyone to help, because only original nature is.

However, none of this is recognised unless recognition has occurred.

Enlightenment is and always will be an event that happens to people, because only original nature is.

Bookmark this article

Lost in Translation

I’m only five satsangs in to my teaching career, but I think it’s time for a course correction.

In the past I‘ve always considered the irreverence for authority prevalent in the West to be a good thing. Authority is prone to abuse, and is often faked; respect should only be forthcoming when genuine authority is demonstrated.

In the past I’ve found the offense Eastern teachers take from the Westerner’s failure to acknowledge position and status a quant example of culture shock. I’ve also considered Westerner teachers who bemoan our irreverence to be suffering from their own power trips.

But then I had never tried to teach before; I had never encountered how easily people’s issues can co-opt a session (to their complete ignorance); how the failure to honour a teaching hierarchy (especially on my part) can allow others to sabotage the time with their own lack of integrity by holding forth with their opinions; how a student first needs to recognise the teacher’s function and their own reason for being there before any real teaching can commence.

I’ve experienced all of these things (and more) in my very short time as a teacher. And all of this is due to my own naivety!

My plan was simple: I would adapt a traditional Eastern method of teaching by holding a weekly satsang, where those wishing to explore enlightenment could come and ask me questions as a means of facilitating their own enlightenment. It would be relaxed, open and informal. As I was just starting out, I thought adopting a donation model would work best: the room was cheap, and maybe if everyone gave a couple of pounds, I could cover the room hire and perhaps save a bit of cash that could eventually go towards hiring a bigger and better venue, or perhaps allow me to buy a few cushions for our sits, or even organise a weekend retreat.

But the sad fact is very few people are interested in enlightenment, many cannot and do not recognise the function of a teacher, and some couldn’t care less if the cost of the room is covered if they don’t really have to pay.

I’ve come to the conclusion that we Westerner’s only really respect one thing: what we have paid for.

About turn

I like to think of myself as a quick study rather than a failure, but the truth is I have come realise that I am doing my students or the attendees to my teaching sessions an incredible disservice by not honouring the fact they are Western, thereby failing to offer them:

a). a structured, easy to digest teaching (perhaps in modules or stages).

b). a structured, formal teaching environment.

c). the facility to pay a set price for a given service. Let’s face it: you’re only going to pay for something you actually want, and if you’ve paid for it, you’ll definitely try and get all you can out of it!

So I’ve cancelled my forthcoming satsangs, and I hope in a short while to return with a series of talks/workshops that will cover my teaching in a structured, easy to understand manner, and with a set ticket price.  I hope this will naturally follow on to weekend and week long retreats.

I have gained a few formal students in this period (and I will continue to accept prospective students) with whom I maintain frequent, personal contact on a 1-2-1 basis (which is a bonus as no money is involved). If you were intending to come to one of the cancelled satsangs, and you are genuinely interested in enlightenment, feel free to e-mail me: alan at (replace with @) openenlightenment.org (no spaces) and we’ll see where we go from there.

Bookmark this article

The Dirty Little Secret of Awakening

There is something wrong with the Dharma.

A sickness is festering, unchecked, in the shadows of the great Saints, Sages and Prophets. Its symptoms include the countless examples of psychological, physical, and sexual abuses visited upon students and devotees by gurus, the financial exploitation, corruption, fraud, murder and drug abuse perpetrated by teachers from both the East and West, the political infighting evident in every major lineage and school, the outright failure of many traditions in producing awakened practitioners, the reluctance of genuinely awakened individuals in coming forward and openly discussing enlightenment, and the casual racism, sexism, fascism and homophobia still found in ‘spiritual culture’.

Ironically, all of this is the result of an endeavour to uphold the highest standards of morality.

Gestation

It’s been just over nine months since my final awakening, and I’ve recently become aware of how easily I became infected with the sickness, and since beginning to teach, the potential for just how severe the symptoms could become.

Since beginning this blog last year, we’ve been visited by a number of individuals who are so badly infected by the sickness that their only chance of recovery – if any – is a Dharma lobotomy. I expect that what I’m going to write here is probably going to attract more of this type, and probably with further accusations of my awakening being anything but genuine or full (see how many times you can spot something that can’t possibly mean I’m enlightened). But if the Dharma is ever going to recover, someone has to bite the bullet and expose the Dirty Little Secret no one wishes to address.

Early detection

Post-awakening is just as much a learning curve as pre-awakening. For a couple of months after my awakening, I felt like I had been emptied out. I was effortlessly present, blissed out, calm and contented. I had of course experienced something similar with my peak and partial awakenings, and so I knew that this state wouldn’t last forever.

So what had permanently changed?

Although many gurus speak about the eradication of the ego or the self, I already knew pre-awakening that many genuine teachers found this model inaccurate and misleading; and my experience confirmed this. I still had an ego, a self or personality; but it did seem as if the subject/object divide had disappeared for good, and had been replaced by wholeness or completion at a fundamental level. So that must be it: I was no longer a subject!

And the sickness had slipped in by simply changing its name.

Diagnosis

We can readily identify the sickness by considering perhaps the most essential (no pun intended) concept of Buddhism: No-Self.

According to Buddhism, No-Self is one of the three characteristics evident in all phenomena, including human beings. If we observe a sensation close enough, we can see that it has no ‘essence’, despite the fact we readily assume all subjects and objects to possess such a quality.

What this has come to mean, however, is the idea that if we believe or act as though we possess a self, say by performing any actions that can be considered ‘selfish’ or ‘egotistical’, then we are acting from a place of ignorance.

Ergo, the enlightened person must be completely selfless.

In my own case, if I am no longer a subject, that means I must act as if I no longer have the concerns that a subject possesses, no? Which, for all intents and purposes, is exactly the same thing as believing I am selfless.

Furthermore, as I am awakened, I cannot possibly act with selfish, egotistical or ‘ignorant’ intent.  My motivations must always be pure then!

Now stick me in a room, surround me by devotees who also behave as if I am infallibly selfless and pure, and watch as I play out every whim unburdened by conscience (‘My devotees bitch and moan when I force them to practice for 48hrs straight/give me their inheritance for my Open Enlightenment centre/play out my sexual fantasies. Of course, they wouldn’t complain if they were awakened like me; I need to make them work harder/give me more money/perform more interesting sexual feats, more often!’).

The abusive guru and the gullible devotee is but one of the many symptoms of the Ignorant Bliss of Selflessness (IBS).

The Dirty Little Secret

The awful truth about awakening (and this has taken me a while to really understand with a degree of clarity) is that the self, ego, personality and even the subject don’t go anywhere, which means that selfish, egotistical, personal and subjective behaviour all remain. If you are greedy, angry and homophobic before awakening, chances are you’ll still be greedy, angry and homophobic afterwards.

If we define awakening as the recognition of our original nature, we can say that the awakened person is simply aware that all phenomenon is original nature; this includes all of the neuroses, issues, and prejudices that come with being a human being. This does not mean the self, ego, personality or subject are eradicated; they are simply seen as perfect, whole and complete. (Get over it.)

Or, to speak in Buddhist terms, No Self does not mean there is no self, but that the self is empty, along with everything else (including your ego, personality, issues, psychosis, facial ticks…and even emptiness itself!).

Perhaps if the concept of Empty Self replaced that of No Self we might go some way to inhibiting the spread of the Ignorant Bliss of Selflessness.

Further Symptoms

With selflessness as the yard stick for awakening, it should come as no surprise that:

• Many Dharma practitioners deny and suppress their angry, greedy, lustful, attached, ignorant, anxious, weird, disturbed, restless, unhappy, sad, mad, bad and selfish emotions, thoughts and behaviours, only to have these unwanted and unloved aspects of themselves play out while the practitioner remains oblivious and ignorant to the fact, and usually within a Sangha or group of similarly deluded hypocrites, where everyone pretends they’re the most ‘enlightened’ people on the planet!
• Many awakened practitioners mistakenly believe they are not awakened because they are evidently not selfless.
• Many schools and lineages of enlightenment will not tolerate discussion of awakening for fear of being accused of displaying pride or attachment, resulting in many genuinely awakened practitioners remaining silent about the phenomenon for fear of expulsion/exclusion.
• By denying their prejudices even exist, the racism, sexism, fascism and homophobia (and even heterophobia!) of many practitioners are left unchecked and unaddressed within the ‘spiritual’ community.
• By investing in a poor model of awakening based on the ideal of selflessness, the mainstay of the Dharma community is catastrophically failing in facilitating awakening in themselves and others. The vows of many traditions and lineages have become nothing but a joke.

Treatment

Thankfully, treatment is free and available to everyone, and recovery is fast and virtually guaranteed.

The treatment is three fold:

1). Be honest with yourself and everyone else, even if you’ve invested a lot of time and energy in a certain worldview, tradition or identity that encourages the Ignorant Bliss of Selflessness. If you really care about awakening, show some integrity.

2). Now that you can consciously accept the existence of your ego and issues, you should address them. Sociopath? Have some therapy! Full of hate? Explore the nature and possible root cause of your anger! Proud? Make your competitiveness work for the cause by becoming the best awakened teacher the world has ever seen!

3).Take a sitting session for a minimum of half an hour once a day. While it is true that just before and after awakening selflessness and compassion (amongst other wonderful attributes) spontaneously arise, which positively transform the world like nothing else can, this kind of ‘perfect meditation’ passes; it is therefore down to a daily practice to foster the natural expression of openness, compassion, freedom, wholeness, peace, generosity and selflessness that demonstrates our original nature. Whether awakened or not, enlightenment must be practiced in order that we transform the world; sitting is one such method.

It should be noted that despite everything I’ve said, enlightenment does have a profound effect on a person, and it can change his or her behaviour in a very profound sense; but exactly how and to what degree appears to vary with each individual. I like to think that enlightenment doesn’t produce the perfect human being, but it does produce a better one.

Right, let’s have it

Come on then: just how unenlightened am I?

Bookmark this article

Permission to Satsang

Over the holidays my mum asked me how my writing was going. I shrugged my shoulders because progress had been slow (as it always is in the publishing world). But then I remembered there was a new development, and proudly announced that I had held my first satsang recently. I’m not quite sure she fully understood the concept of a satsang, but she nevertheless looked puzzled and asked me that if I was teaching surely I would need some type of qualification from someone. Without going into too many details, I told her my experience spoke for itself, and left it at that.

But experience alone doesn’t make a good teacher, does it?

I’ve said it on this site before, and I’ll say it again: just because you’ve experienced awakening, it doesn’t mean you fully understand it, have an accurate and healthy approach to it or that you are teacher material (not to mention that some awakened people don’t want to teach at all!).

Top Secret

A few commentators on this site are students of Shinzen Young, who advocates maintaining a relationship with a teacher – or someone more advanced along the path – regardless of whether you’ve experienced enlightenment or not. I reached enlightenment without a teacher, and I was lucky enough to do so without making too many big mistakes; but I’m not naive enough to think I won’t make mistakes in the future, and so taking Shinzen’s advice, a few months ago I decided to see if I could find a teacher before taking up the mantle myself.

Of course, Shinzen would be the obvious choice (as recommended by his students), but after reviewing what he offered I decided I really needed someone closer to home who I could talk to face to face. After a bit of a search, I came across Mr. X (I’m not giving his name because I’m not sure he wants any attention), a dharma heir to Master Gudo Nishijima of the Soto Zen lineage. Being a big Dogen fan, I hoped we might have a common ground on which to discuss enlightenment. I prayed he wasn’t going to be one of those strange breed of Zen types who refuse to talk about awakening.

I need not have worried; Mr X was open about enlightenment and versed in many traditions (even my own). His enlightenment had been a gradual falling away affair after his life took a difficult turn, as opposed to my three stage awakening, but he recognised that the process unfolds in a variety of ways (although he seemed to take some time probing me before he seemed sure I was enlightened). I was convinced that his awakening was authentic due to my experience of intersubjective enlightenment upon first meeting him, and because he spoke to my experience.

At the end of the discussion, I was quite thrown when Mr. X asked me what I actually wanted. Why had I come to see him? Was I looking for confirmation of my experience, for permission to teach? I certainly wasn’t looking for anyone’s confirmation or permission (God forbid!), and although I arrived at his doorstep with no clear reason to be there, what I did get was an interesting insight into Mr. X’s experience as a teacher.

Mr. X had begun teaching Zazen and the dharma as per his lineage, and although at one point he had a modest Sangha, he eventually decided to stop teaching a group, to close down his popular website, and to carefully vet any prospective students.  He had met too many ‘damaged people’ he said, and his lineage, no doubt thanks to the popularity of Brad Warner, tended to attract for the most part people who were only interested in having a Zen teacher or belonging to a Zen lineage for the kudos. Mr. X was pretty sure he could make a lot of money if wanted to by publishing the couple of books he had written, shaving his head and by giving talks wearing the special Zen robe he had received at dharma transmission. But this to him has nothing to do awakening or helping others get there.

This gave me a lot to think about. Exactly why did I want to teach? To make money? To be a famous teacher? Was I prepared to take on the responsibility of dealing with ‘damaged people’ or insincere seekers?

Mr. X’s advice was to think about teaching very carefully, and to write a book. That way, people would have something of substance.

The Satsang Has Landed

After thinking about it for a long time, I decided that teaching was a natural progression for me (I am of course already writing a few books!). I think there is much more to be gained by sharing my knowledge and experience than there is from hiding away for fear of having to deal with difficult people or their issues (which I already have some experience with after running a popular occult website for a few years). And of course, I can always visit Mr. X should I need advice.

Whether or not I will make a good teacher remains to be seen. And here’s hoping I don’t become an ego-maniac…(I can hear Duncan now: ‘What do you mean, ‘become’?!’)

My first satsang happened on 17^th December 2009 at the Bonnington Centre in Vauxhall, London. 5 people turned up (7 including me and my wife) which isn’t bad for an inaugural meeting on a cold, wintery night in London. I very much enjoyed myself, although I must confess I found the experience a little bizarre, sitting in an armchair in the middle of the room dispensing off the cuff ‘wisdom’ (ha!), but I was surprised at how relaxed and easy the night went, and at how great the people were who came that night (thankfully no ‘damaged’ people!). I hope everyone else got as much out of it as I did.

I look forward to making the satsang a weekly occurrence (possibly starting mid January), and I hope to record the results and maybe post them here for those who might benefit from them.

Bookmark this article

Micro-patronage is a macro-flop

Spurred on by the success of other sites employing the micro-patronage business model, I had hoped to finance the Open Enlightenment project with recurring low monthly donations by generous readers. However, this approach has always sat uncomfortably with Dunc, and so after a good deal of debate and deliberation, I have relented and cancelled the forthcoming micro-patronage drive.

This does mean that certain objectives have been put on the back burner, but we are still open to donations and – as Duncan has been fond of telling me recently – we are still going to be doing everything we have planned anyway!

Onwards and upwards…

Bookmark this article

The Myth of Lineage

There is a common misperception in the West regarding tradition, especially as it relates to lineage within a school that facilitates enlightenment. The two main elements of this misperception are:

In the East, there are unbroken lineages of enlightened teachers/students that transfer the dharma successfully from generation to generation, evident in many of the schools of Buddhism.

In the West, there is and never have been any awakened lineages to speak of. As a result, no Western ‘tradition’ really has anything to offer comparable to the Eastern schools.

But what exactly is meant by ‘dharma’?

Is the dharma the teachings of Siddartha Gautama (563-483 BCE)?

If this is the case, then dharma transmission is nothing but the teaching of concepts, method and culture that have accumulated over the last 2,500 years since the historical Buddha lived. This is completely divorced from the actual experience of awakening, and transmission of the dharma would not require direct, personal experience of enlightenment in order to become a ‘dharma heir’.

Indeed, we can see such a culture evident in Japanese Buddhism, where certain Zen schools are owned by families who pass down the ‘possession of the dharma’ from father to son. This is dharma transmission as family business.

Furthermore, it is common scholarly knowledge that there exists no authentic record of any lineage dating back to the historical Buddha, none whatsoever. Any lineage claiming such a thing is a result of an attempt at some point in the past to raise the profile of the school in question.

Is the dharma the order or law of the universe?

Again, this is not the experience of enlightenment, but a conceptual model or framework of reality. Does the ‘transmission’ of such a model equate with the direct personal experience of awakening?

Is the dharma the transmission of awakening itself?

The Record of the Transmission of the Light reports:

Once, the World-honoured One (Buddha) held up a flower and blinked his eyes. Kashyapa broke out in a smile. The World-honoured One said, ‘I have the Treasury of the Eye of the True Dharma, the ineffable mind of nirvana. I entrust it to Mahakashyapa.’

The moment that Kashyapa smiled is the moment he became awakened in the presence of the Buddha. Regardless of the historical accuracy of this record, the phenomenon of the transmission of enlightenment from one person to another is not just reported by Buddhism; for many Advaita Vedantist’s, it is the only way to achieve enlightenment.

However, although it may appear as if ‘something’ is transmitted from a teacher to a student, the truth of the matter is that what is recognised during enlightenment is not a ‘thing’ locatable in space/time, nor is it something that is ‘missing’, ‘lost’ or ‘lacking’ that the newly awakened student ‘receives’ from outside of him or herself. Similarly, it is not that the Buddha or any awakened individual has ‘gained’ that which is recognised at enlightenment, and so it is not possible for that person to ‘give’ it to anyone either.

This does not mean that awakening cannot and does not occur in the presence of someone already awakened, as my own experience is testament to. But a more fitting understanding of the phenomenon might be the idea of resonance, as if something about the behaviour of the awakened individual can cause another to resonate in a similar fashion to foster a recognition of his or her own, much like a vibration at a particular frequency can cause objects to vibrate in a similar fashion (note that this is just a metaphor; I am not positing ‘enlightenment vibrations’).

It follows then that the dharma as direct, personal awakening is not something that can be possessed, owned or given by any lineage; but a lineage that teaches an understanding of enlightenment – dharma as the teaching of the Buddha and as a model of reality – and helps to facilitate enlightenment in students – which includes the presence of awakened individuals – is certainly something of value.

However, exactly how many lineages match such a description?

Genesis of a tradition

What are the possible origins of a tradition, school or lineage? Here are a number of elements that may play a part in their creation:

• An individual’s experience of awakening
• An individual’s particular understanding and model of reality
• Politics
• Greed for power/money/sex
• Business
• The kudos of being a holy teacher

No doubt there are many more, but this is enough to understand that there is a staggering number of possible combinations of the above that may go in to the creation – and revision – of a tradition.

For instance, someone who has a good model of reality after years of sitting and study might start teaching for the kudos and the access to easy sexual conquests.

Or a genuinely awakened person might decide to make a lot of money out of the fact they are the real deal.

Or someone who really wants to help others experience enlightenment might also enjoy wielding political power.

Even if we leave the question of motivation out of the equation for the moment, and just focus on the authenticity or quality of a teaching or school, we should be aware that:

• Just because an individual has had a genuine awakening, it doesn’t mean he or she can produce an accurate understanding of the experience or a useful model of reality, nor does it mean he or she will or has helped anyone else experience enlightenment, even if a lineage is produced in his or her name, and even if to this day it remains ‘unbroken’.
• Just because an individual has spent many years with awakened teachers, and has a firm understanding of an accurate model of reality and enlightenment, it doesn’t mean he or she has had a genuine awakening, even if he or she decides to set up a school or lineage.
• Just because a lineage teaches a model of enlightenment, it doesn’t mean it is accurate or helpful, that any of the teachers have any direct experience of what they are talking about, or even that the lineage began with an awakened individual.

Given everything considered above, the idea that we should simply look to the East to find ‘unbroken’ lineages of enlightened, ethical and wise individuals is naive at best. A failure to consider the many possible variables involved in a school that promises dharma transmission is no doubt a large enabling factor to the countless abuses perpetrated by guru after guru in the late 20^th century (and which no doubt still occur today).

Next time you come across an ‘unbroken’ lineage, you should ask yourself exactly what is ‘unbroken’: a certain view of the world? A business model? An empty, irrelevant and unaccessible culture? Superstition? Abuse?

Or that rare thing: a group of genuinely awakened individuals, with a good understanding of the phenomenon, whose main concern is helping others to wake up too?

Right on our doorstep

We can now offer a slightly revised definition of the dharma:

The signifier: a model that describes reality based on awakening/enlightenment

And the signified: That which is recognised at awakening/enlightenment, including our relationship to ‘that’, the resulting view of the world, the way we live according to ‘that’ and the beliefs we hold about ourselves, each other and reality.

Although there is much historical evidence to suggest the ‘unbroken’ lineage of a number of occult or secret traditions of enlightenment in the West, we have no way of knowing just how many authentically awakened individuals were a part of these lineages, what was transmitted, what the motivations were behind many of them and their members, or even who the traditions started with. Sound familiar?

However, we do have many surviving Western teachings or models of reality – examples of the signifier – in the works produced by the Greek philosophers, such as Plato, Plotinus and Proclus; the Christian mystics, such as Pseudo-Dionysius and St. Theresa of Avila; the Medieval alchemists, such as Paracelsus and Agrippa; the Renaissance Hermeticists and Christian Cabalists, such as Ficino, Pico della Mirandola and Giordano Bruno; the Elizabethan magicians and alchemists, Dr. John Dee and Edward Kelley; the Rosicrucians and the countless mystery schools; the Freemasons, such as Elias Ashmole; the Traditionalists, such as Julius Evola and Rene Guenon; the Fourth Way and G.I. Gurdjieff; and the traditions of Thelema and the A.’.A.’., founded by Aleister Crowley and continued by Robert Anton Wilson.

(Of course, there have been many ‘pseudo-traditions’ in the West, such as Theosophy and the Typhonian O.T.O., but again, this is just as prevalent in the East.)

I have to agree with Pierre Grimes when he claims that there is not any metaphysic – produced by anyone, anywhere – as profound as the one offered by the Greeks; and I have personally found the models offered by all of the above Western schools helpful, accurate, challenging, insightful and rewarding. And many of them speak in a very profound sense to my experience of enlightenment.

What this means is that there have always been people in the West experiencing enlightenment – albeit underground for a good millennia and a half – creating a spiritual culture as colourful and as rich as any found in the East. If you are interested in awakening, might there be something of value to be found here?

Ultimately, I don’t believe in tradition; unless there is another type of human being on this planet, with a different brain or mind or heart, the answer to the questions ‘Who are we?’ and ‘What is the truth?’ is the same for all of us. It doesn’t matter whether we are born in Burma or Birmingham, whether we are Hindu or Atheist, whether we are a part of a tradition or not, whether we know someone awakened or not; enlightenment is a human phenomenon, it’s everyone’s birthright, it’s possible for anyone to experience it and there are no definite limitations to who might provide a useful, accurate and helpful view of awakening and reality itself, regardless of lineage, culture or geographical location.

So I think it is time we dropped our naive infatuation with the East as somehow more ‘spiritual’ than the West, as well as our naive disregard for the Western pioneers of enlightenment who more often than not taught awakening at great risk of torture and murder. Rather than investing in the silly notion that the Buddha magically appeared in the East as the very first awakened individual and produced a number of unbroken lineages of realised humans right down to the present day (only coming to the West very recently), we should instead consider enlightenment as a human phenomenon that has occurred to many people all across the globe – as it did during the Axial Age, in three other places besides India: Greece (Philosophy), Israel (Monotheism – but not as we know it today!) and China (Daoism) – that is not dependent on adopting any single culture or religion.

Enlightenment is a human phenomenon, not the product of any lineage or school; isn’t it time we approached it as one? What might we be missing if we pigeon hole ourselves as ‘belonging’ to a ‘tradition’?

Bookmark this article