Awakening versus enlightenment

[Bindi]

From what I can understand, awakening apparently involves a realisation of reality, it’s about being in the present, with the mind at bay, no thoughts, which leads to this realisation, and it is available to anyone who is able to completely still their mind. In this state, what is not real appears to fall away over time, leaving only the present, and silence. Apparently risen Kundalini is not necessary to be in an awakened state. Please feel free to correct this definition.

But are those who claim to be awakened claiming to be enlightened, and what is enlightenment?

First and foremost it seems to me that in enlightenment there must be light, perhaps even an explosion of light within. This light is presumably associated with unity with God/the Cosmos, and direct knowledge from this source. And it is considered to be a long and arduous path to enlightenment, and certain conditions must be met, for example going beyond identity and ego. Is risen kundalini necessary to achieve an enlightened state? Again, this definition may need to be corrected.

It does seem that we in the West are more exposed to stories of ‘awakening’ than enlightenment – is it just different terminology, or is there a deeper difference? If there is a difference, does awakening lead to enlightenment?

[Jetsun]

 

From what I can understand, awakening apparently involves a realisation of reality, it’s about being in the present, with the mind at bay, no thoughts, which leads to this realisation, and it is available to anyone who is able to completely still their mind. In this state, what is not real appears to fall away over time, leaving only the present, and silence. Apparently risen Kundalini is not necessary to be in an awakened state. Please feel free to correct this definition.

 

I don't think it has to do with having no thoughts, it is more about realising that you are not defined by your thoughts and about the falling away of separate identity from within the heart and waking up as awareness. Your mind could be racing at 100 miles an hour but as long as you are rooted as awareness it makes no difference to awakeness because ultimately all thoughts arise within awareness and don't define it.

 

This is how Ric Weinman talks about his awakening 

 

"Susanne [my wife] asked me if I thought I was enlightened now. The question seems very funny. For an I to say it's enlightened just looks terribly funny, because the experience of I now is just part of this cloud of mind around me. How can it possibly be enlightened? And that I hasn't changed. If it wasn't enlightened before how could it be enlightened now? Even the awareness that has emerged has always been there, aware, but immersed in the sense of I. It hasn't changed either. So what could have gotten enlightened? For the first time enlightenment feels like a concept which belongs to the I, it's hopes and dreams and projections. This new experience doesn't feel anything like what I had associated with that concept, so how can I equate the two? I have no clue what 'enlightenment' means now. It seems like I knew more about enlightenment before this awakening than I do now."

               - P30 "Awakening Through the Veils" book

 

 

The confusion comes because some translators have translated the Buddha as talking about awakening as being equated with enlightenment, but I don't think many modern people who talk about it mean it in the same way.

 

My own personal thought is that both awakening and enlightenment are constant processes rather than destinations, we are constantly being awakened and enlightened, but the enlightened are ones who have worked through most of their stuff, while the awakened are just going into a new transition out of strict identification with being a separate being into something else, so they still have a lot of conditioning and parts of consciousness to wake up within them even though the core of their sense of I has fallen away. Which is why awake people can still be idiots and cheat on their partners and stuff like that.

Edited September 10, 2015 by Jetsun

[Nikolai1]

I agree with that Jetsun.  I think people start to announce their awakening when they realise that they can no longer back into the worldview of naive dualism. They have become too convinced by the awakened state and can never go back.  It doesn't mean that they are perfect, and if there is still strong traces of 'show-offery' left, the person can become a bit unbearable they way they announce themselves awakened.

[Jeff]

There is obviously a wide variation in the meaning of the terms depending upon the traditions, but...

 

Awakening is the realization of emptiness,  Enlightenment is the realization of the clear light of God...

 

Buddhahood/Christhood is the knowing/being that the two are really the same thing (just different sides of the coin/spectrum).

 

Best wishes.  

[forestofclarity]

It really depends on the traditions. 

 

I think most people use awakening to refer to a fundamental shift in identity. One common example is when one discovers the "witness" beyond the thinking mind, and so no longer takes oneself to be the thinking mind. Another example is when one discovers the subtle body. These are both called "awakening" but they are very different. 

 

Enlightenment typically means that there is a more or less permanent shift. In Buddhism, it is the end of suffering, or in some circles, omniscience. In Transcendental Meditation, there is talk of continuous, permanent awareness, even through sleep. In some Vedanta circles, it is permanently identifying with the atman. In most Buddhist circles, any type of identification is a problem. 

 

As for Kundalini, I think it again depends on the tradition. For example, in kundalini based traditions, everything is kundalini. Interest in spiritual teachings is a result of kundalini. In other traditions, there is more of a difference between wisdom/consciousness/awareness/cit/Shiva and energy/power/qi/kundalini/Shakti at the baser levels. Speculating somewhat, I think this is reflecting in Taoism as the difference between xing and ming. Of course, these two are ultimately non-dual. 

 

So for instance when one discovers inner energy, this can be considered a type of energy awakening. Discovering and refining the witness would be more of an consciousness awakening.

 

Having one doesn't necessarily mean that one also has the other, and different traditions often emphasize one over the other, or start at one over the other. 

[wilfred]

depends who you're asking and the context. in the ones i'm most familiar with (theravada/tibetan buddhism) the two terms are very much interchangeable, at least in my understanding. one can have a temporary awakening or sample the awakened experience, but enlightenment involves entering into this state on a permanent basis. for this to happen all defilements/past karmic charge must be eradicated through insight/wisdom and reaching perfect equanimity, which ultimately comes about by living virtuously and cultivating concentration, seeing there is no grounds for mental afflictions - grasping or rejecting. full realization of impermanence. no walk in the park, probably not within the reach of many in this lifetime, not because it's not possible but because of the size of the task at hand. there seem to be different paths that ultimately converge at the end point of 'enlightenment', some may use our relationship to basic ground or 'clear light' to break down hindrances whereas others need to work more systematically through their blockages to make best progress. i'm in the systematic camp, having plenty of awareness but lots of blockages to work through to increase equanimity.

 

one thing is for sure is that it's probably not worth worrying about until you're much further down the path of purification and that the best teaching is not found in books or literature. it seems like people are liable to go in circles for decades, even a lifetime without someone pointing the way. nobody ever gets enlightened by wanting to be enlightened. i guess i'm interested but i'm curious like that and like some context to things. and the kundalini stuff seems to be a bum steer, at least in the systems i'm aware of. energetic flows are something that open up by themselves as the groundwork is done and the system is open enough. that's a whole other topic and the body needs to be sufficiently conditioned to handle the current that starts to run through it.

 

w.

[Bud Jetsun]

Realization is a tool to chip away at the non-real.

 

Realization does not mean memorizing some words. Real-i-zations are the process of shifting one's mind towards what's real (words are human construct delusions).

 

Final realization is recognition all ones 'belief' of realization process has been also been delusional personal perception artifacts. There has never been any-thing to 'know'.

 

A realized being may still suffer. The difference is, they recognize it as their own choice and have awareness they are equally free to make self-compassionate choices.

 

No matter how realized one becomes, it is a process of the mind, and inherently fleeting.

 

Enlightenment and Awakening are labels for ineffable trans-mind awareness for which I'm not qualified to type.

 

If reading ones written definition of them could offer comprehension of them, even in a tiny way, then they wouldn't be worth pursuit anymore than any other intellectual comprehension.

 

Unfiltered complete oneness perception. Becoming the Way.

 

Unlimited Love,

-Bud

[Seeker of Wisdom]

From what I can understand, awakening apparently involves a realisation of reality, it’s about being in the present, with the mind at bay, no thoughts, which leads to this realisation, and it is available to anyone who is able to completely still their mind.

Realisation of reality - yes. The other things, not so much. How can anyone not be in the present? If awakening meant a lack of thought, then it'd be a very flimsy thing which you'd have to switch off whenever you needed to do anything. The ability to still the mind may be very useful, and a certain level of concentration ability is needed for good vipassana, but it's more important to see directly the true nature of whatever happens.

 

Whether you're absorbed in utter stillness, feeling one with everything, thinking over a complicated issue, walking to the shops, or whatever... you directly see it as impermanent, arising and passing every moment.

 

But are those who claim to be awakened claiming to be enlightened, and what is enlightenment?

Terminology. Awakening = enlightenment.

 

First and foremost it seems to me that in enlightenment there must be light, perhaps even an explosion of light within. This light is presumably associated with unity with God/the Cosmos, and direct knowledge from this source.

From a Buddhist perspective, the experiences you might describe in terms like 'explosion of light', 'unity', 'God' or 'Cosmos' aren't in a special category above things like an itch in your knee or hearing a car drive past. All experiences are equally powerful sources of fundamental insight: that everything is impermanent, dukkha and anatta. This fundamental insight is the heart of awakening from a Buddhist POV. You get it by looking closely at everything until it sinks in.

[Wells]

.

Edited May 10, 2016 by Wells

[Apech]

The Buddha used the term awakened.  Enlightenment is really a western term to do with the use of reason to shed light on things.  However of course due to translations 'enlightenment' is a common word for what the Buddha had.

 

Good or bad as expression - they do bring out the two sides of awakening.  In Daoist Internal Alchemy you cultivate Xing ( original nature) and Ming (life).  In Buddhism you cultivate emptiness and appearance (or luminosity), in vajrayana prana and citta and so on.  In Ancient Egypt Osiris and Ra (or the union of the the two souls).

 

This brings out an experiential fact that there is both our original nature or still, clear, emptiness which we cultivate by not-doing - by letting go of all attachments and resolving ourselves to our true nature .... and there is life/light energy qi/prana which we cultivate for both health and longevity and more importantly elevated states of awareness beyond the limits of the mundane.

 

Real awakening is the union of these two.  It is the realisation of our own nature but in communion with all existence, all others.  This way we have the non-duality of nature, relation and the variety of existence which is the pure flow of the absolute or Dao,

[seekingbuddha]

First and foremost, a thanks to the thread starter.  I have been thinking of  starting a topic on this subject, for sometime.

 

Realization is a tool to chip away at the non-real. Realization does not mean memorizing some words. Real-i-zations are the process of shifting one's mind towards what's real (words are human construct delusions). Final realization is recognition all ones 'belief' of realization process has been also been delusional personal perception artifacts. There has never been any-thing to 'know'. A realized being may still suffer. The difference is, they recognize it as their own choice and have awareness they are equally free to make self-compassionate choices. No matter how realized one becomes, it is a process of the mind, and inherently fleeting. Enlightenment and Awakening are labels for ineffable trans-mind awareness for which I'm not qualified to type. If reading ones written definition of them could offer comprehension of them, even in a tiny way, then they wouldn't be worth pursuit anymore than any other intellectual comprehension. Unfiltered complete oneness perception. Becoming the Way. Unlimited Love, -Bud

 

This is worth a read a second time, for those enquiring minds.  I see a lot of confusion among westerners about definitions.  The easterners  seem to be less concerned about definitions, but are more interested in attaining  real experiences...... There are some here, who understand things clearly - they seem to place more emphasis on practice rather than discussions.  Awakening  is a popular word used in the west, because  the teachers know that they can not tag themselves "Enlightened" - that word is  held in high reverence by easterners.  

 

It is important to  understand that  an "awakened" person  could still fall from that  state-of-mind.  So, I am careful about trusting  a teacher  too easily.  Literally, i mean literally,  there are millions of yogis /monks in eastern countries, who strive for  "Awakening".   But very few make  the  claim of reaching it...... that is the truth.   Lack of proper teachers is causing confusion in the west.  The word  "realization"  seems more appropriate,  because  this all happens on a gradient, and there are only  gradients of  realization.......

 

Why bother about  the  Supreme  Enlightenment,  when we have trouble  just practicing  the  basics/fundamentals/starting steps   prescribed  by  all the  Supreme  Teachers  that  human history has ever known in thousands of years ?  We  have trouble practicing  the foundations of  Sila (morality), Samadhi (proper meditation/contemplation), and Panna (experiential wisdom, not mere intellectual understanding).  If you truly want to reach  Awakening,  first find out what are the steps that you must take  to get there.  Then start doing those steps one by one.  Read the scriptures deeply, to understand the steps properly. 

 

The word "Awakening"  has gotten overloaded and hence misinterpreted by the west.  The word "Enlightenment" has gotten overloaded and misinterpreted.  The word  "Jhanas"  has gotten overloaded and misinterpreted.  Of course,  all the very best Supreme Teachers that entire  human race has ever known - they have all warned us about the forthcoming  "false teachers"  and  "misinterpretations"  (of  their  words).  So, this is all  happening,  as they foretold us, and warned us.  What I care about is  taking steps  on  the prescribed  PATH,  because the  PATH does not  end  until  you are Enlightened.  

 

"All experience is preceded by mind, led by mind, made by mind" - Dhammapada.

Awakening  is  an  Experience.  Enlightenment is beyond  experiences and words.

[MooNiNite]

Awakening and Enlightenment are the same thing. This is when an individual realizes their true nature (experientially). The individual actually becomes who they are. 

[Nikolai1]

This conversation is ridiculous and can't be anything more than dispute over semantics.

[MooNiNite]

I actually become a little upset inside whenever someone uses the term enlightenment to describe "shedding light" on some topic or idea. I think Buddha also shudders a little bit. 

Edited September 11, 2015 by MooNiNite

[Karl]

FWIW and here I cannot adequately claim the definitions are correct. Bud got it closest. It is just a natural human development like puberty. However, modern education techniques have created 'forever adolescents' which have halted a natural progression. In a sense this was also the case when our ancestors died earlier and worked so hard that they had little time for any expansion of awareness.

 

Awakening is the first stage and can happen spontaneously at quite a young age. I have read some evidence that the brain is wired in 'series' until puberty in order that it absorbs experience without a great deal of discernment. Then the brain matures into more separated areas and can begin processing the stored information more carefully. The awakened can go through increasingly permanent periods of lucidity-like when the voice breaks in males.

 

Enlightenment is just the end point of the process of awakening. I've heard it described as being analogous with a star which radiates energy (indeed one of the AYP sutras was 'radiance'). It is the end of the ego that demands more power, women, control, wealth, novelty etc and the enlightened begin to radiate wisdom like the Sun. They have nothing left to achieve. In men this is related to the reduction in testosterone (55 years)-it's very interesting that people like Trump, politicians and crooks are still very virile even way past 55 years so they should not be regarded as enlightened people. Women at 55 years are the opposite and begin to lose estrogen and become more active (perhaps this is a result of the body clock in which the natural requirement to nurture children is no longer required ). It's also likely that the wisest ancestors were regarded as enlightened because they lived a life in which they could live longer than the average peasant, servant or warrior.

 

I would describe myself as somewhat emerging into enlightenment and that completely fits with my age. This is how it seems to be. An ego that is no longer requiring as hedonistic lifestyle as it once demanded, more at peace, wiser and a lot, lot more confident. I'm no longer concerned about how people see me, or any form of taunting. It no longer registers with anything other than a mild amusement of an adult watching a child at play. It doesn't produce animosity or anything competitive but an appreciation for life as it is and I am as I am.

Edited September 11, 2015 by Karl

[Nikolai1]

In men this is related to the reduction in testosterone (55 years)-it's very interesting that people like Trump, politicians and crooks are still very virile even way past 55 years so they should not be regarded as enlightened people. Women at 55 years are the opposite and begin to lose estrogen and become more active (perhaps this is a result of the body clock in which the natural requirement to nurture children is no longer required ). 

This is an idea you hear in the most ancient traditions: that the awakened individual starts to take on the characteristics of both sexes: becomes androgynous.  So, yes, a man's testosterone falls and becomes more in balance with his oestrogen; vice versa for women.  This androgynity is reflected in action, and even physically in appearance. 

 

For me though, age isn't the variable as to whether this happens:  Many men remain very masucline, chasing women and power, until very late in life, and also like Trump and Berlusconi, tend not to be models of wisdom.  Others, like Ramana Maharshi, found himself at age 18 spontaneosusly surrounded by devotees who were writing down his transcendentally wise utterances...and never chased a pretty girl in his life.

 

There are too many exceptions for us to suggest that this is a program of biological maturation.

 

For a man, the gaining of wisdom IS the reduction of testosterone.  The latter is a biological reflection of the former.  Talk of causation can't be justified, only correlation.  For one conspicuoulsly seeking wisdom, this change might happen at any age whatsover.

[Karl]

This is an idea you hear in the most ancient traditions: that the awakened individual starts to take on the characteristics of both sexes: becomes androgynous. So, yes, a man's testosterone falls and becomes more in balance with his oestrogen; vice versa for women. This androgynity is reflected in action, and even physically in appearance.

 

For me though, age isn't the variable as to whether this happens: Many men remain very masucline, chasing women and power, until very late in life, and also like Trump and Berlusconi, tend not to be models of wisdom. Others, like Ramana Maharshi, found himself at age 18 spontaneosusly surrounded by devotees who were writing down his transcendentally wise utterances...and never chased a pretty girl in his life.

 

There are too many exceptions for us to suggest that this is a program of biological maturation.

 

For a man, the gaining of wisdom IS the reduction of testosterone. The latter is a biological reflection of the former. Talk of causation can't be justified, only correlation. For one conspicuoulsly seeking wisdom, this change might happen at any age whatsover.

I think it's generally but not specifically the case. Someone can be jump started into enlightenment, but not prior to 14 years. It's like a genius. The brain can be very different in certain individuals. Children that get an illness which they know will kill them in a few years develop some of this wisdom as a result of the knowledge.

 

I can't say if the drop in testosterone is a result of or a cause of wisdom. It's invariably related to the ability to live in a monogamous relationship for several years. There was a thread about this I read recently. Men who choose partners and stay faithful do begin to lose testosterone. Again, this is true in my particular case. Perhaps some are born with low testosterone to begin with ? I've never studied it so that's a guess.

Edited September 11, 2015 by Karl

[Jetsun]

So you think enlightenment is just about getting old? Most the children I know I consider more enlightened than the majority of adults I know because they have beginners mind and are not fixated into rigid ego positions yet.

[Karl]

So you think enlightenment is just about getting old? Most the children I know I consider more enlightened than the majority of adults I know because they have beginners mind and are not fixated into rigid ego positions yet.

 

Yes, in general I do. Children are innocent, uncomplicated, curious, imaginative and open. They are, by nature, incapable of discernment. This is why they must have responsible guardians. They give back but are not radiant in the sense of wisdom. Children in harsher environments can be persuaded to rape, murder and steal just as easily as they can be found as loving innocents in better conditions.

 

For too long children have been regarded as almost a separate species, an empty vessel which is to be filled with facts and behaviours. Children are in the same process as the rest of us. There is no magic point of adulthood, but a continual process as you pointed out.

 

This does not mean that all adults achieve wisdom, I would think perhaps there are fewer every year. Those that are looking for wisdom-enlightenment-are on a natural path. They know that the shell needs to be broken and are trying to discover the way to accelerate it. Unfortunately this path has been co-opted by new agers and psycorps propaganda. It leads people to either a life in a forest (back woods style hair shirtism) or the more esoteric occultism. Both lead back towards the destruction of enlightenment. This isn't something of an ad hoc anecdotal statement, but a description of definite social design. The same thing was applied to the hippy movement when it was over run with free love and drugs. Those that are trying to break out find themselves trapped like insects in Amber, by the very practices that they sort to free themselves by.

 

As I said, I would consider myself an example of enlightenment. Basically, despite the winds trying to bend and stunt my awareness I've managed to come through it relatively unscathed. I think that was because of fortitude and stubbornness. I was always ant-authority, but never so much as to stand out for a hammer to be applied to the protruding nail. I can remember myself as a young boy. I was a dreamer, but most certainly not enlightened, I had not experience of life.

[Nikolai1]

It's possible to be very liberated at the emotional level; after years of turmoil, to finally feel at peace with yourself,  To stand talll, and know that you are of equal worth, and that you don't need to bow and scrape- To be independent and self-actualised in the Maslow sense.

 

But intellectually, you can be very much trapped in the same old worldview of self and other, real vs not.real, truth and falsehood.

 

This needs to be mentioned in this thread.  That whatever breathroughs we make, they must be integrated into all aspects of our identity.

 

Those who have followed a path always bear the fruit they were aiming for first, and the rest needs to catch up.

[wilfred]

i believe the term 'awakened' has been trivialized to apply to a much wider group of people that it should do, at least in terms of what we're talking about here - it's meaning in eastern traditions. it's not something that can be broken down into words, but meeting realized teachers can shed light on the issue. as in it is a thing and the people who have got there may possess certain abilities.

 

when you hear of spontaneous awakenings, i believe people experience something profound, often a sample of the full awakened experience. this is enough to shift their perceptions, state of mind/consciousness to a siginificant degree, where the ground of awareness becomes much more obvious, but this is not likely to be full-on enlightenment. in buddhist terms people may have broken into the stream, or it could be something else altogether.

Edited September 11, 2015 by wilfred

[Bindi]

i believe the term 'awakened' has been trivialized to apply to a much wider group of people that it should do, at least in terms of what we're talking about here - it's meaning in eastern traditions. it's not something that can be broken down into words, but meeting realized teachers can shed light on the issue. as in it is a thing and the people who have got there may possess certain abilities.

 

when you hear of spotaneous awakenings, i believe people experience something that shifts their perceptions, state of mind/consciousness to a siginificant degree, where the ground of awareness becomes much more obvious, but this is not likely to be full-on enlightenment. in buddhist terms people may have broken into the stream, or it could be something else altogether.

One thing that bothers me about much 'Western awakening' is the simplistic formulas often recommended to achieve this state.

[C T]

In Master Linji's time [9th-century China], some Buddhist terms were used so often they became meaningless. People chewed on terms like 'liberation' and 'enlightenment' until they lost their power. It’s no different today. —Thich Nhat Hanh

[Bindi]

I didnt say  getting enlightened through the ordinary mind is a sin, but trying to go that way is a sin in Zen because it is a waste of time and effort because it is impossible. It is basically what everyone is doing all the time anyway... and failing.

 

Buddhists question everything to go beyond their mind not to stay trapped by it. To destroy concepts and positions. What do you think the point of Koans is? they lead directly beyond the regular mind to something else where there is a greater intelligence which they call prajna.

Jetsun, what is the nature of 'prajna'?

 

edit: I looked it up and found this definition...

 

"Prajna" is Sanskrit for "consciousness" or "wisdom." Wisdom in the Mahayana sense is an intimate, intuitive experience of the true nature of reality that cannot be contained by conceptual knowledge or reached by intellect. This true nature is shunyata, "emptiness."

 

The realization of prajna often is equated with enlightenment itself.

I am curious, because so many say emptiness is the true nature beyond mind, but can this be read as 'consciousness' is the true nature beyond mind, or intuitive experience, or really only emptiness?

Edited September 11, 2015 by Bindi

[manitou]

RE:  the OP.

 

That's an interesting question, as to whether kundalini rising is necessary for enlightenment.  I suspect that it is, because my personal experience was that the k-energy would get stuck in the chakras, and it became apparent to me that I had inner work to do in regards to that particular chakra to clear it.  In that regard, I think that the rising kundalini, if used for the purpose of self-development, could be very instrumental in the process of enlightenment.  As to whether it's absolutely necessary, who knows?  But it does seem to be a clearing out process, if used for that purpose.

 

The very word Awakening seems to imply a period of time, more so than Enlightenment, IMO.  I think Awakening can include a series of discoveries we make about ourselves - the 'Aha's!' that will pop into our psyche.  I think Awakening might describe the period of time after we realize that there's so much more to the physical than we realize, when we start to awaken to the truth.

 

And what is the truth?  That we are all one entity.  That the I Am of me is the very same as the I Am of you - only observed through different filters.  I think 'enlightenment' connotes enlightenment 'from something', in addition to having access to the Light within.  Enlightenment, to me, means to be enlightened of all structure.

 

All of it.  Buddhist, Daoist, Christian, Hindu.  It all goes to the same place, and the training wheels are no longer needed once the I Am, the Oneness, is found.

 

And once found, then what?  So I realize Who I Am.  What now?  To live with the ramifications one day at a time.  To stay present, knowing my connection to every life force on earth - to love my brother as myself - to give to another rather than take for myself.  This is where the real path starts, as I see it.  How to handle the ramifications.