Yeah, the other version (same thing, differently stated) is realizing "I'm just the witness". Which you get seems to depend on your tradition/previous learning/framing. Or that's my understanding, I am (probably) willing to defer. But awakening is not enlightenment.
-
-
Replying to @iwelsh @OortCloudAtlas and
What's the difference between awakening and enlightenment, in your view?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Failed_Buddhist @OortCloudAtlas and
awakening is when you get your first experiential proof that you are not all that crap. So, for example, my first awakening got me "I am not my personality". Didn't get me "I am not my body." Further awakenings got me other stuff.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @iwelsh @Failed_Buddhist and
as for enlightenment. /shrug/ there are a fair number of definitions that seem reasonable "I am everything/nothing", Jiva-mukti (end of new conditioning), the dissolving and reassembly of sense data, etc... Not sure which is "enlightenment". Am sure I am not enlightened.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @iwelsh @Failed_Buddhist and
however, other people use the words in other ways, and I am not saying they are wrong. This is just how I used them. I will say that this causes problem. My first main teacher told me I was enlightened. I said "uh, don't think so". He meant what I mean by awakened.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @iwelsh @OortCloudAtlas and
Let's not forget that "enlightenment" is a late western translation of "bodhi", which is also exactly where the term "awakening" comes from. So the distinction is, at best, a little murky. There isn't even a consensus among Buddhists as to what the Buddha "woke up" from (or to).
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Failed_Buddhist @iwelsh and
Personally I don't like these terms. They only start Buddhist flame wars and confuse people. Seems to me that "enlightenment" is just a placeholder for some vague notion of an "ultimate" attainment. The meaning changes depending on a tradition's language, culture, or metaphysics.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Failed_Buddhist @iwelsh and
Trying to get enlightened is a fool's errand, because it's a completely arbitrary goal. If you want insight into impermanence, do the specific practices that bring about that insight. If you want to glimpse emptiness or no-self, do the respective practices for these insights.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Failed_Buddhist @iwelsh and
Obviously it's a bit more complicated than that, but it's much more useful than lumping together 2,500 years of spiritual development across a variety of cultures.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Failed_Buddhist @iwelsh and
Much as I agree with many of your points, I think you are falling victim to some of the same language games here: the usefulness of wanting to get enlightened is entirely dependent on what is meant by it, and the awareness one has of the ramifications *in context* - which varies.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Oh absolutely! If one enters a specific tradition and enlightenment is clearly defined in context, then there's no problem. These days many people try to learn spirituality by dipping their toes in a variety of traditions (often virtually), and the term can be very misleading.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.