19 ms·
You're enlightened – now what?
- leashless 6y agoMost enlightened people don't even know they're enlightened. The ones who arrived there without conscious effort, through some intense concentration on some other aspect of life, simply lose their angst. Asked to explain, they usually have some kind of muddled folk mysticism about how it happened. Very few of them teach. I know of well attested enlightenment from an olympic-grade swimmer, and a guy who really liked fly fishing, for example. The swimmer counted breaths while swimming, very much like one particular zen practice. The desire to go out and teach is much more a side-effect of the people that were trained in schools founded by people who decided to go out and teach: the desire to teach is not embedded in the enlightenment experience for most people.
- tgb 6y agoThat doesn't really jive with what I've read about "enlightenment", particularly from the study summarized here: https://slatestarcodex.com/2019/10/21/the-pnse-paper/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2019/10/21/the-pnse-paper/ In that, it describes people as outwardly exactly the same as before, but their internal experience changed dramatically. This sounds to be the opposite of what you're describing.
- leashless 6y agoWestern studies of these phenomena are in their infancy.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- silveroriole 6y agoThanks for posting this. It’s interesting and goes some way towards explaining why everyone I’ve met who extols the benefits of meditation is just as prone to mistakes, ineptitude, emotional reactions, pissing people off, etc as everyone else but (unlike those who don’t meditate) seem to have no awareness of it and never apologise!
- nafey 6y agoHold on. Is enlightenment a widely accepted phenomenon with an agreed definition?
- leashless 6y agoSure. It's an ancient study of academic interest in Hinduism, Buddhism, Daoism etc. They all have sophisticated methodologies for evaluating enlightenment in individuals or even texts.
- mping 6y agoIt's not, by a mile. Feel free to correct me and kindly point out the agreed definition between the practices you mention.
- WiseWeasel 6y agoI think it's something like a realization allowing you to live in greater harmony with your circumstances and community.
- volume 6y agoIt's all the definitions in this discussion, but also including "the description is not the described".
- motohagiography 6y ago"To understand is to forgive." -Blaise Pascal Now, go chop wood and carry water.
- raxxorrax 6y agoI would never have attributed that quote to Pascal as he mostly is depicted as quite judgmental. Or perhaps he thought he only needed to forgive himself? Well, after enlightenment you clearly know that you need to chop wood and carry water on your own volition. Ok, technically very likely not for yourself, but still. "You do it for yourself" is the same lie we tell children when they need to go to school after all.
- motohagiography 6y agoSimilarly, in Ted Chiang's story of a rivalry between two super-intelligences, the way that one ultimately prevails is by challenging the other to do just this. The idea is that the path to understanding anything is necessarily through developing the ability to forgive, (which is the seed and the foundation for many religions) is at the same time ridiculously difficult, yet within the grasp of literally every person in the world. It's a surprisingly deep insight.
- StavrosK 6y agohttps://cloudflare-ipfs.com/ipfs/QmTZo9mVX6JwN4hgCF7Ers1jJ9AMQkYM4bsapKGMuYKwe3/stories/understand/ https://cloudflare-ipfs.com/ipfs/QmTZo9mVX6JwN4hgCF7Ers1jJ9A...
- monktastic1 6y agoDo you remember which story? The other comment here links to a good story, but it seems to have nothing to do with forgiveness.
- motohagiography 6y agoBut has everything to do with understanding. :)
- alfonsodev 6y ago"Before enlightenment, chop wood, carry water. After enlightenment, chop wood, carry water."— Zen Kōan
- inglor_cz 6y agoWhat about chopping water?
- alfonsodev 6y agoyou might break the simulation :D
- theon144 6y agoI honestly don't get the point of the article. Is it supposed to be a jab at the modern mindfulness wave? Or is it actually speaking of "enlightenment" as it's understood in most spiritual practices, in which case none of the questions even make sense?
- threatripper 6y agoThe article desperately tries to push all the triggers like a nerd on a party who tries to small-talk about science with a beauty queen who already has achieved inner emptiness.
- SubuSS 6y agoSorry am lacking reading comprehension- whose buttons are getting pushed here? I am a nerd, I do attend parties with all kinds of people - so you have my curiosity:)
- threatripper 6y agoWhat i wanted to say is that it doesn't really seem to understand the subject and is directed at people who also don't understand the subject but who like to talk about it. It goes off in all angles in order to spark some kind of conversation.
- GEBBL 6y agoBeauty queens can be scientists too, you need to check yourself.
- threatripper 6y agoMany beautiful people are not content with just being beautiful. It even gives them some kind of inner unrest that they don't feel they deserve what they have and yet can't achieve what they urge.
- kingkawn 6y agoLotta bitter judgement and history in that metaphor
- _def 6y agoVery good article. This also applies not only to "the enlightend" but especially those who think they are "enlightend" or so to say, know better. It doesn't has to be on an existential level. Even things like climate, privacy, politics... How do you establish that _your_ view is the one? Food for thought. edit: and the biggest question is: How do you know you are right? I think t he answer is: you can't. Not you alone. You need to discuss it with others and see what works out (probably?). Therefore respect of others and their opinions is very important for me.
- temptemptemp111 6y agoWow this guy has no idea what enlightenment is... #KaliYuga
- mellowdream 6y ago'If anyone should think he has solved the problem of life & feels like telling himself everything is quite easy now, he need only tell himself, in order to see that he is wrong, that there was a time when this "solution" had not been discovered; but it must have been possible to live then too & the solution which has now been discovered appears in relation to how things were then like an accident. And it is the same for us in logic too. If there were a "solution to the problems of logic (philosophy)" we should only have to caution ourselves that there was a time when they had not been solved (and then too it must have been possible to live and think).' - Wittgenstein
- dang 6y agoThat's fascinating but I don't understand his argument. Wouldn't it mean that no problem can be solved? There was a time before Wiles proved Fermat, for example.
- entropicdrifter 6y agoI think the central thesis of his argument is closer to, "No matter how big of a problem you've solved, life went on without that solution previously, so don't get too big of a head about it"
- courtf 6y ago"The cemeteries are full of indispensable men."
- peterxpark 6y agoI'm a little confused what this article is trying to say besides being on a peak state high doesn't mean much when it comes to really changing things. Don't get self-deluded about yourself by having a peak state experience. If we are saying "enlightened" as in a general broad category of shift in mentality/emotions/peak state then that's one thing. If we're talking about a technical term that is used specifically within certain traditions then that's a different thing. I think it's very problematic that in a lot of people conflate the two as the same thing. Even Buddhists who spend the decades realizing enlightenment still continue training to deepen. It's still possible to re-enter delusion after awakening. And most real meditation masters I know do not make any claims about enlightenment meaning you're now a great ruler or CEO or something. That would be the Halo Effect.
- Liquix 6y agoZen saying: "Before enlightenment chop wood, carry water. After enlightenment chop wood, carry water". Some more from Ram Dass: “Just because you are seeing divine light, experiencing waves of bliss, or conversing with Gods and Goddesses is no reason to not know your zip code.” "If you see yourself as God and then you come back from this state and somebody says, "Hey, Sam, empty the garbage!" it catches you back into the model of "I'm Sam who empties the garbage." You can't maintain these new kinds of structures. It takes a while to realize that God can empty garbage." What I get from it is that if you are considering starting a cult, creating your own government, going to war, or how to integrate your newfound knowledge into the bureaucracy of the world, you're not quite out of the woods yet.
- _def 6y agoThose are very inspiring quotes, thank you.
- raxxorrax 6y agoDepends if you start the cult for personal enrichment or not.
- HenryBemis 6y agoI know the guy who wrote the book: "How to Start Your Own Religion: Form a Church, Gain Followers, Become Tax-Exempt, and Sway the Minds of Millions in Five Easy Steps" Cool guy and a very fun read! https://www.amazon.com/How-Start-Your-Own-Religion/dp/1440538581 https://www.amazon.com/How-Start-Your-Own-Religion/dp/144053...
- jchook 6y ago"When you meet the Buddha, kill him!"
- MaxBarraclough 6y agoYour first quote reminded me of this from Bruce Lee: > Before I learned the art, a punch was just a punch, and a kick, just a kick. After I learned the art, a punch was no longer a punch, a kick, no longer a kick. Now that I understand the art, a punch is just a punch and a kick is just a kick.
- OneGuy123 6y agoPeople search for enlightenment because they want peace. No more self-doubt, no more fear etc... IMO it's the only goal that matters, since humans in one way or another do things to "remove" fear or doubt from their lives.
- apples_oranges 6y agoI guess after some realisations the instinct is to go out and tell everyone to make them happy. This too shall pass. Also there are so many gurus.. The answers to the questions in this post can be found by observing them.
- dkersten 6y agoIt really depends on the enlightenment, doesn’t it?
- surajx 6y ago"But a question nags at you: why can’t the world already know what you know?" The state in which such a question arises is contradictory to the state of enlightenment.
- raxxorrax 6y agoMany wise people talk about the limits of knowledge, but I think these slackers just don't try hard enough.
- Shaddox 6y agoInteresting point of view since it's so directly in contradiction to mine. I always viewed enlightenment as an unique, untransmissible experience (unique as in it's different for each individual, not that you can only have it once). I think it's near impossible to be able to convey these as teachings since it's such an intimate experience ultimately modeled by the world around you. Perhaps that's just my definition of enlightenment, an intimate understanding of the internal and external world. If I am ever to reach this state, I hope it's an inner state of peace and acceptance because my current angst is wearing me down.
- prossercj 6y agoFor anyone interested, the title of this blog appears to refer to this essay by Heidegger: https://ebookppsunp.files.wordpress.com/2016/06/martin_heidegger_j-_glenn_gray_translator_frebookfi-org.pdf https://ebookppsunp.files.wordpress.com/2016/06/martin_heide...
- kieckerjan 6y agoI knew a guy, twenty years my senior, who claimed he had once been enlightened for a week. He had just stumbled into it, to borrow a phrase from the article. As far as I know he did nothing with it. Just revelled in it (if that is an appropriate word for such a dispassionate state) and after a week he fell back into his old self. He regretted that. To me it sounded awfully like a temporary mental affliction back then, but who is to say?
- WJW 6y agoWhat a weird article. It makes several assumptions that seem entirely unproven, such as that someone who is enlightened would immediately want to "spread the word". Similarly, worries about the practicality (or not) of enlightenment seem very un-enlightened almost by definition.
- nwsm 6y agoI believe that is the point.
- heroHACK17 6y agoYou are always enlightened, and you are always not enlightened.
- dontcarethrow2 6y agoIt feels like working towards enlightenment is what gets us there, once we are there and not thinking about achieving it, do we just settle down and willow in comfort? Losing the enlightened state. So all these back to chopping wood quotes make sense.
- adenozine 6y agoThis article is what yall want on the front page? The author submitted and probably vote-manipulated to get it there. It's a content-less article, it has nothing to do with hacker values or software or entrepreneurship. Please vote responsibly, everyone!
- nottorp 6y agoIt's a lot more entertaining than another presentation of the javascript framework in fashion this hour...
- readarticle 6y agoJavaScript frameworks haven’t significantly changed market share for like three or four years, it’s React with niches of Vue and Angular exactly like it was in ~2017. Even the build systems haven’t changed. “Minimalist” CSS frameworks eschewing JS though, whew.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- _def 6y agoPhilosophy is closely entangled with information technology.
- adenozine 6y agoWould you care to elaborate? I don't mean to be pigheaded, I'm not understanding the connection between philosophy and the science of information.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- triceratops 6y agoJust for starters, logic is a branch of philosophy.[1] 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logic#Computational_logic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logic#Computational_logic
- loopz 6y agoYou're Enlightened implies an "I am Enlightened". Now, you're somebody special. This very realization takes you out of Enlightenment. Impossible to define Enlightenment, we can only point to what it is not.
- nwsm 6y agoThe article does describe someone who is either not enlightened or has been taken out of enlightenment. Maybe they experienced it, maybe they didn't, but now they are concerned with what to do with their enlightenment. It's gone, if it ever was there.
- loopz 6y agoSounds like it's not entirely gone just yet :) But Enlightenment does not imply Clarity, which may come from more contemplation and perhaps some guidance. Some people never experienced Bliss. Some people experience Bliss all the time. Some people can experience Bliss whenever they like, or need to. Bliss is not Enlightenment. So just because someone tasted ice-cream, doesn't mean they should eat it all the time, or that tasting good is all ice is good for.
- poormystic 6y agoMaybe not... I believe that my love relationship with Love makes me very special, and so do most people I meet. May I not be happy with my lot? Is my Happiness in my beautiful Friend so fragile? Everything on Earth is illusory, and the only lasting truth is that there is only ONE. Shall such understanding be its own undoing? I find my Friend in your eyes; in helping you I help Her - I do her work. Spiritual life is not really founded on brain-twisting mysteries at all. It unfolds bit by bit OK? Hre is encouraging news: Happiness is the reward of those who do the work of Love, and those who partake of the Happiness of Love also partake of Love's Beauty.
- loopz 6y agoThere is no undoing; nothing lost, or gained. What is true for one must not be true for another.
- darod 6y agoIf you're enlightened you're probably not asking yourself any of these questions nor reading this article.
- kspacewalk2 6y agoIf you're not asking yourself some version of any of these questions, it doesn't sound like you've very enlightened at all. Going with the light terminology, you are perhaps blinded and/or overexposed.
- guerrilla 6y agoYou seem to have missed the point. An enlightened person would not need to ask these questions since they would already know what to do and so on is what I think was meant.
- lexa1979 6y agoSad... I thought it was about the desktop environment https://www.enlightenment.org/ https://www.enlightenment.org/
- katsume3 6y agoWell Hitler was known to co-opt and misappropriate esoteric teachings[0] for his own horrible acts. That's the problem with occult teachings; so often they are weaponized for evil deeds. As for enlightenment, it can only be understood by explaining it in paradoxes or riddles. My favorite is: If you see the Buddha, kill the Buddha Which is meant to explain how we should not be attached to Buddha as a personality, but rather understand the teachings instead. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occultism_in_Nazism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occultism_in_Nazism
- gregfjohnson 6y agoI would be interested to hear the various things this (initially shocking) phrase means to people. The transformation of consciousness that it invites may be a function of the consciousness of the person considering it. I.e., it might mean different things to different people, each valid in its own way. For me, it means that during meditation practice "profound realizations, deep spiritual or theological insights, etc." are simply distractions, on par with daydreaming about what to have for lunch. Meditation, as a practice of pure consciousness and wordless awareness, invites us to a deeper place than words or concepts can reach. Self-congratulatory ego-driven behavior can be subtle and creative, and can easily don the cloak of the Buddha, especially for practitioners who are starting to move into deeper waters in their practice. It is this "false consciousness" Buddha that the phrase directly addresses for me. In twenty years it may mean something new, depending on where I am at that point.
- sebastianconcpt 6y agoIt's a good question and the answer pushes the dichotomy of 1) do you prefer civilization law and order? 2) do you prefer to stay "deconstructed" and make your ego and personality to be molded by the trends of a global non-identity? Which leads to another interesting question: Which of these alternatives makes you to be the owner of your own destiny in this universe?
- r34 6y agoWhat a great potential fictional character: enlighted & unpractial, free & lost. I suppose the real enlighted wouldn't ask himself (who?!). Maybe that's why they usually stay aside. But seariously: many forget that the goal of spiritual practices is the ability to DO (instead of react)
- crazygringo 6y agoThis article appears to be deeply confusing two drastically different meanings of "enlightened". There's the spiritual sense, which might be described as fully understanding and accepting the impermanence of the world and the "artificiality" of meaning. Separately, there's "getting" something in a knowledge area. E.g. you finally understood how pointers work in C. The author seems to start with the first... but then immediately goes wrong. He assumes if you're enlightened then you want to spread it -- but this is the exact opposite of enlightenment, so the author has it 100% backwards. Then he eventually veers into "But what do you know about education and foreign policy, ecology and immigration, tax reform and monetary policy?" Which is the second sense of enlightenment, but has nothing to do with the first. Spiritual enlightment has nothing to do with applied knowledge in any of those. This is... really just a bad article. The author doesn't seem to understand what enlightenment is at all, and is trying to satirize/criticize it because of that. It's kind of sad, in a way.
- Red_Leaves_Flyy 6y ago>if you're enlightened then you want to spread it -- but this is the exact opposite of enlightenment Isn't the opposite of spread - hoard?
- Complexicate 6y ago> Isn't the opposite of spread - hoard? Only in the 2nd sense (ie: "getting" something in a knowledge area). The 1st sense (... understanding and accepting ...) cannot be hoarded, since it is not given to you from someone else.
- forgotmypw17 6y ago>if you're enlightened then you want to spread it -- but this is the exact opposite of enlightenment, so the author has it 100% backwards. I have to disagree there. Many people who achieve benefits through enlightenment want to spread it to as many people as possible, so that others can receive help in achieving their own enlightenement.
- 6y ago
- dwaltrip 6y agoEnlightenment is an aspirational goal that can never be achieved. No human can fully understand any given situation. To do so, you must first fully understand the entire universe, as everything is connected. And that is of course utterly impossible. I say this as someone who has found great value in Buddhist philosophy and a personal meditation practice.
- cvaidya1986 6y agoAre you sure?
- dwaltrip 6y agoNo I’m not absolutely sure. I’d love to learn how I might be wrong. But I feel pretty good about the idea. Do you have any concrete theories of how a human can _fully_ understand the entire universe?
- cvaidya1986 6y agoSure, reduce it to an abstraction where the part and the whole converge
- mrwnmonm 6y agoI am not sure what do you mean by 'part' and 'whole', but if by 'part' you mean a situation for example, and by 'whole' you mean the universe, well, the situation is very subjective, and you can't really know the whole. If you are an empiricist you can't be sure about anything, you can't be even sure that your theories are describing what 'is' the world, they are just a way to look at it. If you are rationalist, you would believe that there are some kind of innate features of your brain, now where those features came from?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- poormystic 6y agoWhen you understand that the Light you have seen is the Light of a precious Thought whose nature is Love, Beauty, Happiness and Life, you'll want to get to know the Thinker. The Light is Love, and is the inspiration and mother of the Cosmos. Therefore doing loving work is doing the work of the Creator, and the reward of such work is Happiness The only work of the enlightened one is Love; judgment has no place in the enlightened heart.
- taylodl 6y agoYou're enlightened. Have a cup of coffee and enjoy your day!
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- samirillian 6y agoWow, a lot of hate in the comments, and a lot of know-it-alls. I would say that, at the very least, worrying over these details would be a step along that road. And no, there is not widespread agreement on the speciific features. Some would say you cease to perdure in the phenomenal realm at all. Some would say you continue do altruistic things out of compassion. Some would say enlightenment is not possible in a single lifetime. Personally, I have no pretensions about reaching it myself and remain agnostic. Which is why I am shit posting on hackernews with the rest of you schmucks.
- brna 6y agoHere is my two cents, maybe not entirely on topic. It seems to me, that an being at peace with it self has no need to change or make progress in any direction. Human actions, and progress seem to originate from various needs we have, and not from a peace of mind.
- cmroanirgo 6y agoAgree. Enlightenment is having the light within, without darkness. Meditation helps understanding of the problem of inner darkness that we're all born with, but doesn't directly translate into becoming the light. All forms of unconscious reaction are a sure sign that one has darkness within. Unfortunately, our brains are seemingly hotwired into putting all pieces of information it receives into little pigeon holes of assumption. So, when someone provokes us, we get scared and/or angry, and we then re-act to their actions, making us a slave, not only to our own mind, but to the actions of others. Learning how to maintain a peaceful composure in all aspects of life is a great way to learn of the battle between light and dark. Those spiritually inclined can make supplications for assistance to the divine, which personally I find to be of immeasurably great help.
- eludwig 6y ago>>Enlightenment is having the light within, without darkness. In my experience, this is impossible. Light is defined by darkness. Enlightenment must contain both. Trying to extinguish darkness is doomed to fail
- cmroanirgo 6y agoProving non existence in impossible and only takes one case for it to be disproven. If you're willing to take my word for it: it is possible. I've met those who have radically changed themselves, and have met others who walk the path (& the latter are amazing enough). Darkness doesn't exist where Light does. It's a matter of sacrificing the darkness for something better. Remaining staunchly skeptical, distrustful, or scoffing the path is a sure way of not seeing it. It requires objectivity, particularly in spite of one's own prejudices.
- SirensOfTitan 6y agoThere are so many models of awakening it’s boggling. The traditional Theravada 4-path model is a little too psychological perfection to me. From what I understand, Buddhist ultimate insight is typically defined as the realization of the three characteristics: 1. One cannot separate the self from the context the individual is embedded in. 2. All phenomena are transient. 3. Nothing is satisfying forever, even jhanic experiences. There’s a certain shift of relationship to suffering that occurs after various forms of insight. There’s still pain and suffering, and you can still be a total jerk face. Jack Kornfield’s “after the ecstasy the laundry,” I’ve heard is a great exploration of this.
- prox 6y agoCompassion is a common characteristic of enlightenment. If you are still marred in duality you think there is a other. In the enlightened state there really is no difference between all forms of existence.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- galacticaactual 6y agoThe thesis of this article can be encapsulated in a single psilocybin trip, during which you will feel as if the secrets of the entire universe have been revealed, and after which you are utterly powerless to reveal them.
- robaato 6y agoJan Willem van der Wetering "A Glimpse of Nothingness" Would there ever be a time, I thought while I brushed my teeth, when meditation is an accepted general activity? "Where is Father?" "Father is meditating." "Oh." Father is meditating. He often does. The children meditate too when they have a chance. And Mother. And the neighbors. They are all disciples of the master of the neighborhood. There will be new classes, new ranks. When you want to be a member of the government you have to have solved a certain number of koans, otherwise your insight will not be sufficient to be able to help rule the country. The prime minister is a wise old fellow with a bald shaven head. He doesn't want anything. He has no possessions except what he needs for his daily simple routine. He is a high priest who nearly always wears the same clothes. The higher you go the simpler you become. Only the common people are rich, they still want to have property. The more impressive your residence the lower your place in society. Perhaps the prime minister owns a mansion, but it is a gift from the people. He lives there to please his subjects but his bedroom will be a small bare room with white walls and his mattress will be thin and hard. He will get up at 3 a.m. and the ministers will visit him one by one for sanzen. The state will be very rich. The bridges, roads, public buildings, airports, waterworks and national parks will be of the highest quality and well looked after. Nature will be nature again and full of wild life, but the wild animals will be tame.
- robaato 6y agoOh and read the rest of his writings to get a feel for what enlightenment is :)
- pdfernhout 6y agoTangential, but apropos your comment especially on "The higher you go the simpler you become...", "The Midas Plague" from 1954 by Frederik Pohl is a funny story about a socio-economic perspective shift -- related to a situation where "wealth" and social status in an age of robotic automation and automated factories essentially means material simplicity and the opportunity for meaningful work. The story is available at the Internet Archive (and elsewhere on the net): https://archive.org/stream/galaxymagazine-1954-04/Galaxy_1954_04#page/n7/mode/2up https://archive.org/stream/galaxymagazine-1954-04/Galaxy_195... The story was also was made into part of a larger book called "Midas World". I can wonder if "The Midas Plague" might have helped inspire the 1956 sci-fi story by Theodore Sturgeon called "The Skills of Xanadu", which in turn inspired Theodore Nelson to create the Xanadu hypertext system, which in turn helped inspire the web? https://archive.org/stream/galaxymagazine-1956-07/Galaxy_1956_07#page/n117/mode/2up https://archive.org/stream/galaxymagazine-1956-07/Galaxy_195... https://archive.org/details/pra-BB3830.08 https://archive.org/details/pra-BB3830.08 James P. Hogan's 1982 novel "Voyage From Yesteryear" is a more modern version of that theme of a shift in socio-economic culture with abundance -- with an old scarcity-based culture in conflict with a culture rooted in abundance-based thinking: https://web.archive.org/web/20120713225646/http://www.jamesphogan.com/books/info.php?titleID=29&cmd=summary https://web.archive.org/web/20120713225646/http://www.jamesp... For me, the socio-technological version of enlightenment these days involves appreciating the insight summarized in the sig I use: :-) "The biggest challenge of the 21st century is the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity." It's just amazing how difficult it is to get people to appreciate that simple-seeming idea. Perhaps Upton Sinclair was indeed right (even as regards various forms of enlightenment?) when he said: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it." And that sig came from thinking about such stories as well as writings of others like Langdon Winner, Buckminster Fuller, Ursula K. Le Guin, Jane Jacobs, Lewis Mumford, or Albert Einstein (among others) -- so it is not like the core insight there is completely new. For example, Einstein wrote in 1945: "The release of atomic power has changed everything except our way of thinking ... the solution to this problem lies in the heart of mankind. If only I had known, I should have become a watchmaker." Although in an age where digital watches have more computer power than was used to design the first atomic bombs, even being a watchmaker these days can be problematic in the 21st century. And that is even ignoring the "Acceleration of Addictiveness" (Paul Graham) "Pleasure Trap" (Douglas J. Lisle & Alan Goldhamer) potential of watch-based "Supernormal Stimuli" (Dierdre Barrett) given the "pretty neat idea" of digital watches networked to large organizations with problematical short-term profit-driven goals involving socializing costs and privatizing gains. Or in Douglas Adam's insightful and potentially-enlightening words: "Far out in the uncharted backwaters of the unfashionable end of the western spiral arm of the Galaxy lies a small unregarded yellow sun. Orbiting this at a distance of roughly ninety-two million miles is an utterly insignificant little blue green planet whose ape-descended life forms are so amazingly primitive that they still think digital watches are a pretty neat idea. This planet has - or rather had - a problem, which was this: most of the people living on it were unhappy for pretty much of the time. Many solutions were suggested for this problem, but most of these were largely concerned with the movement of small green pieces of paper, which was odd because on the whole it wasn't the small green pieces of paper that were unhappy. And then, one Thursday, nearly two thousand years after one man had been nailed to a tree for saying how great it would be to be nice to people for a change, a girl sitting on her own in a small café in Rickmansworth suddenly realized what it was that had been going wrong all this time, and she finally knew how the world could be made a good and happy place. This time it was right, it would work, and no one would have to get nailed to anything. ..." I've enjoyed learning from the various comments here and pointers to other resources on the main topic of spiritual/psychological enlightenment -- especially the link to the Slate Star Codex review of "The PNSE Paper".
- leff_f 6y agoGreat to be in such a spiritual community! :) I guess if you have to ask those questions you are streets behind aka not enlightened :)
- MrsHippy 6y agouse load cells, esp8266, & hx711 to weigh your (legal)fruiting substrate as it dries.. this way evaporation rate can be logged accurately and wet yields can be monitored.. Load cells should also be used to hang your drying racks to form a complete track and trace system.. I think enlightenment should be shared if you love your neighbor.
- nphd 6y agoYou must first watch every episode of Xavier: Renegade Angel in order to be truly enlightened. "What doth life?"
- ta1234567890 6y agoRecent paper with results of interviewing 319 enlightened people and categorizing their experiences: https://digitalcommons.ciis.edu/conscjournal/vol8/iss8/1/ https://digitalcommons.ciis.edu/conscjournal/vol8/iss8/1/ It seems like most of them lead pretty normal lives (they "chop wood and carry water").
- nurettin 6y agoThis is why we have secular principles. Enlightenment (sub-text religious authoritarianism) doesn't come with the knowledge of international air borders, or income tax distribution.
- antonzabirko 6y agoThis is dumb: the author doesn't understand enlightenment at the theoretical. Plus you need to practically understand it anyways. This subject does not become easier to understand from theory.
- dionian 6y agoEnlightenment is an event, not a state. And it can happen multiple times. Whether you view it as samadhi or kensho or satori.
- sammalloy 6y agoThose who can, do; those who can't, teach.
- amriksohata 6y agoI think the author fails to understand the meaning of enlightenment. When you are enlightened in Dharmic eastern religions like Buddhism and hinduism, there is no what, you are in eternal ever lasting bliss and happiness, there is no chasing material desires as you don't care for them. But because we are in a capitalist mindset and we can't get out of it, we expect everything to have something more to gain from it with "now what", which is the greed and ego that enlightenment itself removes.
- Kaveren 6y agoi guess we should all follow anarchoprimitivism in that case. we need to find "eternal ever lasting bliss and happiness".
- amriksohata 6y agowell the nations that saw others that were primitive, were much poorer, for example china and india were the 2 richest nations in the world, whilst britan was very poor and needed the industrial revolution, not india or china.
- cheezymoogle 6y agoHere's a story. Imagine a jigsaw puzzle. But not any jigsaw puzzle. An unbelievably huge jigsaw puzzle that's been mixed up with other jigsaw puzzles. Some of them are really old and faded. Some of them are brand new. Some are larger and some are smaller. The edges change from jagged to smooth. Like everyone else at the table, you've been trying to put this one puzzle together for years, trying out numberless pieces until one day you realize that you don't even have the box for it. Like everyone else, you were told what it looked like when you were first sat down in this room and left to it. But you're not making any progress and the solution, the memory faded by time and others, doesn't feel right and you abandon it. Now, you ask everyone around you about what the puzzle looks like. And they are all certain about what it looks like when it's finished, despite the fact that you know they haven't spent nearly enough time looking in the box, or the pieces, and you're pretty damn sure it's not a picture of your loved ones burning, a giant man creating smaller men, or nothingness. And you start to talk with other people who don't believe in these solutions. They have their own ideas about the puzzle. The vast majority of them think the idea of a pre-solution is the problem. If only those who have been working on their own sections piece by piece were allowed to work together with their work corroborated by other piece-by-piece sectioners, without pre-solutionists telling them what it looks like, it'd be put together by now. You think this is the right course of action going forward. So you dabble in doing your own piece-by-piece work, keeping up with the latest pictures of the latest additions to different sections, published and funded by the people who originally sat you down at the table. And everything is fine. For a while. Then you begin to see that the sectioners' works are being used to justify new pre-solutions by onlookers that aren't compatible with each other. Some sectioners are just producing pictures of themselves and their funders. And you realize that this just doesn't make any sense. None of it makes any sense. Not the pre-solutionists, not the sectioners. It's all a giant question with no authority and no one seems to realize how insane and un-ending the whole process is. Then you pick up a piece that changes everything. In it you merely see the Self and your own reflection in it. But it changes everything. You look up from the table and see through eons. You see everyone who has ever been sat down at this puzzle table. You see the same people wearing different costumes as the endless passage of time flows. You see the same puzzle processes and sections arising, maturing, then being scattered. You notice this and infinite other things, lost to the ephemera of cognition and memory. Then the pieces fall into place in your brain. And you see that it isn't a puzzle. It was never a puzzle. You realize in your vision that there were countless people throughout time who stood up from the table. And they saw a door and went through it. And came back. And they said in exaltation in the plurality of dialects and tongues that this is not a puzzle. It is a map. A map to exit the room. These chosen few make a new map of the room, offering it triumphantly to the rest. Some see it and in turn stand up and leave the room to go outside. Others follow. But the stream of people slows and stops. The map is left, abandoned by those who followed it to those that didn't or couldn't. And those remaining beings slowly rip it apart, piece by piece, to fit in their view of the puzzle until it too resembles... a puzzle. You proceed to come down from grasping this piece, realizing the truth of what you have seen; That this in fact a massive collection of old, incomplete maps, made puzzles by mankind, all showing the way to a door that leads to outside the realm of the puzzle. So you stand up from the table, go to the exit, and open the door. And there it is. Outside. The Sun. Indescribable to anyone who has been left inside the cave their entire lives. This is so apparent to you that it is the very definition of self-evidence, bound with knowledge ascertained by pure observation. And you realize that nothing, absolutely nothing can erase the certainty that outside and the Sun exists, having been there. You now have a decision to make. In an act of compassion, you return to the room and proceed to draw yet another map for those left behind...
- mulberrybush 6y ago"The mechanism, the method of functioning if you will, by which the dream operates, by which functioning occurs here in Consciousness, is the same whether it is realized or not. This is why it is said that when the Understanding occurs, nothing happens. Nothing changes. Consciousness streams, functions, operates in a body/mind organism in which the Understanding has occurred in the same manner that it operates in the body/mind organisms in which there is not Understanding. Awakening or Enlightenment does not automatically suspend the normal means and method by which the dream unfolds; there is no transfiguration into a super human being of light or some such with paranormal powers, like in some of the fanciful storytelling. Who is there to be transfigured? Who is there to do anything?" "Someone, perhaps it was Robert Adams, once suggested that there should be a Great Gathering Of Awakened Beings, and anybody who showed up would be immediately disqualified." quotes from "Perfect Brilliant Stillness" by David Carse
- pier25 6y agoIn my 20s I believed there was such thing as enlightenment. Now in my 40s, I don't believe in that anymore. Some people decide to focus on problems and that inevitably leads to insights. It doesn't matter if the problem is programming a GPU, baking bread, making music, or understanding your inner world. Obviously the longer you advance on a road the more insights you will have. We get wiser as we get older simply because we've lived longer. In Spanish we have a saying "El diablo sabe más por viejo que por diablo" which can be translated to something like "the devil knows more because he is old than because he is the devil".
- Barrin92 6y agoVery scattered post. I guess the confusion about enlightenment these days is grounded in the conflict between the actual traditional concept and the way spiritual practises have been sold as a sort of productivity booster pack for knowledge workers. In many religious traditions enlightenment is nothing less than the annihilation of the self or something of the sort. It's a proper recognition or awareness of one's own nature, absence of desire, superficial rewards, it's not easy to put into words but I think most people get the point. This has gotten lost in all the self-help posts about meditation and it's been turned into a commodity on app stores and whatnot and now people treat it like a snickers when your blood sugar is low.
- earthboundkid 6y agoBuddhism is politically quietist traditionally, but Abrahamic religions are politically activist, so Western reception of Buddhism requires transforming it into “engaged” Buddhism. It’s hard for someone raised in the West to look at Nazis and just shrug and say that they can only kill the body but not the soul, but that is more or less what Buddhists before 1800 would say.
- krapp 6y ago>Buddhism is politically quietist traditionally, I am not a scholar but what little I know of East Asian history strongly suggests otherwise, particularly in Japan, where even today one of the biggest and most active political parties (Komeito) is just the political wing of a Buddhist sect (Soka Gakkai.) Any religion which is adopted by the elite class becomes politically active. Buddhism is no different that Christianity, Judaism or Islam in this regard.
- earthboundkid 6y agoKomeito is post-war, so doesn’t constitute a counter-example. Buddhists pretty much had the opinion that a king who supports the sangha is a dharma king, whatever other sins he’s committing. The important thing is that the king pays the monastery for his legitimation. Beyond that, they’re not greedy. The king is probably going to hell for 10 million years for all the mayhem he’s causing. No need to be rude about it.
- bsenftner 6y agoDo it yourself enlightened humor: imagine "who's on first" but the confusion is between "entitled" and "enlightened". hahaha.
- bluewavescrash 6y agoEnlightenment doesn't guide action and opinions. Enlightenment prevents the ego from getting involved with action and opinions.
- Kaknut 6y agoCan someone tell me the address to Buddha? Need to have a small talk.
- alexmingoia 6y agoThe idea of enlightenment as a vague loosely-defined “I know it when I see it” phenomena is mostly a western “new age” cultural misappropriation of Buddhist teaching. Enlightenment is well-defined and described in detail by the Buddhist cannon. You can call “enlightenment” whatever you want, but Buddha taught a specific conception of enlightenment and a specific path to achieving it. The Tripitaka describes enlightenment proceeding in four stages (SN 22.122), with each stage defined by the abandonment of some of the ten fetters (SN 45.179 and 45.180) which bind us to samsara. Once the ten fetters are conquered one has reached the final stage of enlightenment and will be liberated from the cycle of rebirth (nirvana). The Tripitaka describes each fetter in detail and how to overcome them. The process of enlightenment is fairly systematic (eightfold path). The ten fetters are: 1. Self identity view (sakkaya ditthi) 2. Sceptical doubt (vicikicca) 3. Attachment to mere rites and rituals (silabbata paramasa) 4. Sensual desire (kama raga) 5. Ill-will (patigha) 6. Desire to be born in fine material worlds (rupa raga) 7. Desire to be born in formless worlds (arupa raga) 8. Conceit (mana) 9. Restlessness (uddacca) 10. Ignorance (avijja)
- jessedhillon 6y agoThis detail addresses none of the questions raised in the post. Either escaping these ten fetters confers a detachment from the world such that one no longer needs to change it, or one wants to share this state with the world and then has to grapple with those challenges identified in the post.
- alexmingoia 6y agoYou’re right, I should have mentioned that the Buddha and the Tripitaka do talk about “what does someone do after being enlightened.” To sum it up, once someone is fully enlightened (arahant) they would either live as a monk (otherwise they’d still be attached to household fetters) or choose to die. In the Tripitaka there are not many examples of lay people who reach arahant stage. In the Milindapanha Buddha is supposedly asked directly whether layman can attain arahant stage, and he says "If a layman attains arahant-ship, only two destinations await him; either he must enter the Order that very day or else he must attain parinibbàna (nibanna upon death). It’s clear from Tripitaka that anyone could obtain arahant stage but obviously if you were free of ten fetters it would be seemingly impossible to live another lifestyle except one described as monastic. Unorthodox Buddhists (Mahayana, Tibetan, Zen, etc.) reject some or most of the orthodox concept of enlightenment. But IMO it’s telling that their alternative conception of enlightenment is both indescribable and lacking a systematic path to attain, which very much contradicts Buddha’s message (I’ve found the way and therefor I can tell you the way, and if you follow you will reach the destination as I have).
- odomojuli 6y agoI'll say this as a somewhat devout Buddhist. If you're asking yourself "now what?" after you're supposedly enlightened, you ain't enlightened. The ultimate takeaway from enlightenment I understand to be true is that if you can be enlightened, it is superior to abandon enlightenment for yourself in service of others to be come enlightened.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- mikewarot 6y agoI am enlightened, and all of that doesn't apply. I see myself as a marketer of some ideas, nothing more. When the conversation happens to run into them, I offer my ideas, and handle any questions about them that might arise. I hope the ideas will spread, and eventually be reified into code, and make things better in the long run. No delusions of glory, profit, etc.... just a slow but determined push to make things better, eventually.
- 0134340 6y agoThe article reminds me of my mode of thinking lately on the paradox of morality: https://0134340.blogspot.com/2020/09/the-paradox-of-morality.html https://0134340.blogspot.com/2020/09/the-paradox-of-morality...
- NiceWayToDoIT 6y agoA lot of interesting questions. What I got from studding different religions is that once you get to the enlightenment all material possession, attachments and affairs are not part of your interests. That being said, we can conclude that all current cult leaders, preachers and gurus are not there, probably they are just there for the usual business of power, money and fame. Today, for truly enlighten person it would be very easy to send message, all you need is Youtube account and a smartphone (adds free). Would people understand message, that is whole another story.
- lcuff 6y agoI believe it was Shrinyu Suzuki, author of "Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind" who said something like "In truth there is not enlightenment, only enlightened acts." Stewart Brand also tells a story that Suzuki was asked once why he didn't talk much about enlightenment in his writing, and his wife who was present said "it's because he hasn't been enlightened", and he batted at her with his fan and said "shh, shh". Very fun. Abraham Maslow is mostly remembered for coining the term 'self-actualized', but not necessarily the detailed description of such a person. It includes working on something typically small, but very important. (Think, teacher of young children). And being so intensely involved in such a thing that they can't describe who they are without reference to this vocation. This speaks to a certain quality of enlightenment to me.
- CRUDite 6y agoSome of you may be interested in the book 'path notes of an american ninja master' by Glenn morris. It describes his path to enlightenment in a what you could describe as a modern and colourful way (and has a great bibliography). If you or dont believe in it as a physical process its still an entertaining read
- gala8y 6y agoI treat 'enlightment' as a technical term reserved only to be used by zen masters to confirm that your state of mind is identical with their state of mind, in a tradition of confirming it one person to another. They just agreed to do it so and been doing it for circa 2500 years. If a zen master says you're enlighted, you are enlighted (in this narrow, technical sense). If you are not confirmed by a zen master, save yourself a hassle of talking about 'enlightment'. All other uses of the term are mambo-jumbo, wanna-be, i-feel-blessed, i-think-i-know, world-is-a-whole utterances with myriads of ways of understanding it. One upside is that it makes us think about being... nicer? That's my view. Nice article, nice list of pretty difficult problems to solve, swooshing around my brain since childhood, but being enlighted just goes orthogonal to every single issue mentioned. BUT, oops!, here I come... talking about enlightment. I will stop here if it is not too late.
- MichaelZuo 6y agoOne afternoon a student said “Roshi, I don’t really understand what’s going on. I mean, we sit in zazen and we gassho to each other and everything, and Felicia got enlightened when the bottom fell out of her water-bucket, and Todd got enlightened when you popped him one with your staff, and people work on koans and get enlightened, but I’ve been doing this for two years now, and the koans don’t make any sense, and I don’t feel enlightened at all! Can you just tell me what’s going on?” “Well you see,” Roshi replied, “for most people, and especially for most educated people like you and I, what we perceive and experience is heavily mediated, through language and concepts that are deeply ingrained in our ways of thinking and feeling. Our objective here is to induce in ourselves and in each other a psychological state that involves the unmediated experience of the world, because we believe that that state has certain desirable properties. It’s impossible in general to reach that state through any particular form or method, since forms and methods are themselves examples of the mediators that we are trying to avoid. So we employ a variety of ad hoc means, some linguistic like koans and some non-linguistic like zazen, in hopes that for any given student one or more of our methods will, in whatever way, engender the condition of non-mediated experience that is our goal. And since even thinking in terms of mediators and goals tends to reinforce our undesirable dependency on concepts, we actively discourage exactly this kind of analytical discourse. And the student was enlightened.
- andrei_says_ 6y agoEnlightenment is not what we think or what we can think. The best metaphor I’ve heard is - you’ve walking all your life with a rock in your shoe, and now suddenly it’s gone. Forever. You can’t “get” it - it’s about something you lose.
- ZoharAtkins 6y agoThanks everyone for engaging! Many rich comments Some quick thoughts: 1) I was deliberately leaving open the definition of Enlightenment--how we define Enlightenment, I think, is not the point. It shouldn't matter what is happening inside someone's brain or how they describe their experience if what we are weighing is the worldly impact of that experience, unless that inner experience can be communicated or translated into something socially tangible. If Enlightenment is supposed to bring "infinite compassion," as some describe, what's the actual delta for the un-enlightened as a result? 2) If you think Enlightenment is a good, like any other, than it can be priced. There is an opportunity cost to pursuing it or not. We should be transparent about the tradeoffs that come from pursuing Enlightenment, just as we should the tradeoffs of specializing in any one thing to the detriment of others. I am worried that we talk about Enlightened people the way Plato talks about philosopher kings. This is a great Buddhist parable on this topic: https://www.ibiblio.org/zen/gateless-gate/2.html https://www.ibiblio.org/zen/gateless-gate/2.html 3) My article is not trying to make a point; each day I ask questions. My aim is to stimulate thinking, not refute or defend a position, though of course I have biases. No snark is intended. I believe the skepticism I evince is not in opposition to strands of Zen, but consonant with them. 4) There are good reasons to be pluralistic about our definition of Enlightenment, otherwise we become sectarian and intolerant and that is how religious wars start. On the other hand, maybe there is one true Enlightenment--but can you insist on that and not become theocratic? I'm not sure.
- wltprgm 6y agoJust coming back to read this post and threads, it has been 3 days since I saw this clickbait title Apparently, just as I thought, the author doesn't know about enlightenment. No, that doesn't imply that I am more "woke" than anyone else, or anyone else is more "woke" than me. Even if it does, so? Enlightenment, if you know it, you know it. You want to change the world, go ahead. You give no f* about the world, you do you. (Critically) Questioning enlightened people about what they will do for themselves or the world won't make a difference, it doesn't make the author more enlightened, more clever or sounds superior. I will gladly ask after he finishes his words, so? I can't change the world, so? I can't change people to learn, so? You aren't happy with me enlightening, so? I enlightened, or not, so? I will change the world, and so? Now you are enlightened in this moment, so?