Instent enlightenment

[kwanseum]

It is sometimes said in Seon/Zen that enlightenment is instant.  However, the Buddha strongly expounded that we (sattvas) must exterminate evil Karma and create virtuous Karma-Vipaka in order to establish a world of rejoicing.

Does anyone have any views on how these two ideas go together?  It could be that enlightenment is not dependent of your Karma or it could be enlightenment occurs when your Vipaka is right or it could be other.

Thoughts anyone?

[Ngawang Drolma]

I think that what seems instant was probably built up by aeons of work 
But it can appear instant.

Best,
Laura

[catmoon]

There is no law against sudden deep change.

[t]

 

[Optimus Prime]

I think that what seems instant was probably built up by aeons of work 
But it can appear instant.

Well said, Laura.

It's a bit like planting a tree and waiting for the fruit to drop.  When you plant a tree, you've got to wait months and even years for it to grow big enough to bear fruit.  During this time, you need to fertilize it and water it every day, day after day.  After a long time, the tree starts to bear fruit.  A few weeks later, the fruit grows bigger and ripens.  Then it ripens more until it falls off the tree.

Enlightenment is like the fruit falling off the tree - it happens in an instant.  Cultivation is all the hard work you've put in everyday to take care of the tree watering and fertilizing it - this happens slowly.

When you hear of people who've become suddenly enlightened, it's highly likely that they were strong cultivators in past lives and may have been on the brink of enlightenment.  An example is of the great Chan Master Hsu Yun's birth, where he was born in a flesh caul, which supposedly designates that he was already an 8th stage Bodhisattva when he was born.  Even so, when you read his biography, he still had to cultivate and endure severe hardship for years and years before he was enlightened.  He lived and breathed cultivation 24/7 for years before he penetrated his mind.

So even though he was enlightened suddenly, he still had to cultivate gradually for decades - and we're talking about one of the greatest Chan masters in Chinese history.

[Quiet Heart]

 
I think "instant enlightenment" and "years of effort" are one and the same thing, like a coin with both a "heads" and a "tails" side. How can the two really be seperated, since they are the same coin?
A dam may only have a small trickle of water feeding into it, but it has no outlet. so the water level keeps growing. Over a period of time the water level will grow until the dam bursts, and the water will rush out in a flood.
Or on a cloudy night the moon can not be seen but it is still there behind the clouds. If a windstarts to blow, the clouds are blown away, and the moon is revealed.
In both of these examples, what s the "truth". Is it the pond that stands there quietly without seeming to do anything? Or is the flood that breaks through?
Is it the cloudy, aparently moonless night, or is the moon that suddenly appears through the cloud?
It isn't either of them...they are both just two aspects of the same thing...seen from a different perspective.
In exactly the same way "instant enlightenment" and "years of effort" are just two sides of the same coin, seen from a different perspective.

[Wonky Badger]

I started out in Zen, but now the Zen concept of enlightenment confuses me a bit. I read Alan Watts' "The Way of Zen" and listened to some of his lectures. There he tells shortly about people during WWII attaining satori (enlightenment) when they heard bombs falling upon them. These were not necessarily Zen practitioners, but ordinary European people. When hearing a bomb falling towards them, knowing that there was no escape, letting go of life so to say, they supposedly instantly became enlightened. The bomb turned out to be a dud and they lived to tell the story.

I don't know how true this is, or if maybe what they experienced was "kensho", awakening, often confused with satori. Anyway, this is what I associate with "instant enlightenment"; in the face of "certain" death you let go of everything and suddenly all is clear.

[Optimus Prime]

Wonky,

I highly doubt that those ordinary non-Buddhist European people got enlightened just by hearing a bomb being dropped.  They probably achieved a bit of letting go in their minds, but enlightenment?  Not so easy.

If someone is enlightened, they'd easily be able to explain the principles behind the Buddhist scriptures in detail - even though they've never heard that particular scripture before.  You can just read it to them and they'll explain the principle behind it for you in detail, expertly showing how that principle can be applied in daily life.

[Ngawang Drolma]

It's a bit like planting a tree and waiting for the fruit to drop.  When you plant a tree, you've got to wait months and even years for it to grow big enough to bear fruit.  During this time, you need to fertilize it and water it every day, day after day.  After a long time, the tree starts to bear fruit.  A few weeks later, the fruit grows bigger and ripens.  Then it ripens more until it falls off the tree.

Enlightenment is like the fruit falling off the tree - it happens in an instant.  Cultivation is all the hard work you've put in everyday to take care of the tree watering and fertilizing it - this happens slowly.

When you hear of people who've become suddenly enlightened, it's highly likely that they were strong cultivators in past lives and may have been on the brink of enlightenment.  An example is of the great Chan Master Hsu Yun's birth, where he was born in a flesh caul, which supposedly designates that he was already an 8th stage Bodhisattva when he was born.  Even so, when you read his biography, he still had to cultivate and endure severe hardship for years and years before he was enlightened.  He lived and breathed cultivation 24/7 for years before he penetrated his mind.

So even though he was enlightened suddenly, he still had to cultivate gradually for decades - and we're talking about one of the greatest Chan masters in Chinese history.

 

[kwanseum]

If someone is enlightened, they'd easily be able to explain the principles behind the Buddhist scriptures in detail

I fear you're over-complicating the Dharma.  Perhaps seeing one's own transitory nature and the interconnectedness of all life would have been enough for an awakening. 

[Optimus Prime]

If someone is enlightened, they'd easily be able to explain the principles behind the Buddhist scriptures in detail

I fear you're over-complicating the Dharma.  Perhaps seeing one's own transitory nature and the interconnectedness of all life would have been enough for an awakening.  

Neither over-complicating the Dharma nor over-simplifying it.  The Dharma can be as complex as volumes and volumes of Sutras or it can be as simple as 1 breath.

I was merely stating a simple fact, Kwanseum - that someone who is really enlightened does not necessarily have to get their wisdom from books - it can also come directly from the enlightened mind.  It's one way that one can recognize someone with accomplishment.  See the Sutras state the principles in them but an enlightened mind can bring those principles alive.

Take the 6th Patriarch Hui Neng for example.  He was illiterate and had never heard the Lotus Sutra before.  But when someone recited it to him once, he was able to penetrate to the meaning of that Sutra immediately.  This just shows that the principles of the Sutra were already familiar to his enlightened mind - even though he had never encountered it before.

Ajahn Chah was also not very literate.  Yet he was able to come up teach and transform all these University educated westerners.  He could talk for hours and hours with no notes explaining numerous Sutta principles in minute detail, making those principles easier to understand by relating it to real life events and happenings that his listeners would be familiar with.

Master Hsuan Hua had only 2 years of formal schooling (from what I can remember), yet he was able to teach and transform PhD's.  He too could lecture for hours on end about the many, many Sutra principles with no notes.  Yet his words were always in accord with the Sutras - he did not contradict the Sutras but rather, supported them, enhanced them and made the Sutra principles easier for others to understand.

[lowonthetotem]

This is always an interesting discussion.  I think that alot of the "controversy" revolves around translation, as well as some cultural and just plain fundemental Buddhist ideals that are often taken for granted by teachers deeply ensconced in a Asian Buddhist community.  Perhaps this is why Alan Watts isn't really the go-to-guy on this subject.  Zen is a Mahayana tradition.  Within Mahayana, there are many levels of enlightenment, so you have to ask, "What do we mean by Enlightenment?"  Is this the enlightenment of a Bodhisattva like Kuan Yin?  Is this the enlightenment of the Buddha?  The enlightenment of the Bodhisattva and the Buddha are not the same, and if there are different levels, how can any of it be "instant?"  Contrary to the beliefs of many Western Zen practitioners, Zen is not exempt from this hierarchy of attainment.  In general, Zen practitioners believe in Bodhisatvas and the Buddha as different and on different levels.  I am not saying that all do, but you'd be hard pressed to find an Asian Zen teacher, or one thoroughly taught in an Asian tradition, who did not take the Zen version of the Bodhisattva Vows him or herself.  Dogen himself heartily encourages practitioners to take these vows in his teachings.  It would seem silly to take the vows if they did not believe in Bodhisattvas as entities distinct from the Buddha.

Still, being such shortlived folks, ourselves, and lacking the circumspection of the Buddha, who could clearly recall his past lives, viewing "Enlightenment" as an attainment or a rung on a ladder can give the practitioner a rather skewed understanding of these things if they find themselves striving to attain or possess the next "grade" up.  I think the use of "sudden" and "instant" enlightenment is more of a skillful means that allows practitioners to learn to abide in and/or accept their current karmic situation.  My teacher has always taught that you get the most "bang for your buck" through the practice of acceptance, in regard to both ourselves and others.

Finally, I think "enlightenment" used in this context generally refers to what is called "stream entrance" in other traditions.

[lowonthetotem]

I think that what seems instant was probably built up by aeons of work

I think that this MAY be true, but is not really at the heart of what is Zen.  Zen is direct.  You/I/We are not the person/ality who lived through those Aeons which cultivated our Kharma.  As a person, we do not possess the attainment of our previous lives.  This life is a condition that we must accept for better or worse.  We all like to cite examples of great teachers and masters, but not many of us are born with that behind us.  In fact, very few of us are, if any.  Still, this is not a reason to dispair.  In acceptance, sudden attainment is always possible, it just may not be the attainment that we wish or hope for.  It may not be (overwhelmingly IS not ever) the enlightenment we fantasize about. But, wishes, fantasies, and hopes are all mental contructs.  It is always better to start where we are and go from there.  Ideas about enlightenment, attainment, and even Right View often do more to turn us away from the path than keep us on it.  Zen is powerful becaus it is Zen, that is meditation.  Start there.  Find what you can find there.  Don't try to embelish or establish something and many other things will fall into place, although it may be a little less than satisfying to the ego.  It will still leave a deep impression that is impossible to erase.  Zen/Tien/Soen/Dhyana/Meditation IS the instant enlightenment.  If you look for something more, you may want to reconsider why you have undertaken the practice or your understanding of what it is for.

I think the real thing here is to understand that very few of us, actually almost none of us, in fact just assume none of us, have the kharmic background to achieve the enlightenment of the Buddha or even a Bodhisattva.  If you can accept that and still go on with Zen... well you will go on with Zen in a very "sudden" of "instant" way.  Zen is not a drive though window for understanding.

[santamonicacj]

There is no law against sudden deep change.

Agreed. A point I often forget.

One of the drawbacks of the Tibetan step-by-step method (imo) is that this point is not presented, except in Dzogchen.

[Lobster]

When hearing a bomb falling towards them, knowing that there was no escape, letting go of life so to say, they supposedly instantly became enlightened.

Sportsmen too develop states of 'being in the zone'. When living in the moment, we may find the experience too simple and exclaim, 'is that it?'
Entering a clear minded state temporarily is not that uncommon.
The consequences are absent of 'this or that'. Just as being under a bomb has no more reality than dropping one.

I wonder what is in the middle of the experience? Nothing?