The Moment of Direct Realization
The Prasangika presentation of the path to enlightenment is encapsulated in one defining moment: a direct realization of emptiness. This one moment is the quintessential experience of the entire path and thus serves as a pivot on which the whole Prasangika method rotates. This experience is revered as a pure, unfiltered glimpse of ultimate truth – a perception of the true nature of reality. It represents the culmination of one’s conceptual understanding of emptiness and the dawning of non-conceptual insight. And because of its ultimate reliability, this experience is taken as the definitive arbiter when determining which minds are capable of discerning truth. In other words, the direct experience of emptiness is seen to establish both ultimate truth and the validity of the mind that realizes ultimate truth. On the foundation of these two established premises, the entire Prasangika path is constructed so as to lead the student to that direct experience.
For many years now, i have found it curious that so much emphasis is placed on this one moment along the path to enlightenment. If it really is a path, then how can one section of the path be elevated above all the rest? Every journey will have some moments that are more memorable than others but the success of the journey depends equally on the all the steps that we take. How can we say that any particular moment is the “real experience” of the journey?
And even more suspicious is the fact that the one moment which is held up as a direct realization of ultimate truth does not occur at the end of the path, as we would expect, but somewhere in the middle. After this direct glimpse of emptiness there are experiences that must be cultivated before enlightenment is reached. This begs the question of why an incomplete experience of enlightenment, which comes at an intermediate stage of the path, is adopted as a realization of the true nature of reality and why such a (not yet fully-matured) state of mind is the assumed standard-bearer of a valid mind. Surely the mind of enlightenment perceives nuances of truth that are not perceived by an initial realization of emptiness and surely the mind of enlightenment is a more appropriate candidate for the prototypical “valid mind”. So why is the path structured around a direct realization of emptiness instead of around the mind of enlightenment?
A more wide-ranging question is: If we over-accentuate one section of the path to enlightenment, how would that effect our understanding of the entire path? What distortions and exaggerations might we expect to find? For example, if someone were attempting to climb Mt. Everest and he focused all his energies on reaching a temporary shelter half way to the peak, how would that effect his efforts to get all the way to the top? If he spent almost all of his time and attention on trying to get to the temporary shelter under the assumption that the trek from the shelter to the peak would be effortless, would he be prepared for the second half of the journey?
There are good reasons for emphasizing the importance of a direct realization of emptiness – beyond the belief that it is an instance of a completely valid mind observing ultimate reality. However, we also need to understand the limitations and deceptive nature of this experience. Perhaps most important is that a direct realization of emptiness is the direct realization of something which is assumed to be partial. It is a direct realization of an emptiness that is assumed to exist separately from conventional truths. Up until the meditator experiences a direct realization, he has been meditating on an emptiness that has been conceptually distinguished from all other phenomena. This emptiness does not actually exist because the two truths are the same nature; emptiness only exists in union with conventional truths. Thus, if the meditator realizes “only emptiness” without simultaneously realizing conventional truth then he has realized a false emptiness.
The direct realization of emptiness is the core of the Prasangika method but we should not accept everything that is said about this experience as a literal truth. We need to investigate this event based on our personal experience and come to our own understanding.
2 comments:
Hello.
Congratulations for your blog. It´s very interesting.
I will tell you, the realization of emptiness is in no way deceptive. It is also not completely necessary for enlightenment. However, it has its benefits. Emptiness is a very real fact. One can understand it conceptually, but until it is understood as a reality one can not be said to have gone beyond the mind (unless they attain enlightenment before). After the realization of emptiness, the mind will never be the same. You will no longer believe in distinctions between good and bad, me and you, etc. You will not label yourself in any way. You will be able to see through all things, be they mental or physical. Basically the realization of emptiness is a direct realization past all conceptions of the mind, such that it permanently obliterates all conceptions of the mind. The realization of enlightenment and the realization of emptiness are different, but they go hand in hand as fundamental realizations of reality. The realization of emptiness is very important, however, because it conditions one's mind to the reality of enlightenment. UG Krishnamurti once asked Maharshi if it was possible for him to give him the thing called enlightenment. Maharshi said, "I can give it to you, but can you take it?" The realization of emptiness allows you to "take it," so to speak. Once you are empty, enlightenment can be received much more easily. In fact, I think that most people have the realization of enlightenment sometime in their lives. However, because they have not permanently seen through the conceptions of the mind, they lose grasp of this realization. That said, emptiness is an important realization and not one to be taken as a mere halfway point that should be disregarded.
Post a Comment