Then something just snapped. Something inside of me. I didn’t care anymore. I didn’t care about being better than Kakarot. I didn’t care about being a Super Saiyan. I didn’t care if I lived. I didn’t care about anything. And then it happened… That is how I became a Super Saiyan. The sleeper has awakened. – Prince Vegeta, from Dragon Ball Z
Pretty much all of the mystical traditions, East and West, have maps that describe the territory of spiritual awakening. In the Buddhist tradition one need only look at the Zen Ox-Herding pictures, Tozan’s Five Ranks, The Tibetan Five-Path Model, or the Theravada Four-Path Model to find extremely sophisticated maps describing the process of enlightenment. The map I’ve studied the most, and which I find most helpful at this point is the Theravada model, which describes 4 distinct stages of enlightenment.
The original model, created during the time of the Buddha and expanded since, described four progressive stages leading to the attainment of Arhantship. One who reaches the first stage was called a stream-winner (sotapanna), one who reaches the second stage a once-returner (sakadagami), one who reaches the third stage a non-returner (anagami), and finally there is the 4th stage, the arhant. Traditionally these designations were referring to re-birth, and the number of lifetimes that it would take to attain the 4th and final stage. They were also described in terms of various fetters that kept one stuck to the wheel of samsara. The 1st stage was said to cut 3 of 10 fetters (skeptical doubt, attachment to rites and rituals, and personality belief), the 2nd stage was said to weaken the 4th & 5th fetters (greed and hatred), and the 3rd stage was said to eliminate these two fetters. The last stage was said to cut the remaining 5 fetters (attachment to the first 4 jhanas, attachment to the formless jhanas, restlessness and worry, conceit, and the last veil of unknowing).
But don’t worry too much about the fetter-model as I’m going to largely ignore it in favor of Daniel Ingram’s revised 4-stage model. Ingram takes the same 4 stages but describes them much more in terms of how one’s perception changes, what the fundamental insights are, and the relationship to the diminishment of duality. He gets rid of the dogma surrounding certain emotional capacities completely disappearing as a result of enlightenment—what he calls the limited emotional-range models—and instead opts for a less dogmatic and more pragmatic understanding of these models. There is still quite a bit of overlap, and one can see how these two different models relate. That being said, if you’re a big fan of the original Theravada dogma, you may not be interested in reading any further. If instead, you’re interested in having an empowering, realistic, and achievable model of enlightenment, then keep on reading.
The Revised Four-Path Model of Enlightenment
In Ingram’s model he uses the same names and designations for each of the stages. The difference is in the descriptions. The stream-winner, in this case, has gone through the full progress of insight, has “experienced” the discontinuity moment of fruition, and now cycles through the insight stages on a continual basis. In terms of their core perception of reality however, Ingram claims that they, “do not have all that different an experience of most sensations from those who are not yet stream enterers.” In a sense, they have gotten a powerful hint of what’s to come, in the experience of nirvana, but has not yet become integrated with most of their experience. Stream-entry is also said to be the opening of what’s called the “dharma eye,” the importance of which I may try to explain one day.
With further practice the stream-winner will go through another full-blown insight cycle, starting again from the very beginning, re-experiencing Mind & Body, and going through the same basic pattern of the progress of insight. At the end of the next full cycle they will again experience fruition, and this is the attainment of the 2nd stage of enlightenment. The primary insight of the 2nd stage is that one will continue to go through cycle after cycle, and this is seen as the way to make further progress. Still, for those of 2nd path, nothing fundamentally has changed in their dualistic perception of reality.
After a while, and it can vary for different people, one will have gone through many cycles—with what will appear to be an underlying cycle beneath these surface cycles. When the underlying cycle comes to completion, the surface cycles and deeper cycle converge with a fruition, and there is a dramatic shift in perception where one begins to see what is meant by emptiness, now in real-time. This shift, which is the 3rd stage of enlightenment, has to do with seeing the empty, selfless nature of reality upon mere reflection. Where once emptiness was contained in the discontinuity experience at the end of an insight cycle, it now permeates all of experience. It comes obvious, for those of 3rd path, what is meant by the lines from the Heart Sutra, “form is emptiness.”
The time between 3rd path and 4th path tends to be the longest yet. Ingram breaks 3rd path into early and mature phases. In the early phase one is still looking for the cycles to bring further progress, whereas in the mature phase emptiness is so ordinary and integrated into one’s experience that the inquiry turns away from the cycles and toward the last subtle hints of duality, which remain.
Finally, there is another radical shift in perspective, in which the sense of a separate center-point, observer, or doer is completely undone. Apparently this realization can occur and then fade for some time, until finally the shift is permanent (i.e. nothing can interrupt this centerless perspective). This is the opening of the “wisdom eye”, the attainment of arhantship, and as Ingram says is the end of insight path: “For the arahat who has kept the thing open, there is nothing more to be gained on the ultimate front from insight practices, as ‘done is what is to be done’.” It’s also interesting to note that it’s difficult to predict how long it will take from 3rd to 4th path. It tends to be the longest path, though I have so little data (even anecdotal) that it’s really hard to say. One of my teachers, while on retreat, suggested that from 3rd to 4th path is largely dependent on one’s karma. That seems as good an explanation as any, given the lack of data. ((The one person who I do have data on is Daniel Ingram, who took 6 years from the time of stream-entry to the point where there were no vestiges of duality left. He spent several months on retreat during this period, but his longest retreat was a month in length and he got from 1st to 4th path while in medical school. I know other people who I strongly suspect have also “done it” but who I don’t have reliable data on. Maybe one day…))
My hope is that those who are interested in making genuine spiritual progress will be empowered and excited by a map like this. It is extremely practical, describes territory that is absolutely achievable, and can help us refine our understanding of the way that deep spiritual insight unfolds. To find out more about this particular map, I would recommend checking out my absolute favorite Dharma book, Mastering the Core Teachings of the Buddha (also free online here).
Great breakdown here, I’ve been hoping to read something concise like this (have yet to tackle Daniel Ingram’s book). Thanks for posting it.
I particularly like the description of the wisdom eye. Would love to get your take on the dharma eye as well, as I’ve long been curious for a description of it (what its role is, how it fits into the insight cycle, stuff like that) from someone who is more versed in the literature.
Just trying to throw some fuel on that particular fire, if you know what I mean. =)
“it’s difficult to predict how long it will take from 3rd to 4th path. It tends to be the longest path”
This is maybe a little naive, but I wonder if the reason why it tends to take longer (if that is the case) is because all shifts up until this one are still within the context of a sense of I-other, and this is a shift out of it. It is in many ways the most radical shift of them all.
Yeah, it seems like one could argue that the 1st stage could take longer on average, considering how many people start practicing and don’t get there. But I digress on that point…
Yeah, I think you’re right that it probably is a radical shift that jumps out of the context of I-other, no matter how subtle. And because of that shift maybe it does take more time, though as you say it may or may not be the case. I have so little evidence, and most of what I do have is anecdotal.
The sesne of a separate centre-point observer can go from the conscious mind,
BUT if there is still egoic thought (“I” noise) and emotions (separarive emotions like anger and fear – I feeling afraid of that etc) arising in non dual awareness, then there is still duality deeper in the psyche that remains unresolved.
That is not total enlightenment, as people like Buddha and Ramana Maharshi proved with their full attainment, proving that can be done.
Ray,
This is a working model for me, and one that seems much more realistic, as more people I know have actually experienced something like what is being described in this model. And for me it’s much more helpful, because of what my experience has told me along the way. Namely, that there is nothing wrong with any thoughts or feelings that arise whatsoever. Not on a fundamental level, and this is why I don’t hold to a model of awakening that talks about eliminating certain kind of thoughts or emotions from what one can feel. Also, and I’m afraid to say I can’t speak for the Buddha or Ramana Maharshi, but there really aren’t any people I know of today that have done this, and to which it is clear. And if it were clear, then we should be able to bring them into a neuroscience lab and all the areas associated with what you are called “egoic thought” or “separative emotions” just wouldn’t operate. None of the advanced meditation practitioners who have been brought into the neuroscience labs, have showed a complete elimination of the activity areas of fear, etc. I’m afraid that people who claim this is awakening, and that it can be done, can’t point to anything besides mythic stories and dogmatic, unfounded belief about other people’s awakenings. I’m interested in real people doing it right now. And I’m interested in verifiable facts.
All that said, I still want to work to free myself of neurotic emotional patterns and to be as skillful as I can with the emotions that arise. I think that the mature spiritual life has to do with working with what’s here, not with trying to eliminate it. If fear, anger, etc. are reduced in the process, fine. If they stay the same, fine. If they actually increase (whoa, imagine that, a model of awakening that says that a human being actually experiences MORE from awakening!) then fine. I’m not making an enemy out of anything in this human experience, and anyone who does, I believe, is not living a mature spiritual life yet.
Hi Vince,
I think that is what Ray was saying. (At least how I read it initially.)
There may be a clear awakening, but how it is expressed through this human life is a process and it includes healing, maturing and refining skillful means.
Fundamental problem with measuring the body response to emotion. The body still experience the emotions but the spirit inside does not. Total detachement from emotion cannot be measured.
Hi Per,
That’s not what I took from his comments. When someone says, “That is not total enlightenment, as people like Buddha and Ramana Maharshi proved with their full attainment,” that very much sounds like a there is some distinct endpoint, and for him that endpoint has to do with completely eliminating certain types of thoughts and emotions. That seemed pretty clear from his comment.
And that is very different from saying that, “There may be a clear awakening, but how it is expressed through this human life is a process and it includes healing, maturing and refining skillful means.” That, my friend, is what i was trying to say, and unless Ray pipes in to refine his view, I’m going to have to stick with my interpretation, of what is honestly a pretty common (and I think mistaken) view on awakening.
That said, I’ve seen people who on the one-hand do hold that the spiritual life is about healing, maturing and refining skillful means. But, somehow, they still hold this strange ideal that certain human emotions or thought patterns can be completely eliminated from experience. Why should we hold that view, if we see the process as unending? We wouldn’t. Perhaps we’d hold it as an ideal (like the ideal of Buddhahood), but even that ideal is dangerous if we take it literally. Then you get teachers, and I’ve sat with many of them, who will drop in disempowering comments about awakening not being possible. I think that really confuses students (it certainly confused me) and so should be challenged.
@Needtobetold : Detachment from the emotions is not the same as the emotions not arising, and so that is a bit different then what Ray was saying, correct?
I also have never really jived with that description of things. Emotions or thoughts arise and I am detached from them. What does that mean? I’ve never had the experience of being “completely” detached from anything that arises in experience. This to me, is also not what real freedom is about. It’s a nice idea, but why would we walk around detached from our emotions? And can we really detach ourselves from certain emotions (for instance, the one’s we don’t like) and then still experience positive emotions fully (wouldn’t we be detached from them as well)? That to me, doesn’t sound like something I want at all. I want to be free to experience everything fully as it arises. That to me, is non-duality. When everything is as it is. There isn’t detachment, there’s full-hearted engagement that is simultaneously not exclusively identified with the experience (in other words, it isn’t merely “me”).
My experience has been that I feel emotions more clearly, as time goes on, and as my practice is deepened. Sadness is more real, if anything. Fear is clearer, if anything. Anger is more like anger. There is, for me, less of a problem with the emotions, less of a cascade of internal reactions, and honestly a different relationship to them, but that isn’t the same as saying that I’m detaching from emotions. Rather, I’m just letting them be as they are, completely. And as a result, I really don’t see a problem with these emotions, and would never expect to have them disappear or be detached from them. As my teacher, Jack Kornfield, often says, “ah Mara, I see you. Please, come join me.” My practice now is to invite Mara (difficult emotions). The strategy of avoiding these emotions, or secretly hoping they’ll disappear one day, is the same strategy that prevents being able to see them clearly.
Best of luck in your practice.
‘I want to be free to experience everything fully as it arises. That to me, is non-duality. When everything is as it is. There isn’t detachment, there’s full-hearted engagement that is simultaneously not exclusively identified with the experience (in other words, it isn’t merely “me”).’
Bingo! Very well put and not said often enough. I can’t think of anything more dualistic than erecting an actively cultivated ‘detachment’ between oneself and the rest of reality.