When you know it is stupid to become something, this is enlightenment. – H.W.L Poonja
I posted this quote from H.W.L Poonja, or “Papaji” as his students called him, on my twitter feed yesterday. The quote elicited an interesting comment from a dharma buddy, about whether this is a mature expression of enlightenment when compared to another Buddhist teacher, Joshu Sasaki Roshi. I would share some of the background with Joshu Sasaki Roshi, but I don’t think that it’s actually relevant to this post, insofar as what I want to say has nothing to do with the content of the argument, but rather has to do with Advaita teachings, in general, when compared to Buddhist teachings. ((I should say that there isn’t always a clear delineation between Buddhist and Advaita teachings and teachers. Certainly there’s enough difference to make these points, but there’s also a lot of overlap. Many Zen teachers, do at times, sound like Advaita teachers. But, even with Zen masters, the difference seems to be with building up views and models of enlightenment, and using those as teaching tools. Just as an example, it turns out that Zen has the largest written teaching cannon of any Buddhist school.))
My first thought, when looking at my friend’s concern is that Papaji is mainly trying to point to something here (rather than sum up his view of enlightenment), as this quote is taken from the context of a live discussion with a student. In the very next page he speaks about it differently, so I think it’s important not to take this one quote as indicative of his entire view of enlightenment, but rather as a teaching tool.
That said, the entire approach of Advaita masters, like Papaji, is really more about helping people dis-identify with their views of enlightenment, right there in the moment, so that there are no views to cling to. Even though they themselves have views (that seems inevitable), their method is a ruthless deconstruction of views, and so it’s really hard to compare the words of an Advaita teacher with a Buddhist teacher. I’m not saying it’s impossible—as I’m clearly attempting it myself—just that there’s something lost in the comparison, especially when what one’s values are on the side of complex and mature views.
That said, I personally find that seeing this difference, I go to Advaita teachers–like Papaji, Nisargadatta, Ramana Maharshi, Karl Renz, Adyashanti (to some degree)–for something different than I go to Buddhist teachers for. I go to them to have my ideas about enlightenment questioned, to pull the rug out from all definitions, views, & models about “what it is”. I think they do this better than almost anyone, and I continually find that by going back to these types of teachers, there’s a re-balancing and deepening that happens.
I think part of what happens, when I have a really compelling and complex view about enlightenment, is that I can get sort of ridged around the view, and it starts to get stale. It’s like the whole staring at the finger pointing to the moon. I get so involved in the various creases and lines on the finger that I forget what it’s there for. For those that are stuck on methods, techniques, and views, having a conversation with a good Advaita teacher, or reading some of the recorded talks from the famous dead-dudes in India, will really dislodge that in many cases. ((That, or it will piss you off to no end.))
It also dislodges the sense that enlightenment needs to be seen primarily from a gradual, or time-based, perspective. In points directly to ones experience in this moment, almost mercilessly. Take this other quote from Papaji’s discussion, with a student who asks:
Student: I have a question relating to freedom, about the use of the correct method in regard to the chakras.
Papaji: Don’t worry about methods. If you are sincere and honest, and have a true desire for freedom, even wrong methods will take you there. Therefore, give rise to the desire 100 percent, and the rest will take care of itself. What you are doing is not important, the end is important. You can do anything you like. The end must be that “I have to be free.”
In the student’s question, you can almost hear their reliance on method and technique, and in Papaji’s answer he undercuts all of that, and points directly to ones motivation, and to what is ultimately driving the search. It’s as though, he’s saying, “quit staring at my finger and generate the unquenchable desire to be free. If you do that, nothing can stop you.”
Of course, I always come back to my wise and mature Buddhist teachers, but I feel that in coming back, I strangely understand what their saying much better. I see the beauty and wisdom in their hard-earned views, but I also see their ultimate inability to point one to the truth. Their words, no matter how beautiful, need to fall on the ears of those who “have to be free,” and who are willing to question absolutely everything. If they don’t, then it just becomes a beautiful and mature view, a model finger, always pointing, but not really guiding, to direct Reality.
