Extreme desire for Enlightenment

Dual world views like the ones shared by Gnostics, Manicheans etc. can also be found in Buddhism in the opposition between saṃsāra and nirvāṇa, whatever the frame and the substance. Even if everything were mind (cittamātra), there still is the opposition between cognition and ignorance, Science (vidyā) or no-Science (avidyā), or access to non-originated Luminosity (skye med ‘od gsal) and no access.

The Drikung founder Jikten Gonpo Rinchen Pel (1143-1217) makes that clear in his Cintamani Shastra : the garland of blazing wish-fulfilling gems (bstan bcos tsin+ta ma Ni'i phreng ba zhes bya ba'i rtsa ba). In a chapter on obstacles to liberation (thar pa'i bar du gcod par byed), the practice of the Four abodes of Brahma (cattāri brahmavihārā) is said to be an obstacle to liberation, to “Engaging in the Peace of Samādhi” (shin tu zhi ba'i ting nge 'dzin).

“199. By giving the state of Lord Brahma along with his enjoyments, comforts and joy, obstacles to liberation are created.

200. The samadhis of utter peace, the concentrations and absorptions, loving-kindness, compassion and joy, equanimity, and the concentration of joyous peace, and the six mundane perfections create obstacles to liberation.

201. Also, the concentration of experience and awareness create obstacles to liberation in terms of cause, path and result altogether. The mind wishing the joy of peace for oneself, creates obstacles to the attainment of complete enlightenment.

202. Those who propagate such wishes— the parents, abbots and masters— are said to be obstacles creating maras by none other than the Buddha himself.

203. Alas. These maras who create obstacles deprive one of the ultimate happiness. Through the harms of the three realms of samsara, they harm all the time, continuously. How would I develop fondness for these vicious enemies and obstructers?

204. With an intention to defeat the entirety of maras, in front of the Bodhi tree, the protector Lord Shakyamuni, through samadhi on innate great loving-kindness, established all the maras without exception, in the state of utterly supreme great bliss.”[0]

Everything has to yield for “ultimate happiness”, and those thought to stand in its way (including parents, abbots and masters, are considered “vicious enemies and obstructers” on whom no “fondness” (dga’ ba, joy) ought to be lost. It’s a sort of totalitarianism of the “utterly supreme great bliss”, in which even Māras are to be forcefully (through “innate great loving-kindness”) established.

Is this totalitarian project even feasible? If Lord Shakyamuni were that powerful to establish “all the maras without exception, in the state of utterly supreme great bliss”, why wouldn’t he do the same with all beings of saṃsāra? The fruit, full awakening or supreme great bliss, is to be realised by every being individually according to Buddhism. Yet at the same time, Buddhism conceives of Buddhas in a Gnostic fashion. Buddhas manifest worlds, emanate missionaries, create situations and use all sorts of skilful means (including archonts/Māras) to guide beings towards awakening. Their power is such that, if they wanted it, they could end saṃsāra here and now. At least such seems to be the gist of the belief of Buddhists. Looking at the state of the world, Buddhist messiahs failed too. The endeavor seems to remain an individual one, if necessary even against “parents, abbots and masters” and leaving aside the four abodes of Brahma, loving-kindness, compassion and joy, equanimity, because they stand in the way of one’s individual supreme great bliss.

How would we know if someone “striving on” towards supreme great bliss, sacrificing everything on their path towards it, would actually have found it? How would we recognize such a person or Buddha?

"Do we really want what we think that we want?"

Slavoj Žižek recently made a digression the feasibility of Buddhism’s search for happiness[1] during his talk on ‘Surplus Happiness: The False Joy of Excess’ at the Institute for Art and Ideas (AIA).

“I am opposed to happiness, not in the cheap sense of we want to be happy. I think with all my respect for Buddhism that this is maybe the limit of Buddhism. The Dalai Lama repeats all the time the purpose of our lives is to be happy. He just defines this term differently. Here are a couple of quotes from Dalai Lama.

“Happiness is not something already made. It comes from your own actions.”
“When we feel love and kindness towards others, it not only makes others feel loved and cared for, but it helps us also to develop inner happiness and peace.”
“We don't need more money, we don't need greater success or fame, we don't need the perfect body or even the perfect mate. Right now at this very moment we have a mind with all the basic equipment we need to achieve complete happiness”.

“Following Freud, Lacan on the contrary asserts death drive as the basic component of our lives. Death drive which operates precisely beyond the pleasure principle what Lacan calls enjoyment, “jouissance”, emerges out of a self-sabotage of pleasure. It is an enjoyment in displeasure itself, and I am even more of pessimist here, in the sense of do we really want what we think that we want? Quite often what appears as an obstacle to getting what we want is really what sustains our desire.”

“In Buddhism we are taught to sacrifice desire in order to attain this inner peace of Enlightenment, in which sacrifice cancels itself. On the contrary, the true sacrifice is desire itself. Desire is an intrusion which throws off the rails the rhythm of your life. It compels you to forfeit everyday pleasures and comfort for discipline and hard work in the pursuit of the object of your desire, be it love, a political cause or whatever.”

***

[0] tshangs pa'i dbang po'i go 'phang dang // longs spyod bde skyid ster bas kyang // thar pa'i bar du gcod par byed// shin tu zhi ba'i ting nge 'dzin// bas bsam gtan snyoms par 'jug pa dang // byams dang snying rje dga' ba dang das 'a ba ba// btang snyoms zhi bde bsam gtan dang*[J]mas // 'jig rten pha rol phyin drug gis// thar pa'i bar du gcod par byed// gzhan yang myong rig ting 'dzin gyis// rgyu lam 'bras bu thams cad kyi// thar pa'i bar du gcod pa ste// rang nyid zhi bde 'dod pa'i blos// rdzogs pa'i byang chub bar du gcod// de 'dra'i bsam pa ston pa yi/ /pha ma mkhan po slob dpon dag_/ bar du gcod pa'i bdud rnams su// rdzogs pa'i sangs rgyas nyid kyis gsungs// kye ma bar chad bdud rnams kyis// gtan gyi bde ba 'phrog byed cing // khams gsum 'khor ba'i gnod pa yis// dus rnams rgyun tu gnod pa yi// dgra bgegs ma rungs 'di dag la// bdag lta ji ltar dga' ba skye//bdud kyi dkyil 'khor pham bzhed na// byang chub mchog gi shing drung du// skyob mdzad shAkya'i dbang po yis// gnyug ma byams chen ting 'dzin gyis// ma lus bdud kyi dkyil 'khor rnams// bde chen rab tu mchog la bkod//

[1] Slavoj Žižek presents: ‘Surplus Happiness: The False Joy of Excess’