In this post, we try to verify the adventitious relationship between enlightenment and unenlightenment. But let’s first recall the meaning of enlightenment, unenlightenment, and adventitiousness in Buddhism.
As discussed in Post 3, when introducing a few fundamental concepts, in the Astasahasrika-Prajnaparamita-Sutra (Chinese: 道行般若波羅蜜經), Buddha defines enlightenment as ” the thought of enlightenment is no thought since in its essential original nature thought is transparently luminous.” Furthermore, Citta (Chinese: 本覺心), as a quiescent mentality, qualifies as a “no thought” mentality and, therefore, enlightened and luminous, per Buddha’s definition.
As discussed in Post 12, when introducing non-luminosity as the conscious quantum realm, in the Aṅguttara Nikāya (Chinese: 增一阿含經), Buddha stated, “The mind, O monks, is luminous, but defiled by adventitious defilements.” Furthermore, in the same post, we discussed that defilement means a fluctuating mentality and, therefore, it is either “unenlightened (Chinese: 不覺心),” or “non-luminous ((Romanized Sanskrit: tamasa; Chinese: 無明).”
Adventitious (Chinese: 不定的, 偶然的, 外來的), by definition, means “associated with something by chance rather than as an integral part; extrinsic.” Since the Buddha defines defilement as adventitious, Citta and non-luminous must satisfy the following two conditions.
- Association by Chance: If two events are associated by chance in Buddhism, it necessarily means that there is no causal relationship between them. In other words, an enlightened mind cannot cause enlightenment, nor can unlightenment be caused by enlightenment.
- Extrinsic: An extrinsic relationship means that the enlightened mind must exist separately from the unenlightened mind.
As discussed also in Post 12, according to quantum field theory, a space without fluctuations does not exist on earth because “is “the simplest thing you could possibly imagine in the universe, is already full of quantum energy fluctuations. Scientists call this dilemma “empty space is not empty.”
So, we explore whether scientists have attempted to create a domain in which “empty space is empty,” i.e., one with no fluctuations.
In this video, “Empty Space is Not Empty,” quantum scientist Dr. Derek Leinweber discusses the results of just such an experiment when he tried to create a domain without fluctuations. As a premise for his experiment, he proposed a hypothetical space devoid of quantum energy fluctuations, which he called an “empty vacuum.”
To his disappointment, Dr. Leinweber’s experimental results led him to acknowledge that an “empty vacuum without fluctuations actually costs an enormous amount of energy to create.” “And if you were able to create it, you’d discover that it is actually unstable. Any sort of perturbation would push that empty vacuum into something where the vacuum is actually full of quantum fluctuations.”
While not being able to create a stable domain without fluctuations does not necessarily negate its existence, it does mean that, even if such a domain existed, the domains with and without fluctuations have an adventitious relationship.
- No Causal Relationship:
- The attempt to create an “empty vacuum” itself verifies that the quantum energy field cannot cause it.
- Similarly, the domain without fluctuations could not have been the cause of the quantum field because it does not exist.
- Extrinsic:
- The fact that the “simplest thing” on earth is full of quantum field fluctuations verifies that even if an “empty vacuum” existed, it does not exist as an integral part of the quantum energy field.
From a Buddhist perspective, a domain without fluctuations does exist. But it does not exist as quantum energy; it exists as a quiescent mentality known as Citta. As discussed in Post 7, Citta can be verified only by becoming part of it through direct perception until one becomes enlightened,
Indeed, an enlightened individual can prove the two conditions that adventitious defines:
- No Causal Relationship.
- That an unenlightened mind cannot cause enlightenment is quite apparent. Throughout human history, there has never been a recorded case of someone suddenly becoming enlightened without reason.
- That enlightenment cannot cause unenlightenment is also quite obvious: no enlightened person has ever complained about losing enlightenment without reason, either.
- Extrinsic: That enlightenment and unenlightenment are extrinsic is obvious because no human mind can simultaneously be enlightened and unenlightened. Enlightenment and unenlightenment cannot coexist at the same time because a mind cannot be quiescent and active at the same time.
However, enlightenment is not easy to achieve. Like Dr. Leinweber’s scientific experiment attempting to create a domain without fluctuations “costs an enormous amount of energy,” achieving enlightenment required considerable personal effort. It took Adyashanti several decades. And he is the lucky one. Many more had tried for much longer and maybe a lifetime, but never succeeded.
As mentioned in Post 15, when exploring the Three Delicate Marks, “until one is enlightened, one should know that Buddha is the only one able to tell you the true nature of reality humanity experiences. Since science cannot answer “What Exists?”, it canalso not tell humanity that suffering is existential, that karma, causality, and a delusional misunderstanding of reality resulting from observation accompany consciousness at birth. It cannot tell humanity to minimize the negative impacts of causality by living a wholesome, benevolent, and altruistic life, and by treating others as you would like to be treated. In Buddhism, there is no savior to help humanity because there is no forbidden fruit to be eaten. The journey to your salvation is your own responsibility.”
(If you like this post, please like it on our Facebook page and share. Thank you.)
