the fundamentals of
Enlightenment and the Enlightenment Technique
"in the words of Charles Berner"
The Object of Enlightenment
There is no lecture that I could find to match the Transmission of Truth, Chapter 4, which is titled,
The Object of Enlightenment. The text is below.
The Object of Enlightenment. The text is below.
The Transmission of Truth: A Manual for the Enlightenment Master is the transcribed and edited version of the 1977 Enlightenment Master Training Course lectures. This is chapter three.
Section 4
The Object of Enlightenment
I want to explain in more detail one aspect of the Enlightenment Technique which I think is very important. It is what I call the 'object of enlightenment,' I don't know what other short phrase to use. The phrase 'object of enlightenment' is not satisfactory. However, the problem of the object of enlightenment is a difficult one. We think, in the case of working on "What is Life?" for example, that all we have to do is take all or part of life as an easy object. Suppose someone looks at the curtain and says, "Now, I'm intending to directly experience this curtain. This curtain is part of life. This curtain is the object of my enlightenment and therefore I have a very obvious object." This is self-deceptive because the truth is there isn't any curtain. It's an illusion, as all of life is. So, in the end what would be the object? There are ultimately only two basic objects: what another actually is and what you actually are. They turn out to be identical.
There is also no ultimate object when you work on "Who am I?" because there's no thing. If a person thinks he is a body, he'll find out he's not. If he thinks he's a mind or personality, he'll find out he's not. In the end, there's no ultimate object to "Who am I?" because there's no thing that a person is.
As a master you need to thoroughly know what I'm talking about here so that you can explain it from a dozen different points. What the participant is to take for his object of enlightenment is whatever he is thinking of life or another or himself as, at the moment. If he is working on "Who am I?" he will think of or indirectly experience himself as something, or as nothing, or as whatever, and he should intend to directly experience that, whatever it is, For example, even though he may know intellectually that he won't turn out to be a body, if he still actually experiences or thinks of himself as a body, he should intend to directly experience that body. At that moment that is the object of his enlightenment. The object of enlightenment is what he is identified with plus the Truth, He won't have it sorted out like that. If he did, his enlightenment would be almost complete. But that's what the object of enlightenment consists of: what he is identified with plus the Truth itself.
Then, something will occur in his consciousness as a result of his contemplation He may experience a purple light, for instance. He should communicate that to his partner. Then he should again notice what his indirect experience of himself at the moment is and intend to directly experience that.
If he is working on who he is, the truth of that is who he actually is. But he is identified, say, with personality, body, emotional feelings, a flash of light, Or whatever, He may say, "I'm the glowing truth." Then he should intend to directly experience himself as glowing truth, That becomes the object of his enlightenment. He should intend to directly experience who he is now, which to him at the moment would be glowing truth. When that happens it tends to break this experience and he deidentifies from being "glowing truth" and he gets closer to the Truth. But if he doesn't actually experience himself as glowing truth, if he just has the experience of glowing truth independent of his experience of himself, he should just communicate that to his partner and not intend to directly experience it. He should intend to directly experience only what he experiences himself to be; everything else that occurs as a direct result of his contemplation should only be communicated.
You can't tell the participants what the object of their enlightenment is not only because this would be laying the ultimate trip on them, but because the object of their enlightenment is a constantly changing thing from second to second while doing the technique. What the participant should do is intend to directly experience the object of his enlightenment and take for his object whatever it is for him at the moment, For example, suppose a participant is working on "What is Life?" and he contemplates the curtain. He focuses his eyes on the curtain and tries to stare his way into it instead of directly experiencing it. That's the best he can do at the moment so you've got to accept it for the moment. He continues with the technique and says, "The curtain isn't life, life is something that is the essence of this curtain. The essence of this." He should then intend to directly experience this essence that he is now thinking of life as being and when he experiences that essence it will vanish and something else will occur. As he continues that will vanish too.
If he's working on "What is Another?" then his object of enlightenment is whatever he has identified the other with, mixed in with the Truth. The fortunate part of all this is that you really can't lose the Truth because it's everywhere and always. Even though he looks at his partner and says, "Another to me right now is a grey block," there's still the Truth of another in there somewhere.
People tend to waste their time on Enlightenment Intensives talking about their experiences, They are only trying to have experiences instead of a direct experience. So a participant gets this grey block. What he should do with that is intend to directly experience that grey block. Then he'll experience that another is not a grey block. He may then experience that another is a soft feeling. Then he should intend to directly experience the soft feeling. And so on and so on and so on. If your participants do this, they can do in fifteen seconds what it takes other people fifteen days to do. But it is you as the master who must communicate this to them.
What the object of enlightenment is is whatever it is to the participant at the moment. A participant working on "What am I?" might say, "Well what's my object of enlightenment?" You say, "I don't know, whatever it is to you at the moment. Whatever you are to you at the moment." He says, "Well, I'm a frustrated person." You say, "Well, then you should intend to directly experience this frustrated person." Within a fraction of a second it will change to something else, if he does that. There should be this evolution going on. The people who go very slowly on Enlightenment Intensives don't know what the object of enlightenment is, It's your job to explain this to them so they know not only what the technique is but how to do it effectively. You should teach them to discriminate between that which they should intend to directly experience and that which they should communicate to their partner.
The object of enlightenment is determined by the question. The question is the framework. It's "who," "what," "life," or "another." They shouldn't change that around. But say a participant is lost about what life is and he is going to contemplate his hand as an aspect of life. He says, "Well, what is that? Is that a hand?" and he intends to directly experience that. Then he says, "Well, it's a livingness, that's what it is to me at the moment." Then for him the object of enlightenment at that moment is the livingness of his hand and he should try to directly experience that rather than the hand because life to him is now livingness. When he does that he might get a scary feeling in his stomach and he should communicate that to his partner. If the scary feeling is life to him, he should then intend to directly experience it.
As the master you should allow that freedom. If you don't, you're going to slow the participant down because the object has to be whatever it is to him at the moment, The object may cycle and come back again and again and again and then go this way and that way and keep coming back to this or that. Finally that core thing which keeps showing up will be penetrated and he will have a direct experience and a degree of enlightenment.
Often people are completely lost and they say, "I don't know anything..." They're dealing only with ideas, you see. The participant is having an idea of life or he's trying to define the word "life" instead of have a direct experience of life. That's all some people can do, so you have to start there with them. In the beginning you should be satisfied with that as a master. Eventually, he says, Well, I don't know. I just.. you know... I'm lost." Finally he's given up on the definitions and he's totally lost. He has made progress. So you point to his hand and say, "Well, is this a part of life?" He says, "well, yeah..."You say, "Well, what's that?" He says, "Oh, you want me to experience that?" This is how you get them on to this business, Then you have to keep refining the instruction as they gradually comprehend the reference point of what you're explaining they should do. Just explaining the words of the technique doesn' t take long, but to get them to understand 'intention' and 'object' and 'open' and 'direct result of your contemplation takes work.
The participant says, "Well, do I have to stay with my hand?" You say, "No, you don't have to. It doesn't matter, you can take this whole process of life going on." That can be the object of his enlightenment and by the very fact that he's dealing with a real thing rather than just a concept makes a tremendous difference. They don't tend to ~et tired or sleepy or bored, if they have a real object. They get into it because they're dealing with a real thing, not just words. This is very valuable. It's better to have them dealing with their hand than dealing with the concept of life. The concept of life is just in thought-land and nobody can ever have an enlightenment experience in thought-land. However, there will be some people who, no matter how you try to explain it, will not understand you, so you let them go on in thought-land and after a day or two they'll say something like, "Hey, life is terrifying.'" You say, "Very good. Now what is it? What is that?" Finally they've got the impact of the power and reality of the question. It's a tremendous step forward for them. They begin to realize that we're not just playing, that Enlightenment Intensives are after the real thing.
This is a very important aspect of the Enlightenment Technique and you should understand it thoroughly.
Section 4
The Object of Enlightenment
I want to explain in more detail one aspect of the Enlightenment Technique which I think is very important. It is what I call the 'object of enlightenment,' I don't know what other short phrase to use. The phrase 'object of enlightenment' is not satisfactory. However, the problem of the object of enlightenment is a difficult one. We think, in the case of working on "What is Life?" for example, that all we have to do is take all or part of life as an easy object. Suppose someone looks at the curtain and says, "Now, I'm intending to directly experience this curtain. This curtain is part of life. This curtain is the object of my enlightenment and therefore I have a very obvious object." This is self-deceptive because the truth is there isn't any curtain. It's an illusion, as all of life is. So, in the end what would be the object? There are ultimately only two basic objects: what another actually is and what you actually are. They turn out to be identical.
There is also no ultimate object when you work on "Who am I?" because there's no thing. If a person thinks he is a body, he'll find out he's not. If he thinks he's a mind or personality, he'll find out he's not. In the end, there's no ultimate object to "Who am I?" because there's no thing that a person is.
As a master you need to thoroughly know what I'm talking about here so that you can explain it from a dozen different points. What the participant is to take for his object of enlightenment is whatever he is thinking of life or another or himself as, at the moment. If he is working on "Who am I?" he will think of or indirectly experience himself as something, or as nothing, or as whatever, and he should intend to directly experience that, whatever it is, For example, even though he may know intellectually that he won't turn out to be a body, if he still actually experiences or thinks of himself as a body, he should intend to directly experience that body. At that moment that is the object of his enlightenment. The object of enlightenment is what he is identified with plus the Truth, He won't have it sorted out like that. If he did, his enlightenment would be almost complete. But that's what the object of enlightenment consists of: what he is identified with plus the Truth itself.
Then, something will occur in his consciousness as a result of his contemplation He may experience a purple light, for instance. He should communicate that to his partner. Then he should again notice what his indirect experience of himself at the moment is and intend to directly experience that.
If he is working on who he is, the truth of that is who he actually is. But he is identified, say, with personality, body, emotional feelings, a flash of light, Or whatever, He may say, "I'm the glowing truth." Then he should intend to directly experience himself as glowing truth, That becomes the object of his enlightenment. He should intend to directly experience who he is now, which to him at the moment would be glowing truth. When that happens it tends to break this experience and he deidentifies from being "glowing truth" and he gets closer to the Truth. But if he doesn't actually experience himself as glowing truth, if he just has the experience of glowing truth independent of his experience of himself, he should just communicate that to his partner and not intend to directly experience it. He should intend to directly experience only what he experiences himself to be; everything else that occurs as a direct result of his contemplation should only be communicated.
You can't tell the participants what the object of their enlightenment is not only because this would be laying the ultimate trip on them, but because the object of their enlightenment is a constantly changing thing from second to second while doing the technique. What the participant should do is intend to directly experience the object of his enlightenment and take for his object whatever it is for him at the moment, For example, suppose a participant is working on "What is Life?" and he contemplates the curtain. He focuses his eyes on the curtain and tries to stare his way into it instead of directly experiencing it. That's the best he can do at the moment so you've got to accept it for the moment. He continues with the technique and says, "The curtain isn't life, life is something that is the essence of this curtain. The essence of this." He should then intend to directly experience this essence that he is now thinking of life as being and when he experiences that essence it will vanish and something else will occur. As he continues that will vanish too.
If he's working on "What is Another?" then his object of enlightenment is whatever he has identified the other with, mixed in with the Truth. The fortunate part of all this is that you really can't lose the Truth because it's everywhere and always. Even though he looks at his partner and says, "Another to me right now is a grey block," there's still the Truth of another in there somewhere.
People tend to waste their time on Enlightenment Intensives talking about their experiences, They are only trying to have experiences instead of a direct experience. So a participant gets this grey block. What he should do with that is intend to directly experience that grey block. Then he'll experience that another is not a grey block. He may then experience that another is a soft feeling. Then he should intend to directly experience the soft feeling. And so on and so on and so on. If your participants do this, they can do in fifteen seconds what it takes other people fifteen days to do. But it is you as the master who must communicate this to them.
What the object of enlightenment is is whatever it is to the participant at the moment. A participant working on "What am I?" might say, "Well what's my object of enlightenment?" You say, "I don't know, whatever it is to you at the moment. Whatever you are to you at the moment." He says, "Well, I'm a frustrated person." You say, "Well, then you should intend to directly experience this frustrated person." Within a fraction of a second it will change to something else, if he does that. There should be this evolution going on. The people who go very slowly on Enlightenment Intensives don't know what the object of enlightenment is, It's your job to explain this to them so they know not only what the technique is but how to do it effectively. You should teach them to discriminate between that which they should intend to directly experience and that which they should communicate to their partner.
The object of enlightenment is determined by the question. The question is the framework. It's "who," "what," "life," or "another." They shouldn't change that around. But say a participant is lost about what life is and he is going to contemplate his hand as an aspect of life. He says, "Well, what is that? Is that a hand?" and he intends to directly experience that. Then he says, "Well, it's a livingness, that's what it is to me at the moment." Then for him the object of enlightenment at that moment is the livingness of his hand and he should try to directly experience that rather than the hand because life to him is now livingness. When he does that he might get a scary feeling in his stomach and he should communicate that to his partner. If the scary feeling is life to him, he should then intend to directly experience it.
As the master you should allow that freedom. If you don't, you're going to slow the participant down because the object has to be whatever it is to him at the moment, The object may cycle and come back again and again and again and then go this way and that way and keep coming back to this or that. Finally that core thing which keeps showing up will be penetrated and he will have a direct experience and a degree of enlightenment.
Often people are completely lost and they say, "I don't know anything..." They're dealing only with ideas, you see. The participant is having an idea of life or he's trying to define the word "life" instead of have a direct experience of life. That's all some people can do, so you have to start there with them. In the beginning you should be satisfied with that as a master. Eventually, he says, Well, I don't know. I just.. you know... I'm lost." Finally he's given up on the definitions and he's totally lost. He has made progress. So you point to his hand and say, "Well, is this a part of life?" He says, "well, yeah..."You say, "Well, what's that?" He says, "Oh, you want me to experience that?" This is how you get them on to this business, Then you have to keep refining the instruction as they gradually comprehend the reference point of what you're explaining they should do. Just explaining the words of the technique doesn' t take long, but to get them to understand 'intention' and 'object' and 'open' and 'direct result of your contemplation takes work.
The participant says, "Well, do I have to stay with my hand?" You say, "No, you don't have to. It doesn't matter, you can take this whole process of life going on." That can be the object of his enlightenment and by the very fact that he's dealing with a real thing rather than just a concept makes a tremendous difference. They don't tend to ~et tired or sleepy or bored, if they have a real object. They get into it because they're dealing with a real thing, not just words. This is very valuable. It's better to have them dealing with their hand than dealing with the concept of life. The concept of life is just in thought-land and nobody can ever have an enlightenment experience in thought-land. However, there will be some people who, no matter how you try to explain it, will not understand you, so you let them go on in thought-land and after a day or two they'll say something like, "Hey, life is terrifying.'" You say, "Very good. Now what is it? What is that?" Finally they've got the impact of the power and reality of the question. It's a tremendous step forward for them. They begin to realize that we're not just playing, that Enlightenment Intensives are after the real thing.
This is a very important aspect of the Enlightenment Technique and you should understand it thoroughly.
The Object of Enlightenment
Study Questions
1. When doing the Enlightenment Technique what should the participant take as his object of enlightenment?
2. Can you tell a participant what his object of enlightenment is?
3. As a master, if you see a participant changing his object of enlightenment, should you or should you not stop him?
4. What are the advantages of being in contact with a real object of enlightenment?
Study Questions
1. When doing the Enlightenment Technique what should the participant take as his object of enlightenment?
2. Can you tell a participant what his object of enlightenment is?
3. As a master, if you see a participant changing his object of enlightenment, should you or should you not stop him?
4. What are the advantages of being in contact with a real object of enlightenment?