The human condition and enlightenment are topics whose entanglement leads to the eruption of philosophical debates regarding the definitions of this term as well as what these perspectives mean for individuals’ achievement of enlightenment. In particular, the Eastern and Western philosophical schools of thought present different approaches to understanding enlightenment as an idea as well as the steps required in its achievement. For these schools of thought, the teachings of Buddhism and the Immanuel Kant’s ideas on enlightenment provide clear distinctions between the ways that these two ideologies perceive this notion. In a sense, the former addresses the idea of the metaphysical while in Kant’s perspective, enlightenment touches on the human being’s ability to practice the use of critical thinking. Consequently, this essay seeks to show that the contrasts between the approaches of Buddhism and Immanuel Kant to understanding the idea of enlightenment lead them to differ in their applications of the term to their respective teachings.
Buddhism, being the older of the two philosophical approaches, provides a foundation upon which our understanding of enlightenment can find a common foundation. According to Meng and Boyd-Wilson (403), the Buddhist term “enlightenment” refers to an individual’s awakening to the realization that he or she exists as part of a greater reality rather than the subjective reality that exists in the pre-awakened mind. In this way, the Buddhist perception of the notion of enlightenment focuses on the person’s ability to shed prior approaches of distinguishing between things and rather, perceive them as iterations that exist in a common reality and thereby become inseparable from it. However, the spiritual aspects of this perspective are evident in the fact that Buddhism considers this singular reality as the relativity of matter in time and space (Meng and Boyd-Wilson 411). Therefore, Buddhism approaches the issue from a spiritual perspective and considers enlightenment as one’s awareness of this oneness of everything in existence as part of a cohesive whole.
For Immanuel Kant, the idea of “Enlightenment: describes the intellectual movement of which he was a part, and seeks to describe a state of the conscious mind in which a person exercises his or her individual capacity to exercise critical thought. In Kant’s perspective, the individual’s ability to think for himself or herself is a measure of the person’s enlightenment since he considers the use of “one’s own understanding” as the path to enlightenment and the abandonment of “nonage” (Kant 28). This notion contrasts with pre-existing perspectives of the human being’s right to exercise individual thought in a way that challenges the norms that persist in the individual’s environment. Overall, this perspective of enlightenment focuses on the human mind and its ability to question the order of things, as they exist in nature. Therefore, Kant’s vision of enlightenment is a call on people to apply the natural abilities of their minds to create their own understandings of the world rather than accepting the realities imposed on them by their environments.
Upon further analysis of the Buddhist and Kantian perspectives of enlightenment, there is an evident similarity in how these two perspectives place a reliance on the human mind and its ability to transcend subjective perceptions of reality. Here, Kant asks people to exercise freedom of thought to determine whether the understandings that they have of the realities around them correlate to the facts that they obtain through their personal analyses (Kant 53). The intended outcome is that in the case of incongruence between the two, the individual has the freedom to go against this pre-existing perspective of reality. Similarly, the Buddhist enlightenment concerns the person’s ability to rise above his or her subjectivity and perceive reality from an objective standpoint. By focusing on the existence of an absolute reality that requires an awakened mind to perceive, Buddhism thereby also calls for critical thought and the use of one’s personal capacities to understand the natural world in a way that opens up the person’s mind to the interconnectedness between the realities that constitute the absolute reality.
Even with these similarities in the dependence that the Buddhist and Kantian perspectives of enlightenment place on the individual human mind, it is clear that the two have different uses for the term’s application. For Buddhism, enlightenment is a step on the path to developing a greater understanding of and better relationship with a person’s connection to the metaphysical (Mend and Boyd-Wilson 414). On the other hand, Kant challenges any mode of thinking that uses unascertainable facts, or whose interpretation of the facts fails to satisfy the critical thinking faculties of the individual as part of the natural order. For Kant, I believe that the Buddhist perception of enlightenment would also fall under the category of the illusionary perspectives of reality that he required the human mind to overcome. However, it is also undeniable that Buddhism lends to Kant’s own understanding of the term since it precedes Kant’s enlightenment and in its tenets, requires the individual’s awareness as the motivator for enlightenment.
Overall, the Buddhist perspective of enlightenment presents a clear way to live harmoniously with the environment but the applicability of and the necessity for Kant’s interpretation has significant implications in the modern context. Primarily, Kant’s arguments against the blind acceptance of the realities that authority figures and institution impose on individuals in society and considers such blind acceptance a crime against reason (Kant 51). In his perspective, the application of enlightened thinking can enhance the coverage of individual rights while also increasing the tolerance with which individuals perceive the actions and opinions of others. In a way, Kant’s enlightenment accepts that people have the freedom and right to think for themselves and calls them who question the natural order. In this way, his philosophy not only proposes that critical thought is a right and responsibility but also notes its necessity in allowing human beings to behave rationally and in a civilized manner.
Enlightenment is a term that Buddhist and Kantian thinkers alike consider as essential in awakening the human mind to the possibility of a reality outside the norms around which it developed its understanding of reality. While the Buddhist view focuses on the interconnectedness between individual realities and the absolute reality that connects us all, the Kantian perspective focuses on the human mind and its ability to exercise critical thought. In this way, the two perspectives are similar since they require the person to apply an individual capacity to perceive and question the realities around him or her. However, the focus on the metaphysical in the Buddhist perspective makes Kant’s approach to the concept more applicable regardless of an individual’s opinions regarding the metaphysical. Therefore, Kant’s approach to enlightenment lends itself to applications in individuals’ lives as well as in their roles as part of a collective society, highlighting their responsibility to think for themselves.
Works Cited
Kant, Immanuel. "Civilization and enlightenment:‘Idea for a Universal History from a Cosmopolitan Point of View9." Classical Readings on Culture and Civilization. Routledge, 2017. 47-55.
Meng, Lingqi, and Belinda Boyd-Wilson. "Enlightenment as a Psychological Construct and as a Buddhist Religious Pursuit: A Cross-cultural Understanding." Contemporary Buddhism18.2 (2017): 402-418.
