Awakening seems nice thing to "reach", but wouldn't I become ambitionless happy rock without any goals once I "reach" it? Realization of my goals seems more important than just state of pure bliss. Does this indicate that I have too large ego?

Home - Quora Link

I want to piggyback on Pausha Foley’s excellent answer to add an important detail. Awakening is not the end of all achievement. It is integral to the idea of agency to have goals and to want to achieve them. Awakening does not make you any less of an agent. It only changes the nature of the things you’re trying to get.

The thing that really affects the generation of and motivation to achieve goals is enlightenment. Every single enlightenment narrative I’ve ever read describes the enlightened person as devoid of the ability to create and achieve goals. It may indeed be the sole distinguishing factor between enlightenment as described by Westerners and awakening as described by those same Westerners.

What I want to say to this question is that the distance between the normal state and awakening is very great, and the distance between awakening and enlightenment is perhaps greater still. Another thing I want to state is that I personally consider myself to have been enlightened before I became awakened.

What I want anyone interested in this to understand is that I consider awakening and enlightenment to be related, but very different kinds of human achievement. They aren’t just different things, they are also different kinds of thing. It’s possible for a correlation to exist without a causation. Meaning that if you are awakened you might be more likely to find enlightenment in your lifetime but that doesn’t mean that awakening is required for enlightenment or even that more enlightened people that are awakened exist than enlightened people that are not awakened.

If you want to achieve goals though, I think awakening is the better goal. Enlightenment will only wreck your ability to achieve them by destroying motivation. Awakening alerts you to a reality other than the material that is continuous. What continuity means is that you can do a thing and have it affect reality in a way that you can perceive. If you keep doing different kinds of things then it will affect reality in legible ways. That’s essentially what reality means, that the mind can grasp cause and effect. Awakening alerts you to another frame of cause and effect.

Enlightenment, on the other had, creates a state of mind known as nonduality. Nonduality erases the perceptive distinction between subject and object. You might think this provokes superpowers. After all, if I’m looking at you, and I perceive no difference between us, then anything I do is going to provide the same sort of cause and effect as something I do regarding myself.

But this is, sometimes hilariously, not the case. Because enlightenment does not do the super important job of removing ignorance. You can not understand yourself just as much as you can not understand how hitting a ball with a bat won’t make it go over the fence. So even if you see yourself the same as someone you’re interacting with, that doesn’t mean you understand them.

Awakening, well, kinda removes this ignorance. Not that you can control others as you would yourself, but rather you can tell what sorts of actions would be fruitful rather than pointless. Crucially though, it does not make it so you can tell what will provide that control. Others will always, forever, remain outside your direct control.

The best distinction between enlightenment and awakening I have been able to determine is that enlightenment primarily affects perception of self, while awakening affects perception of other. Goal-seeking is a function of the self. So awakening won’t affect it much.