I thoroughly discussed enlightenment in The Integration Theory of Psychoanalysis and the Digest Version of the Integration Theory of Psychoanalysis. Based on these discussions, I defined the causal relationship between psychoanalysis and enlightenment in A Sequel to the Integration Theory of Psychoanalysis and mentioned the degree of health in various mental states, which we usually experience in our daily lives, according to ten levels. Here, I briefly introduce my consideration.

  Enlightenment is generally described within Buddhism or in its relationship with Buddhism. However, enlightenment differs fundamentally from Buddhism in one way. Needless to say, because Buddhism is religion, it premises faith to Buddha. In contrast, enlightenment does not premise faith; rather, faith becomes a hindrance to enlightenment. Faith and the subjectivity developed by enlightenment relate to one another like water and oil. Buddha considered enlightenment more important than faith and advocated, "Renounce your faith."

  Freud discussed the mental structure by defining it as containing the id, ego, and super ego. "Id" indicates desire, and "super-ego" indicates prohibition of that desire. "Ego" lies between and coordinates the id and super-ego. This concept applies not only to humans but also to animals, which form groups. Therefore, it is impossible to discuss mental states peculiar to humans, with a wide range from psychoses to enlightenment, according to Freud's mental apparatus. Therefore, a revolution is needed in the realm of psychoanalysis.

  In the Emotion Control Theory, I distinguished the natures of mind originating in animals from those unique to humans and developed my theory defining the former as the displeasure-defense system and the latter as the displeasure-regulation system. The formation of the displeasure-regulation system that is, emotional control is essential for a human's healthy mind. I classified the formation of the displeasure-regulation system into eight stages and completed the radical psychoanalytic treatment. Then, in the Formation  Theory of Psychic Phenomena, I presented the methodology by which a generally healthy person can attain enlightenment. As emotional control stabilizes, the degree of awakening is elevated. In other words, an individual can realize the equality of every phenomenon, especially phenomena opposed to each other, and can notice the principle of the unification of duality. Enlightenment indicates the subjectivity manifested in an individual who has become acquainted with the principle of the unification of duality. He/she is in the mental state of thinking, "I am alone throughout heaven and earth." When individuals climb the "mountain of enlightenment" and reach the peak, they can see, in detail, all mental states. Further, it is possible to evaluate the mental states by ranking them into ten phases. As mentioned above, enlightenment is more closely connected to psychoanalysis than to Buddhism.


                                                     Psychoanalysis and Enlightenment

  I use a multiple-choice question as an example, which most Japanese individuals would have had some experience with. Label A and B however you like, and choose the number that best describes your choice for A and B. (For example, if you are concerned with psychoanalysis, you might label A as the intersubjective theory and B as the relational theory.)

       1. It is A.
       2. It is B.
       3. It is not only A but also B.
       4. It is neither A nor B.
       5. It is any option from 1 to 4.

  The choices from 1 to 4 have ordinary content. But what kind of choice is 5? Have you come across as a choice with similar content? This choice is strange, but you answer correctly whenever you choose 5.

  A mind that is not caught (a mind that sticks to nothing) is one theme of this article. I will briefly try to explain the nature of this mind. The correct answer in relation to this theme is 5. If such a choice is given on a test at school, we usually walk over a test. When a person has studied earnestly and sees this choice, he/she may get angry and say, "Don't be silly!" We certainly receive the impression that choice 5 parries the question. I wonder if an individual would choose 5 as an answer when given the following proviso:"Write your reason for choosing 5." A person should closely examine the other four choices and rule them out in order to choose 5 as an answer. People will choose 5 as an answer after taking these necessary steps, which proves that they already have a mind that is not caught (a mind that sticks to nothing).


                                                Psychoanalysis and Enlightenment

  On the one hand, I have argued the importance of "subjectivity" developed through the establishment of emotion control, and on the other, I have argued for the importance of "enlightenment" characterized by the mind that is not caught and sticks to nothing. However, I have not discussed the relation between subjectivity and enlightenment as much. Some individuals may doubt that an argument about the mind that is caught by and sticks to (self-) subjectivity is inconsistent with an argumant of enlightenment. Here, I will clarify the relation between subjectivity and enlightenment. One conclusion is that this relation is expressed as: subjectivity → enlightenment → subjectivity. In other words, subjectivity takes up a position at the gate of enlightenment. Subjectivity before attaining enlightenment is a mental state where an individual cannot thoroughly realize the mind that is caught by and sticks to something. In this mental state, an individual only weakly realizes the activation of the displeasure-defense system, and if he/she can obtain "the equality of the displeasing factors," he/she will be able to attain enlightenment. Fully attaining enlightenment represents thoroughly realizing the mind that is caught by and sticks to something. However, in order to go on living, it is necessary for an individual to leave the state of enlightenment. Then subjectivity is regained again. I have no words for subjectivity after attaining enlightenment, and here I would borrow Buddha's phrase:"Holy am I alone throughout heaven and earth."

  I also explain the context mentioned above by other expressions. In Digest version of the Integration Theory of Psychoanalysis, Chapter 28: Enlightenment, 3. Mind that is not caught (mind that sticks to nothing), I present a multiple-choice question in the following form:

     ① It is A.
     ② It is B.
     ③ It is not only A but also B.
     ④ It is neither A nor B.
     ⑤ It is any option from ① to ④.

 In the case where ④ and ⑤ are not adopted and an answer is chosen from ① to ③, which represents primary judgment, the case where ⑤ is chosen from all numbers represents injudiciousness, and the case where ④ and ⑤ are not chosen from all numbers represents ultimate judgment. A and B show most of contents, which present (over physical reality, which is the fourth dimension and psychic reality, which is the fifth dimension) in the phenomenal world involving us, and can be judged under the categories of ①, ②, and ③. However, when A and B are the contents belonging to the emotional system, which constitutes psychic reality (i.e., emotions such as love and hatred), it is difficult to judge them under the categories of ①, ②, and ③. In this case, ④ and ⑤ are also adopted, and ⑤ is chosen. Moreover, when the contents of A and B (i. e., financial sense) present over physical reality and psychic reality as mentioned above, thereby surpassing primary judgment, ④ and ⑤ are adopted. However, after close examination, ④ and ⑤ are not chosen, and an answer is judged again under the categories of ①, ②, and ③. In this case, judgment is regained again, and this series of psychic work is expressed as: primary judgment → injudiciousness → ultimate judgment. The above mentioned sequence: "subjectivity → enlightenment → subjectivity" is thereby replaced with this psychic work.


                                             Psychoanalysis and Enlightenment

  As mentioned in The Integration Theory of Psychoanalysis and the Digest Version of the Integration Theory of Psychoanalysis, experiences of Zen are characterized by subtle and profound experiences and recognition of essence negation. Enlightenment is characterized by the principle of the unification of duality, which is the mental state in which "being = not-being" in the thinking system, "self = object" in the perception system, and "pleasure = displeasure" in the emotion system are established. Zen enables "being = not-being" and "self = object." The perceptualization of concepts and equality of wisdom are gained through these two formulas. In other words, "thinking system → perception system" produces subtle and profound experiences, and "thinking system ← perception system" surrounding the former formula brings about a different essence. This leads to recognition of essence negation. However, Zen does not include the emotion system, which is remaining part of the principle of the unification of duality, and is indifferent to "pleasure = displeasure." Therefore, the ascetic practices of Zen are not directly connected to enlightenment.

  In order to attain enlightenment, "pleasure = displeasure" should be established. The establishment of emotional control is essential for the discovery of the principle of the unification of duality in the emotion system. The formation of pleural loops of forgiveness and pleural loops of help equalizes the displeasing factors and establishes "bad self = bad object" and "weak self = weak object." (With the presence of the undifferentiated displeasing factors or under the inequality among the power of the displeasing factors despite the differentiation of the undifferentiated displeasing factors, spots are produced in the interlocking movements among the displeasing factors. This promotes the activation of the defensive factors. Then, the perceptualization of concepts creates hallucination, and wisdom creates delusion.) When the equality presents among the power of the displeasing factors, despite the activation of the self-displeasing factors, the grandiose self can be easily activated, and the self's subjectivity can be maintained using the interlocking movements among the displeasing factors (the perceptualization o concepts, in this case). (These psychodynamics are used in the first level in Chapter 2: Ranking thenatures of mind in A Sequel to the Integration Theory of Psychoanalysis.)


                                                         Psychoanalysis and Enlightenment

  Speaking of enlightenment for modern people, the present content of enlightenment is not different from that during the old days. However, I think that the opportunity, the motive, and the process toward enlightenment have come to be quite different now. Moreover, the opportunity and motive for enlightenment are quite varied not only in days but also in areas. It is the main theme what has changed or what a person has gained through the process toward enlightenment.

  I hear that people who have attained enlightenment were called "saint hermits" during the old days and that saint hermits would commit suicide. There would be nothing for a person to do after attaining enlightenment; the motive to stay alive would cease. This might lead to suicide. However, suicide is self-destructive behavior. It makes me sad to think of questions such as, "Does destruction win even if a person can attain enlightenment?" If a person commits suicide after attaining enlightenment, he/she will lose all that has been gained; the face of enlightenment is utterly lost. Therefore, I will discuss an instance where a person does not commit suicide after attaining enlightenment. For example, a person can circumstantially understand his/her own mind after attaining enlightenment. Moreover, he/she can cope with anything within unified mental states generated through enlightenment, even if misfortunes should arise. Because misfortune is apt to bring about traumatic experiences, he/she usually continues to live owing to a profusion of consolation and help from others. On the contrary, enlightenment always gives a person the "readiness" for each situation, which can incubate him/her from hardship (see Chapter 29-15).

  What nature of the mind, or readiness of the mind relates to enlightenment for modern people? Here, I will redefine enlightenment in a modern style. Enlightenment refers to the following: a person goes through many hardships but does not give up his/her free mind and lives subjectively. Some explanations and conditions are required for this definition. Pain-filled minds and free minds are activated based on the "principle of unification of duality." This means that to be caught is the same as not to be caught. Whether or not a person can bear such a mental contradiction depends upon the level of his/her emotional control. The expression of living subjectively is easy to understand but vague. Subjectivity is formed by tandem work between two types of the grandiose self (the concerned and solitary types of the grandiose self). A mental state originally without subjectivity is out of the question. Although conceit (taking a defiant attitude) and meddling (altruism) are also involved in subjectivity, they should be excluded because they do not lead to enlightenment. Moreover, what about cases where a person loses or rejects his/her subjectivity? These cases also do not lead to enlightenment. However, if we experience a loss of subjectivity, accompanied by a feeling of being happy, this must not be bluntly denied. In this case, it cannot help but use the activation of the ideal self, which is directly linked with the reward system, but the destructive aggressions should be excluded. The activation of the defensive factors does not naturally lead to enlightenment.

  The stage of enlightenment is a mental state that always holds two types of contents. One is the mental state in which a person can realize a "free mind," and the other, in which a person can realize that all work is painful. The free mind indicates a mental state in which a person can live without being caught by anything. Both types of the grandiose self, which is the incarnation of our subjectivity, and the apologetic self, which is the foundation of patience (frustration tolerance), continue to activate within the free mind. However, issues catch our attention on various levels. For example, we are caught by disease. We are anxious about whether or not our being can be mentally affirmed, even if we are physically healthy. In other words, we are anxious about our own estimations and those of others. We cannot say that a person has a free mind if he/she does not possess  self-confidence and is crushed by anger and fragility. Because we cannot live alone and because human relationships are important to us, we worry whether our personal relationships (i.e., family, school, work, etc.) are adequate. It is easy to understand the truth that all work produces pain. Therefore, if we are released from such oppressions, our mind can be set free. However, I wonder whether this is possible.

  The Integration Theory of Psychoanalysis solves these problems. Emotional control, which has already been introduced several times, is our means for continuing to live with a free mind, today. Here, I will briefly design a prescription for the problem mentioned above. It is needless to say that rest and adequate treatment are necessary for an ailing individual because he/she cannot mentally overcome a physical disease. If he/she has an incurable disease and is nearing death, it is necessary for him/her to take back his/her free mind with the help of other people. Additionally, psychic pain causes/exacerbates physical diseases. In these cases, a person does not possess self-confidence and has low self-esteem. Moreover, when a person worries about the slightest problem even if he/she is healthy, it becomes difficult to activate the self-regulatory factors and sub-factors. In other words, he/she tends to use the "interlocking movements among the displeasing factors" (the objectification of self), and the "premonitory type of the closed cycle" (the subjectivization of object), which are unconscious natures of the mind. Thus, all our relationships provide the possibility of becoming the source of psychic pain. In order to  prevent excessive pain, it is important for us to trust the subjectivity of other people. This means that the activation of the object-regulatory factors and sub-factors is important.

  We cannot but solve each of our problems whenever they occur. Withdrawing into ourselves in order to avoid the occurrence of problems, or expanding our social connections as means to please everybody, is no way to live. The meaning of enlightenment for modern people is as follows: a person does everything on a trial-by trial basis, attains enlightenment at each trial, accumulates the experience of enlightenment,and discovers a way to live "within his/her means."


                                                   Psychoanalysis and Enlightenment