1. Introduction
In many religious traditions, ultimate reality is viewed as transcendent and beyond words, and yet these same traditions are characterized by extended discussions of this reality. This is perhaps best exemplified in Buddhist and Hindu discourse on enlightenment, which is often characterized by seemingly contradictory or highly figurative language designed to reorient the listener to new conceptions of reality. This raises the question of metaphor’s role in discourse that aims to express that which is perceived to be beyond words.
The current study draws on the principles of Conceptual Metaphor Theory (Lakoff & Johnson, Reference Lakoff and Johnson1980, Reference Lakoff and Johnson1999) in order to investigate how two contemporary Buddhist and two Hindu teachers figuratively represent enlightenment. Utilizing a discourse approach, we focus on how metaphors are recontextualized (Cameron, Reference Cameron2011; Semino, Deignan, & Littlemore, Reference Semino, Deignan and Littlemore2013) by the same speaker over the course of a single talk. For the purposes of this paper, we will be restricting our definition of metaphorical recontextualization to an instance where a speaker draws on a source domain that he or she used earlier, but uses it in a different sense or for a different function. The study identifies a recurrent pattern of such recontextualization consisting of four elements: (1) source domain reversal (discussed below), and a shift (2) from force to object-based schemas, (3) from a focus on lower and easier to articulate to higher and more difficult to articulate levels of truth, and (4) from descriptions of a process to a state. In some respects, this pattern reflects a transition from a kataphatic to an apophatic stance (cf. Sells, Reference Sells1994), which we define as a move from talking about a perceived ultimate reality to describing it in terms of what it is not or to call for silence (sometimes referred to as negative theology). These elements are identified within discourse samples and are then presented in summary form in Table 1 at the end of the paper. In terms of identifying this recurrent pattern in usage, we draw on the notion of a family resemblances model. This means that each speaker utilizes particular elements to varying degrees, but that there are enough shared characteristics to allow us to conclude they are drawing on a similar pattern (Rosch, Reference Rosch1975). The findings are then discussed in relationship to related linguistic research on Eastern apophatic religious discourse.
table 1. Family resemblances model of the source domain reversal discourse pattern
notes: * Yuttadhammo; ** Bon Yeon; *** Sadhguru; **** Rupert Spira.
2. Literature review
2.1. enlightenment
As the focus of this study is an examination of metaphorical descriptions of the target domain of enlightenment in Hinduism and Buddhism, it will be useful to review some common features of the conceptualization of enlightenment in these two traditions. Both characterize life in this world as inherently subject to suffering amidst repeated deaths and rebirth. Thus the ultimate goal of human existence is achieving enlightenment (nirvana, moksha) and freedom from saṃsāra, the cycle of birth and death. The path to enlightenment is conceived of as being quite arduous and in many traditions requires renunciation and intensive training and practice. In Hinduism, the ultimate goal is to develop the realization that the personal self (atman) is unreal, and the identification of the self with Brahman, the absolute self or reality. The everyday sense of self, as composed of an individual’s thoughts and feelings, is regarded as illusory, and the misapprehension of self is linked to the deep-seated misapprehension of reality (Rodrigues, Reference Rodrigues, Fernando and Moodley2018). The Hindu and Buddhist views regarding the illusory nature of the individual self are close, although Buddhists reject the existence of even a transcendent self or soul.
In Hindu philosophical traditions, there are several perspectives on how enlightenment can be achieved (Mishra, Reference Mishra2013). As outlined in the Bhagavadgita, these involve jñāna (meditative practices), karma (selfless actions without attachment to outcomes), or bhakti (loving devotion). In Buddhism, enlightenment is achieved through the Noble Eightfold Path: (1) right view, (2) right resolve, (3) right speech, (4) right action, (5) right livelihood, (6) right effort, (7) right mindfulness, and (8) right concentration. These are often summarized as moral virtue (#3–#5), meditation (#6–#8), and wisdom (#1, #2). A notable feature of the Noble Eightfold Path is its focus on human psychology and meditation. However, some Buddhist schools (e.g., Pure Land) have replaced this emphasis on mindfulness and concentration with a more devotional orientation. In both Buddhism and Hinduism, many contemplative practices focus on mindfulness. For the purpose of this paper, we will define mindfulness as consisting of two components: “the self-regulation of attention” so that mindfulness “is maintained on immediate experience, thereby allowing for increased recognition of mental events in the present moment” and the adoption of “a particular orientation toward one’s experience in the present moment, an orientation characterized by curiosity, openness, and acceptance” (Bishop et al., Reference Bishop, Lau, Shapiro, Carlson, Anderson, Carmody, Segal, Abbey, Speca, Velting and Devins2004, p. 232).
Both traditions view the enlightened state as inherently ineffable. Verbal description is therefore conceived of as solely a pragmatic means to an end. Buddhists view verbal description as upāya (skillful means). According to this view, which became especially prominent in Mahayana Buddhism (Federman, Reference Federman2009), statements have only utilitarian value as provisional guides toward enlightenment. This attitude is illustrated by the traditional parable of the raft, which has been examined from a cognitive linguistic perspective by Lan (Reference Lan2012) and Gao and Lan (Reference Gao, Lan, Chilton and Kopytowska2018). According to this parable, the raft, representing the Buddhist dharma (the teaching of how to achieve enlightenment), is abandoned once the seeker has reached the other side of the river, representing enlightenment (see the Alagaddūpama Sutta in Ñāṇamoli & Bodhi, Reference Ñāṇamoli and Bodhi1995, p. 229). The assumption that truth lies beyond words and the highly pragmatic notion that even the most profound teachings are of only provisional value imbues Buddhist discourse with an inherent paradox. Teachings are essentially medicine formulated to overcome particular psychological impairments (deep-seated human delusion), so this “medicine” must be packaged with a sort of “expiration notice” to ensure that practitioners do not lose sight of the fact that the conceptualizations provided in the teachings do not constitute the ultimate goal. As shown in the analysis that follows, the provisional nature of the teachings is often expressed through the use of metaphor and recontextualization.
2.2. conceptual metaphor theory, recontextualization, and force dynamics
Given the ineffable and highly abstract nature of the concept of enlightenment, it is no surprise that religious teachers often resort to figurative language in their attempts to convey related religious and philosophical ideas. In many cases, figurative language can be combined with other elements to make abstract religious ideas more tangible and vivid, and therefore potentially more expressive, emotive, and persuasive (Charteris-Black, Reference Charteris-Black2004, Reference Charteris-Black2017; Richardson, Reference Richardson2012; Richardson & Nagashima, Reference Richardson and Nagashima2018; Silvestre-López, Reference Silvestre-López and Navarro2019).
Conceptual Metaphor Theory (referred to below as CMT) describes the cognitive process underpinning metaphor usage as a conceptual mapping between a source and target domain (Lakoff & Johnson, Reference Lakoff and Johnson1980, Reference Lakoff and Johnson1999). This mapping is often represented using capital letters in the form of X (the target domain) IS Y (the source domain). For example, Taitetsu Unno’s introduction to Shin Buddhism refers to “four horses” in order to describe “four kinds of people on the path of Buddhism” (Unno, Reference Unno2002, p. 14). The word path in this context can be analyzed as one component of the source domain of a physical journey (Lakoff & Johnson, Reference Lakoff and Johnson1980) being used to describe the target domain of progress within Buddhism or the evolving experience of being a Buddhist, giving us BUDDHISM IS A JOURNEY. This can be connected to the growing body of research investigating the JOURNEY or PATH source domain as mapped on to some aspect of Buddhist life or practice in key texts. Examples include LIFE IS A CYCLIC JOURNEY IN THE WHEEL OF SIX PATHS (Gao & Lan, Reference Gao, Lan, Chilton and Kopytowska2018), MEDITATION IS A PATH (Silvestre-López & Navarro i Ferrando, Reference Silvestre-López and Navarro i Ferrando2017), and LIFE IS A JOURNEY ACROSS A RIVER (Lan, Reference Lan2012).
Metaphor usage is not static. Speakers can retain an earlier target domain while manipulating the source domain (or vice versa) as the discourse context evolves. This recontextualization usually occurs when a user in some way elaborates on, subverts, or reconfigures some aspect of a metaphor for a specific effect. Recontextualization has been investigated across a range of discourse situations, such as appropriation of a metaphor from a previous interaction, from a separate discourse stream, or from another participant during a conversation (Cameron, Reference Cameron2011; Kövecses, Reference Kövecses2015; Pihlaja, Reference Pihlaja2014; Richardson, Reference Richardson2017; Semino et al., Reference Semino, Deignan and Littlemore2013). In this paper, we will be focusing on the more unusual situation, which we call source domain reversal, of a participant making use of a particular source domain to refer to a target, and then later, in the same stretch of discourse, using a source domain with seemingly opposite meaning to refer to the same target. We will not be viewing these examples as incoherent or random and we avoid negatively evaluating them as cases of mixed metaphors. Instead, our goal is to show that a lack of homogeneity of metaphor usage (complete with the appearance of incompatibility and paradox) becomes understandable once it is appreciated how the selection of particular source domains at different moments in the discourse is seen as a necessary part of the natural theory-building process (Cameron, Reference Cameron and Gibbs2016; Kövecses, Reference Kövecses2018).
There appears to be a close correlation between source domain reversal and paradoxical language in Buddhist and Hindu discourse. Cognitive linguistic scholars have already examined individual examples of seemingly contradictory language in key Buddhist texts. For example, Lu and Chiang (2007, p. 333) discuss the conceptual metaphor FORM IS EMPTINESS that underpins their translation of a line from the Heart Sutra, “Form is emptiness and emptiness is form”. They (2007, p. 343) argue that the form of something can be perceived, so that it cannot be said to be “literally void, but that the materials that form our body are never absolute or fixed”.
This connects to Gao and Lan’s (2018, p. 255) analysis of one line from the Diamond Sutra, which they translated as, “The mass of fine dusts is spoken of by the Buddha as no mass of fine dusts”. They interpret this as meaning that the Buddha’s intention is not to deny that material objects exist, but to emphasize that “dusts are conditioned results of causes and effects and hence are transient and impermanent”, and therefore can be characterized as in some sense empty. This builds on Gao and Lan’s (2018, p. 254) identification of both KNOWING IS SEEING and SEEING IS NOT KNOWING in the text, with the latter applying to attempts to understand the true nature of the Buddha by looking at his form or appearance. We will return to this connection between source domain reversal and paradoxical language in the analysis below, in addition to the notion that participants use this type of language to express different levels of meaning.
One way to examine the effects of source domain reversal is to examine the discourse patterns in terms of the change they produce in force-dynamic relationships. The notion of force dynamics posits that language can often be analyzed in terms of the relationship between the competing force tendencies of an agonist and an antagonist (Talmy, Reference Talmy1988, Reference Talmy2000). The force tendencies can be divided into a tendency toward rest or movement, with either the agonist or antagonist exhibiting the stronger force (in Talmy’s diagrams, marked with a ‘+’). Force dynamics have already been applied to areas such as metaphorical descriptions of emotions (Kövecses, Reference Kövecses2000), Christian language (Charteris-Black, Reference Charteris-Black2017), and Buddhist language (Kowalewski, Reference Kowalewski, Chilton and Kopytowska2018; Richardson & Nagashima, Reference Richardson and Nagashima2018). One important finding from Kowalewski’s (Reference Kowalewski, Chilton and Kopytowska2018) application of Kövecses’s (Reference Kövecses2000) force-dynamic modeling of emotions to Buddhist language is that, at the early stages of Buddhist practice, emotions are often described using a force-based account, while at the later stages they are more commonly described via an object-based account. According to Kowalewski (2018, p. 224), the purpose of these earlier descriptions is to portray the problems associated with a “passion-driven person”, while the goal of the later, object-based descriptions is to explore how negative emotions can be eradicated.
Kowalewski (Reference Kowalewski, Chilton and Kopytowska2018) approaches this in terms of schemas, which can be defined as highly abstract frameworks that underpin more elaborated metaphorical mappings. In the EMOTION IS A FORCE schema, the antagonist element is viewed as attempting to impose its force tendency on the agonist. If the antagonist’s force is stronger, it produces an emotional reaction or response in the agonist, but if the agonist’s force is stronger, then the influence is resisted and there is no response. This then connects to the EMOTION IS AN OBJECT schema, where an object (the affectant) affects the base (which may not be explicitly mentioned). In the initial state, the affectant and base are in contact, but later, the affectant either ceases to exist or is removed from the dominion of the base. One example from a Buddhist text, taken from Kowalewski (2018, p. 219) is, “aversion drops away from him—like a palm leaf from its stem”. This same shift from emotions intensely affecting the practitioner to emotions being described in later stages of meditative practice as “‘being there’, but not directly affecting us … and they might even eventually ‘disappear’” has also been explored by Silvestre-López (2016, p. 185) in his analysis of the language of mindfulness meditators. This paper will seek to explore the relationship between the way practitioners talk about this shift and the phenomenon of source domain reversal.
3. Method
We chose to focus on YouTube clips rather than sacred texts in order to address an imbalance in cognitive linguistic analyses of religious language. Many of the analyses referenced above tend to focus on sacred or key texts within a particular belief community. In contrast to this, the analyses of religious language that are based on the discourse dynamic approach and positioning theory favor modern online interactions and interviews on sites such as YouTube and Facebook (e.g., Pihlaja, Reference Pihlaja2014, Reference Pihlaja, Nørgaard and Busse2018). Analyses based on key texts within a religious community have the obvious benefit of providing insights into highly influential, representative, and important language. However, what the discourse dynamic approach has shown is that it is also important to focus on how religious beliefs are being interpreted in modern contexts and how metaphor usage shifts and evolves during discourse.
This study focuses on four YouTube clips that address the question, “What is enlightenment?” The four speakers were chosen because they are recognized figures and teachers within their respective belief communities, and therefore their ideas could be viewed as representative of a particular group. They also belong to four distinct belief communities that could be connected through their shared usage of the term enlightenment. We focused on this term because it is a highly abstract idea that is notoriously difficult to describe, and is therefore fertile ground for unusual uses of metaphor. It should be noted that the four clips were selected solely due to the fact that they provide representative discourse related to enlightenment and not based on their metaphorical content.
The four speakers were Yuttadhammo Bhikkhu, Jane McLaughlin-Dobisz, Jaggi Vasudev, and Rupert Spira. Yuttadhammo Bhikkhu is a Canadian-born monk in the Theravada Thai Forest Tradition. Ordained by Ajaan Tong Sirimangalo in 2001, he went on to teach meditation in several countries, in addition to publishing electronic books on Buddhist practice and uploading numerous talks to YouTube. His talk is 7 minutes and 47 seconds long, and it contains 1025 tokens. Jane McLaughlin, who is often known by her dharma name Bon Yeon (the name used in this paper), is a Zen Buddhist monk, guiding teacher of the Cambridge Zen Center, and author and editor of books related to the practice of Zen. Her talk is 4 minutes and 8 seconds in length, and it contains 576 tokens. Jaggi Vasudev, more popularly known as Sadhguru (the name used in this paper), is a well-known Indian yogi and mystic. He is the author of several books related to the practice of Yoga, in addition to being the founder of the Isha Foundation, an organization designed to promote the benefits of Yoga. His talk is the longest at 12 minutes and 40 seconds, with a token count of 1217. Finally, Rupert Spira is a teacher of Advaita Vedanta, a non-dualistic branch of Hindu philosophy and practice based on a unifying interpretation of three key Hindu texts known as the Prasthanatrayi. His talk is 8 minutes and 7 seconds long with a token count of 1024.
The clips were transcribed and the Metaphor Identification Procedure (MIP) was used to identify metaphorical lexical units. Following this procedure, we define occurrences of metaphor in language as a lexical unit with a more basic, concrete meaning being used to talk about something more abstract and less concrete (Pragglejaz Group, 2007). In cases where it was unclear whether a word or phrase had a more basic meaning that was commonly used, the online MacMillan dictionary (https://www.macmillandictionary.com/) was consulted. For example, in the case of “infinite consciousness infiltrates human experience”, the lexical unit infiltrates was marked as metaphorical because the MacMillan dictionary defines one of the basic meanings as, “to go into a place in order to find out information about it or damage it”. This confirms that infiltrate has a more basic meaning that involves physical movement into a concrete location for a specific purpose. The dictionary entries thus provide the analyst with a means of checking basic meanings that goes beyond subjective intuition. After identifying metaphorical units using MIP, we proceeded to apply CMT by identifying source and target domains and, where possible, connecting them to similar mappings in previous research. The source domains were then examined for evidence of recontextualization or development over the course of the clip. It was during discussions about individually identified cases of recontextualization that the possibility of a shared discourse pattern among the four speakers began to emerge. Over the course of several discussions and analyses of the data, we identified the four elements outlined in the ‘Introduction’ above and began to explore how they could be connected, both within each talk and across the talks as a whole.
4. Analysis
Having described our methodology and introduced the four speakers, we will now explore the use of figurative language in the clips below. We will particularly focus on cases of source domain reversal and shifts from force-based to non-force-based metaphors, along with shifts in the level of the teaching and transitions from descriptions of a process to a state.
In terms of metaphorical density, we found that Yuttadhammo Bhikkhu had the highest number of metaphorical units (125) and the highest relative frequency of metaphor usage at one metaphorical unit per 8.2 tokens of speech. Bon Yeon made use of 41 metaphorical lexical units at a relative frequency of one unit per 14.0 tokens of speech. Sadhguru’s clip contained 61 metaphorical lexical units at a relative frequency of one unit per 19.9 tokens of speech, and finally Spira made use of 96 metaphorical lexical units with a relative frequency of one unit per 10.6 tokens of speech.
4.1. yuttadhammo bhikkhu
4.1.1. Darkness and baggage
Yuttadhammo begins his description of enlightenment by focusing on two different ways of understanding the term ‘enlightenment’:
(1) the main goal of meditation is enlightenment or freedom
… it could mean one of two things
being bright being removed or taken out of the darkness
enlightening oneself in terms of gaining wisdom or understanding or or light
and the other one becoming lighter or giving up one’s burdens
(0:02–0:56)
This explanation provides us with two distinct metaphorical source domains, CLARITY/BLINDNESS and UNENCUMBERED/ENCUMBERED, connected by an overarching frame of FREEDOM/LACK OF FREEDOM. Notions of clarity and blindness are closely associated with the well-known UNDERSTANDING IS SEEING domain mapping (Lakoff & Johnson, Reference Lakoff and Johnson1980), which features widely in Christian, Muslim, Hindu, and Buddhist language (Charteris-Black, Reference Charteris-Black2004; Reference Charteris-Black2017; Gao & Lan, Reference Gao, Lan, Chilton and Kopytowska2018; Lan, Reference Lan2012; Lu & Chiang, Reference Lu and Chiang2007; Silvestre-López & Navarro i Ferrando, Reference Silvestre-López and Navarro i Ferrando2017). Charteris-Black’s (Reference Charteris-Black2004, Reference Charteris-Black2017) proposed conceptual metaphor SPIRITUAL KNOWLEDGE IS LIGHT encompasses many of these usages across multiple religions.
Yuttadhammo develops this notion of clarity by referring to clarity of vision as the end goal of a journey:
(2) … and coming to see things as they are
… coming to see the truth about our emotions
… once we come to see these things clearly of course
we’re able to approach every experience in a much more enlightened manner
(1:43–2:11)
4.1.2. Movement and obstacles
This is then further reinforced with an analogy that contrasts the dangers of moving through a dark room with the advantages of illumination:
(3) … something akin to a person coming out of a dark room …
and they were living their lives bumping into things …
and when after they practice meditation
it’s like suddenly someone turned on the light
and they’re able to see and they’re able to avoid dangers
(2:15–2:46)
The above extracts describe three distinct forms of metaphorical movement: the first is moving through a process of development to a point where things are seen clearly, while the second is moving through various situations and life experiences with and without the clarity provided by enlightenment. This is congruent with previous research in this area. Silvestre-López and Navarro i Ferrando’s (Reference Silvestre-López and Navarro i Ferrando2017) and Silvestre-López’s (Reference Silvestre-López and Navarro2019) analyses of Buddhist texts related to the subject of meditation also observed the use of the metaphors THOUGHTS ARE OBJECTS and EMOTIONS ARE OBSTACLES. These fit in with the more general conceptual metaphor DIFFICULTIES ARE IMPEDIMENTS TO MOTION (Lakoff & Johnson, Reference Lakoff and Johnson1999; also discussed in the context of Buddhist discourse in Lu & Chiang, Reference Lu and Chiang2007).
The third type of movement shifts the focus of what or who is moving to aspects of our lives and environment that usually affect us in some way. In an unenlightened state, practitioners often become attached to their feelings, but if enlightened, feelings simply arise and disappear. Yuttadhamo then goes on to associate attachment with the notion of baggage or burdens:
(4) wisdom … necessitates happiness because it relieves the burden
… you are free from this whole emotional baggage
that comes from our obsessions and our attachments to things
… we approach things without any emotional baggage
… a clear a clear sense of how things and what things are
(5:16–5:40)
(5) … nirvana
… is simply freedom from suffering
… freed of one’s burdens
because one has become wise
(6:04–6:14)
This conceptual mapping between emotions and objects that can weigh people down has been observed in a number of cognitive linguistic studies of Buddhist language. For example, Kowalewski (Reference Kowalewski, Chilton and Kopytowska2018) identifies a mapping between specific emotions and the source domain of BURDEN in his data from early Buddhist texts.
When we combine Yuttadhammo’s use of CLARITY and ENCUMBERMENT metaphors, it is possible to organize the key concepts in the clip in the following way:
ENLIGHTENMENT IS UNOBSTRUCTED MOVEMENT
ENLIGHTENMENT IS DETACHMENT FROM OBJECTS
ENLIGHTENMENT (i.e., freedom from suffering) IS FREEDOM FROM ENCUMBERMENT
NOT BEING ENLIGHTENED IS OBSTRUCTED MOVEMENT
NOT BEING ENLIGHTENED IS ATTACHMENT TO OBJECTS
NOT BEING ENLIGHTENED (i.e., suffering) IS ENCUMBERMENT
This suggests a further entailment that is not explicitly stated by Yuttadhammo but completes the EVENT STRUCTURE of this series of conceptual metaphors: OBSTRUCTED MOVEMENT leads to ATTACHMENT, which then leads to ENCUMBERMENT, which is the experience of suffering. Therefore, UNOBSTRUCTURED MOVEMENT IS FREEDOM FROM ATTACHMENT and FREEDOM FROM ENCUMBERMENT, which is freedom from suffering. This then returns us to the perceived simplicity and immediacy of the enlightenment experience:
(6) when we feel and think things we see it simply for what it is as it is
… wisdom can’t but arise
because we’re looking at things simply for what they are
(6:57–7:08)
4.1.3. The force dynamics of unimpeded movement
When considering these mappings from a force-dynamic perspective, we will focus on Yuttadhammo’s earlier use of obsession in conjunction with his above use of the phrase “can’t but arise”. The term obsession suggests that the intensity of the desire associated with emotions is often too strong to resist (Kövecses, Reference Kövecses2000). The person who does not meditate can therefore be viewed as the antagonist with a force tendency toward unobstructed movement being acted on by an obstructing antagonist (desire) with a greater force tendency toward rest. However, the later use of “can’t but arise” suggests a development towards an opposite force dynamic outcome for the committed practitioner. In this case, that person would be an agonist with a greater force tendency toward unobstructed movement overcoming the intrinsic force tendency of obsessive desires. This evolving force-dynamic relationship is depicted in Figure 1 using the Talmy’s (Reference Talmy2000) system for visualizing force dynamics. The explanation on the far right of the diagram (not part of Talmy’s system) describes the outcome of the transition from an unenlightened to an enlightened perspective in terms of both the target and the source.
Fig. 1. Configuration of force dynamic elements in Yuttadhammo’s discussion of enlightenment in terms of ability to successfully maneuver through a landscape.
As Figure 1 shows, from the level of the source, the agonist (represented by the circle) is attempting to navigate the immediate environment (i.e., possesses an inherent tendency toward motion as depicted by the ‘>’ sign within the circle) but is initially obstructed by darkness and obstacles (the antagonist, depicted by the crescent shape on the right), a force which is stronger (depicted by the ‘+’ sign). The agonist is thereby unable to move along the intended trajectory (as depicted by the small circle on the line below the figure which represents stillness). As the darkness and obstacles disappear (depicted by the upward arrow), the agonist’s inherent tendency toward motion is no longer thwarted (as depicted by the ‘>’ sign on the right-hand portion of the line below the figure.) Viewed in terms of intended meaning (i.e., the target), a religious practitioner attempts to become fully aware so as to realize enlightenment, but is initially obstructed by obsessions and false views, but these ultimately dissipate as the practitioner develops wisdom.
This relationship between the agonist and antagonist in terms of the source domain of OBSTRUCTED/UNOBSTRUCTED MOVEMENT is connected to the relationship involved in the domain of ENCUMBERED/UNENCUMBERED MOVEMENT. Although the source domain is different, the force-dynamic relationship is complementary, with the same components and pattern as Figure 1. This is because both obstructions and burdens have a force tendency toward rest, which is finally overcome by correct practice and appropriate reactions toward agonists with a greater force tendency towards progression. This allows us to place both source domains within the more general frame of UNIMPEDED MOVEMENT.
However, this force-dynamic relationship evaporates in a follow-up statement Yuttadhammo makes after he has talked about avoiding the dangers of obstructions:
(7) … when we’re able to just be and let things come and go
(4:48–4:50)
Here, the end result of successful practice is not represented as unimpeded movement while surrounded by static objects, but as an absence of movement while surrounded by unrelated moving objects. Viewing this source domain reversal in terms of the source–path–goal schema, the notion of UNIMPEDED MOVEMENT merges the path and goal aspects in that the goal becomes unrestricted movement along a path. In contrast, the notion of just being dismantles the applicability of the source–path–goal schema altogether.
At no point does Yuttadhammo acknowledge or attempt to explain the incongruence between these two ways of looking at enlightenment. However, one effect is that descriptions of practice as movement focuses the listener on the process of achieving enlightenment, while stillness focuses the listener on the nature of what continuously experiencing enlightenment (a state) could be like.
4.2. bon yeon
4.2.1. Here, not over there
Bon Yeon begins by referring to the Buddha’s enlightenment story as a moment of “pure recognition”. She describes how the Buddha looked up and saw a star and immediately “boom got enlightenment”. The immediacy of the experience is foregrounded by the concept of purity, which appears to mean untainted by desire or attachment, and the use of boom, which metonymically represents the suddenness of an explosion. This emphasis on the purity and immediacy of the experience is then further consolidated:
(8) it’s not somewhere else …
we think oh it’s over there and I’m over here
and I am never getting there because I’m not enlightened
and right away we taint the moment we’re in
and the moment we’re in is the only moment we’ve got
and that is enlightenment
(0:24–0:51)
(9) … whenever we compare you know what this moment is
and we think enlightenment is something else
then we’re always putting it far away
and then we can’t get there
(3:58–4:07)
Bon Yeon first sets up a possible world where practitioners think “oh it’s over there”, drawing on ENLIGHTENMENT IS THE END POINT OF A JOURNEY. She then reverses this via a two-step process beginning with a container metaphor blending spatial proximity with temporal immediacy where the present moment becomes something that the perceiver is inside. The second step is explicitly associating these container and spatial proximity source domains with the main topic, “… and that is enlightenment”, which makes it clear that enlightenment is not figuratively located outside of the present moment (or somewhere else), but inside it (the current location of the perceiver).
The effect of completely reversing the JOURNEY source domain is not just to counter an opposing viewpoint but also to completely overturn and overhaul the listener’s perspective. There is also a subversive element to this part of the clip in that the common figurative representation of enlightenment as the end point of a journey is being explicitly challenged. However, we must always be aware that this is a particular perspective being adopted at a particular moment in her discourse for a specific purpose. It should not therefore be viewed as a rigid, static commitment to always avoid describing meditative practice in terms of a path and destination.
4.2.2. Keeping something by letting it go
As we saw in Extract (8) above, her discourse also conceptualizes the present moment as a possession, something “we’ve got”, and explicitly integrates it with the concept of enlightenment. The notion that enlightenment is something that you can “get” is further consolidated in Extract (10) below, giving us ENLIGHTENMENT IS AN OBJECT THAT CAN BE POSSESSED. The way that Bon Yeon talks about enlightenment also makes it clear that it is something that is good for us to possess. However, this is then further elaborated with enlightenment being represented as something that is difficult to hold on to, in addition to the paradoxical idea that we need to give up possession of something in order to secure it:
(10) enlightenment is very easy to get
very difficult to keep
(1:37–1:40)
(11) let everything go and just do that
you get everything
(2:26–2:31)
The source domain reversal occurs when Bon Yeon shifts from talking about enlightenment as something practitioners get to something that practitioners let go of (because paradoxically relinquishing possession of an object ultimately causes you to keep that object). The effect here is to subvert the regular understanding of the process of getting and keeping something and to emphasize that detachment is the key to the experience of enlightenment. The domain of KNOWING is conventionally conceptualized in terms of metaphorical GRASPING, but in this case the “grasping” associated with enlightenment is only achieved through the opposite action: ceasing to grasp.
4.2.3. Escaping the trap
Despite the fact that enlightenment is not conceptualized as a journey in the clip, the popular conceptual metaphor LIFE IS A JOURNEY is instantiated in the description of her daily routine of “going through” her day. A negative mind state experienced in the course of her daily life is then variously described with the source domain of BEING TRAPPED IN A CONTAINER, and the blending of RAPID MOVEMENT with UNCONTROLLED MOVEMENT:
(12) if I get caught up in that mind state …
I just say to myself
“What are you doing now?” …
and it just like levels whatever storyline I’m in
(2:37–2:49)
The above reference to speaking to herself suggests the committed intention of counteracting this mind state. However, Bon Yeon then goes on to elaborate A NEGATIVE MIND STATE IS BEING TRAPPED IN A CONTAINER by adding agency patterns in the form of A NEGATIVE MIND STATE IS THE SELF CONSTRUCTING A CONTAINER and A NEGATIVE MIND STATE IS THE SELF TRAPPING ITSELF IN THE CONTAINER:
(13) it’s a mind state that we create
and we put ourselves in it
and we don’t have to …
(3:17–3:21)
This conceptualization of emotions as containers has already been identified in discourse about meditation in Silvestre-López’s (Reference Silvestre-López, Ordóñez-López and Edo-Marzá2016) analysis of the language of mindfulness meditators. It also connects to the conceptual metaphor EMOTIONS ARE PRISONS identified by Silvestre-López and Navarro i Ferrando (Reference Silvestre-López and Navarro i Ferrando2017) in their discussion of key texts related to the practice of Buddhist meditation. They argue that this metaphor is an elaboration of the more general metaphor EMOTIONS ARE OBSTACLES, which would connect this usage to the figurative language of Yuttadhammo above. There is also a contrast here with Bon Yeon’s earlier movement mapping for enlightenment as something here rather than over there. According to the earlier mapping, enlightenment is not somewhere else, but here the implied requirement is to find a way to not be where you are: trapped in the container. This may not be a clear example of source domain reversal because Bon Yeon states that leveling rather than movement is required to escape the container. However, there is a strong contrast, as can be seen when we view them from a force-dynamic standpoint in Figure 2 and Figure 3.
Fig. 2. Configuration of force dynamic elements in Bon Yeon’s discussion of pursuing enlightenment in the here and now.
Fig. 3. Configuration of force dynamic elements in Bon Yeon’s discussion of enlightenment as the dismantling of the false narrative of the self.
In Figure 2, the subversion of the initial metaphor is depicted using two panels. The first panel depicts a more conventional conceptualization of enlightenment as the destination of a journey, which is obstructed by the tremendous “distance” between the practitioner’s current unenlightened status and the ultimate goal. However, this conceptualization is negated and replaced by the opposing notion of a practitioner who is “still” and not seeking to go beyond the present moment. In this new conceptualization, the practitioner is strong and is thereby unmoved by false conceptions that would spur the practitioner toward movement (the antagonist depicted to the left of the circle).
The contrast between Figure 2 and Figure 3 highlights the fact that there are multiple ways to construe the process of achieving enlightenment for different purposes. The movement mapping is aimed at what practitioners incorrectly think they need to do, while the container mapping focuses on what needs dismantling to facilitate enlightenment.
4.2.4. Stillness at 100mph
Embedded within Bon Yeon’s description of the self constructing its own trap is another paradoxical contrast. It begins with her description of the hectic pace of everyday life:
(14) and you can actually
hmm find that quiet
and that stillness going 100 miles an hour
(2:53–3:00)
(15) we feel like oh I’m gonna spin out of control …
I gotta go here I gotta go there
(3:12–3:17)
There is a complex blend here involving the conceptual metaphor MODERN LIFE IS UNCONTROLLABLE MOVEMENT, part-for-whole metonymy (physically moving quickly while travelling and completing tasks comes to represent the stressful life as a whole), and hyperbole (at times we must physically move at fast speeds, but not that fast). She also simultaneously juxtaposes this language with the Buddhist notion of non-perturbed awareness in each moment, represented paradoxically as the complete absence of movement. This association of stillness with equanimity is familiar to Buddhists due to the representation (a visual metaphor) of the enlightened Buddha as a figure sitting still.
In force-dynamic terms, the pressures and pace of life represent the antagonist with a greater force tendency towards movement overcoming the agonist, the self, with its force tendency towards rest. However, the metaphorical overlay of stillness is not a force-based metaphor and has no intrinsic relationship to the metaphors of everyday life. The committed practitioner can achieve stillness through mindfulness regardless of the pace of everyday life. This contrast highlights the argument that there does not have to be an intrinsic connection between being busy and the practice of mindfulness. However, this is not a pure example of source domain reversal because the target domains are different: in the case of “going 100 miles an hour”, the target domain is EVERYDAY LIFE, while the target domain of “stillness” is MINDFULNESS.
4.3. sadhguru
4.3.1. The limits of language
Sadhguru opens with an example of source domain reversal by juxtaposing the novel term “en-darkment” with the traditional term “enlightenment” followed by a warning of the inherent limitations of using language to express enlightenment. He draws on movement, spatial proximity, and containment metaphors to make the point that language can help us to a point, but never fully represents ultimate reality:
(16) whether we talk about enlightenment or en-darkment or whatever else
we are only talking around it
never it …
so the talk draws you closer
close is not in
I’m almost there is not a good place
(1:09–1:39)
He returns to this emphasis on the critical limitations of language at the end of the clip, repeating the phrase “these are just words” and suggesting lightheartedly that the word enlightenment should be replaced with a nonsense word. However, he concedes that “we have to use some word”. This language is based on LIFE IS A JOURNEY, ENLIGHTENMENT IS THE ULTIMATE DESTINATION, and WORDS ARE INCOMPLETE GUIDES TO THE DESTINATION. Sadhguru’s emphasis that words alone cannot get you there sets up his use of source domain reversal by emphasizing that there cannot be one correct explanation, only multiple partially useful but ultimately inadequate attempts.
4.3.2. Enlightenment is endarkment
Sadhguru explains the relationship between his use of the terms en-darkment and enlightenment through an analogy that views the fundamental nature of being as a beam of light passing through space until an object “stops it”. The moment the light strikes an object or surface, it becomes visible or detectable. However, if its progress is uninterrupted, it remains unseen and undetected. This is explained by personifying the notion of darkness:
(17) darkness doesn’t care
it allows light to pass through, nothing happens
light is powerless in darkness
(8:19–8:28)
This personification is important as it more readily allows the listener to associate the attitude of the agent (darkness) with their own potential attitudes as religious seekers. According to Sadhguru, the unenlightened perceive their life to be “relevant” because of obstructions such as the body, relationships, and work. When spiritual progress is no longer hindered by these worldly concerns, a form of unlimited freedom is achieved.
(18) only if there is something which stops the light
light is an effective force
if nothing stops it
if you ignore it
it means nothing
(8:31–8:43)
(19) something stops you means
your body … wife … husband … job stops you …
because you are bouncing off all these things
your life is relevant …
if we stripped you of all these things
it’s irrelevant isn’t it?
(9:10–9:33)
The above extracts draw on a complex juxtaposition of conceptual metaphors framed by UNENLIGHTENED PEOPLE ARE INTERRUPTED BEAMS OF LIGHT and ENLIGHTENED PEOPLE ARE UNINTERRUPTED BEAMS OF LIGHT. One unusual aspect of this particular analogy is that it has reversed the usual dependence found in enlightenment metaphors (as we saw in Yuttadhammo’s language above) on UNDERSTANDING IS SEEING or SPIRITUAL KNOWLEDGE IS LIGHT, and instead maps irrelevance onto the notion of not being detected or seen by objects: IRRELEVANCE/ENLIGHTENMENT IS NOT BEING SEEN. This is reinforced by Sadhuguru’s framing references to en-darkment and darkness, which gives us the supremely paradoxical ENLIGHTENMENT IS REMAINING IN DARKNESS.
The metaphors associated with uninterrupted movement also blend the notion of a GOAL with the PATH, so that the goal of the practitioner is not conceptualized as a specified destination, but rather as unlimited movement. This contrasts with the same conceptual metaphor used by Yuttadhammo above: NOT BEING ENLIGHTENED IS OBSTRUCTED MOVEMENT. In addition, the jump from being stopped and bouncing off these entities to the possibility of being stripped of them entails an unstated missing conceptual link: these entities do not just block the movement of the unenlightened, but also then cover or wrap themselves around them. The underlying metaphor PSYCHOLOGICAL, SOCIAL, AND PHYSICAL ATTACHMENTS ARE CLOTHING introduces important entailments, such as the notion that these are only external trappings, and as such, we can be “stripped” of them.
The reference to light as a force makes Sadhguru’s analogy ideally suited to a force-dynamic description in which the seeker of enlightenment is the agonist with an intrinsic force tendency towards unobstructed movement being opposed by objects representing aspects of his or her existence with an intrinsic force tendency towards rest. The relationship is shown in Figure 4.
Fig. 4. The force dynamic diagram for Sadhguru’s use of the metaphor ENLIGHTENMENT IS LIGHT PASSING UNIMPEDED THROUGH SPACE.
However, the use of force-dynamics must be qualified here through Sadhguru’s use of passing through. This suggests that the result of experiencing enlightenment is not being construed as one force tendency overcoming another, but ultimately one force dissolving the force-dynamic relationship by ignoring the force tendency of the other. This fits with Kowalewski’s (Reference Kowalewski, Chilton and Kopytowska2018) observation that the later stages of Buddhist practice are often not described using force-based metaphors. The reason for this, as we see here, is that enlightenment is often perceived as the disintegration of the force-dynamic relationship, rather than a display of greater force, and this may explain the use of the term nothingness. We would argue that this term needs to be understood in the sense described by Lu and Chiang (Reference Lu and Chiang2007) in their analysis of EMPTINESS IS FORM in the Heart Sutra (discussed in Section 2 above). They argue that the mapping appears paradoxical, but it can be explained by positing that form is not being construed as literally empty, but something that is no longer able to produce sensory attachments: “These insights enable one to move without hindrance because what is feared is in fact a surface illusion” (2007, p. 347). Sadhguru’s point here is therefore not that our bodies and jobs cease to exist when enlightenment is experienced, but that they become powerless entities that no longer enter into a force-dynamic relationship with the practitioner. The term nothing therefore refers to a final event structure where nothing can obstruct and cover the enlightened mind.
4.3.3. Being in and being within you
Sadhguru then subtly shifts his focus from positively defining light as effective when stopped to the description of enlightenment as passing through objects and gaining access to positively defined experiences such as boundless freedom. This signals a shift away from the beam of light analogy towards multiple forms of representation:
(20) if you learn to live in this irrelevance
suddenly you find there is something so phenomenal …
no context … simply here … nothing …
if you learn to live like this, then the very boundless will open to you
(9:42–10:22)
(21) … but if you stop seeking that relevance
and simply sit here
you will see a boundless nature
which doesn’t need any context
exists within you
(10:32–10:43)
(22) … it is only when you touch that boundlessness
you have a taste of freedom
(11:00–11:04)
This invites the listener to juxtapose the previous image of passing through darkness because we have become irrelevant with existing inside the experience of irrelevance. This then switches again to a description of the experience of unlimited freedom associated with enlightenment as an object that can be experienced through actions such as touching and tasting. This then shifts to something that exists within you, suggesting a bounded space (see Silvestre-López’s (Reference Silvestre-López and Navarro2019) notion of MIND IS SPACE), but paradoxically described as having no boundaries.
When we add the above novel notion of en-darkment to this array of shifting metaphorical imagery, it becomes impossible to develop a systematic, linear understanding of what enlightenment is according to Sadhguru. Given his introductory remarks, this appears to be a deliberate strategy to emphasize the limitations of language and point to the need for direct experience, achieved through the employment of source domain reversal.
4.3.4. Simply sitting
This conclusion is further reinforced by his instruction, similar to the language of Yuttadhammo and Bon Yeon above, to be “simply here … nothing … stop seeking that relevance … simply sit here”. Earlier in the clip, he made the point that a journey is only meaningful if the destination is reached, then he drew on an analogy that blended the notion of a goal with never-ending unobstructed movement, and then the experience of enlightenment with something that could be actively touched or tasted. Finally, we have the clearest example of source domain reversal, where moving without hindrance is replaced by the absence of movement, giving us ENLIGHTENMENT IS STILLNESS.
4.4. rupert spira
4.4.1. Turning and returning
The primary allegory in Rupert Spira’s description of enlightenment is one side of the Earth being in darkness, not because there is no Sun, but because it has turned away from it. Spira then likens this to the process of “becoming a finite mind”, construed as an act of turning away from an ever-present infinite consciousness:
(23) the only way consciousness can arise in the form of attention
is by ceasing to gaze at itself
by assuming the limitations of the body
and therefore becoming a finite mind
and only as that finite mind can it face away from itself
(1:16–1:30)
The underpinning conceptual metaphor is A FINITE MIND IS TURNING AWAY FROM THE SOURCE and, at a more basic level, LIGHT IS AN AID TO KNOWING (Lakoff & Johnson, Reference Lakoff and Johnson1999, p. 241). This would appear to entail that enlightenment is turning back towards the source, but Spira switches instead to a movement metaphor: ENLIGHTENMENT IS RETURNING TO THE SOURCE:
(24) so the return to itself is is
it appears to be the return of a finite self
when the finite self returns to itself
(1:31–1:39)
Spira then goes on to elaborate the path aspect of this return journey by drawing a distinction between two possible ways back: the path of jñāna, which follows the “I am aware thought”, and the path of bhakti, which follows love or happiness. The effects of the ever-present infinite consciousness in experience actively facilitate this return journey through illumination, sign-posting, and infiltration, with Spira calling this active agent God:
(25) God’s infinite being shines in the mind …
the feeling of peace and happiness is God’s footprint in the heart …
infinite consciousness infiltrates the human experience
(2:30–2:56)
He then goes on to state that these two paths are in fact identical experiences which both lead to the same return to infinite consciousness. He then blends the JOURNEY metaphor suggested by the verb follow with metaphors of unintentional movement in the form of falling, sinking, and structural collapse:
(26) if we follow them and follow them
we realize we actually
we we fall out of the the body mind
(3:20–3:33)
(27) and if we trace either of these experiences
we fall out of the body mind
we we pass out of time into eternity
(3:43–3:54)
(28) when the finite
the apparently finite self sinks into its source
collapses into its source
there is this revelation
(5:19–5:26)
This language provides multiple conceptualizations of enlightenment that exist in tension with each other in terms of their construal of the finite self as an animate entity acting intentionally or unintentionally, or an inanimate entity:
ENLIGHTENMENT IS …
RETURNING TO THE SOURCE: an animate, intentional journey (e.g. “retrace its steps”)
FALLING INTO THE SOURCE: an animate, unintentional movement
SINKING INTO THE SOURCE: a possibly animate or inanimate, unintentional movement
COLLAPSING INTO THE SOURCE: a possibly animate or inanimate, unintentional movement
What connects them is their completion of an event structure that begins with separation from the source and ends with a return to the source, infinite consciousness. The description of the return journey as the finite self retracing its steps to infinite consciousness suggests purposeful goal-orientated movement, but this must be held in tension with the other three conceptualizations suggesting unintentional movement. The sense of a goal can also be derived from the active agency of infinite consciousness in the form of illuminating (“shines in the mind”), leaving tracks (“God’s footprint in the heart”), and infiltrating the finite self.
Spira’s metaphor for enlightenment is depicted in force dynamic terms in Figure 5. As can be seen, the seeker’s consciousness appears in bifurcated form as both the finite and dualistically oriented mind (the agonist) and as the seeker attempting to trace this divine footprint (the antagonist). This seeking aspect of consciousness is further aided by the activity of the divine which helps move the seeker toward the goal (hence the antagonist is shown on the left).
Fig. 5. The force dynamic diagram for Spira’s use of the metaphor ENLIGHTENMENT IS RETURNING.
Spira’s use of FALLING, SINKING, and COLLAPSING as source domains depicts movement resulting from the pull of gravity. The metaphors are, in this respect, compatible with the notion of rejecting enlightenment and embracing dualism as an intentional turning away because that is what is required to resist the attracting force of non-dualistic reality.
4.4.2. Returning but never leaving
Spira utilizes source-domain reversal as he details what the result of this returning to infinite consciousness means in terms of the non-dual nature of reality and the realization of the illusion of leaving and returning. As we see in Extract (29) below, for Spira, to return to infinite consciousness is to become aware that one could never have left:
(29) The primary illusion is personal consciousness
the finite mind
the second illusion is then everything that that finite mind does to
retrace its steps back to its origin
then there is this recognition at some point
I never left home
I have never been
there has never been anything other than infinite consciousness
(2:05–2:24)
This negation of the conceptualization of movement is further developed as Spira, in a similar manner to Sadhguru, lays out the problems associated with describing enlightenment using language. He notes that even the use of the term infinite is problematic because it falsely suggests that its counterpart must also exist. This leaves Spira with no choice but to conclude at the end of the clip that, “the highest teaching is silence … the teaching falls silent”. In cognitive linguistic terms, just as the return to the infinite mind is conceptually described as a collapse into the source, a truly non-dualist perspective must end with the complete dismantling of the descriptive event structure and any force-dynamic relationship through source domain reversal (from movement to having never moved and from two minds to a single mind). It is also interesting to note the paradoxical tension in Spira’s final metaphors between the final point of a hierarchy of ideas being the highest point and silence being the end point of downward movement in the form of falling.
5. Discussion
The analysis has demonstrated that source domain reversal is a key element in this sample of Buddhist and Hindu discourse on enlightenment in the Buddhist and Hindu traditions. We have noted a number of discourse functions, such as shifting the focus from the process of achieving an experience to the nature of that experience in Yuttadhammo’s clip, and attempting to completely overturn and reconfigure a listener’s perspective in Bon Yeon’s clip.
One discourse pattern that appears in all the clips is the use of source domain reversal. This involves enlightenment being metaphorically conceptualized using two source domains, a more conventional conceptualization (almost always mentioned first) followed by a more novel reconceptualization. This type of pattern also often involves a conceptualization relying on a force-based schema coming before one relying on a non-force-based dynamic schema, typically in the form of the object-based schema described by Kowalewski (Reference Kowalewski, Chilton and Kopytowska2018). Moreover, various textual elements (including the ordering of elements from simple to more profound) typically suggest that the reconceptualization realized by source domain reversal represents a more profound insight into reality. Finally, in the case of this type of pattern, the reconceptualization often shifts from a focus on enlightenment as a temporal process to a focus on a state. These four elements are presented in summary form in Table 1. As the table demonstrates, the overall emergent pattern is best described in terms of a family resemblances model (see Rosch, Reference Rosch1975; Rosch & Mervis, Reference Rosch and Mervis1975). What we mean by this is that the language used by each participant does not systematically display clearly delineated, prototypical examples of every element. However, when the instances are examined as a whole, they display enough similarities and overlapping characteristics for us to posit that a shared discourse pattern displaying non-criterial features with fuzzy boundaries is present. It also needs to be noted that the four clips included many other enlightenment metaphors that did not involve source domain reversal and are thus not listed here.
A methodological strength of the current study is the examination of discoursal patterns to reveal how speakers alter conceptual metaphors to spur listeners toward reconceptualization of a target domain. The patterns uncovered in this study would have been missed by a methodology focusing only on isolated instances of metaphor. A clear limitation of this study is the small sample size of four clips, so further investigations are required to confirm, reject, and investigate some of the patterns observed here. One surprising finding was Spira’s use of a force-dynamic configuration involving an antagonist (the infinite mind) exerting external force on the agonist (the finite mind) so as to push the agonist toward enlightenment. It would be interesting to investigate whether this type of relationship is common in Hindu discourse relative to Buddhist discourse, or whether it is more common in specific Japanese Buddhist schools, such as Pure Land, that emphasize the notion of taking refuge in an external power.
Further afield, researchers may investigate whether similar discoursal patterns appear in negative theology within the Christian or Islamic traditions. Indeed, work on these traditions alludes to a similar awareness of the challenges related to talking about beliefs about a perceived ultimate reality and the discourse strategies to deal with them. For example, Feyaerts and Boeve (Reference Feyaerts, Boeve, Chilton and Kopytowska2018) discusses the “apophatic presumption” of theology as the belief that it is impossible to say anything literally true about God and that even the consequent use of metaphor has to deal with “the constant withdrawal of the target in the act of metaphorical mapping”. This connects to Sells’s (Reference Sells1994) discussion of the response of negative theology to the dilemma of transcendence:
It is negative in the sense that it denies that the transcendent can be named or given attributes. The formal denial that the transcendent can be named must in some sense be valid, otherwise ineffability would not become an issue. Insofar as it is valid, however, the formal statement of ineffability turns back on itself, and undoes itself. … I am caught in a linguistic regress. Each statement I make … reveals itself as in need of correction. The correcting statement must then itself be corrected, ad infinitum. … The regress is harnessed and becomes the guiding semantic force…of a new kind of language. (p. 2)
This study has essentially used a cognitive linguistic framework to examine how metaphor is employed in this “new kind of language” (Sells, Reference Sells1994, p. 2).
An interesting feature of source domain reversal is that the second element overlaps and exists in tension with the first element and thus performs a subversive function. It effectively counters the temptation to view language about enlightenment as something linear, absolute, and rigid. In some cases, this appears to involve a type of linguistic self-destruction, where paradoxical and contradictory language has the effect of not just recontexualizing but also sabotaging previous domain mappings. This type of metaphor usage could be viewed as having an important social discourse role in Buddhist and Hindu discourse in general. Teachers exist because of the perception that detailed discourse is useful and important to a point in most forms of Buddhism and Hinduism. These teachers, in order to have something detailed to say, must first draw on metaphor and force-dynamic relationships in order to describe and provide advice about an active process of achieving something and “getting somewhere”. However, they also feel it is necessary to express that enlightenment is not ultimately about active achievement and that language is at best inadequate and potentially misleading (Lu & Chiang, Reference Lu and Chiang2007), and at worst harmful. Source domain reversal is one discourse device that facilitates the switch from talking about doing something to pure awareness, just being, silence, and nothingness. It therefore plays a key role in supporting the existence of detailed discourse about enlightenment, while at the same time providing an exit complete with demolition charges.
