Enlightenment--an Engineer's Perspective

Many scholars agree that Buddha taught that we become "enlightened" when we realize that this world is not full of separate, unchanging beings who are interacting.  Belief in separate beings is a convenient, practical illusion.  It is helpful to think of "you" and "I" and "them" separately as we make plans and take action.  But an "enlightened" person recognizes that, in reality, there are no separate beings or things.  Reality is all connected.  Everything that seems separate is separate only to a degree.  Everything that seems unchanging is unchanging only to a degree.  Those who occasionally sense this reality in their day to day living are on the path to enlightenment.  Scholars say that those who constantly, clearly see this reality in it's fullness at all times--even if they are sick, the boss is yelling, or their dog dies--these people have reached Buddhahood.

In my 20 years of Buddhist practice, I've been trying to glimpse, as often as I can, the reality that everything is connected, that there are no separate, unchanging beings or things.  I never expect to consistently see this reality, don't even know if this consistency is possible, and I don't really care.  But I definitely feel benefits--peace, happiness, serenity--from each glimpse of connected reality that I'm able to achieve or in thinking about the connectedness of all things.

I'm an engineer.  One thing that has helped me see the connected nature of things more often is to explain this idea to myself in engineering terms.  Scientific terms.

A scientist or engineer trying to describe anything in the physical world always defines a "model".  This model is a simplified representation of what is really there.  Scientists humbly acknowledge that they can't possibly represent everything about something as simple as the water spilling out of a faucet.  So they make choices, creating a model that is simpler than reality.  In their model, the flowrate remains steady, the water flows without friction, the water can't be compressed under any pressure.  None of these assumptions are perfectly accurate, but without them, the flow of water is too hard to describe.  Also, they define a "control volume", a space they are studying, a shape.  But the boundaries of this space don't really exist, they are just needed so that the scientists can analyze the water.

This is what I do in life.  I create models in my head for "you" and for "me" that are oversimplified.  I erect boundaries between us in my head that are much more rigid that what is really out there.  In that you change you change my thoughts and I change yours, the reality is that we aren't fully distinct.  Also, like the scientist oversimplifying water, I oversimplify who you are and who I am so that I can interact in the world.  This is fine as long as I remember whenever possible that, in reality, "you" and "I" are interconnected and far more complex than my models for "you" and "me" can ever describe.