winterknight

Read a little of his first book... it seemed fine. He's a little bit too "cantankerous cynical old sage" for my taste, but... Heh. If that's true, it probably brought as many problems as solutions. The flight-to-over-thinking can be an incredibly powerful defense mechanism.

Yes -- greater mental peace -- a dropping off of various desires and more contentment. At the same time, an increased intensity of striving for liberation.

If "I am awareness," who is aware of that fact? There is no state of freedom. Freedom is constant; it is not a state. No identification with thoughts ever is the case. It isn't for you, either. Speaking of "shifts" is technically inaccurate, but for discussion's sake: 1 year of intense self-inquiry, but before that 19 more years of searching. There's no way to do that. Anyone can parrot answers. You have to look at them in context and use intuition.

Well, there are two answers to that question. Less accurate: The Self, whose nature is being, consciousness, and bliss, which is beyond time and space and all pairs of opposites and dualities -- it alone is. More accurate: <silence>

I don't know what it is -- might be trauma. I'd suggest, like I suggest to all seekers, getting psychoanalytic/psychodynamic therapy. Prepare to spend some time and effort on it; it'll be worth it. Glad to hear it! In the final analysis, karma does not exist. But for discusison's sake, karma really just means the laws of cause-and-effect, whatever they are. We don't know what they all are... we speculate, but we don't know. Different eastern traditions have different ideas about it: karma running from birth to birth, various kinds of punishments and rewards for immoral and moral acts, etc. But technically karma could be as simple as: you knocked over a glass of milk, and it stained your carpet. That's cause and effect -- karma. Personally I prefer to call it all God's will, but even that isn't strictly true in the final analysis.

Not literally, no. You could use that metaphor if you found it useful. Some parts of the journey can be. On the way you'll have to face a lot of negative emotions within yourself.

It's not just because I'm enlightened that I can answer so many questions, but also because I've put a great deal of study, reflection, and effort in.

When you meditate, you open your mind up to experience things that might be beneath your mind's surface. It's just like when you're about to fall asleep, or when you're dreaming -- you experience a different state of mind than usual. So you might be tearing up because you're feeling emotions that you don't normally allow yourself to feel because you block them out or are focused on other stuff.

It's not to my taste, that's all I will say.

Find the true I through self-inquiry and you won't have to put in effort...

Imagine you're watching a movie. You get really into it. The hero is about to get killed by the vllain... you're scared for him... and the person next to coughs, and suddenly -- you realize you're in the theater. The movie still seems to be going on. But you realize it's not real. It's sort of like that. Not exactly, but sort of. A second way of thinking about it: Suffering comes from the story we tell about the meaning of pain, a story that is built around our personal identity. The pain matters because it could hurt us. But who is this "us" that it is hurting? When we get in touch with something deeper than what we think we are, that story falls apart -- is meaningless. It's more than meaningless, in fact: it might even be transformed into something beautiful, since it cannot harm us. It becomes this interesting sensation. Yes, something like that could be connected to letting go of the ego, even for a short period of time. But don't read too much into these experiences, and don't feel the need to understand them, unless they bother you over and over again or for a long period of time. Experiences like these are not critical to the goal of the spiritual search.

Sure, it's the start of a good practice. It's not that you'll find anything like a strong or a subtle feeling. That's the point, actually. Don't clog up your mind with these expectations of what you'll find. You know that you are, right now, don't you? Do you or don't you know that you're reading these words, right now? You do, right? That's the feeling. That's all. That. Just as simple as that. What is that? Focus on it.

Whether it's me or not me in the ultimate equation -- that is, philosophically, intellectually -- doesn't matter. The game of self-inquiry is quite simple. You already have this thing called "I" that you know you are. We're trying to find out what it is, this idea that we use so casually and constantly and that we feel to be so obvious and certain. For the purposes of locating that I feeling, we say that everything you see is not you, because that "I" feeling implies that separation between "I" and "everything that I perceive/think/experience." When you look at a table you don't feel "I am that table." You feel there's this thing called "I" and then... there's that table. Even if you tell yourself intellectually "we're all part of the same universe or whatever" -- that doesn't relate to the feeling that we're trying to hone in on. So given all that -- "what do I mean by I? What is this feeling called I?" That's the game. So it's not really about "living in a paradox"... that is all intellectual. There is a direct recognition that will resolve that paradox.

There is that "point," of course. If you're at that point there will be no need to "inquire" because there is no "I" to need or perform such inquiry. It is only when you seem to fall away from it that there is a need to inquire to re-realize that truth. Eventually you will realize it's not a point but simply the constant changeless Truth, and always has been.

It's really good that you tried for several hours. It does take practice. Keep practicing -- determine that you will practice however long it takes -- it may take weeks or months. The fact that you call it a "riddle" suggests to me that you are again using too much thinking. Your thinking mind is confusing you like crazy. But look at your own language: "I contemplated on the source of my certainty that I exist." "I could not find one." "I do not have a feeling of certainty that I exist." Do you not see how these very statements embody that very certainty that you say you cannot find? Who is that "I" you're referring to? You do have that certainty. You've just mentioned it several times! It's not something mystical or hard to find or far away. It's not a trick question. You do know that you seem to be looking at this screen right now, reading these words. Now, where is that knowledge coming from? Take the awareness you mention "of my own search." How do you know that you're aware? Who is aware of that?

Yes, basically. To be precise, though, happiness as it used by most people in ordinary language essentially means a kind of pleasure -- that is, it's the happiness that is the opposite of unhappiness. But when I use happiness, I mean the real happiness that is our true nature, and is unchanging, and is beyond pleasure & pain, and has no opposite.

That's an intellectual answer. Self-inquiry is not about trying to "think" your way to the answer. You know that you are. This is obvious. The point of self-inquiry is to find out where that knowledge is coming from, or what it is. Follow the link I gave above to see what that's like. Right now you are saying that you are having trouble surrendering. That means you are identifying yourself with the one who is trying to surrender -- in other words, you think the one who wants to surrender is "I." Who is that I? When I ask that, I don't mean for you to "think about it" and come up with an intellectual answer like "me as ego," but to hone in on the feeling of "I"...that steady, unquestionable knowledge that "I am"... are you the surrenderer? Who is watching the one who attempts to surrender and the one who resists? It's not about adopting perspectives at all. It's about inquiring into the very obvious, plain-as-day fact that "I know that I am." What is that I? You need to trace that feeling/knowledge to where it comes from.

Yes, don't surrender if you don't feel like surrendering. Instead, relentlessly self-inquire into who wants to surrender. Who is it that is trying to surrender?

They're not really the happiest. It's the story that we tell ourselves that they are. That's how we rationalize all our striving. We're validated in this way of thinking by our family (which rewards us with affection and recognition when we achieve) and by society. These moments you mention are marked by a strong pleasure of achievement. But think about all the pain that it took to get there. And once you're there, the pleasure lasts -- how long? And then you're striving again. And then there's the chance of failure. And even if you succeed, it could be taken away from you. Even if you're "unique and special" at what you do, and are the best for a while, your powers could be taken from you by circumstance or by illness or by someone better, or by any number of things outside of your control. The happiness we experience even in these pleasurable moments is the pleasure of the Self, but it is marked on either side by the mental circumstances that surround it -- that is, by the story we tell about it. What makes it pleasure is that it is in contrast to the pain on either side, so it stands out. All that agony and uncertainty -- and ahh, the release of success stands out by comparison. Ramana Maharshi gives the example -- with respect to all pleasures, and achievement pleasures are no different -- of someone going from the cool shade of a tree into the blazing hot sun, just to have the pleasure of coming back under the tree. That contrast between the searing sun and the cool shade is what makes for pain and pleasure. It's what makes that achievement stand out in our memory, too, and that's why we label it 'happiest.' The enlightened one, by contrast, simply stays in the shade. As you can see, this is quite different. You don't get the contrast. But the contrast is because there's a ton of pain mixed into things. None of this to say you shouldn't strive, but we should be clear that this is not in fact the source of real happiness.

Yes, that's exactly the same distinction I made above. The awareness with the "I" in it is subject-object awareness. The awareness that is beyond that has no I in it.

The awareness that is the actual Ground -- and this will be recognized perfectly when your search is over -- is not the normal awareness that you are familiar with. The awareness you're familiar with is subject-object awareness. There is something that is aware of that subject-object awareness. That "awareness" is actually beyond all opposites, beyond even awareness and unawareness, beyond time and space, etc. -- and so the Buddhists call it emptiness, since no quality or content can be ascribed to it. But is indeed the same "thing" (though some Buddhists would disagree -- some people always disagree...).

Yup!

To have a correct understanding, for whatever that's worth. I'm not sure what the stages of enlightenment you're referring to are and what model they come from. There's really only one enlightenment, which is beyond this world and runs through it, and even that enlightenment in the end, and the world it supposedly runs through, cannot be said to exist. No need to figure it out. Only clear away the misconceptions -- indeed, only give up thinking -- and what remains is That.

The Truth really goes beyond "oneness." That's why advaita means "not-twoness." One implies two; the Truth goes beyond the distinction. The Truth is beyond separation; but it is also equally beyond unity. These are part of a duality that must be overcome. They are both in thought. This has affected "my day-to-day life" most by the fact that I recognize there is no "my day-to-day life." That thought is fiction. Leave it all behind. I don't agree that there are perceptions, subtle or otherwise, so subtler perceptions may or may not be happening. If for the sake of discussion I talked about perceptions, I'd say probably, because quiet minds invite that sort of thing. But really there is no such thing as perception, and desires for subtler perceptions can be a snare.

Do whatever suits you. Different methods are for different minds. To my taste RM's self-inquiry is best.