Search the Community

Cause of Suffering WE VERY OFTEN FEEL THAT WE CREATE OUR OWN SUFFERINGS. IN SPITE OF THIS, WHY DO WE CONTINUE CREATING THEM? AND WHEN AND HOW DOES ONE STOP CREATING ONE'S OWN SUFFERING? The first thing, and very basic to be understood, is that whenever you say WE VERY OFTEN FEEL THAT WE CREATE OUR OWN SUFFERING, this is not the case. You never really feel that you are the creator of your own suffering. You may think so, because you have been taught so; because for centuries and centuries teachers have been teaching that you are the creator of your own suffering and no one else is responsible. You have heard these things, you have read these things. They have become your blood and bone, they have become your unconscious conditionings, so sometimes you repeat like a parrot WE CREATE OUR OWN SUFFERING. But this is not your feeling, this is not your realization, because if you realize it, then the other thing is impossible. Then you cannot say, IN SPITE OF THIS, WHY DO WE CONTINUE CREATING IT? If you really feel, and if it is your own feeling that you are the creator of your own suffering, any moment you can stop -- unless you want to create it, unless you enjoy it, unless you are a masochist. Then everything is okay, then there is no question. If you say, `I enjoy my suffering,' then it is okay; you can go on creating it. But if you say, `I suffer and I want to go beyond it. I want to stop it completely -- and I understand that I am the creator,' then you are wrong. You don't understand it. Socrates is reported to have said that knowledge is virtue. And there has been a long discussion for these two thousand years over whether Socrates is right or wrong -- knowledge is virtue. Socrates says that once you know something, you cannot do contrary to it. If you know that anger is suffering, you cannot be angry. This is what Socrates means -- knowledge is virtue. You cannot say, `I know anger is bad; still I move in it. What to do about it now?' Socrates says that the first thing is wrong. You don't know that anger is bad; that's why you go on moving in it. If you know, you cannot move in it. How can you move against your own knowledge? I know that if I put my hand in the fire it is going to be painful. If I know, I cannot put my hand in. But if somebody else has told me, if I have heard through the tradition, if I have read in the scriptures that fire burns, and I have not known fire, and I have not known any similar experience, only then can I put my hand into fire -- and that too only once. Can you conceive it? That you have put your hand into fire and you have been burned and you have suffered, and again you go and ask, `I know that fire burns, but in spite of it I go on putting my hand into the fire. What to do about it?' Who will believe that you know? And what type of knowledge is this? If your own experience of suffering and burning cannot stop you, nothing is going to stop you. Now there is no possibility, because the last possibility has been missed. But no one can miss it; that is impossible. Socrates is right, and all those who have know, they will agree with Socrates -- that agreement has a very deep point in it. Once you know.... But remember -- the knowledge must be yours. A borrowed knowledge won't do; borrowed knowledge is useless. Unless it is your own experience, it is not going to change you. Others' experiences are of no help. You have heard that you are the creator of your own suffering, but this is just in the mind. It has not entered your being, it is not your own knowledge. So when you are discussing, you can discuss about it cerebrally, but when the actual phenomenon happens, you will forget, and you will behave in the way you know, not in the way others know. When you are at ease, cool, collected, silently discussing anger, you can say it is poison, it is a disease, evil. But when someone makes you angry then a complete change occurs. Not it is not an intellectual discussion, now you are involved. And the moment you are involved, you become angry. Later on again, retrospectively, when you again get cool, the memory will come back, your mind will again start functioning, and you will say, `That was wrong. It was not good of me to do that. I know anger is wrong.' Who is this `I'? -- just intellect, just the superficial mind. You don't know -- because when someone pushes you into anger, you throw this mind away. It is useful as far as discussion is concerned, but when a real situation arises, only the real knowledge will help. When there is no situation, you can go on. Even in a discussion the real situation can arise. The other can go on contradicting you so much that you become angry and then you will forget. Real knowledge means that which has happened to you. You have not heard about it, not read about it, you have not collected information about it -- it is your own experience. And then there is no question, because after that you cannot go against it. Not that you will have to make an effort not to go against it; simply you cannot go against it. How can I? When I know this is a wall and I want to go out of this room, how can I try to pass through the wall? I know this is a wall, so I will search for the door. Only a blink man will try to go out through the wall. I have got eyes. I see what is a wall and what is a door. But if I try to enter the wall and tell you, `I know very well where the door is, and I know this to be a wall, but in spite of this, how can I stop myself from trying to enter the wall?' then that means that as far as I am concerned that door looks false. Others have told me that it is the door, but as far as I am concerned, I know that door is false. And others have told me that this is a wall, but as far as I see, I see the door here in this wall, and that is why I try. In this situation you have to make a clearcut distinction between what you know and what you have gathered as knowledge. Don't rely on information. From the greatest source -- even if you collect from the greatest source -- information is information. Even if a Buddha says it to you, it is not your own, and it is not going to help you in any way. But you can remain thinking that it is your knowledge, and this misunderstanding will waste your energy, time and life. The basic thing is not to ask what to do so that suffering is not created. The basic thing is to know that you are the creator of your suffering. Next time whenever a real situation arises and you are in suffering, remember to find out whether you are the cause of it. And if you can find out that you are the cause of it, the suffering will disappear, and the same suffering will not appear again -- impossible. But don't deceive yourself. You can -- that's why I say it. When you are suffering you can say, `Yes, I know I have created this suffering,' but deep down you know that someone else has created it. Your wife has created it, your husband has created it, someone else has created it, and this is simply a consolation because you cannot do anything. You console yourself: `No one has created it, I have created it myself, and by and by I will stop it.' But knowledge is instant transformation; there is no `by and by.' If you understand that you have created it, it will drop immediately. And it is not going to come up again. If it comes again, it means the understanding has not gone deep. So there is no need to find out what to do, and how to stop. The only need is to go deep and to find out who is really the cause of it. If others are the cause then it cannot be stopped, because you cannot change the whole world. If you are the cause, only then can it be stopped. That's why I insist that only religion can lead humanity towards non-suffering. Nothing else can lead, because everyone else believes that the suffering is caused by others; only religion says that suffering is caused by you. So religion makes you the master of your destiny. You are the cause of your suffering, hence you can be the cause of your bliss. - Osho - The Book of Secrets, discourses on Vigyan Bhairav Tantra

Yeah, the established state should be one of perfection, which may be called 'bliss', Adyashanti also has a cool quote on this: 'Who cares if you have bliss when you have love'. David Spero also speaks about it nicely:

Remember when I mentioned about possibly falling back into the dark night if I'm not careful? Well, yeah. Everything seemed new. But I wanted to go back to the familiar, but there was nothing familiar. I wanted that bliss back after all. And it was gone. I was blissful and sad at the same time. But the bliss didn't seem enough. Then it disappeared somehow. And the day went by rather normally. And from all these previous months of meditation — these seemed to be the most normal day I ever met. I've gotten used to having out of the ordinary situations ever since the beggining of enlightenment experiences and I just felt. . . neutral. Yet strangely even without the luxury of pleasure and joy, it was more satisfying than those two. Even the pain above seemed to be more normal somehow — more easy to accept and cope with. Sometimes the feeling just seemed more like a neutral texture than something "bad". Ingram explained the equanimity stage as something like a quiet awe after the storm or a return to simpler times in childhood. Yes, this describes it perfectly. It's a funny feeling. Somewhere in my self inquiry and enlightenment practice, I've realized why they made so much emphasis on how the senses were connected. Because the divide of senses is another illusion of language. And that's how this experience is like. The senses blend together into one whole experience. Think of how a baby might see the world — would they categorize things cleanly like "teddy bear" or "mommy". They wouldn't hear sounds as "A piano" or wouldn't hear smells as an "apple." I remember the neurologist Dr. Oliver Sacks wrote a piece on a man who was blind for his entire life and had a surgery on which he could see again. When he saw for the first time, he didn't start pointing out random objects. When objects turn and move, they weren't the same objects to him anymore. He didn't see colors as "red" or "blue", he simply saw them as the different shades that can't be described with words. He would in awe sit near the window seeing cars pass by and he wouldn't know what they were. I remember a story of a person who was deaf too. And the thing about the deaf is that they need to learn sigh language early or they will pass through a critical stage that allows them to learn a language. And another boy told by Oliver Sacks find it amazing how the different trees he saw could all be summarized into just the word tree. And it seemed to me as if I could turn on and off "knowing" and "not knowing" what I see. And hear. And touch. And taste. And smell. Not that I didn't know the concepts. Like how you can't just forget the ending of a movie you just watched — I can't forget the concepts — but when I sense things without dividing, I can still understand what it was like before the movie. I've read somewhere that this is what the fourth visappana Jhana is like — maybe that was what happened in my last post. ------- Ingram said that people in this stage can sometimes make very odd yet profound realizations, and this was mine. I don't really see myself as having a personality anymore. I like learning new and difficult things but I don't see myself as an intellectual person. I like hanging out alone but I don't see myself as a solitary person. I've continued learning poetry yesterday because I see things as ever changing now. I don't see myself as the same person in the past who think poetry is just "overcomplicatiing emotions you can summarize in categorizations and number graphs to rate how well you're doing".( Yeah, I tended to be overdetached from my emotions. ) It's another different but valuable perspective. I wanted some affirmation that I knew many things others didn't. It wasn't overtly obvious but still there. Somewhere in there I thought if I could just know more, I could solve my fear of the unknown. Of my own fear that my skills weren't enough. But really — what is enough? We define things in ways that are useful to us. A chair could be used to sit. A chair could be used to stand on to reach high places. But do the ways we use them really provide their essence? How does this mean to ourselves? And what we define as enough or too much? I wanted to be admired. I unconsciously thought enlightenment would allow that. Not that I am enlightened though. I imagined people coming to talk to me. Quick successes. Quick admiration. Quick praise. But in reality as I progressed, not many people emphasized it much. I was just an ordinary person — no skills of genius and no visible major achievements. More of an everyday ingenuity with ideas, curiosity and a simple warmth. No more shitting about being remembered in history. I'd already passed down my influence. Where? When I share information, time and resources, other people hear and it transfers to more and more people. Which transfers to more and more people in return. Did you think the big ass names are the ones that change history? Take Hitler. He was the one who led. But who gave him advice? Who carried out his orders? Who spread his ideas? Who gave him clothes? Take Elon Musk? Who managed things without him? Who taught him the original ideas he had? And so on. And so on. History tends to give credit to all the leaders. The pioneers. The originals. The revolutionaries. But who allowed those leaders to become leaders in the first place? We remember the lives of leaders that we forget how we are the leaders in our own lives. That history isn't just made by the leaders, but the everyday people. It seemed as if when I see the world without cultural assumptions, the influence is divided equally when estimated between people. Whether that influence is bringing humanity down or bringing it up. Whether it comes from effort or lack of effort. My old self would think it was hippie bullshit. But we're all connected. We are already being a part of the things going around us — just by being alive. And I look around in my familiar home. The same old green couch. The same old collection of my dad's elephant figurines. The same old books I'm reading laying over the table. When the cultural assumptions are lost, it seemed to me everyone had primarily equal value. They were equally oridinary. Equally extraordinary. I either thought of myself as some boring, wimpy and stupid bastard who wouldn't amount to anything or tell myself some story about how awesome life is, how I'm special especially in how much I know and how I'm going to make it big someday. No. Haha. I don't know anything just like how every human being is bad with something. I know some things just like how every human being is good with something. And for some reason I'm fine with that. I'm just someone with an extraordinarily ordinary life. And it truly is the quiet awe after the storm.

He who knows the Bliss of Brahman, whence all words together with the mind turn away, unable to reach it—he never fears. - Taittiriya Upanishad (2.4.1) When a man finds fearless support in That which is invisible, incorporeal, indefinable and supportless, he has then obtained fearlessness. If he makes the slightest differentiation in It, there is fear for him - Taittiriya Upanishad (2.7.1)

I am a couple of weeks behind in videos..but many of Leo's other videos offer awesome insight into raising kids despite the fact that he has none...I'm curious now...but it's likely an interpretation @ThirdEyeSees ....that said...children usually have neurotic fucked up parents...and end up fucked up/ neuroti, and in need of healing/ reprogramming....our culture is also fucked up, and it fucks up both kids and parents...it's all pretty fucked...on the rare occasions, when conscious parents raise Devine kids, with magic bubbles of cultural deflection encompassing them, it's quite incredible....and the world would be pretty boring without kids...we need their innocence and curiosity....their spirit of wonder....their laughter....and their pure bliss!!!

I was panicking. Absolutely panicking. I was writing furiously on the identities I attached myself to. A failure. The terrified one. Someone who's angry at themselves. Some irrational and emotional baby. Some lazyass who isn't doing their work. Fuck. Fuck. Fuck. Whenever I removed one image of myself, even more came to emerge. I kept in mind Peter Ralston's exercise. Imagine there was a being with a blank slate who will become you if you explain who you are well. You can't say something vague "A lawyer" or "The funny one". Because other people are like that and they're not you. You can't say something your life principles or philosophies because it wouldn't understand how often you follow these and how well. And so on. Just yesterday I was feeling bliss. No longer the uncomfortable feelings of joy in Stage 8 that can become "too much". More of the pleasant feelings of Stage 9. But the thing is — the amazing power of how blissful this state distracts the practitioner from their object of focus. To work on calming this state — I had to focus on everything. Every sound. Every thought. Every feeling. Every sight to focus. Taste. Smell. Touch. The Mind Illuminated compared it to a narrow wild river. Its restriction makes it more intense, wild and overflowing. But once it settles into a much wider pond, it becomes calmer. But it made me feel overwhelmed — I remember a character who had the power to mind read, but they could never turn it off. So he always grew into a panic just by the sheer number of thoughts he can hear in a crowd. It was like this — but for more than just thoughts. I went to find the quietest place I could find, and continued there. I was so pissed. I got attached to enlightenment. I wanted it now. NOW. NOW. NOW. I had fallen so deeply in love with all that pleasure — and next day, I lost it all replaced with all this pain. The Stage of the Desire for Deliverance as called by Daniel Ingram. Next was Reobservation where I saw life with greater clarity. A painful clarity. Ingram explains that sometimes people here experience a frustration for "worldly" responsibilities such as life, job, relationships, moral codes and sex. I was suddenly frustrated with my own powerlessness to do much for this world. I didn't know enough. I didn't accomplish enough. I didn't have much of an ability to influence. I was just some normal guy. How the hell could I do anything? And more than that ; I was mediocre in my eyes. Just some ordinary teenage student — nah. Nah. Nah. Sure, I've been meditating and doing personal development since I was a kid and managed to surpass being depressed for years —but fuck — I want more than that. The thing I found most important during my depression back then was truth. Know the truth objectively and you'll somehow get out of this. If I had more understanding and information — I could solve everything. Wisdom is my highest value. And how was I reacting to all this? By freaking out. I was so angry at myself for not realizing the truth earlier. I thought I was just some pathetic bastard. But I remember what Ingram said — just keep meditating. So I gathered myself and meditated on my breath. Trying to muster the focus from my frustrations to my self. My embarrassment. My fear. My anger. All lost in my breath. And as time passed, it was gone. And I felt a calmness. A strange awareness of everything surrounding me. What seemed quiet to others before seemed unbearably loud to me. Now the noise of the crowd seemed as peaceful as hearing a soft rainfall. I could listen to every voice in the crowd as I talked with a friend. I felt the air around me. My own thoughts just trying to understand this. And I did all at once. My negative emotions seem unjustified and strange. Why would that bother me so much? I learned from Osho that most of ourselves is from comparisons. What if everyone else on Earth disappeared? There would be no one smart because there would be no one to be smarter too. No one good looking because there would be no one to be more good looking to. Who would you be? And for the first time — I seemed to experience that clearly. Did I just pass 3 stages in a day? Reading on, the extreme manifestations in this stage are rare but worth warning about. But some people just pass the Dark Night in a few minutes, hours or days. It was also introduced that Equanimity is when people start to feel that their spiritual practice is no big deal. I'll keep doing it — but it seems as ordinary yet important as taking a bath. Ingram mentions that if practitioners don't become well aware of new qualities such as peacefulness and ease, then they'll fall back to the stage before. Eh, I'm not phased much. Besides, I have a test tomorrow. See you.

@Shanmugam eternal bliss is your natural state. Thousands of words are the veil to your natural state.

@Shanmugam I agree with that interpretation of bliss. What i wanted to point out, is that bliss is considered a pleasurable emotion by most people. Most people seek enlightenment to gain something, such as the pleasure to be released from their suffering. This desire in itself is in conflict with gaining enlightenment. If the desire to gain bliss is the driver for a seekers practices, then enlightenment will never be found. It is the ego that desires. If you define bliss as something that just is, without looking forward to it. Then you are rare and already outside the trap of it. Yes, but the ego is not just a part of you. It is what most of us are fully and completely, at least in my experience. Its not that we are the ego in actuality, but it's all we know we are until we go deeper and let go of it. There is no problem at all, you are right about that, but only if you are already enlightened. If not, then the ego will cling to it as a desirable outcome. This is the trap of seeking enlightenment to gain something, when in actuality it is more an act of letting go and accepting life. Bliss is just something desirable for most normal human behinds, something they want and are striving for. Because of this i warn against it. It is my opinion, that focusing on desirable outcomes of enlightenment is dangerous, and beside the point. Because bliss has no meaning or purpose for an enlightenment person, it has no value at all. It's like showing a picture to someone who is blind. It's like asking the day of the week to a goldfish. Also i have lots of respect for your traditions. Tho i must admit, i do not know all of your religion in detail, as it is complex and vast So please forgive me, if i put my western spin on some insights, but is another perspective not worth wile at times?

@ShanmugamA tree resides in bliss because it doesn't know it's a tree.

one more thing.. Out of bhumikas I mentioned, only the stage 1-4 are stages of the progress... Anything after that is something that happens out of chance.. It rarely happens that some people reach 5th, 6th or 7th bhumika... The explanation given for this is prarabha karma.. And the eternal bliss I am talking about is the bliss of the people who are in 6th or 7th bhumika.. Also, as far as the jnani is concerned, there is no inferior or superior stage after the 4th.. It is not so difficult to understand.. We are in bliss when we sleep and there is no duality in deep sleep. This happens everyday. The only difference in the jnani going through this bliss is that his consciousness, empty of any objects just shines.. And most of the times, these jnanis are in samadhi, absorbed in Self.

@zazed actually, bliss is the nature of self itself.. it is not like experiential happiness.. You are bliss, and there is really no distinction of experiencer and experience in the bliss of self. the bliss of the self which is always mentioned is not an emotion. (what you say is a common misunderstanding, because there is bliss but there is no duality) The reason I posted this is to stop people from getting deluded. This is not a trap as you mentioned. It is the exact opposite.. I will tell you why. Ego doesn't like it when enlightenment is mentioned as bliss.. Because, for the ego, it looks like a distant goal, something that cannot be achieved. Even though the whole point of enlightenment is realizing ego as an illusion and totally dissolving the sense of separate identity, paradoxically, ego also wants to get enlightened. And when enlightenment sounds like something that is very easy to attain, ego likes that idea. I have witnessed this in so many people. If enlightenment is mentioned as eternal bliss, what is the problem for anybody to hear this? There is no problem at all. It is the ego which wants to make it as a problem. In India, every scripture talks about how blissful the direct experience of atman is... When you are not enlightened yourself, why deny something that is written again and again for ages in our tradition? And even if this was false, it is still not misleading,.. Because, no one, after realizing their own nature going to get disappointed after seeing that it is not eternal bliss.. Trust me, you wont say "Oh my God, people cheated me saying that enlightenment is bliss, I wasted all my life to attain this and now I am disappointed". Instead, you will just relax into the peace of your true nature. On the contrary, if enlightenment is understated, there is a danger.. Then every ego out there will be ready to declare that it is enlightened.. And that is the trap! Anyway, as I mentioned, most of the enlightened ones are in 4th bhumika (stage)... In this stage, they are active in the world and they will go through pain and pleasure, but with no complaints or regrets.. They don't feel incomplete or diminished. Yoga vashista has the complete description of all stages.. It says that in the 6th bhumika, people cannot come out of samadhi without others help, they are always absorbed in self, with no body consciousness, and food has to be fed to their mouth while they are in samadhi, to keep them alive. Ramana maharishi was actually like this when he was in the cave. (it is funny when I read from people who say 'ramana was training his mind, he was contemplating about self in the cave etc)... Termites were eating his body and he had absolutely no body consciousness.. I have dissolved my sense of duality three years before.. It took time to get steady; now I am always peaceful and there is a kind of pleasantness and innocence most of the time which I can't describe... But it is not like any emotions of happiness that I have usually experienced in life. It is not a distinct or special experience. It is just the nature of reality itself. When I don't have troubling vasanas, I am usually in deep pleasant peace. It is not an emotion or feeling, it is just me.

I also enjoyed Ramana Maharshi's writings. And this quote of you is exactly why it doesn't lead to eternal bliss. Bliss as we consider it, is an emotion. With the cessation of duality, who is there left to feel the emotion of bliss? What remains to even care about feeling bliss? Why is it even important to feel this pleasant bliss? And what are pleasant feelings even? It is just semantics and bickering when people say there is no bliss, so you are right in a way. But it is in reality totally beside the point. In actuality, bliss is a mundane idea of the human brain. The enlightened one is above bliss even, so it is irrelevant to him. His state is unfathomable and beyond words or any comprehension of both of us now. And yet extremely simple and non-special in its non dual reality. When there is no duality, what is there? Who/what am i really? Is bliss not an emotion to desire, am i that desire, or that emotion itself? And if i am experiencing and enjoying bliss, there is bliss and there is me, so there is again duality? If there is no duality, then yes, i am bliss. but i am also hate. i am love. i am pain. i am joy. i am green, black, blue and orange. I am high and i am low. i am sound and i am light. i am thought and i am speech. I am you and i am this one. I am all the things, for if i was not all the things, then there is me and the separate thing. Two things is duality, and there is no duality, so they say. This is why it is irrelevant to think it leads to eternal bliss, its a trap of the mind/brain, a limitation to let go. Its not that you are wrong, its just not the right question to ask perhaps? But what do i know.. I am talking about non-duality, this creates duality, because there is non-duality, and there is my talking about non-duality?!

Here is a verse from Brihadaranyaka Upanishad Chapter 4, Section 3, verse 33: “4.3.33 He who is perfect of body and prosperous among men. the ruler of others, and most lavishly supplied with all human enjoyments, represents the greatest joy among men. This human joy multiplied a hundred times makes one unit of joy for the Manes who have won that world of theirs. The joy of these Manes who have won that world multiplied a hundred times makes one unit of joy in the world of the celestial minstrels. This joy in the world of the celestial minstrels multiplied a hundred times makes one unit of joy for the gods by action those who attain their godhead by their actions. This joy of the gods by action multiplied a hundred times makes one unit of joy for the gods by birth, as well as of one who is versed in the Vedas, sinless and free from desire. This joy of the gods by birth multiplied a hundred times makes one unit of joy in the world of Prajapati (Viraj), as well as of one who is versed in the Vedas, sinless and free from desire. This joy in the world of Prajapati multiplied a hundred times makes one unit of joy in the world of Brahman (Hiranyagarbha), as well as of one who is versed in the Vedas, sinless and free from desire. This indeed is the supreme bliss. This is the state of Brahman, O Emperor, said ‘Yajnavalkya. I give you a thousand (cows), sir. Please instruct me further about liberation itself.’ At this Yajnavalkya was afraid that the intelligent Emperor was constraining him to finish with all his conclusions.” Shankara also acknowledges this verse in his commentary on this Upanishad and further cites a verse from Mahabharata in his commentary: “Vedavyasa also says, ‘The sense pleasures of this world and the great joys of heaven are not worth one-sixteenth part of the bliss that comes of the cessation of desire’ (Mbh. XII. clxxiii. 47).” ......................... So, when you reach a stage in your life which makes you wonder 'Am I enlightened?', be careful not to delude yourself... First of all, once your perception of reality becomes non-dual, there is not going to be an agent or a separate entity to ask 'am I enlightened', when there is true enlightenment. Because, that is when you realize that there is no one to get enlightened; you come to realize that both bondage and liberation were illusion.. (There was no snake in the first place, all you perceived in the darkness was a rope Go deep in your mindfulness practice, sharpen your attention and awareness to witness each and every arising thought, keep zooming into the field of consciousness and catch every though before it arises.. If you do it moment to moment, the illusory entity that you take yourself to be will completely disappear! Mindfulness when done properly is self-inquiry; self inquiry when done properly is mindfulness... If you are able to see that they are one and the same, then you are on the right path, a fast track to enlightenment.

I hear many people say that enlightenment doesn't end in eternal bliss and such a thing is not possible.. But some scriptures in Vedanta as well as many vedantins say otherwise. Here is what they say: Enlightenment doesn't have to cause eternal bliss but there are some people who actually attain this bliss because of their Prarabdha karma. Ancient text called Yoga vashista, speaks about 7 bhumikas, the stages of enlightenment.. Out of this, only the first four are really the stages of enlightenment.. The fourth stage is called Moksha. After that, attainment of 5th, 6th and 7th only happens for rare individuals due to their prarabdha karma.. I also remember Ramana Maharshi saying to a disciple in a conversation that a jnani is in the 4th state. In the fourth state, duality completely dissolves.. As far as a jnani is concerned, a jnani in the 5th state is no superior than the one in the 4th state, because both have lost the sense of individual existence, so there are really not two persons to compare. Only for the onlookers, there is an apparent superiority in the jnani of the 5th stage. A jnani in the 7th state can go into samadhi and never come back alive... Here is an excerpt that I found online which has some citations as well: http://www.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/2010-May/024462.html Here is a conversation between Ramana and a seeker: Question: To which of the seven stages of knowledge [jnana-bhoomikas] does the sage [jnani] belong? Bhagavan: He belongs to the fourth stage. Question: If that is so why have three more stages superior to it been distinguished? Bhagavan: The marks of the stages four to seven are based upon the experiences of the realised person [jivanmukta]. They are not states of knowledge and release. So far as knowledge and release are concerned no distinction whatever is made in these four stages. Question: As liberation is common to all, why is the varistha [literally, the most excellent] alone praised excessively? Bhagavan: So far as the varistha’s common experience of bliss is concerned he is extolled only because of the special merit acquired by him in his previous births which is the cause of it. Question: As there is no one who does not desire to experience constant bliss what is the reason why all sages [jnanis] do not attain the state of varistha? Bhagavan: It is not to be attained by mere desire or effort. Karma [prarabdha] is its cause. As the ego dies along with its cause even in the fourth stage [bhoomika], what agent is there beyond that stage to desire anything or to make efforts? So long as they make efforts they will not be sages [jnanis]. Do the sacred texts [srutis] which specially mention the varistha say that the other three are unenlightened persons? Question: As some sacred texts say that the supreme state is that in which the sense organs and the mind are completely destroyed, how can that state be compatible with the experience of the body and the senses? Bhagavan: If that were so there would not be any difference between that state and the state of deep sleep. Further how can it be said to be the natural state when it exists at one time and not at another? This happens, as stated before, to some persons according to their karma [prarabdha] for some time or till death. It cannot properly be regarded as the final state. If it could it would mean that all great souls and the Lord, who were the authors of the Vedantic works [jnana granthas] and the Vedas, were unenlightened persons. If the supreme state is that in which neither the senses nor the mind exist and not the state in which they exist, how can it be the perfect state [paripurnam]? As karma alone is responsible for the activity or inactivity of the sages, great souls have declared the state of sahaja nirvikalpa [the natural state without concepts] alone to be the ultimate state.

Yesterday night, the nimitta began rapidly and I mean RAPIDLY expanding. It's as if a small orb the size of my pinky grew to be as big as a building in my mind. I was in the middle of the night time leisurely reading and upon this, took this chance to enter a luminous Jhana. I closed my eyes and sat upright. And I no longer had to prepare for it to grow larger, it was already growing larger by itself. I began moving it back and forth in my head as fast as a sweat inducing high speed basketball game. And rather than moving only subtly, or growing smaller, it followered through. I kept hearing my family members talk a bit beyond my eyes. And I felt as if I was seeing through my eyelids — having images in my mind of what I would see happening if I open my eyes. My mom on the couch hunching down talking to my mildly amused grandma. But I went deeper. The Mind Illuminated described it as like sinking into a pool of bliss. And it does. It feels "moist" somehow. Something soft as a cushion wouldn't describe it. A cushion would seem too "solid" to fully describe it. Flowing first and then fully submerging into it. It lasted for 15-20 minutes when I saw the time. But it felt like an eternity. After it, I started to feel subtly disgusted. Disgusted with my meditation. Disgusted with my family. Disgusted with my room. Disgusted by weakness. Disgusted with life. I searched for Daniel Ingram's description of this stage in his book — it was called The Disgust Stage. And it was right. I did feel like my mind was expanding and contracting at the same time. Think of it like trying to close a bag full of so much stuff inside. Except the bag and the things inside feel as large as the radius of a nuclear bomb and the force to close in it as similar. And that was. . . frustrating. The book described it as the inability to focus on the center of things. Deeper awareness is often described with big talk of calmness but deeper awareness here was just disgusting. I felt like my senses and mind were being intruded by all this information and it was frustrating. Amongst that, I was still being bathed by bliss. I could feel the refreshing coldness of it. How wet it feels in my head. What a bizarre combination. Bliss and disgust at the same time. I threw up that night. Yellow and pale brown looking moosh in the toilet and next to it. More than one time, you bet. I wonder if I ate too much to make up for my intense hunger earlier or it was the disgust acting in me. Maybe it's both. After groaning at how terrible I felt while having a family member trying to comfort me by rubbing my back, I slept. When I woke up, it was gone. I slept late from the stress and usually I'd be falling asleep in lectures at a time like that, but I felt alert the whole day. Things I expect to be embarrassed of distressed about didn't expect that way. I find I fell deeper in love with meditation and I've became wonderfully interested by how fascinating everything was. I often think a lot of absolutely terrifying shit to others is fascinating. A daredevil — not in extreme sports but in ideas. In changing beliefs, in changing viewpoints and especially in changing paradigms. What a ride, I bet. Or maybe all this joy juicing my system is making me overoptimistic. Texts seem to warn about that. I need more equanimity. Equanimity is a non reactivity of what's bad or good. It may seem like what's left is a feeling of emptiness, but far from it. Alan Watts talked about an old teaching in Buddhism — it's like the sky. There can be clouds covering it. Rain. Whirlwind. Storms about. But what's beneath is always the calmness of a blue sky. Once everything is cleared up, what's left is joy. It doesn't mean wouldn't no goals in mind, especially with my interest in all this. But if I wasn't able to, there won't be such a large variation in my mood. If there's any change at all. It's just . . . calmness. I've heard enlightenment doesn't really make you 100% happy. It only changes your relationship with emotions. They refer to the two types of emotions. The direct emotion and how you feel about that emotion which the second one is something you can control. Its like how people can listen to the same music and one can think it's horrible and the other can think it's amazing. Emotions — even what we call the negative emotions, don't actually have to be "negative". Same goes with positive. In Headspace, the author recounts talking to his guru, that even the positive view has to be removed. Because to have a positive view means that you have a negative contrast to compare it with. How could we know light without darkness? Life without death? If my judgement is right from what the book says, the Passing and Arising Stage where I experienced intense joy then intense calmness with pummeling insights of how time did not exist and how existence wasn't different non existence was about a week or two ago. The Fear Stage came quickly after that when I suffered intense terror at some crazy ass visions during a meditation. Misery Stage was two DAYS earlier and Disgust Stage was yesterday at the time I'm writing this. Am I mistaken, or is everything coming a lot more faster than I expected it? Though, now that I think about it, when I think back, it looks like I experienced stages like these before. I just never actually had information at hand like this to know what it's called. I pick up my iPad and flick through pages of my ebook to read. I'm in stage 9, I realize. Is this really happening? Haha, well whatever it is. This is going to be interesting.

It's an unsettling bliss. Not for the entire day really, but for very long. You ever watch those movies where for example, a family member of a character dies and they'd come into a room expecting they'd still be there, they're gone? And because of this, they feel distressed. Upset. Longing for the past. But they know they can never go back. It's like that. But for my sense of self. I've spent my entire life with myself. I've criticized my identity. I've prided on my identity. I've shouted angry words at myself. I've gently told myself to hang in there. I was with myself in my highest and at my lowest. I've read books together with myself. I was with myself when I was with my friends and family. But it's gone. I always had been daydreaming a whole world since I was a kid. Where I'm the hero. Where I can be admired. Cherished. Become a success. Whether it's in the world of one of those samurai anime tv shows I used to watch or a world of my own creation. It's been an inner legend as if different variations of the same tale being spread throughout history. The history of my life. The idea of "The success story." Those times where I cheered on movies about a character who's caught by the enemy and put in great pain but manages to push through. Those stories of people stuck in poverty and managing to contribute millions to humanity in a business. Those stories of people who were absolute dicks but managed to become a humble Saint. And so on. Its like my sense of self was organized and shaped into an ice cube. But it began to melt, and I try to cusp the water into my hands but I can't anymore. Because my real self is formless. And I'm trying to hold on whatever is left of the ice. I don't think most people would understand if I told them. So all I have is a site like this. I see flickers of pride and gratitude for who "I" am but then I realize this person doesn't exist. And it's not the same. There's bliss now. And yet there's also an unsettling emptiness. A sadness. In who? I don't know anymore. I don't know.

Learn OSHO KUNDALINI MEDITATION This “sister meditation” to the OSHO Dynamic is best done at sunset or in the late afternoon. Being fully immersed in the shaking and dancing of the first two stages helps to “melt” the rock-like being, wherever the energy flow has been repressed and blocked. Then that energy can flow, dance and be transformed into bliss and joy. The last two stages enable all this energy to flow vertically, to move upwards into silence. It is a highly effective way of unwinding and letting go at the end of the day. Osho on How to Shake: "If you are doing the Kundalini Meditation, allow the shaking – don't do it! Stand silently, feel it coming, and when your body starts a little trembling, help it, but don't do it! Enjoy it, feel blissful about it, allow it, receive it, welcome it, but don't will it. "If you force, it will become an exercise, a bodily physical exercise. Then the shaking will be there, but just on the surface. It will not penetrate you. You will remain solid, stonelike, rocklike within. You will remain the manipulator, the doer, and the body will only be following. The body is not the question, you are the question. "When I say shake, I mean your solidity, your rocklike being should shake to the very foundations, so it becomes liquid, fluid, melts, flows. And when the rocklike being becomes liquid your body will follow. Then there is no shaker, only shaking; then nobody is doing it, it is simply happening. Then the doer is not. "Enjoy it, but don't will it. And remember, whenever you will a thing you cannot enjoy it. They are reverse, opposites; they never meet. If you will a thing you cannot enjoy it, if you enjoy it you cannot will it." Osho Instructions: The meditation is one hour long, with four stages. First Stage: 15 minutes Be loose and let your whole body shake, feeling the energies moving up from your feet. Let go everywhere and become the shaking. Your eyes may be open or closed. Second Stage: 15 minutes Dance ... any way you feel, and let the whole body move as it wishes. Again, your eyes can be open or closed. Third Stage: 15 minutes Close your eyes and be still, sitting or standing, observing, witnessing, whatever is happening inside and out. Fourth Stage: 15 minutes Keeping your eyes closed, lie down and be still. http://oshokundalini.com/index.html

@Shin Here some purposr i discovered form myself. (And i think some others can confirm) When i fap, i dont only get 10 seconds of bliss, also the time afterwards i feel calmer and more clear headed. This effect is stronger the longer the breaks inbetween. On the other hand, if i would fap daily the "afterglow-effect" would almost completly be lost.

@Anna1 Not really apathy, just the exact opposite.. Whatever I do, I am able to do with full enthusiasm.. I get completely absorbed and become one with the task.. But I agree I lack many things: the ability to regret, ability to complain about what happens in life, ability to feel anxious about future, ability to feel the emotions the same way I did (weird, huh? ) etc... And I am not suffering from it, I am enjoying the freedom that comes with it.. If I suddenly come to know that all this has nothing to do with enlightenment that is talked about by gurus but it is seriously a mental disorder, that will make no difference to the peace... This reminds me of a popular quote: "I'm not suffering from insanity, I'm enjoying every minute of it" Let me be very honest with you.. I really know absolutely nothing about how an enlightened person's mind looks like. I don't know whether he experiences pain or pleasure etc.. All I know is about my own mind and the freedom and peace that came from my own practices... And I wouldn't know what happens in the future because no one can tell. But I have heard different things said by different people about how an enlightened person thinks and experiences life. There is a guru in India with millions of followers who claim that this guru has changed their lives. They are totally impressed by him! And the guru claims that he is in ecstatic bliss all the time, he doesn't have any thoughts at all except when he has to move around, if he wants he can simply close his eyes and just die by his will etc... And there are other people who claim that after enlightenment there is still suffering, still craving, still anger, etc. Finally there are people who claim that there is no suffering (the suffering which causes an individual to feel miserable , lost or diminished) but there is still pain and pleasure. This version actually is quite similar to the type of whatever disorder that I have. .. But this weird disorder also made me incapable of worrying about anything at all. But ultimately, enlightenment is just a word with many definitions that people have associated with some kind of liberation that happened for them, which can be verified only by them. After all, I can only know what happens in my own conscious field.. When others tell me about their field of consciousness, I don't really have any way to verify this. I just have their testimony poured into my ears... So, Let me repeat... I don't know anything about what happens after Moksha, what persists after moksha etc. But since you are certain about it and seem to know everything that happens after moksha, let me ask you this question: You say that pleasure and pain persist after moksha... may be.. I don't know.. I have only heard people saying so... But how do you know that for sure? Can you be absolutely certain and 100% sure about this? If yes, how? (I am not starting another debate with you.. I am only going to ask you questions.. In the further discussions about this topic with you, I am going to maintain that I don't know)

Didn't follow instructions/advice on using spinal-breathing pranayama when I was around 18. It is like kriya-yoga and was used with mantra meditation alongside a few other prescribed yoga practices for working with kundalini energy etc. You were supposed to start slow and simple and only take on further progression practices once the previous ones had proved to be comfortable and balanced over several months, and warned to scale back and reduce or remove practices if you are experiencing any negative symptoms. Being naive,I didn't listen to any of that and even took on practices that were described for only people who have practiced comfortably for years. I overdid it and became very ungrounded because I was getting interesting experiences of bliss and general intense physiological stuff. It was not a spiritual pursuit for me but more wanting to get high and it was a way of escaping. Sometimes practices can create joy and all kinds of phenomena that is exciting to the ego but it is frenetic and ungrounded as opposed to integrated. Eventually over time it kind of exhausted and burnt out my nervous system and any practices would be overstimulating and overwhelming. Any pranayama would leave me severely uncomfortable for days, and even meditating for short term made me uncomfortable, ungrounded and emotionally volatile and anxious for a few days. Even ten minutes would make the next day or two quite uncomfortable. It took almost 2 years before I could meditate for any length of time again without negative symptoms and maybe another 2 years before I could feel grounded in general. There were also shorter periods of more severely uncomfortable experiences. Scary times, frankly, but worth the lessons, and also gives me an appreciation of being able to just sit in silence.

With the positive research coming out on Ketamine and depression, I had higher hopes for this compound for relieving depression and also consciousness related work. Whilst admittedly I was not using it in a formal therapeutic environment, it would seem that plant based entheogens are far more pleasant and safer. One of the main drawbacks of Ketamine is its apparent potential for addiction. I can't say I found it remotely addictive and I have a rather long history with alcohol & tobacco addiction. My doses of Ketamine were over a month apart. But, going by reports on the net, many do succumb to the addictive qualities. I'm guessing when working with a trained therapist the potential for addiction and bladder related issues are going to be greatly reduced. In a medical setting, Ketamine has an excellent safety profile- its clinical use wouldn't be so widespread otherwise. For me, I found the experiences very cold, distant and dark, but not definitely not overwhelmingly negative. There is a severe loss of motor control and a numbness to the extremities. In my first experiment, I was so dissociated that when I played a song that I love I felt absolutely nothing, it was as pleasurable as listening to nothing at all. Sub-ego death doses of Ketamine are really so very different to trytamines- if I was listening to that same song on mushrooms I would have been blown to pieces emotionally. Dose wise, I aimed for the lower end of what others reported online would bring about a "k-hole"/full ego dissolution but did not experience anything like that. On my second experiment I ingested a total of 200mg of Ketamine via two different ROAs and had a very similar experience to the first time. I even incorporated some heavy intentional breathing/circular type breath work and even this was not enough to encourage any substantial feelings to emerge. I tried the Wim Hof method (intentional breathing) on Acacia root bark/DMT and Syrian rue last week and the bliss was immense. I think the worst side effect of Ketamine has to be the grogginess after you come around. It's just simply not really worth moving for a while. You won't be able to walk well at all. Why and how people use this stuff at raves just seems utterly insane to me. Be safe if you plan on doing this drug outside of a clinical setting! Consider your body position- laying down or propped up in bed is best. Also consider the potential for addiction, some people really seem to like the feeling this drug induces. I can't say i'm one of those people.

I was just checking out some old videos of myself and it was really eyeopening from a distance and in the light of what I know about my psychology today. In 2009, 2012 or 2015, no matter when, I played the oboe beautifully. Still, I remember always feeling so inadequate and I see it in the videos. There were two fundamental problems: I was beating myself up over the tiniest mistakes and as soon as something happened, I simply gave up playing the rest of the phrase. Sometimes, admittedly not when I have a gig but when I'm playing for college, this still happens to this day! My posture and strength. My stance was too wide, my knees and center too floppy and as soon as I had to play, there was massive movement in my legs and body in order to compensate. The funny thing is, that never happened to me when I was singing (either classical or pop while accompanying myself on various instruments). I felt so amazing and expressive doing that. In those videos, I was just beaming like crazy - I delivered, never made mistakes and gave a fuck about technical imperfections - but actually, my singing skills were way lower than my skills on the oboe at all times (well, for at least 10 years now). But my carefree bliss totally charmed people. That's what I was lacking on the oboe most of the time. Nobody likes a perfectionist. I mean, seriously, there was this piece one I just listened to: I literally thought "what is that angelic sound? It's so beautiful, I can't even believe I was part of producing it!" then my bad shape hit me, a mistake slipped and I couldn't play the piece to the end (the listener-me was thinking: "quite unfortunate, but OK... it was so beautiful before"). When the piano finished as well, I looked all defeated and you could literally see all the nasty words that were going through my head. I was defeatedly explaining what happened, talking talking talking and I didn't let my professor say a word!!! Other than that, there was so much interesting stuff in these videos. E.g. a lot of free improvisation that evoked feelings somewhere in between of "what the fuck is this?!", "dope shit" and "omg we had no clue what we were doing". Or my bachelor project that wasn't so well played because once again I wasn't in shape but perfectly designed and well-orchestrated with the other participants (an actress, pianist, singer and technicians). Now, I feel motivated to make reeds, practice, get my body in shape, play, do something I already started with some reeds.

@Joseph Maynor Read these excerpts of various commentaries by Shankara: "The Absolute is that in which there is no particularity. There is no name, no form, no action, no distinction, no universal, no attribute. It is through these determinations alone that speech proceeds, and not one of them belongs to the Absolute. So the latter cannot be taught by sentences of the pattern 'This is so-and-so'. In such upanishadic phrases and words as "The Absolute is Consciousness-Bliss' (Brhad.III.ix.28.7) . 'A mere mass of Consciousness' (Brhad.II.iv.12) , 'Brahman', 'Atman', the Absolute is artificially referred to with the help of superimposed name, form and action, and spoken of exactly in the way we refer to objects of perception, as when we say 'That white cow with horns is twitching'. But if the desire is to express the true nature of the Absolute, void of all conditioning adjuncts and particularity, then it cannot be described by any positive means whatever. The only ' possible method then is to refer to it through a comprehensive denial of whatever positive characteristics have been attributed to it in previous teachings, and to say 'neither this nor that'. - (Brhad.Bh.II.iii.6) - Shankara "Nor can the Absolute be properly referred to by any such terms as Being or non-being. For all words are used to convey a meaning, and when heard by their hearers convey the meaning the speaker had in mind. But communicable meaning is restricted without exception to universal, action, attribute and relation.... The Absolute, however, does not belong to any universal (genus), so it cannot be expressed by a noun such as 'Being' or 'non-being'. Being without attributes, it cannot be described by any adjective denoting an attribute. And being actionless, it cannot be expressed by any verb denoting activity. For the Upanishad speaks of it as 'Without parts, without activity, at rest' (Svet .VI.19) . Nor has it any relation with anything. For it is 'One', 'without a second', 'not an object' and 'the Self. Hence it cannot be expressed by any word. And the upanishadic texts themselves confirm this when they say 'That from which words fall back' (Taitt .ll.9) , and in other passages." - (Bh.G.Bh.XIII.12) - Shankara And because the Absolute has no particular characteristics, the Veda indicates its nature by denying of it the forms of all other things, as is shown, for instance, in the following pa sages: 'And so, therefore, the teaching is "neither this nor that"' (Brhad.II.iii.6) , 'It is other than what is known, and above the unknown' (Kena I.U), 'That from which words fall back without obtaining access, together with the mind' (Taitt .II.9) . And the Vedic texts also relate how when Badhva was questioned by Baskalin he gave his answer merely by not speaking. 'Sir, teach me in words', Ba§kalin said. But the Teacher remained silent. Finally, at the second or third time of asking, Badhva replied, 'I am telling you, but you do not understand. This Self is utter silence' - (B.S.Bh.III.ii.17) - Shankara ........................................................ This teaching method 'Adhyaropa apavada' is not properly followed by many modern teachers who teach Vedanta today. That is why people get stuck in all kinds of concepts..I recently came across books by Swami Satchidanandendra Saraswathi, who was a Sanskrit scholar and vedantic monk. He dedicated his whole life in bringing out the kind of teaching method that was actually adopted by Shankara. He lived up to the age 94 and has written over 200 books. In fact, he rediscovered this teaching method again. Here is how he describes in short, in one of his books: (a) In order to disclose the nature of the self as Brahman in itself Srutis like the following negate all specific features superimposed on it by the unenlightened common mind :- "It is this Akshara (the Imperishable), 0 Gargi, so the knowers of Brahman say. It is neither gross nor subtle, neither short nor long, not red, not viscid, not shadowy, not dark, not the air, not the ether, not adhesive, tasteless, odourless, without the sense of sight, without the sense of hearing, without the vital principle, mouthless, without measure, neither interior nor exterior,. It eats nothing, nobody eats it." - Br.3-8-8. (b) Lest, by this strict denial of all properties it may be taken to be absolute nothing (s'unya), it is taught by means of illusory attributes seemingly pertaining to it owing to Upadhis (apparently conditioning factors). (c) At the close of the teaching the rescission of even the imputed attributes used as a device for purposes of teaching, lest it should be regarded as actually belonging to it. (modern teachers stop with (a) and (b) ) ...................... And Buddhism has a different teaching model, uses different kinds of concepts but ultimately the goal is the same. All theories in traditions are only teachings devices, they are not the truth themselves. For example, many people don't know that Vedanta itself is an intentional superimposition to remove superimposition on Self.

@Real Eyes Well to answer your question in all honesty I did not have any expectations going into the experience. However I prepared myself as much as I could before the trip and I was ready to experience heaven and bliss or hell and obliteration and I experienced both. It was far beyond anything I could have ever imagined and it was a life changing experience. I read a lot of trip reports and listened to the lectures of Martin Ball and Kilindi Iyi before the trip and that definitely also helped me to ground myself and prepare for the experience. I have thought about it deeply every day since it occurred.

Talking about living true to your values, today was a good day. I finally know my job decently enough to guide customer, and even if it's just basic guidance (working in a hypermarket) the egoless state and bliss that appears just after is amazing. Know imagine this feeling, and multiply it by 100, this is how it probably feels to live according to your deepest values.