Digest Number 146

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 5/3/99 12:13:35 AM Pacific Daylight Time, Jan wrote to the

list:

 

<< Regarding the second, as in nature everything is balanced, one will

experience an alternation of periods of ecstasy and depression (when ecstasy

and visions are absent). Depression will feed the desire for ecstasy so the

circle is closed. The longer this situation continues, the less likely one's

escape from it. It is even possible that one interprets the perceived

phenomena / knowledge as coming directly from God, with the predictable

result of a turbo boost for the personality-experience, creating desire for

more. >>

 

Dear Jan and list,

 

As one who has been "stuck in bliss" for over 2 years, but without (so far!)

experiencing any cycles of depression, I naturally wonder if the downside is

inevitable. To the question "so one should not try to perpetuate blissful or

ecstatic states?" Sri Ramana Maharshi pretty much concurs with Jan when he

answers:

 

"The final obstacle in meditation is ecstasy; you feel great bliss and

happiness and want to stay in that ecstasy. Do not yield to it but pass on

to the next stage which is great calm. The calm is higher than ecstasy and

it merges into samadhi. Successful samadhi causes a waking sleep state to

supervene. In that state you know that you are always consciousness, for

consciousness is your nature. Actually, one is always in samadhi but one

does not know it. To know it all one has to do is to remove the obstacles."

 

But because I don't meditate, am not "religious" and the states come to me

spontaneously I wonder what, then, should I do. I wonder if there is a point

in trying to "escape from it" or to attempt to stay in "that quiet place,"

or simply trust in the "process" and let it take me where it will.

 

Thanks for any responses,

 

Love, Hillary

[Guest guest]

On Mon, 3 May 1999 Druout wrote:

>

> "The final obstacle in meditation is ecstasy; you feel great bliss and

> happiness and want to stay in that ecstasy. Do not yield to it but pass on

> to the next stage which is great calm. The calm is higher than ecstasy and

> it merges into samadhi. Successful samadhi causes a waking sleep state to

> supervene. In that state you know that you are always consciousness, for

> consciousness is your nature. Actually, one is always in samadhi but one

> does not know it. To know it all one has to do is to remove the obstacles."

>

 

yikes if this isnt me i dont know what is .

 

i noticed how much i follow bliss yesterday actually. zen master yi was

leading a group mediation and about 10 minutes in, *zing* bliss rush,

frozen body...usual stuff. problem is... its hard not staying there. very

hard not staying there. (*me* staying there...big problem)

 

The two sides of it tho came together a few times. like the phrase 'your

tears are in my eyes'. it comes together sometimes. bliss and 'antibliss'

because its just like 2 sides for the same thing. i think just like

dualistic thought or something gets in the way. (ok deb, use the word

'like' a few more time )

 

Its easier to make the merge from the anti-bliss side, cause its not so

seductive.

 

so those 'depressions' help break the cycle i think. cause when things do

go through, its just the stillpoint or something. primary point.

 

i grew up in the 80's, does it show ?

 

--janpa the ex valley girl wannabe.

[Guest guest]

> Druout

[...]

> Dear Jan and list,

>

> As one who has been "stuck in bliss" for over 2 years, but

> without (so far!)

> experiencing any cycles of depression, I naturally wonder if the

> downside is

> inevitable. To the question "so one should not try to perpetuate

> blissful or

> ecstatic states?" Sri Ramana Maharshi pretty much concurs with

> Jan when he

> answers:

>

> "The final obstacle in meditation is ecstasy; you feel great bliss and

> happiness and want to stay in that ecstasy. Do not yield to it

> but pass on

> to the next stage which is great calm. The calm is higher than

> ecstasy and

> it merges into samadhi. Successful samadhi causes a waking sleep

> state to

> supervene. In that state you know that you are always consciousness, for

> consciousness is your nature. Actually, one is always in samadhi but one

> does not know it. To know it all one has to do is to remove the

> obstacles."

>

> But because I don't meditate, am not "religious" and the states

> come to me

> spontaneously I wonder what, then, should I do. I wonder if

> there is a point

> in trying to "escape from it" or to attempt to stay in "that

> quiet place,"

> or simply trust in the "process" and let it take me where it will.

>

> Thanks for any responses,

>

> Love, Hillary

 

Dear Hillary,

 

If nirvana / moksha would be dependent on, or a result of, meditation, it

would be worthless What Ramana means is that the "so much desired state

of perennial bliss" is ever present; it can not be achieved in any way. From

the perspective of 'ego', many layers have to be removed and ecstatic bliss

is one of them. Now you've recognized it, it will be much easier to

continue 'business as usual', without being distracted by the ecstasies.

Another possibility is to do the things that are thought to be unpleasant

otherwise. In a state of ecstasy it shouldn't matter what one is doing. I

noticed that the 'pull' of bliss can get so much that some are thinking of

wanting to quit from the job and submit to long-lasting meditation.

 

The 'rationale' of 'arriving' at the perennial bliss is always Kundalini;

all that is required is recognizing the obstacles, preferably before they

manifest. Only these events require attentiveness and eventually "seclusion,

work and meditation". The ecstasies can be used in creative activity or just

a good walk. This will use energy and divert attention. As a coin has two

sides, the eventual depressions will lessen too. If one succumbs to

ecstasies, work and relations will suffer and one will find out the hard way

that ecstasy leads to nothing (the depressions will become extreme too).

 

Finally, if one has succeeded in removing all obstacles, one just can enjoy

the 'ride'. If one is very introspective it is possible there are no blocks

and the entire 'ride' is a joy. Ramana is a good example of this and

Ramakrishna, who was introduced to nonduality by the monk Totapuri, of the

other. There is a large difference between 'professional' meditators like

Ramana and someone who doesn't meditate or practices only a little. The

'professional' will get at nirvikalpa samadhi before 'attainment' of moksha

whereas the 'non-meditator' will 'attain' moksha first and then get at

nirvikalpa samadhi but it will soon transform into sahaja samadhi, which

isn't a samadhi in the proper sense. IMO the 'way of the non-meditator' is

preferable as it offers 'reality-check' and one doesn't get trapped in

samadhis.

 

Jan