Meditation types, techniques and experinces

[YmirGF]

Originally Posted by Satsangi

Friend YmirGF,

Thank u for such a detailed response; it still misses one answer- can u elaborate what u see in the periphery of your "awareness?"

I'm not sure that I can render it into words as there are no symbols available to define what I perceive. By way of an anology... Within the mind of the individual, upon self-realization, will see a light similar to, but brighter than a new born star. (Yes, I know it sounds cheesy, but that is just the way it is.) Once One is immersed in the light of that star, one comes to its centre, which is seemingly empty and void. This is the no-form region, from which, form arises as a natural byproduct.

After existing within the silence of this void, after the senses have adjusted to the region One begins to detect "something". In some ways, it is like you are in a room that is completely dark and so quiet you can hear a pin drop. Since you experience only the bliss of the nothingness your inner senses are become sharpened, like the hearing of a blind person is heightened ... and slowly you being to sense something more and that the void isn't quite as void as it once seemed to be initially. This is part of what I have come to call, "Buddha's little joke". The humor is that the void does indeed seem totally and completely void for the longest time... then the fun begins. I dunno how else to put it really, it's like it takes a fairly long time, in this timeless area for the inner senses to click on, but when they do, something magical begins anew.

Originally Posted by Satsangi

The answer u have given seems on surface to differ from "Dharmic model" to some extent, especially the part that "causal body once created cannot be destroyed." If seeing from an "enlightened view", there is no causal body or any body to begin with; the perception is an illusion. But, from a "common person's view", the causal body can be destroyed.

It's hard for me to make sense out of this.

Originally Posted by Satsangi

Also, from the words of the Sages; there are no questions or no doubts remaining on realizing the Truth. But u seem open enough to admit that u may be wrong.

It is that clarity that I trust I will never lose. I would suggest that those who have no doubt have simply been seduced by their delusions. The reason I feel I can get away with that comment is because for many years I had NO DOUBTS whatsoever. For the most part, I am fairly confident and certain that my perceptions are correct, but I refuse to make the intellectual blunder of proclaiming that my ideas are correct. It is a self-imposed line I refuse to cross. I figure that there are enough human animals who have trumpeted the old tune of "no doubt", and feel allowing for doubts it somewhat refreshing in contrast.

Originally Posted by Satsangi

I am still in my initial steps; hence, I tend to go by the Scriptures by default.

I understand. You need your scriptures as much as you believe you do, but if you trusted your own abilities as much as you trust your scriptures, with their muddied, second hand knowledge, you will quickly find you experience has outgrown them. (They have their value; just don't get too hung up on the specifics.)

Originally Posted by Satsangi

In the "Whole" there is creation and destruction. Your explanation deals with creation and ongoing creation where nothing is lost. What about "destruction" or rather an apparent change in the form of the Whole? May be creation and destruction are just "illusions" when "enlightened."?

Would you say that the child you once were was destroyed when you became a young man? Does that child still exist in your memories? It is in this way that nothing is ever completely destroyed. The only thing I will tell you with some certainty is that you are energy and energy is action. You will forever change, even if you resist that change. It is what you are. There is simply no "finished" changeless state beyond which nothing exists.

Originally Posted by Satsangi

Another difference is that in Dharmic religions the "entity" is Achyut meaning unchangeable; hence yes u differ there too when u say that the "energy body" and multiple incarnations came from the "entity."

I liken the entity to a spinning top. It is changing at a rate that we cannot normally detect and so it appears static. It is anything but static and changeless, though neophyte observers may well report it as such.

In regards to "god". In the early days of my inner explorations, I would hit a new (to me) state of consciousness and think, "Aha, this is god!" When I first saw the soul or entity or Atman, my first thought was "Aha, this is god!" I could never imagine any state greater than what I was currently experiencing. When I entered the Paramatma state I thought, "Aha, this is god!" and for a spell, I could not conceive of any state of consciousness greater. Then there was the void. That soundless non-being state. Of course, I thought once, again, "Aha. This is god!" I could not conceive of any state greater or more complete. Then, of course, when I hovered in front of Vishnu, looking into those majestic, immense eyes, I thought, "Aha! This really IS god!" But then I saw something reflected in His indescribable eyes... that made me think... and that thought had quite an impact.

So after the rinse and repeat of countless such instances, I no longer think, "Aha... This is God!" and am pretty reluctant to play that game anymore.

[Satsangi]

Friend YmirGF,

Thank u again for an enlightening reply. I cannot resist but suggest this to u. How about you focus more on the "Buddha's Joke"- when the "fun" begins; may be u will find something. You probably will find a very luminous area and just wait to see what is in the middle of that area. Before u do this drop all ur notions though!! Another request- if u see something let me know ASAP!!

Regards,

[Yeshe]

Originally Posted by Satsangi

Saiva,

Thank u for all the responses; I still need clarification on existential versus mental. I kind of understand that the mind differentiates between the "outer and inner world". To you it may have been easy to "shut off the thoughts"; its hard for most people including myself. Any further tips?

Regards,

It isnt hard, you allow it to be because the you have inserted dualism. You THINK that its easy to turn off physical mouth, but not mental mouth. There is a dualism in itself, easy hard. Now, there will be a struggle, but that doesnt mean hard. You have just been thinking for so long its odd to try and stop them.

Right now its natural for you to think. When you interrupt that comfortable nature, it creates the illusion of difficulty. Only the ego allows such things to happen. When No-Thought becomes natural, you will feel that its hard to think.

[Satsangi]

I want to thank all my friends here who have answered graciously especially YmirGF, ToR, ben d, zenzero, Shaiva, wannabeyogi, wayfarer, Onkarah and all others. This again are the questions for all meditators here.....

(1) What is he highest knowledge (spiritual), or experience in your opinion....or u think it is matter to find out and not "think".
(2) What do u aim or hope to gain by whatever u are doing as Sadhana
(3) Can duality or qualified non duality (Vishishtadvaita) followers ever be "enlightened" or it HAS to be non dual to qualify as an "enlightenment."

The questions are basic, but with great implications.

Regards,

[Wannabe Yogi]

Originally Posted by Satsangi

(1) What is he highest knowledge (spiritual), or experience in your opinion....or u think it is matter to find out and not "think".

How would I have any Idea what the highest experience is. Spiritual experience is not the be all and end all. In fact sometimes it leads us down the wrong path.

Originally Posted by Satsangi

(2) What do u aim or hope to gain by whatever u are doing as Sadhana

To love others with a pure love and see God in all beings. I don't want to be attached. This way I can be free to love others.

Sankara wrote about the seer and seen. At some point it is God (Brahman)looking at the ego and not the ego looking at God.

Originally Posted by Satsangi

(3) Can duality or qualified non duality (Vishishtadvaita) followers ever be "enlightened" or it HAS to be non dual to qualify as an "enlightenment."

Yes the concept of duality and non-duality are of the mind. A dualist can be lost in love of Krishna and a non-dualist can be lost in Brahman. Both paths are good who cares what you call it. Some folks want to become the suger and some people want to taste the suger.

There are many people in both camps walking the streets of the world who claim to be enlightened but I think it is not as that common as many would like to think.

[Onkarah]

Hi Satsangi
Wannabe’s post was a perfect answer for me. Nonetheless here are some answers to the pile.

(1)What is he highest knowledge (spiritual), or experience in your opinion....or you think it is matter to find out and not “think".

It is matter of mastering the mind and seeing beyond the limitations of body, mind and intellect, all that we take ourselves to be without question. No-thinking states, such as Samadhi and meditation are very useful, but one still needs to know by what that no thinking state is recognised i.e. by consciousness. In other words it is being conscious of consciousness itself to the point where one is one with that consciousness and not that which thinks or acts inside the consciousness with the presumed individuality which is so commonly attributed. Long sentence right well when this point is understood then there is no right or wrong, as all is seen as being a part of IT and one is no longer "asleep whilst awake".

Additionally I must add there is no point chasing a samadhi experience or a meditational bliss if we continue to miss our Self.

(2) What do you aim or hope to gain by whatever you are doing as Sadhana

No real aim anymore. I used to aim to understand Advaita. My Guru along with the scriptures removed the last inclining of desire to achieve something. What I appear to be doing now is growing in that understanding and broadening an understanding of that which I AM, be it reading new philosophy or simply cooking a cake, whatever happens is just THAT happening. I could say my aim is to be reminded and never forget that, which would be wrong if one thinks I imply a doing in that aim.

(3) Can duality or qualified non duality (Vishishtadvaita) followers ever be "enlightened" or it HAS to be non dual to qualify as an "enlightenment."

I think you are probably not asking just for the Vishishtadvaita perspective on enlightenment exactly, as this can be found on line e.g. Vishishtadvaita - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

One would need to look in other Vishishtadvaita sources should one feel wikipedia is incomplete. I would be interested to help with this if you are indeed specifically what you are needing. Please say or start a new thread.

Philosophically from a non-dual perspective everyone is enlightened and it is ignorance (avidya) which stops this from being known. Personally I would say that some non Santana Dharma faiths can lead to enlightenment, it does not depend on
faith or relationship with God as dualistic or non-dualistic specifically, but rather on knowing consciousness itself. You probably know the non-dual definition already, so please let me explain why I choose to answer from this perspective, it isn’t that I am a non-dualist.

Enlightenment is not dependent on duality or non-duality, the state of the enlightened person is still worldly, bound in the wakeful and dream states of consciousness and still subject to thought, hunger or other human experience even after enlightenment. Again, look at the Gurus who eat, pray, sleep and even appear to get angry.

We may never know an enlightened person for sure, for example we may never know that a self-realised women yet be her very child. Why? Because enlightenment happens to humans who are, according to the tenets of Vedanta, already divine. More importantly it is the *way* which removes this confusion, whether it is in front of a murthi or in meditation, and it is from these paths that the divine in the mundane reveals itself. It is not an experience to be sought or maintained. It cannot be sold or bought online. It is taught to us from those who already found the goal and look back to lead others from the darkness of confusion, anger, fear etc. Enlightenment comes from that which we already have, through many specific dedicated paths (or the grace of God, as an after realisation when IT is reached).

It is because the path removes the confusion that I answer with the Advaitin definition of enlightenment. Once Advaita was understood well and from the help of my Guru I came to a satisfactory conclusion. This conclusion was missing whilst I was hunting for the right *way* or path to that end. Think of someone who may not be too sure or who may still be searching, they would require a path first in order to come to any conclusion at all, be it Advaita, Vishishtadvaita or Buddhism, etc. The philosophy of non-dualism, for the mind I have, reduced doubt and so confidence arises in my reply on enlightenment, one reason is that it stops the doubting of which path I should be on and rather lets me focus on life itself. Having established that all valid paths lead to the truth the path is no longer a question. That is why non-dualists answer like this, they have surrendered their greatest sacrifice, their very ego to choose a path, in order to accept and receive everything in return. It is the highest form of devotion and is the same devotion as in Bhakti. I leave the debate of “which path is best” for those who still need a *way*. It is this complete acceptance and submersion which helps clear the mind of the doubts which hinder the goal divine of Vedanta: liberation whilst living.

[Anti-religion]

Originally Posted by Satsangi

(3) Can duality or qualified non duality (Vishishtadvaita) followers ever be "enlightened" or it HAS to be non dual to qualify as an "enlightenment."

The questions are basic, but with great implications.

Regards,

Dvaita(Vaishnava) Schools have their own set of meditating procedures,to attain their goal of Samadhi(which may be different from advaita/Patanjali Yoga System).

Sri Raghavendra Tirta of Madhva Dualist school followed Kundalini yoga practice to attain Jeeva Samadhi.

[Satsangi]

Thanks again for great replies.

The "ego" has to be destroyed in Advaita as well as Dvaita and Vishishtadvaita for liberation while alive. The Vishishtadvaita says that You are Atma (which does not have any attributes) similar to Brahm or Akshara and being in that way, recognize that Paramatma resides in your Atma. The Dvaita probably has similar interpretation. What I mean to say is that both consider form of God as the Ultimate and Nirgun; hence thoughts of God are Nirgun and not like the thought of anyone else; but the thoughts of God have to flow free and uninterrupted.

I do not think that the Yoga practices of the Dvaita and Vishishtadvaita are different from classic Ashtanga Yoga. In fact, the Maharshi Patanjali's Sutras recommend meditation on the form of God as better than the rest.

Is'nt the "Self" experienced in the Samadhi only ? What are other ways?

Enlightened person cannot be bound by the three states (sleep, awake, dream), desires etc. The Gurus eat to preserve the body (I eat for the taste of it and fill up to the hilt), the Gurus get angry when Dharma is broken or for the sake of others (I get angry when my ego is assaulted) and the enlightened Gurus are "Conscious" while their body is in the three states (awake, dream and sleep) whereas once I sleep, it takes a great effort to wake up!!

What I am saying is God realization is God realization-- Advaita, Dvaita, Vishishtadvaita, or even Hinduism/Buddhism/Jainism/Sikhism/Islam /Christianity etc.. etc.. cannot lead to realization of "different Gods". Hence, I again say that God is like a Sphatika Linga- it takes on the color of anything u do Abhishek with. Similarly, U "realize the God" in that form depending on which of the above "prism" u adopt to look at Him. Now, here are the questions -

(1) What do u do to "realize God" without any "prisms"?

(2) How is God in the "REAL FORM" or "primordial form" without any of the above "prisms"?

I do have my own opinion on the above questions, but will wait to learn from my friends here first.

Regards,

[TurkeyOnRye]

Originally Posted by YmirGF

.......
...
.
So after the rinse and repeat of countless such instances, I no longer think, "Aha... This is God!" and am pretty reluctant to play that game anymore.

I cannot help but compare this experience to a sperm and egg at the moment of conception and its subsequent journey from that moment on.

God, life is grand!

[ben d]

Originally Posted by Satsangi

Now, here are the questions -

(1) What do u do to "realize God" without any "prisms"?

It is not a matter of not using prisms, concepts, ideas, etc., but these serve merely as an expedient, a means to an end, and is like the metaphorical raft in the story below, it serves no further purpose when enlightenment is.

While the Tathagata, in his teaching, constantly makes use of conceptions and ideas about them, disciples should keep in mind the unreality of all such conceptions and ideas. They should recall that the Tathagata, in making use of them in explaining the Dharma always uses them in the semblance of a raft that is of use only to cross a river. As the raft is of no further use after the river is crossed, it should be discarded. So these arbitrary conceptions of things and about things should be wholly given up as one attains enlightenment. - Buddha ...

(2) How is God in the "REAL FORM" or "primordial form" without any of the above "prisms"?

The REALITY behind the concept of God in the "REAL FORM" will always be on the other side of any conceptual description, it is beyond any and all
expression.