Yogic evolution - defence to defencelessness

A profound story:

Two yogis meet.

Yogi #1 is immensely proud of his powers and says, "I'll show you my siddhis. Strike me with this sword as hard as you can!"

The other does and the sword shatters against his adamantine frame.

Yogi #1 then says, "See, nothing can hurt me! What about you?"

Yogi #2 says, "Do the same to me."

The first yogi whips out another sword and strikes with immense strength, but the sword simply swishes through the other yogi without any resistance.

Try replacing:

• swords with words, 
• adamantine body with adamantine ego and self-image;
• both yogis with yourself

to understand the evolution:

from aggressive defence

to

total defencelessness or unreactiveness.

Idries Shah writes somewhere that a seeker first becomes a dervish and then a Sufi. A dervish may have greater powers than a Sufi who has surrendered totally.

NOTES

The two yogis may be Gorakhnath and Sadasivendra Sarasvati, aka Sadashiv Brahmendra, though I have no idea from where I got this story.

Inertia, impetus, and understanding

A different take on the three gunas - tamas, rajas, sattva.

Think of tamas as inertia - that which impedes movement and sustains rest. A mind or attention with tamas dominant is also at rest, a stuporous and involuntary rest, upon some object.

Think of rajas as impetus - that which makes something move and sustains movement. Attention of a rajas-dominant mind is also in motion, uncontrollable and without volition, pulled all over the place by different objects.

Think of sattva as understanding, and subtle, increased willpower. Understanding is independent of, othogonal to, motion or the lack of it. Attention with sattva dominant can rest on an object with little effort and for as long as one wills. It can also move from object to object with little effort as one wills.

A saattvic mind controls its tamasic and rajasic tendencies as needed to change attention naturally, i.e. resting on an object or moving to another as desired.

Mind-field as ocean and universe

[Prerequisite: read and have some understanding of PYS 1.2 citta vṛtti nirodhaḥ]

The term citta in the PYS is often translated as consciousness. In Samkhya-Yoga philosophy, consciousness or consciousness-force is citi-śakti [1]. A better and more precise translation of citta is the English word or phrase - mind-field [1]. Citta is usually understood as limited to a specific individual, possibly localised to the volume of space that is their body. What if this localisation is natural but unnecessarily limiting?

Imagine an ocean. Imagine a whirlpool near an island in the ocean. The whirlpool comes alive as the waters in the area form a spiral and dies with tides, currents, etc. going down - merging into and becoming indistinguishable from the waters around it. If you further imagine it to be a mindful entity, it might think of itself as localised to the area near the island. If its mind spans its coming alive and dying - or waking up and falling asleep - would it still think itself restricted to that area? Perhaps the mind-field would be that of all the waters around the island and the whirlpool would be one of the funkier parts that bubble up and down in a weird way!

Imagine all the connected water on Earth's surface - the oceans - as a single entity. There may be thousands or even millions of whirlpools, big and small, coming alive and dying every day, or waking up and sleeping daily. Imagine the mind-field of that entity like the motion of all the oceans.

Now imagine the enormity of shutting down or pacifying all the vṛttis, the whirlpools, of the oceans.

Samkhya-Yoga psychology or philosophy goes even further and considers the entire universe to have - or be - a single mind-field. Now consider pacifying or shutting down an entire universe of vṛttis!

(This is what each yogi is striving to do, most unknowingly, and a rare few, knowingly. Since this pacification is probably unnatural, there is another, subtler, interpretation of the word nirodhaḥ. Instead of shutting down, the mind-field vṛttis devolve into their subtler causes, successively, until the completely balanced and unmanifest cause is reached for individual areas of the overall mind-field.)

Science starts from individual bodies, conglomerates of matter, developing consciousness and frantically striving to connect and communicate externally. Vedanta philosophy starts from consciousness inherent in the Absolute - the source of all manifestation - and posits an interface - between that Absolute and the manifested physical bodies - called the mind-field, and the various physical bodies. This mind-field may be restricted to an individual body, or more elegantly, may span the entire manifestation at subtler levels and restrict itself to a single body at grosser levels.

A limited analogy might help. Consider icy water flowing on the ceiling of a cave in a cold climate. As water freezes, stalactites form. Water keeps flowing down stalactites, lengthening them. The ice at the tip of a stalactite is separate from the ice at the tip of the others. But ice at the root of one stalactite can be understood as part of a single ice sheet, and is the same at the roots of all the stalactites. And the subtler cause, the water inflow, from which the ice manifested, is even more obviously the same.

NOTES

[1] Sw. Veda Bharati. 1986. Patanjali Yoga Sutras of Patanjali with the Exposition of Vyasa..., Glossary. pp. 452. Himalayan Institute, India.

2.5 minutes of magic

Some 130-odd years ago, Swami Vivekananda, in his Raja Yoga lectures [1] quoted the Kurma Purana's definition, in time, of dhāraṇa-dhyāna-samādhi as attention resting solely on one object for 12 seconds, 12x12 seconds, and 12x12x12 seconds respectively.

What does this mean practically?

Say you like coffee. Place a cup of your favourite coffee before you. Start a stopwatch - your phone's clock app is a good option.

If your attention while drinking a good cup of coffee doesn't drift anywhere else for 12 seconds, that is dhāraṇa on coffee drinking. If it stays for 12*12 seconds = 12*(10+2) = 120/60+24 = 2 minutes 24 seconds, that is dhyāna on coffee drinking. 

Please note that becoming aware of your observation is also a drifting away! A meta activity is still a distraction.

Reset your stopwatch if any distraction occurs.

And samādhi? 12*12*12 seconds = (120+24)*(10+2) seconds = 2 minutes*(10+2) + 24 seconds*(10+2) = 24 minutes+240 seconds+48 seconds = 24+4 minutes + 48 seconds = 28 minutes, 48 seconds. (Make sure you brew many cups of coffee!)

All three states of attention must be natural and unforced. Any effort made takes one's mind back to the preceding state of active attention-placement, pratyāhāra, and the stopwatch resets to zero!

If not for distracting ads or incoming messages every few minutes, attention on the TV or, these days, on the mobile phone would be an easy way to explain the meditative state!

In Heartfulness practice, five minutes of meditation practice every day is enough for a start. One has twice the 2.5 minutes needed to reach an unforced and natural meditative state! Please note that transmission makes the practice even more effortless by sustaining the attention on the heart.

(A sincere and serious effort for just one week will give palpable benefits in resting the attention on a single object. They will be even more palpable coupled with Heartfulness  cleaning to remove emotional weight and unnecessary distractions. Try meditation alone for a week. Then add daily cleaning to the daily practice. Finally add the daily introspection and prayer before sleeping, for even greater benefits.)

And the magic? It comes from experience alone.

(Bonus points: before the day's meditation, link mentally to the condition after the previous day's meditation. After meditation, spread today's condition in the space around you, and share it with everything in that space.)

NOTES

[1] Sw. Vivekananda, 2016 ed., Raja Yoga, Advaita Ashrama, Mayavati

A little paean to meditation

Beautiful expression from a lifelong meditator:

Trying and struggling to achieve a level of meditation always brings the opposite results. One cannot fall asleep beating a drum and shouting to one-self repeatedly, "I am determined to sleep."

The states of consciousness can be changed only very gently. 

Let meditation seep through you like water into a rock, like the sound of a falling rose petal, like a baby's finger growing invisibly, like the sun's ray sipping a drop of water.

There are no dramatic manifestations, just a slow and graduating transformation.

- Pt. Usharbudh Arya (Sw. Veda Bharati), Superconscious Meditation, Himalayan Institute Press

Thoughts and progress in meditation

Here's one perspective of progress based on thoughts in meditation [1]. This seem independent of the type of meditative practice:

1. Random thoughts, followed by their chains or sequences of thoughts, as one's attention drifts. Daydreams and fantasies.
   
2. Random thoughts arising quickly, but no chains. One is able to detach or relax one's attention from each new starting thought.
   
3. Specific thoughts around current practical problems, in the conscious or subconscious mind.
4. Answers, solutions, guidelines. Inspired or intuitive ideas.
   
5. No thought arises uninvited. Inspiration from one's superconscious may be requested.
   

Stages 4 and 5 occur after a fair amount of introspection, releasing self-created layers and complexities, and changing one's habitual behaviour.

NOTES

[1] Arya, U., (Sw. Veda Bharati). 1989. Superconscious meditation (Problem Thoughts). pp.90-102. Himalayan International Institute of Yoga Science and Philosophy.

Two simple questions to train your mind

There are effectively only two questions one has to ask to train one's mind:

1. What am I doing now?
2. What should I be doing now?

 If both answers match, one's mind is trained at the time.

The answer to the second question obviously requires some planning - short, medium, or long-term. But the two questions are the easiest way to check if one's mind is attending to what one wants, i.e., is "am" == "should"?

A lifelong project or goal, like mukti or self-realisation, is difficult to pin down to such a simple technique. But "am" and "should" matching naturally is a sign of progress.

Per PYS [1], an untrained mind fluctuates between these states of mental attention:

1. kṣiptam - disturbed, agitated, jumpy; habitually, involuntarily reactive; rajas-dominant mind
   
2. mūḍham - stupefied or somnolent; unreactive; tamas-dominant mind
   
3. vi-kṣiptam - distracted, but with illuminative flashes; mind sattva-dominant at times, but generally overlain by rajas

Further training leads to ekāgram - willed attention on a single object, as long as desired, with a sattva-dominant mind

In the highest mental state, niruddham, sattva is totally dominant, and one's attention moves effortlessly, freed of all potential and actual distractions.

NOTES

[1] Slightly evolved descriptions than in 5 mental states.

Cleaning and free will

Put simply, "my" past events are unchangeable - dead. But their effects or residues in the mind-field cause "my" present events.

My past actions predict my present actions in the same or similar situations.

Cleaning in Heartfulness removes the mind-field residues at subtler levels, reducing the intensity of events. Total cleaning may even prevent events altogether.

Cleaning removes emotional residues - samskaras. I can act now without being bogged down by my past emotional reactions. But only I can let go of my tendency to act as I did in the past. This can be done only by acting differently. Again and again, repeatedly, until a new mental habit is in place for those situations.

Free will lies entirely in my present actions - thoughts, speech, and physical actions. But the range or spectrum of possible actions in situations is dramatically increased by cleaning.

Spirituality and evolution

A simple proposition:

Every human being with a normal mind has the capability for two opposing attentions - outward and inward - with respect to one's physical sense organs. Most humans don't use the capacity to look inward and it atrophies. Spirituality is simply dusting off and reusing that capability.

When a certain percentage of humans goes inward regularly to subtler and subtler levels, human evolution will become spiritual as well as intellectual.

The rest of this post will be entirely theoretical for the atrophied :-)

Going deeper inward requires less physical energy and more mental relaxation, aka surrender.

One human is unlikely to fully grasp the extent of human knowledge. Somewhat similarly, one will never reach the ultimate inward levels of transcendental experience. Partly because, at that level, there will _be_ no separate "one" to have that experience.

Inward attention - longer, deeper, and broader - transforms one's perspective of oneself, from a separate entity to a more and more connected one at subtler levels. Going even further inward leads to a universally connected perspective. There is an even subtler perspective, of a transcendent whole with embedded physical bodies.

Stages in Vedanta - beyond time, space, and causation

In Living with the Himalayan Masters, Swami Rama talks about finding contradictions in the Upanishads and how he got them clarified.

First, the problem:

“The Upanishads appear to be full of contradictions. In one place they say that Brahman [the Supreme Reality, God as pure transcendence] is one without a second. Somewhere else they say that everything is Brahman. In a third place they say this world is false and Brahman alone is truth. And in a fourth place it is said that there is only one absolute Reality beneath all these diversities. How can one make sense out of these conflicting statements?”

Next, the resolution of the contradictions. First, the answers of Swami Vishnu, a sadhu at Uttarkashi. Next a paraphrase/explanation of those answers.

Answering my questions systematically, Swami Vishnu said that there are no contradictions in the teachings of the Upanishads. These teachings are received directly by the great sages in a deep state of contemplation and meditation.

He explained, “When the student starts practicing, he realizes that this apparent world is changeable, while truth never changes. Then he knows that the world of forms and names, which is full of changes, is false, and that behind it there exists an absolute Reality that is unchanging. In the second step, when he has known the truth, he understands that there is only one truth and that truth is omnipresent, so there is really nothing like falsehood. In that stage he knows that reality that is one and the same in both the finite and infinite worlds. But there is another, higher, state in which the aspirant realizes that there is only one absolute Reality without second, and that that which is apparently false is in reality a manifestation of the absolute One."

>>>>

[My paraphrase]:

When one starts practising, one realises that the world that is apparent to one keeps changing over time, yet there are other, more abstract, things that take longer to change. Extending this idea leads one to think that there must be a final something, an absolute truth, that never changes.

Then one considers the ever-changing world of names and forms as false, and behind it, an unchanging absolute reality. Or, the foreground is understood as changing due to the unchanging background.  [1. Changelessness in time => beyond time]

[A slightly different interpretation: that which remains unchanging - in time - after all changing layers or veils are removed, or that from which no more removal of changing veils or layers is possible , is Reality or Absolute Truth.]

In the second step, after experiencing this truth, one further realises that if there is an absolute truth, it must be the same at different places, and in fact, everywhere. Otherwise, there will be different absolute truths in different places. So if there is only one absolute truth, that absolute truth must be the same everywhere, and thus it is omnipresent. So there is really nothing like falsehood only in one or a few places and absolute truth behind it only there. [2. Beyond space]

At that stage one realises that absolute reality is one and the same in both the finite and infinite worlds, or in both the apparent and the real worlds, or in both the changing and the unchanging ones.

But there is still another, higher, state.

The aspirant realises that there is only one absolute reality without a second, and that that which is apparently false is actually a manifestation of that one absolute reality. [3. Not causation or creation of something completely new.]

[Thus, out of the limitless manifest many delimiteds which remain inextricably imbued by their source, which is both their efficient and material cause.]

<<<<

“These apparent contradictions confuse only that student who has not studied the Upanishads from a competent teacher. A competent teacher makes the student aware of the experiences one has on various levels. These are the levels of consciousness, and there is no contradiction in them.”

Swami Vishnu continued: “The teachings of the Upanishads are not understood by the ordinary mind or even by the intellectual mind. Intuitive knowledge alone leads to understanding them.”

I would quibble and say that intuitive knowledge means it is already present in, or accessible to, everyone. Having the experience brings it to their conscious awareness. But an open mind and surrendered heart, the humility described by Swami Rama, are needed to have and understand the experience.

The Psychologically-Quiet Mind

A quiet mind, or the mind-field of the self-realised, is not one without any thoughts forever. [1]

A psychologically-quiet mind blooms in, and due to, a spiritual path. Such a mind is without energy-sapping negativities or obsessions or useless spinning around its concocted images of itself and others. Yet it is dynamic [2], free, light, steady, and illuminative. Or pure, simple, and transparent [3]. If the body also attains a similar state, the Absolute can make the mind and body of such a self conscious of their own natural, effortless, living rhythms.

This psychological quietude can result through many ways. The external ways are generally divisive. Worse, their results, even if intense, are temporary. The internal ways let go of the outside totally or progressively. The results are self-validating, permanently transformative, and never-ending/infinite.

The mind is drawn to subtler and subtler levels and increased sensitivity. Detachment too, but only from that which separates, artificially and violently. The triggering elements of emotional turmoil are cleansed. Or like burnt seeds [4], they can no longer sprout.

NOTES

[1] Patanjali's Yoga Sutra 1.2: yogaḥ citta vṛtti nirodhaḥ results in 1.3: tadā dṛaṣṭuḥ svarūpe avasthānaṁ. Yet, Vyasa's commentary says not all vrttis cease in yoga. This may be taken to mean only those causing psychological turmoil cease.

[2] Stillness and quietude seem to go together. Yet, quietude, or better, calmness can accompany action, even mental action. Think poised action, without haste. Even better, efficient and effective action with interest, even affection.

[3] Babuji says without mala (impurities), vikṣepa (complexities), or āvaraṇa (veils or occluding layers).

[4] Like Vyasa, Babuji calls them dagdh beej.

The sneaky I and the practice of meditation

Normally, one's 'I' is thought of as one's physical body and whatever is inside. The 'I' may also define one's relationships with others. Liking something or someone also defines one's 'I', even more so dis-liking. Immediate, so-called instinctive, responses or thoughts also delineate one's personality, the I-me-my set of emotions, thoughts, sensations, actions, and memories in my conscious, subconscious, and unconscious.

One may also define one's 'I' by what one cannot or will not do, where doing includes thinking, speaking, and physically acting.

This is where sneakiness comes in.

In Living with the Himalayan Masters Swami Rama's Guru taught him graphically about perspective. [1] He suddenly hugged a tree and frantically begged to be rescued from it. It took a while for Swami Rama to calm down enough to realise who was grabbing what!

Now, think of meditation, an activity requiring little energy [2] and greater and greater relaxation over time. Its effects are palpable, but not instantaneous. In some ways, the effects are reductive, not additive, of the 'I'. Indeed after a particular stage, one has to deliberately relinquish the 'I'-sustaining thoughts in order to progress.

This may be one reason why people have trouble with meditation. They are so comfortable with their 'I' that they refuse to let go of it. Further, if meditation is defined as an effort-ful activity, they use the excuse of an inability for physical activity for not meditating and so losing their self-created 'I'.

NOTES

[1] The lesson was on mAya. mAya doesn't hold us, we hold it.

[2] In India, most things come with terms and conditions. If someone says, "It's easy to do that," there's generally some, or a lot, of context, background, and previous skill development left out. Meditation defined as effortless focus is not one of those things. When the focus is not effortless, one is not in meditation. In Heartfulness meditation, the situation is even easier, the source of the light in one's heart itself pulls one's attention inward and creates the effortless focus.

Daily sadhana forever

Why daily sadhana? And why lifelong?

Experiencing the Infinite is an infinity of experiences. Infinitely-different experiences.

 

Surrendering to meditation changes its daily experience. Sometimes slightly, sometimes completely.

 

All inner experiences are needed. The more, the better.

 

Savour the condition after meditation.

 

Too many seekers, even sincere ones, are in a frenetic rush for the next experience, inner or outer. Undigested experiences also cause problems like an unsettled, torpid, or over-driven mind.

Savour systematically [1]. First pay attention to the condition, with or without words. Then, expand or enliven the condition by sharing it. Then, digest or assimilate it, until it is steeping subconsciously. [2]

Alternately turning one's attention outward and inward and outward again, supports the transition from a deeply absorbing meditation to the usual workday state. Or, try to pay attention - without the least strain - to both the inside and outside simultaneously.

Ultimately, one's inner, non-physical, layers should be able to switch to their most subtle or most gross states easily and quickly. At a subtler stage, there should be general, ongoing awareness, of everything. Daaji uses the phrase"360-degree awareness".

 

Your inner layers are not infinite. Experiencing the Infinite within completely needs an infinite number of experiences. Put differently, the spiritual journey is infinite.

NOTES

[1] like coffee tasters - How professionals taste coffee

[2] Daaji's AEIOU exercise, expressed differently

Bottom-line of meditation

 Bottom-line of meditation:

- what am I thinking or emoting or sensing?

- is it my starting object?

- if not, let go of it, gently.

Meditation then blooms, flows, explodes, dissolves, and does everything else by itself.

Attention and meditation

When 'consciousness' is replaced by 'attention', one looks at spirituality differently.

Attention is more neutral.

Attention also explains meditation much more easily than concentration or even focus.

I pay attention, or something grabs my attention. That something could be positive, negative, or neutral.

In Yoga and Sahaj Marg philosophy, Nature provides experiences to unwind my samskaras - all of my personal, interpersonal, and collective samskaras.

In or out of meditation, my attention is drawn easily to things I like, even more easily to those I dislike, or just to familiar things, because of my samskaras and tendencies.

Letting the samskaras unwind by letting my thoughts, emotions, or physical sensations - arising from the "heat" or energy of my attention - escape without grabbing hold, or by my remembering to release if grabbed, allows my attention to go back to its previous object. Hopefully that object is indeed the object of my meditation.

It is easier to understand the training of attention through meditative practice than training of the mind or expansion of consciousness. Attention doesn't encompass so many different overlapping ideas. Still, the quality of attention could be subtle, tight, heavy, light, torpid, distracted, clear, etc., depending more on its object than its supposed giver.

Meditation helps you to learn to sustain your attention with minimal effort through a simple two-step practice.

1. Start with attention on an object and 2. let go of everything else that pops up and moves your attention willy-nilly. This letting go also fosters the ability to switch attention easily and without stickiness.

What can we do with this effortlessly sustainable and effortlessly switchable attention? Anything in the world, really. But, in gratitude to those who so generously and freely regenerated in us this ability, we share this training with others freely.

Once our attention is effortlessly sustainable, we can also train it on subtler and subtler objects or concepts. E.g., Daaji talks about the 5 C's of the Heart Region: the feelings of contentment, calmness, compassion, courage, and clarity - and their opposites - discontment, restlessness, anger, anxiety, and confusion.

One way to measure spiritual progress: observe or witness your feelings in various situations and note how much closer they are to all the 5 C's. 

In the Mind Region, attention may be on the immanent and its opposite, the transcendental. Then the ego flows effortlessly between its separative and zeroed-out modes.

In Heartfulness/Sahaj Marg, we start with attention on an infinite object, one of the subtlest possible, light without luminosity - light without 'light'ness. Much like a Zen koan, it is impossible to grasp intellectually (though one can get to an asymptotic understanding), making it easy to witness the quality of attention itself, and its changes in every meditation.

Evolution and Samkhya-Yoga philosophy

There is a hyper-realisitic philosophy called sāṁkhya (literally, from categories or from numberings), which posits an evolution (or descent, depending on your point of view) from two sets of infinities.

One infinity is a unitary set called prakṛti (Nature/Manifestor) or pradhāna (Base/Foundation) [1]. From this infinity manifests everything non-conscious, including mind [8], body, and material universe.

The second is a set of infinities called puruṣa's. Like the sun radiates light, each puruṣa radiates consciousness. Every living thing is a unidirectional combination of one puruṣa and a part of prakṛti.  Consciousness illuminates, but is untouchable by, the non-conscious. Vaguely similar to sun rays illuminating the earth. [3]

Now to evolution of the universe or multiverse. Think of a puruṣa as a consciousness source which purifies one part - a jīva (you or any living creature) - of an ocean of prakṛti. bhog, samādhi, and whatever else makes this purification happen for you as a jīva is by your surrender to this activity with minimal conditioning [4]. You, as an ocean current or whirlpool, are able to tune into the incessant inspiration from your puruṣa better with more and more purification. Your actions become more and more natural and less and less conditioned by subconscious and unconscious tendencies (vāsana's) and emotional residues (saṁskāra's).

Spiritual evolution of humans is purification of a significant part of the non-conscious ocean - a particular threshold of jīva's (humans, e.g.) attaining self-realisation, with its ripple effects.

Self-realisation, IMHO, is getting off the seesaw of habitual likes and dislikes (Babuji's Heart Region) and letting the seesaw of I and the Divine (Babuji's Mind Region) rest permanently on the side of the Divine. Kabir has a nice couplet for the latter:

     Love's lane is exceedingly narrow; it can't hold two.
     When 'I' was, the Divine [5] wasn't; now the Divine is, 'I' am not. [6]

I like sāṁkhya because it explains very elegantly a confusing Vedantic idea - I don't have to do anything as I am never bound - by splitting the I into conscious and non-conscious I's. The puruṣa 'I' is eternally free and unblemished. The prakṛti 'I', my bit of ocean, is what changes, maybe from iceberg to water to vapour to space! 

prakṛti as a whole goes through cycles of simplicity and complexity, purity and impurity, lightness and grossness, across cycles of manifestation and unmanifestation, which cause evolution at a multiverse level.

sāṁkhya is atheistic as there is no need for a whimsical God to plan or direct anything. It is close to science in the idea of natural evolution occurring due to individual actions. ṛta (root of rhythm?), or collective karma at the level of the infinite prakṛti, instead of random chance as in science [7], also drives evolution. But ṛta is not arbitrary, and applies even to higher beings.

yoga/rāja yoga philosophy adds the concept of a special puruṣa, an eternal Guru or Guide, not subject to grosser mental effects even when it does associate with (a part of) prakṛti and incarnates in a physical body.

yoga is traditionally considered the practical aspect of sāṁkhya theory. Its practices or techniques take one's mind gradually from a mostly outward focus to an inward focus and then to one that can go both ways equally easily.  Inward focus is of many levels or stages, and one key principle of sāṁkhya - an effect manifests from a cause - is used in the technique of resolving (Babuji's laya) a grosser effect thought layer into a subtler cause layer.

In Sahaj Marg, dissolution/resolution is done through cleaning. And in meditation, by letting the (almost?) infinitely subtle transmission of the Source of Divine Light guide your attention towards Itself, or your mental vibrations towards Its own level.

NOTES

[1] Babuji's bhūma [2] seems to be both pradhāna and puruṣa's, in a latent state

[2] From the chāndogya upaniṣad (7.24.1)

[3] Sun rays do enter into physical reactions as energy, even while illuminating. Consciousness rays, qualitatively different, cause understanding or wisdom in a layer of prakṛti, but it's a unidirectional relationship.

[4] Some conditioning is needed while living in a physical body, in a specific society, at a particular level of technology, kind of social stage (child, parent, elder, sage), etc.

[5] Kabir says 'Hari' for 'the Divine'.

[6] "'I' isn't" is technically better than "'I' am not", as 'I' is considered to be a set of "I, me, or mine" thoughts.

[7] Perhaps statistical random chance is indeed ṛta for gases!

[8] Mind, intellect, and ego (manas, buddhi, and ahaṁkāra) are considered non-conscious or jaḍa.

Samskara, Stithaprajna, and Robots

Think of an event which happens regularly every day.

A normal event.

I like or dislike it. [1]

The "like/dislike" creates an emotional residue - a saṁskāra. The "I" makes it my saṁskāra.

Technically, the first is called rāga/dveṣa and the second ahamkāra or abhiniveśa. Those naturally in a state beyond likes or dislikes and unconcerned about their self-image and other-images [2] have sthitaprajña - settled wisdom.

From philosophical to material, theory to real life.

How is a sthitaprajña different from a robot (or even a machine)? After all, both are naturally incapable of rāga and dveṣa and have no abhiniveśa, the subconscious fear of losing their self, mental or even physical. [3]

The answer, I believe, is love. Transcendental love flows always, but at its purest and most elevating through a sthitaprajña.

 

 

NOTES

[1] I may like or dislike only some part of it, or all of it. Also, I may like/dislike myself or the others [2] who are in the event. Trivial likes or dislikes, and their emotional residues, don't have long-term effects on one's future.

[2] I create a mental image not just of myself, but also of others. Some parts of those images are useful in normal life. Most are not just useless, but also false.

 

[3] Arguably. A robot programmed with Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics will strive to protect itself in normal circumstances. Also, machines are designed to shut down if their inputs are too high or too low, outside operational parameters.

A meditation pastiche

Meditation is not esoteric, it's simply your mind in effortless focus, as when you're enjoying a cup of coffee or a favourite ice-cream.

Spiritual meditation is indeed esoteric as it is effortless focus on an infinite object, which does transform us.

Spiritual meditation is difficult to practise only because our minds are habituated to effort-ful thinking. Like trying to sleep when wired up mentally. Yet, instead of taking a pill to dull the mind, one can relax by regular practice.

The natural mental state is that of lightness, simple observation, and purity. Our habitual, even obsessive, overuse of the mind creates unnecessary layers of biases, complexities, and heaviness or grossness. Use, not abuse, is needed. 

Bringing the post-meditation state into normal life is more important than just spiritual meditation. An exercise of deliberate transition like Daaji's AEIOU helps immensely. 

A lot of mental activity that drives our behaviour and thinking is subconscious. Meditation, and more so, Heartfulness cleaning, bring up its contents to our conscious awareness. Letting go of what comes up in a detached way clears our subconscious. But we must then deliberately fill our subconscious with positivity. This is easily done in Heartfulness by inviting transmission. 

The superconscious must be experienced, not read about. It is my innermost self, so the only thing blocking its awareness or experience is my self-created mental layers. Repeated meditative experiences expand my understanding of the Infinite. But the joy of meditation lies in the ever-new, ever-fresh, effortless experience.

A slightly different perspective

Meditation is effortless focus on an object. Every normal human being meditates every day, when they do something as simple as drinking a nice cup of coffee or tea. Their minds are in a natural state of flow, resting without strain on what they are doing. This can be extended to any activity that one likes to do. Going for a walk in a nice park. Petting a dog.

It's easy to meditate, or think easily, about a concrete, physical object. Normally, one's attention is naturally drawn easily to something that one likes (and perhaps even more easily to what one dislikes!)

But what about a subtle object of thought?

Something non-physical?

That is generally thought to be tougher.

Yet, here is the paradoxical basis of meditation as relaxation. The subtler the object, the gentler the effort. Straining or tightening the mind makes it difficult to grasp or accept a subtle idea, especially one that changes your conceptual frameworks or exposes your biases.

Babuji said that it's like using a crane to pick up a needle.

Going from activity - to thought - to idea - needs lesser and lesser effort, lesser and lesser energy.

That implies letting go of complexities, which stop us from:

• seeing the forest for the trees, 
• seeing underlying patterns in the myriad details of daily incidents, and
• letting go of negativities or impurities or veils or biases in our images, of others and of ourselves.

Strangely, relaxation takes more time and willpower than activity. We have to go against our training from birth to think, actively and incessantly; to keep the mind eternally busy. It is easier to give a higher priority to an external activity.

Learning something subtle, something new or different may require skill and effort, diligence  and patience, but it need not be emotionally stressful. Then it becomes abuse of the mind.

Daaji said that pausing [while doing spiritual work] is very, very important. I think it helps us to understand that unremitting activity is not necessary. It also allows you to work deliberately, and carefully.

As simple as possible but no simpler*

Possibly the simplest conceptual model [0] of spirituality.

Start from what is self-evident - the physical body and things in the space outside it. Science and spirituality [1] have no quarrel thus far.

Now consider the complicated world of consciousness, mind, intellect, five-fold sheaths, three-fold bodies, layers, and what-have-you. Stripped down to its barest essentials, it is something that is not the physical body, but has definite relationships with it. [2] Science agrees, but considers the non-physical part to be created from or by the physical body.

Spiritual paths generally agree that there is something beyond this non-physical part, beyond the mind and intellect - infinite, un-graspable/unknowable, beyond time and space. It can yet be experienced - in a limited way - inwardly. Those who have experienced the Unknown have given some descriptions or analogies [3], especially using a series of increasingly subtler physical ones, and then negating or transcending each one. E.g., from earth/solidity to water/liquidity and so on to space/immanent and transcendent.

 The simple model looks something like this:

UNKNOWABLE/INFINITE/DIVINE

======================

NON-PHYSICAL PART

==============

PHYSICAL BODY

===========

OUTSIDE

One explanation for the non-physical part is that it is an interface between the Unknowable and our physical body. [4] The interface has two sides, one adjacent to the Unknowable, and the other next to the physical body. Limited and contextual descriptions of the Unknowable say that it is pure, simple, and subtle or light. Naturally, the interface should also have similar qualities on that side. The physical body's qualities normally appear in stark contrast to those of the Unknowable and such is also the interface next to it.

A naive idea would be that the interface is very thin. But usually, there is a gradient from pure, simple, and subtle to impure, complex, and gross, as one's mind or non-physical part (NPP) "moves" from the Unknowable to the physical body. Put differently, from the "inside" to the "outside".

The simplest explanation for our present state is that the focus of this interface has become weighted towards the outside. So it ignores or is unable to receive, let alone process, impulses or signals from the inside correctly. All spiritual practice is about moving the focus inward for longer times and with greater stability until the interface is permanently weighted towards the inside. Paradoxically, this needs less effort than going outward because purity, simplicity, and subtlety were the original and natural states. [5] Yet another paradox is that the inward journey of each individual's NPP is reported as commonality and unity, even transcendence, [5] while the outward journey leads to differentiation and separativeness, competitiveness and groupism.

Much spiritual jargon comes from complicated, incomplete, and inconsistent explanations of spiritual experiences or reports thereof. I have not considered the focus or movement of the NPP laterally, across human beings. But such focusing may be done more effectively once the inward focus is settled and it becomes easier to see patterns, or in other words, keeping in mind the forest while dealing with individual trees.

NOTES

* Ascribed to Einstein, Everything Should Be Made as Simple as Possible, But Not Simpler
gives a detailed history.

[0] A more "structural" details of model in Two bodies or what do we really know?

[1] Some spiritual paths consider the objective or material world outside to be unreal or at least unimportant.

[2] E.g., reading these words requires you to process them physically as well as non-physically. Understanding, vocabulary, memory, intellectual processing, etc. uses physical energy and time, as well as abstract or non-physical processing.

[3] Given the differing times and cultures, these descriptions have differed. Garbled and misunderstood communication of the descriptions caused further confusion.

[4] See Mind Sandwich for a similar perspective.

[5] According to spirituality. Since science has no measurable proof of the Unknowable, and considers the NPP to have originated from the body, it logically considers numinous or transcendental states to be later developments of the NPP.

[6] Trying to describe something that is simultaneously immanent and transcendent is a major preoccupation of the early Upanishads.