|
|
Post by zendancer on Dec 4, 2022 9:56:30 GMT -5
My wife, daughter, and I have all spent time with Satyam in the past at his retreat center (Pura Vida) near Dahlonega, GA. He's an interesting fellow for sure. When I have time, I'll have to relate some funny stories about our experiences with him.
|
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Dec 4, 2022 10:01:00 GMT -5
My wife, daughter, and I have all spent time with Satyam in the past at his retreat center (Pura Vida) near Dahlonega, GA. He's an interesting fellow for sure. When I have time, I'll have to relate some funny stories about our experiences with him. Cool! He's a funny guy. |
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Dec 4, 2022 23:05:23 GMT -5
I think this little story fits here well:
|
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Dec 5, 2022 8:31:03 GMT -5
I think this little story fits here well:  That's purddy funny! Turtles all the way down! Persist. |
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Dec 5, 2022 10:00:16 GMT -5
The difficulty in approaching the exploration you have put forth is that it seems like the discussion is actually to agree upon what the different samadhi states refer to in comparison with flow and deep flow. I do not have a running definition of the samadhi states, but it does seem you’ve shared them before. I’ll search back sometime, or maybe someone can point me to a link to them. It seems that either one of the states is always immediately available and/or explorable via meditation, where the subtle engagements with mind-body are more recognizably nuanced. But, in general, it seems that in either of those deeper states and/or shortly thereafter, one is prone to what are called siddhis. The instances of “no reflective thought”, “unseen electrical circuit”, “magnetic field”, “in the moment with no thought of past or future”, “no desire for anything to be different than it is and no self concern at all”, and other strange phenomena purddy much all refer to the 20 some odd number of these siddhis that Patanjali’s Yoga Sutras describes. All of them were broken down into three main categories: types of clairvoyance, types of psychokinesis, and types of mind-body control. At the same time, even though there’s a certain science to how they are nurtured and/or applied, he also warns against the pursuit of these siddhis at the expense of realizing Self (he stated as the most important, and I’d agree), because they typically would reinforce the sense of a separate self due to the pride, arrogance, and inflated ego. I had heard some version of this caution in different conversations while doing me own walkabout through the universe and, for whatever reason, took it to heart. I can identify 4-5-6 of the siddhis did show up for me, and I might even use them as tools on occasion, but not for egotistical purposes, which would be somewhat divisive of flow in how I regard it. With respect to flow and deeper flow, I suppose they refer to how much one is aware of and in conscious command of the context at hand and/or any sense of self that may or may not be lingering (brick layer versus some revered teacher). The different teachers mentioned were operating within a context of being possessors of some otherworldly knowledge that others were seeking, many of which were in a receptive mode for what they were expressing. In such a situation, the seekers had chosen to be there, to be open to the message, and to sometimes pay homage in the form of service or money to the community that formed around said teacher, for better or worse. In such a situation, the teacher would not really be all that challenged by context as long as their message and means of teaching resonated with the group. I think that makes sense. As such, one’s state of flow would likely depend on the context, which can grow exceptionally complex, depending on any number of factors. In some of them, it might require one to more heavily rely on mind (knowledge, memory, intuition, etc) to make certain adaptations to nurture one’s flow; whereas in others, it might be better to approach it from a deeper degree of emptiness, coming naked to the endeavor, tapping into an informative silence (nice one, Laffy). A meditative context can be a nice form of purposefully tapping into such an informative deeper flow, but there are occasions that arise when consciously sensing a similar flow in an almost dreamlike way in ordinary actions of life, though relatively less ‘deep’ due to the demands of the context. I assume it would be similar for even the greatest of teachers, depending on their familiarity with the context. But again, I’m not sure how the deep flow/samahdi is being defined. In my experience, it is nice to have a clearer understanding of the experiential mind and its limitations AND an appreciation for the vastness prior to it/them, which is why honesty and the potential for SR might be considered of higher value. Having the immediately available option of starting from a place of existential gratitude, nakedness, and fearlessness is always nice. Maybe, just maybe, I haven’t babbled to much for ya.  Maybe I can follow up with something a little more on target if this doesn’t add any value. Your babbling is always appreciated! My post was prompted by a discussion with someone who objected to a comment I made that was pointing to what I considered a "distinguishable difference" between the effortless state of flow following SR and what I remembered as a somewhat "deeper" state of flow immediately following a CC. His response could be summarized as, "There is nothing deeper than THIS." I agree with his response 100%, but ATST I suspect that the reported statement of Jesus in the NT, "In my Father's house are many mansions," may have been pointing to what I was pointing to. As one example, some people wake up from the consensus paradigm and never directly apprehend/encounter what the word "God" points to whereas other people do. What they apprehend cannot be captured in words, but "a shining effulgent darkness" (written by a Christian mystic) is one way someone attempted to point to it. THIS unfolds however it unfolds, but different human manifestations of THIS have widely varying experiences and realizations in the process of that unfolding. I hesitated to use the word "deep flow" because it implies that deep is better than "ordinary everyday flow," but I couldn't think of any words that accurately apply to what I was attempting to point to. I haven't read much about siddhis, and I would certainly not suggest that anyone chase after special experiences, powers, CC's, etc because such chasing would be a movement in the wrong direction and would enhance the sense of being a SVP seeking to go from point A to point B (when most of us would probably agree that there is no point B). I simply noticed in the spiritual literature that many people have written about distinct kinds of phenomena following kensho events that seemed noteworthy. I have also personally met many sages/teachers/whateverwewanttocallgthem who seemed extraordinarily clear following a powerful kensho event and attracted lots of followers who later fell back into the mind, got attached to various questionable ideas, and lost all of their followers. Initially they were "in the current" to use Ramana's words, but later they seemed to have lost that connection to Source. Various Advaita sages have a fairly agreed-upon list of definitions regarding different forms of samadhi, and I have a reference for most of them, but one or two of them make me wonder exactly what's being pointed to. For example, what's the difference between sahaja samadhi and sahaja nirvikalpa samadhi? I use the phrase "everyday samadhi" to refer to the state of flow represented by the brick-laying guy. Artists and musicians, particularly, seem aware that when they get totally involved in their artwork, time, space, and selfhood disappear altogether for a while even if they know nothing about deeper meditative states of samadhi, such as nirvikalpa. "Being in the zone," for certain people, such as mountain climbers, is a state of unity consciousness that is often regarded as mystical in retrospect because they were able to do things that were seemingly impossible. As one mountain climber stated with considerable awe after summiting a sheer wall, "Something else took over and climbed that rock face because it was far beyond my capability. If THAT had not taken over, I would have peeled off the face and fallen to my death because I had reached a point in my free climb where I couldn't move in any direction and had no idea how I could save myself." That may not be an exact quote, but it's pretty close. AAR, flow is an interesting topic and one that perhaps other people can provide additional insights about. Right. In my observation, the siddhis are things/capabilities that arise, and it is likely that, because they are quite mystically phenomenal, they became special things to pursue. That they can be replicated at worldly will is probably why a specialized science of them arose. It may be that there is something of a gray area that transferred to the idea of seeking enlightenment and that it can be attained by the person, and something that can emerge only through practice, much like the total 'selfless' involvement in an activity, including meditation. Mountain climbing and bricklaying would be more outward focuses of attention while falling into a flow, while meditation would be more inwardly focused, perhaps attempting to bring the attention to a point (while others may use it as a form of escape from their mind (to which the attention/unconscious identity is attached). It might be noted that when in such states of flow, it is only in hindsight in which the source of agency is applied, thus giving rise to the insight into whether there's still an unconscious belief in an SVP doing such things. That is, everyone who has ever lived experiences flow states (even while thinking) on a daily basis, but most have never noticed it. The self is never there, only unconsciously assumed as an overlay, and often it shows up in the reporting of things that happened 'to/from' appearing peeps, regardless of the fact that no one has ever actually found a 'me'. That is where ND comes in and throws a monkey wrench into the whole affair. That's kind of what I was alluding to in my earlier rambling. I'd be curious to see the changes in outward, observable appearance of flow (to an onlooker that report such observations/stories of them) if one were to drop a deeply revered sage into the mix of living life in, say, NYC and/or dealing with grind of running a business and/or the nuances of intimate relationship. But the fact remains, that flow is something that emerges as a lack of self-consciousness; the deeper sense of flow is alluding to being in/of the flow, and there is no consciousness of any self, which would divide and give an open door to the inherent fear. KNOWING is being a sense of THAT which is informing the mind of the inherent dreamlike quality of the world in which life in NYC, the grinds, and sense of other are actually falling away. I mean, everyone can be such a sage, but only if they are willing to simply look, and notice that unerring Truth prior to all 'truths' the mind conjures. Even science is 'validating' such nuances in the studies related to the Cosmological Principle, but perhaps hasn't/can't come to terms with its implications, much in the same way it approaches consciousness studies. I do wonder about such scientific practioners' minds when some of the deeper realizations might give them a flash, like when they keep splitting things smaller and smaller, but keep finding mostly space. Yet, they keep looking for more things, thus perpetuating the creative process. But, it is more likely that the momentum of their habitual studies about physical nature and/or the outward appearances that keeps things neatly out of focus, much like the pursuit of siddhis. But perhaps some of them do get a flash and do take it to heart, but I haven't really looked into it. There's that story that Newton burned a lot of his books before he died, but I do not know the full story of the whys. When IT dawned on the 'me', it was easy to appreciate at least one potential why. I remember when the Italian sadhu (heavily into Vedanta for decades) I had met was in the course of testing me (he told me later he was, anyway), that I told him that I had stumbled onto something I was not supposed to see, and I simply could not put it into words. That series of interactions went on for a couple weeks, and I had never even heard of Advaita at that point. I remembered thinking of several books that I would have no problem burning, if not for just a fun ritual of showing wondrous gratitude, hehe. I appreciate the symbolism of the eternal fire. 🔥 |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Dec 5, 2022 15:04:19 GMT -5
I think this little story fits here well: |
|
|
|
Post by japhy on Dec 5, 2022 16:56:23 GMT -5
There is self sustaining flow / Samadhi and not self sustaining flow / Samadhi (e.g. experienced through work / art / music). In self sustaining Samadhi the "object" of Samadhi is the Samadhi itself. Normal flow is a feedback loop. Self sustaining flow is a feedback loop that feeds on itself.
Looking at it more any flow / Samadhi ultimately feeds on itself (i.e. the flow itself is what causes the flow to continue), but usually this is not seen since the experience is so intervened with the activity.
In Buddhist meditation there is the term access concentration. By following the the breath (for example) "one gains enough concentration" for some initial flow to occur, now one can shift the attention to the flow itself and one enters self sustaining flow.
The first four Jhanas are a way of step wise elimination of factors "causing the flow" (fundamentally an illusion). After reaching access concentration one puts physical pleasure at the center of ones flow by concentrating on a slight smile for example and enters the first Jhana. By leaving the physical pleasure behind and replacing it by emotional pleasure / love one moves to the second Jhana..
The meaning of deep flow is not very clear to me from the word itself and I get the feeling that ZD and Reefs talk about somewhat different states.
Following inavalan's quote:
Nirvikalpa means without disturbances, so the experience of the Samadhi itself is pure and not tainted by anything. The first / second Jhana or the artist Samadhi are therefore clearly not nirvikalpa. Nirvikalpa is pure and self sustaining. In Zen terms one could also say that nirvikalpa is free of Makyo.
Savikalpa Samadhi is impure (e.g. the first Jhana is savikalpa). Impurity is not a judgement.
Sahaja is the Samadhi of an enlightened one (permanently abiding in Samadhi). It can be either pure or impure.
|
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Dec 5, 2022 17:48:58 GMT -5
In the most fundamental sense all of life is an uninterrupted flow of being, but ND sages often distinguish between intermittent flow/samadhi (which I like to call "everyday flow"--the kind of non-reflective state that occurs when one becomes psychologically unified with whatever activity is being pursued), and a permanent state of flow that occurs after the illusion of selfhood is penetrated. What sages point to as "intermittent flow/samadhi" occurs because reflective self-referential thoughts eventually return, and those thoughts make it seem as if there is a "me"that is sometimes unified with whatever is happening and at other times appears to be a separate observer of whatever is happening.
SR reveals that any apparent independently-existing states of mind, as well as the idea that there is a "me" experiencing such states of mind are cognitive distinctions, only. In truth, there is only THIS--a unified infinite field of being--that unfolds however it unfolds. If a human being meditates and by intense concentration and breath control enters nirvikalpa samadhi--a state of bliss in which body and mind have disappeared--, it is how THIS unfolds. There is no separate volitional person who sometimes enters or exits NS in the same way that there is no SVP who ever experiences anything.
The distinction of "deep flow" is simply a potential distinction (and thus an imaginary postulation) that might point to something slightly different than the sense of flow that becomes permanent after SR. My curiosity is focused on what kind of difference there might be between sahaja samadhi and sahaja nirvikalpa samadhi, and whether those words are pointing to the same state or two different states? I'm curious whether Ramana ever clearly explained what he used those words to point to. In NS there is no body consciousness, no thoughts, and no perceptions whereas in SS there is body consciousness, thoughts, and perceptions, but no sense of "me" as a SVP. What, then, is the meaning of inserting the word "nirvikalpa" between the words "sahaja" and "samadhi?" If SS is pointing to a permanent wakeful state of flow, what is SNS pointing to? I suspect that Satch might have some idea about this if he happens to check in.
I was using the term "deep flow" to potentially point to a state of mind that Ramana seemed to exhibit at all times but which many other sages only seemed to exhibit during a limited period of time (ranging from several days to several years) following a CC or breakthrough realization.
|
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Dec 5, 2022 18:33:21 GMT -5
Your babbling is always appreciated! My post was prompted by a discussion with someone who objected to a comment I made that was pointing to what I considered a "distinguishable difference" between the effortless state of flow following SR and what I remembered as a somewhat "deeper" state of flow immediately following a CC. His response could be summarized as, "There is nothing deeper than THIS." I agree with his response 100%, but ATST I suspect that the reported statement of Jesus in the NT, "In my Father's house are many mansions," may have been pointing to what I was pointing to. As one example, some people wake up from the consensus paradigm and never directly apprehend/encounter what the word "God" points to whereas other people do. What they apprehend cannot be captured in words, but "a shining effulgent darkness" (written by a Christian mystic) is one way someone attempted to point to it. THIS unfolds however it unfolds, but different human manifestations of THIS have widely varying experiences and realizations in the process of that unfolding. I hesitated to use the word "deep flow" because it implies that deep is better than "ordinary everyday flow," but I couldn't think of any words that accurately apply to what I was attempting to point to. I haven't read much about siddhis, and I would certainly not suggest that anyone chase after special experiences, powers, CC's, etc because such chasing would be a movement in the wrong direction and would enhance the sense of being a SVP seeking to go from point A to point B (when most of us would probably agree that there is no point B). I simply noticed in the spiritual literature that many people have written about distinct kinds of phenomena following kensho events that seemed noteworthy. I have also personally met many sages/teachers/whateverwewanttocallgthem who seemed extraordinarily clear following a powerful kensho event and attracted lots of followers who later fell back into the mind, got attached to various questionable ideas, and lost all of their followers. Initially they were "in the current" to use Ramana's words, but later they seemed to have lost that connection to Source. Various Advaita sages have a fairly agreed-upon list of definitions regarding different forms of samadhi, and I have a reference for most of them, but one or two of them make me wonder exactly what's being pointed to. For example, what's the difference between sahaja samadhi and sahaja nirvikalpa samadhi? I use the phrase "everyday samadhi" to refer to the state of flow represented by the brick-laying guy. Artists and musicians, particularly, seem aware that when they get totally involved in their artwork, time, space, and selfhood disappear altogether for a while even if they know nothing about deeper meditative states of samadhi, such as nirvikalpa. "Being in the zone," for certain people, such as mountain climbers, is a state of unity consciousness that is often regarded as mystical in retrospect because they were able to do things that were seemingly impossible. As one mountain climber stated with considerable awe after summiting a sheer wall, "Something else took over and climbed that rock face because it was far beyond my capability. If THAT had not taken over, I would have peeled off the face and fallen to my death because I had reached a point in my free climb where I couldn't move in any direction and had no idea how I could save myself." That may not be an exact quote, but it's pretty close. AAR, flow is an interesting topic and one that perhaps other people can provide additional insights about. Right. In my observation, the siddhis are things/capabilities that arise, and it is likely that, because they are quite mystically phenomenal, they became special things to pursue. That they can be replicated at worldly will is probably why a specialized science of them arose. It may be that there is something of a gray area that transferred to the idea of seeking enlightenment and that it can be attained by the person, and something that can emerge only through practice, much like the total 'selfless' involvement in an activity, including meditation. Mountain climbing and bricklaying would be more outward focuses of attention while falling into a flow, while meditation would be more inwardly focused, perhaps attempting to bring the attention to a point (while others may use it as a form of escape from their mind (to which the attention/unconscious identity is attached). It might be noted that when in such states of flow, it is only in hindsight in which the source of agency is applied, thus giving rise to the insight into whether there's still an unconscious belief in an SVP doing such things. That is, everyone who has ever lived experiences flow states (even while thinking) on a daily basis, but most have never noticed it. The self is never there, only unconsciously assumed as an overlay, and often it shows up in the reporting of things that happened 'to/from' appearing peeps, regardless of the fact that no one has ever actually found a 'me'. That is where ND comes in and throws a monkey wrench into the whole affair.
That's kind of what I was alluding to in my earlier rambling. I'd be curious to see the changes in outward, observable appearance of flow (to an onlooker that report such observations/stories of them) if one were to drop a deeply revered sage into the mix of living life in, say, NYC and/or dealing with grind of running a business and/or the nuances of intimate relationship. But the fact remains, that flow is something that emerges as a lack of self-consciousness; the deeper sense of flow is alluding to being in/of the flow, and there is no consciousness of any self, which would divide and give an open door to the inherent fear. KNOWING is being a sense of THAT which is informing the mind of the inherent dreamlike quality of the world in which life in NYC, the grinds, and sense of other are actually falling away. I mean, everyone can be such a sage, but only if they are willing to simply look, and notice that unerring Truth prior to all 'truths' the mind conjures.Even science is 'validating' such nuances in the studies related to the Cosmological Principle, but perhaps hasn't/can't come to terms with its implications, much in the same way it approaches consciousness studies. I do wonder about such scientific practioners' minds when some of the deeper realizations might give them a flash, like when they keep splitting things smaller and smaller, but keep finding mostly space. Yet, they keep looking for more things, thus perpetuating the creative process. But, it is more likely that the momentum of their habitual studies about physical nature and/or the outward appearances that keeps things neatly out of focus, much like the pursuit of siddhis. But perhaps some of them do get a flash and do take it to heart, but I haven't really looked into it. There's that story that Newton burned a lot of his books before he died, but I do not know the full story of the whys. When IT dawned on the 'me', it was easy to appreciate at least one potential why. I remember when the Italian sadhu (heavily into Vedanta for decades) I had met was in the course of testing me (he told me later he was, anyway), that I told him that I had stumbled onto something I was not supposed to see, and I simply could not put it into words. That series of interactions went on for a couple weeks, and I had never even heard of Advaita at that point. I remembered thinking of several books that I would have no problem burning, if not for just a fun ritual of showing wondrous gratitude, hehe. I appreciate the symbolism of the eternal fire. 🔥 Yes and yes to the bolded paragraphs. That's kinda sorta what I was getting at. Ramana may be the exception to the rule for most ND sage stories because he spent so many years in NS and so many years in wakeful silence. He reportedly told one seeker that it was as hard for him to think a thought as it was for most people to NOT think a thought. IOW, mind talk and ruminative thinking had essentially ceased for him. If this is true, then perhaps deep flow was his natural state, and his comments about "the natural state" may have been pointing to that depth of mental silence. I suspect that what happens for most people who have a big CC or attain SR is that deep flow becomes a temporary condition that dissipates as a result of reflective thoughts getting back up to speed, so to speak. Tolle claimed that 80% of his thinking ceased following his "vortex" experience, but eventually he began reading about ND and thinking about what had happened to him. If he was in deep flow for a year or so, it probably dissipated as a result of writing his TPON book and thinking about the ramifications of what he had realized. Sages and awakened monastics who are supported by others and who don't have to engage with work-related activities, family responsibilities, etc., may live a much more choicelessly aware/silent lifestyle than other sages and thereby be able to remain in a state of deep flow indefinitely. |
|
|
|
Post by zazeniac on Dec 5, 2022 18:51:19 GMT -5
From "Be As You Are" where Godman clarifies and summarizes RM's views on Samadhi. In my view RM saw KNS and savikalpa samadhi as intermediate stages on the path to sahaja. Several times, RM mentions the removal of vasanas as a necessary pre-requisite to sahaja. This excision occurs as one practices SI.
"The classification generally used by Sri Ramana divides the various samadhis into the following three-fold division:
1 Sahaja nirvikalpa samadhi This is the state of the jnani who has finally and irrevocably eliminated his ego. Sahaja means ‘natural’ and nirvikalpa means ‘no differences’. A jnani in this state is able to function naturally in the world, just as any ordinary person does. Knowing that he is the Self, the sahaja jnani sees no difference between himself and others and no difference between himself and the world. For such a person, everything is a manifestation of the
indivisible Self.
2 Kevala nirvikalpa samadhi This is the stage below Self-realization. In this state there is a temporary but effortless Self-awareness, but the ego has not been finally eliminated. It is characterised by an absence of body-consciousness. Although one has a temporary awareness of the Self in this state, one is not able to perceive sensory information or function in the world. When body-consciousness returns, the ego reappears.
3 Savikalpa samadhi In this state Self-awareness is maintained by constant effort. The continuity of the samadhi is wholly dependent on the effort put in to maintain it. When Self-attention wavers, Self-awareness is obscured.
The following brief definitions formulated by Sri Ramana should be sufficient to guide the uninitiated through the terminological jungle of samadhi:
1 Holding on to reality is samadhi.
2 Holding on to reality with effort is savikalpa samadhi.
3 Merging in reality and remaining unaware of the world is nirvikalpa samadhi.
4 Merging in ignorance and remaining unaware of the world is sleep.
5 Remaining in the primal, pure, natural state without effort is sahaja nirvikalpa samadhi."
|
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Dec 5, 2022 21:14:46 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Dec 5, 2022 22:02:24 GMT -5
The way I described my experience in '09 a few months after it started to fade was of the same feeling I'd get from a day out on the slopes or a day up at the lake, but that it was persistent and uncaused. The most salient aspect of it was the absence of self-referential thought and emotion, and the word bliss is quite apt. It never faded completely, and there's a sort of a psychic/physiological bookmark there. Mind became informed soon after that this is what I had been chasing out on the slopes, and by other means. The "current" is something I'd plugged into long before the sudden vanishing act, and I didn't attract any throngs but it did save my marriage. As far as living in the moment, I still had work to do day-to-day, but not getting caught up in the narratives of my clients made it far easier to do that work. So this brings me to a point of caution in my self-comparison, because anyone having a similar experience is going to be on their own arc, and what realizations come along for the ride seem (from what I've read of others, like you) to vary considerably. "Desiring things to be other than they are", in relative terms, can be a matter of degree, and mitigated quite successfully by any given people-peep in various ways, some along the lines of healthy human adulthood, others not. So the differential between that state before and after realizing the false sense of misconceived identity can be attenuated in relative terms, but as mind becomes informed, it's clear that the existential chasm is only bridged by grace. In short I'd say that deep flow as you've described it is yes, very distinguishable from relative flow, and I honestly can't imagine it happening free of a significant existential realization, but I wouldn't necessarily try to buttonhole that realization, conceptually, and would expect potential wide variation in the reports. Yes. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Dec 5, 2022 22:13:17 GMT -5
I'm throwing this out there for discussion, but I wonder if it would be worth distinguishing between the kind of effortless flow that occurs after SR and what might be called "deep flow?" Ramana once told a seeker, " Nirvikalpa samadhi is the deepest state but sahaja samadhi is the highest state." ... I'm curious whether anyone else thinks that a distinction between flow and deep-flow might be pointing to something significant? It may only be a pointer to what happens when the mind becomes extremely silent rather than relatively silent. Thoughts? I can relate to your Ramana quote.. I get into a hypnotic trance for my psychic experiences that involve working with my subconscious. Trance is a multi-dimensional state, and not only light, medium, deep, as generally thought. It is a way of focusing on a narrower range of perception, tuning in, bypassing of the critical-factor, selective thinking. I ask my subconscious to optimize my trance for most mundane or psychic experiences I intend having: reading, working-out, driving, ..., but also regressions, psychic sensing, tapping into guidance and knowledge, healing, ... There is also an " expanded awareness" state, that I feel to somehow be in the opposite "direction" of the hypnotic trance. In this state I feel I reach anywhere both in the physical-reality, and "wherever" I can " ascend" in the non-physical-reality, with the same ease. Anyway, hypnotic trance states go deeper, and expanded awareness states go higher / wider / further (not in physical terms). Both kinds are inner states, but hypnotic states feel to be from the perspective of leaving behind the "here", while the expanding awareness feel to be from the perspective of expanding "there". The former are toward and through the subconscious, the latter are after and past the subconscious. I don't think ZD implied different levels of flow in the sense of a progressive deepening when he was talking about deep flow. The way I see it, it's like flipping a switch. It's a sudden shift from the relative to the absolute perspective. What you are describing all belongs to the relative perspective. In comparison to our normal experience, flow happening in the relative context may still be very profound, but it is no comparison to flow in the absolute context. What you are addressing though is a common misconception about the impersonal or absolute perspective. Very often people think that the impersonal is just a more expansive version of the personal. And so they imagine some sort of path to the impersonal via gradually expanding their perspective and awareness. That's not how it works. The light is either on or off. There is no twilight zone. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Dec 5, 2022 22:23:12 GMT -5
The way I described my experience in '09 a few months after it started to fade was of the same feeling I'd get from a day out on the slopes or a day up at the lake, but that it was persistent and uncaused. The most salient aspect of it was the absence of self-referential thought and emotion, and the word bliss is quite apt. It never faded completely, and there's a sort of a psychic/physiological bookmark there. Mind became informed soon after that this is what I had been chasing out on the slopes, and by other means. The "current" is something I'd plugged into long before the sudden vanishing act, and I didn't attract any throngs but it did save my marriage. As far as living in the moment, I still had work to do day-to-day, but not getting caught up in the narratives of my clients made it far easier to do that work. So this brings me to a point of caution in my self-comparison, because anyone having a similar experience is going to be on their own arc, and what realizations come along for the ride seem (from what I've read of others, like you) to vary considerably. "Desiring things to be other than they are", in relative terms, can be a matter of degree, and mitigated quite successfully by any given people-peep in various ways, some along the lines of healthy human adulthood, others not. So the differential between that state before and after realizing the false sense of misconceived identity can be attenuated in relative terms, but as mind becomes informed, it's clear that the existential chasm is only bridged by grace. In short I'd say that deep flow as you've described it is yes, very distinguishable from relative flow, and I honestly can't imagine it happening free of a significant existential realization, but I wouldn't necessarily try to buttonhole that realization, conceptually, and would expect potential wide variation in the reports.Yes, that seems to be the case. In every description of deep flow that I've read about it occurs after a CC or significant realization, and the duration varies with the individual from several days to several years. In some rare cases, such as Ramana and perhaps the Buddha, it was apparently permanent. Like you, I had a demanding small business to operate (with ten employees and multiple construction projects) when that happened, so sitting on a park bench doing nothing for two years or more was not in the cards. My marriage was saved by the "pouring concrete realization" that occurred several years later. I would say it's logical that it would be accompanied by a realization when it happens because it is the impersonal perspective. I don't trust those reports about Ramana though. I find the deification of Ramana by certain authors a bit weird. It doesn't ring true (and from an alignment perspective it is demonstrably not true) but it is also counter to Ramana's message. I'm curious, you both say it saved your marriage. How? |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Dec 5, 2022 22:43:25 GMT -5
I'm curious whether anyone else thinks that a distinction between flow and deep-flow might be pointing to something significant? It may only be a pointer to what happens when the mind becomes extremely silent rather than relatively silent. Thoughts? In a typical day I can recognise three prominent states. I’m a musician, if sit and play the piano for an hour, as with your task oriented builder, self-referencing ceases and thought takes a back seat. Then there’s the ordinary waking-dream state of drifting into reflection. Thirdly, there is the realisation of the happening of the moment - which is a state of present flow or unfolding. The difference between the first and third state is present yet absorbed as opposed to present and open. There is a less frequent fourth state. It’s a deeper version of present flow and coincides with your description of deep flow. It has followed kensho events and other ‘breakthroughs’ and significant insights. But it doesn’t stick around. After a while the intensity of this state fades and it becomes the more everyday ‘happening of the moment’ state. I tend to think of it as more of a spiritual lollipop rather than something that would be feasibly ongoing - and I’m not interested in chasing it. But maybe it sticks around for some - I should imagine that it is rare. I think you may be onto something with your ‘extremely silent’ and ‘relatively silent’ analysis. I think UG is a good example. Even though he was in and out of 'it' all the time, he spend most of the time in that state, which he called the natural state - total mental silence, total loss of sense of self, just raw sensory perception and the body functioning naturally and optimally without any thought interference. When the body or the senses would get tired, his sense became dull and blurry, he would then suddenly conk out and then come back after a while, with senses and body functioning at their peak again. The body would also automatically perform weird movements, very similar to yoga postures when he came back. You heear the exact same reported about Anandamayi Ma. Ramakrishna had similar episodes regularly. His body would suddenly become stiff and cold and his heart would almost stop and he'd conk out. He described it as spontaneously going into nirvikalpa samadhi. It's almost identical to what UG described. Another commonality between UG and Ramakrishna and some other sages is the total lack of boundaries. Ramakrishna would walk past a child in the street that got a beating and a few moments later, his body would show the exact marks and pain as the body of the child that had just been beaten. , Now, this may be exceptional cases. In general, it doesn't seem very practical to witness someone getting a slap in the face and then having your own face turn red, does it? Seems a bit excessive. |
|
Maybe I can follow up with something a little more on target if this doesn’t add any value.
