Deep Sleep vs.waking state spirituality

[shannon]

Hello. I´ve been told that this topic has already discussed, but I haven´t been succesful in finding it. So, encouraged by Lightmystic, I decided to open this thread. I´ll use to different stages:

1/ I´ve already said that I dropped all my books and practices because one day I realized that the thinking center and all its concepts (and yes, that includes the great sages, traditions, meditations, NDE´s, bardo lights, spirituality,...everything conceived by the mind) is a byproduct of a reduced part of our existence, that is, the waking state. All spirituality belongs to it.Even if I have a divine experience while meditating, if I have a nirvikalpa samadhi, if the most respected sage gives me his blessings and ask me to teach around the world, all that dissapears in deep sleep. That´s why I consider this state the most important key to self realization.

I have discussed this topic with some prestigious masters, even those who spent decades having amazing spiritual experiences, Kundalini ecstasies, etc., and they all have agreed with me. Each one told me that all of that belongs to the waking state only, and something that belongs to just one state cannot be our real nature. Our nature is not conceivable, thinkable, nor has it form. It´s beyond mind.

Then I asked why this obvious truth is not teached more frequently, considering how much time and drama is usually spent in a "search", and they all agree that the reason is people don´t want to hear the truth or are not ready to understand that deep sleep is closer to our nature than any mystical experience, because mind nees something to grab, some "form" and "name", while there´s nothing of that in our true nature.

So, what´s your take on this matter? Any opinion would be very welcome.

2/ Lightmystic and Nisargadatta, two members of this forum say they are able to be aware during deep sleep. Are you there? I´m extremely interested in your opinion!!

What´s the nature of this "objectless Awareness"? Did it give you, as Ken Wilber said, the definitive and crystal clear view on our true nature? And even more important, considering there are no objects whatsoever in that state, did you keep any sense of being an individual ? Is it expressable in words?

Thank you very much.

[lightmystic]

Yes, there is Awareness during sleep, but it's not the MIND that's Aware. So it's not like there is THINKING during sleep, because then that wouldn't really be sleep then. It's more the subtle continuity, the subtle Awareness that continues during sleep.

Can you get a sense of that at all in retrospect? Remember that you cannot get a sense of it at the time, because the actual thought process of recognizing it while it was happening would mean that sleep was not really happening.

I addressed this in some detail in my response to Karen on your introduction thread. It points to the recognition that the thinking mind is not the same as Awareness. It's just that the thinking mind defines the dualistic world, defines experiences, etc.. A Priori (i.e. more fundamental) than that process is the Awareness that underlies it, and that Awareness is what we are, and is completely universal. You can see for yourself, it's just seeing what underlies the thinker.

One way of doing this is simply to watch your thoughts go by. It's kind of the attitude "Hmm....I wonder what I'm going to think next?" this starts to highlight the difference between the thoughts themselves and the perceiver which underlies all of those thinking processes, the perceiver that is used to taking credit for those thoughts. That's the basic identification, the mistake of the intellect. It's believed so deeply for so long, so blindly, that we don't even realize that we are doing it. And we believe it so strongly that the suggestion that it might not be that way automatically brings us face to face with our survival instinct. Those fears have to be met to some extent in order to allow ourselves to really see it clearly. This is because the belief that we exist as separate makes the actual discovering we don't feel like death - more death than any actual real death - where the fear of death actually stems from.

But there is no such thing as a separate individual. There is really the appearance of that, but it is real in appearance only. THAT is the illusion. It's not that perception itself is not real. It's that the classification of them into limited and separate things is the illusion. And the illusion isn't supposed to go away. Indeed, that would defeat the purpose of life. No story, no experience, no life. But when the illusion is seen through, then, on the most fundamental level, the story is no longer blindly believed, and so there is the safety to appreciate the story, and the ups and downs are something to appreciated, because those feelings are no longer threatening anymore.

And words that attempt to define what is beneath the mind (i.e. what is beneath "the mechanism that defines things") would just be another definition and therefore not outside of mind. So it CANNOT be understood intellectually. Understanding says "it's x (and implied, therefore, not y)". In other words, it has to look like SOMETHING in order to be comprehended by the mind. Even the concept of "nothing" brings up an image in the head (perhaps empty space, or just whiteness - but those are all "things" defined by the mind). This is the process of perception itself, which contains all possible things that could take place within perception. The idea that perception is limited, or any idea, any limitation, is yet another thing that appears within impersonal perception. The idea of personalness, of a separate person at all, is just another impersonal thing that appears within your own impersonal perception. And when I say "your", I'm talking about you - the perceiver. But this perceiver has no edges. Any edges perceived is just another thing WITHIN perception. So it can even be said to be much more accurate (in a sense) that the perceiver is NOT really a noun, but a verb. The perceiver is not a perceiver, but a process of perception itself. The idea of a perceiver is just another thing that appears within that process of perception. And that process is what you are. And that process contains everything within it, is not separate or different from everything within it. And all the boundaries are that exact same process telling a story. You are the reader in the story, not the main character, and everything in the story is created with your, the reader's mind.

But we are so used to feeling like we are an individual, and, no matter how well we intellectually understand it, we will instinctually cling desperately to that notion until it is seen, on the deepest level, for real, that we are not really that.

So what to do? Find every feeling inside that appears threatening (and they can be triggered by "outside" events - it's a feeling either way) and allowing yourself to gently start to feel into it. Anything that hurts is because it feels limited. And it feels limited because it is being avoided, and so is not able to be seen clearly. These are not things we consciously do, but things that we HAVE been doing for so long that they go on during what we think of as "status quo". So a huge part of the process is discovering the ways in which we've ALREADY been doing these things, and starting to look into them enough to recognize that they are perfectly 100% safe. Easier said than done, but that is where the rubber meets the road, and how we become freer and freer over time. It is what every spiritual book, technique, etc. is attempting to point to. But it cannot be conceived of as an idea, because it is the process of discovering that no idea is really true, is really the whole story. So it's discovering what the ideas are referring to, and it's all the same thing - allowing us to feel into those places that we would desperately not want to feel into. Not because they are limiting, but because we are actually there to discover that they are NOT limiting, but are actually safe to feel. What hurts, always, is the resistance.

[zendancer]

LM: What you are saying seems quite different from the awareness experienced in absolute samadhi, which Zen calls "the falling off of body and mind." Entering samadhi there is a distinct sense that all separateness is coalescing into a unified state. After total unity occurs, and the separate observer has completely disappeared, there is still a clear and distinct sense of awareness during the entire time that the state continues. There is, however, nothing that one can say about that state of awareness because there are no qualities or aspects to it and there is nothing outside of it. It is totally undivided. My understanding is that that pure awareness is what Nisargadatta called the "primordial" and "monolithic" awareness of the Self.

The same kind of awareness in the waking state is what we experience on a daily basis (when the mind is silent), and, in the same way, absolutely nothing can be said about it. It has no qualities or aspects. It does not age; it does not need anything or seek anything; and it does not change in any way over time. It sees "what is" when there is wakefulness, but it sees nothing in absolute samadhi. Nevertheless, the awareness in samadhi is not subtle. It is just as clear and unmistakable as waking awareness, but without any kind of content. The only thing I can say about it is that it feels as if awareness slowly sinks to the bottom of a deep ocean and rests there in a state of total emptiness and equilibrium.

I have never experienced pure awareness in deep sleep in the same way that I have experienced it in samadhi or in normal wakefulness (when the mind is totally silent), but I assume that it is present because I have been awakened from deep sleep by the body's awareness of something happening externally that requires wakefulness. Pure awareness never sleeps, but I have never felt one-with it during deep sleep.

My speculation is that Nisargadatta so totally identified with pure awareness that eventually all transient phenomena receded into the background. At least he seems to speak about it in that way. If this is true, and I have certainly not yet verified it for myself, then perhaps awareness did not diminish in its clarity and intensity the same way that it seems to do for most of us when the body is in deep sleep. Has anyone other than Nisargadatta spoken about this?

I should probably mention that I do not think any of this is very important, and it has virtually nothing to do with seeing through the usual illusions that dominate most peoples' lives. It is simply another interesting aspect to be considered by those who are interested in self-exploration and self-discovery. It is turtles all the way down! LOL

This subject reminds me of the story told by a Zen Master who was sleeping outside of a cabin one night under the stars. (Have I told this story? If so, I apologize in advance.) She was sleeping facing away from the cabin. Out of a deep sleep she heard a voice say, "Take a look." She ignored the voice, but moments later it returned with more forcefulness and said, "TAKE A LOOK!" Again, she ignored the voice, but the third time this happened, she woke up and wondered what was going on. She turned over and suddenly saw that the cabin floor was on fire ignited by sparks that had jumped out of the fireplace. She spent the next hour or so putting out the fire and cleaning up the mess before she rested for a moment and suddenly realized the sequence in which everything occurred. She was halfway through a hundred day silent retreat at the time this event happened. Interesting story, huh?

[shannon]

Apr 23, 2010 14:48:52 GMT -5 lightmystic said:

it has to look like SOMETHING in order to be comprehended by the mind. Even the concept of "nothing" brings up an image in the head (perhaps empty space, or just whiteness - but those are all "things" defined by the mind)

Yes, this is something very important. I think that this wonderful teacher, Rupert Spira, has given the most brilliant explanation on deep sleep I have ever read. Take a look. I´m sure you´ll enjoy it. And if you want to read the whole essay, it´s shown in his website for free at this location: non-duality.rupertspira.com/page.aspx?n=a187791a-9146-495e-a6d6-ce7451ae6449

"The state of deep sleep is an idea that occurs from time to time in the waking state and is conceived in terms of the waking state itself, that is, in terms of objects, time and space. In other words, the waking state imposes the presumptions of the waking mind onto what it conceives to be a state similar to its own, in which it is not, by definition, present and of which therefore it has no knowledge.

In other words, just as the waking mind conceives of the waking state to be a vast, four dimensional container of time and space, in which all objects, including a little intermittent spark of consciousness, are supposed to appear and disappear, so it conceives of deep sleep to be a similar vast, four dimensional container in which all objects have been removed leaving a blank, dark, unknown object called ‘nothing.’ Furthermore, the waking mind conceives that the separate entity remains in deep sleep but without its appendage of consciousness.

However, the mind has absolutely no knowledge of a state in which it is not present. Deep sleep is defined as the absence of mind, so what can the mind legitimately say about it? The mind imagines the existence of a state in time, because it can only think in its own terms of time, space etc., and then superimposes a further presumption that that state is full of ‘nothing,’ a blank object. This ‘blank object’ is the closest the mind can get to imagining what a non-objective experience might be like.

The idea that deep sleep lasts for a period of time, say for four hours, is entirely a projection of the waking mind. There is no experience of mind in deep sleep and therefore no experience of objects. And in the absence of objects there is no time. Therefore deep sleep has no duration.

So deep sleep cannot be understood from the perspective of the waking state. The ideas of blankness, nothingness, void, dark, are all attempts of the mind to superimpose its own limitations onto Consciousness. A ‘blank state’ is the very best conception of Consciousness that the mind can come up with. This conception is the mind’s attempt to assert its dominion over Consciousness and to bring it within its own grasp."

[shannon]

Hello, Zenmaster. I have to disagree regarding the importance of deep sleep. I think this state (it is not really a state, since space and time are not present in it) is the most powerful tool to understand our nature, to understand that we "are" without the need of a mind.

All traditions speak of the need of trascending the mind, but 99.99% of the people who try to find their true Self remain attached to the worst trick of this mind they want to get rid of: the "spiritual seeker- ego". Do you remember Suzanne Segal´s case? Very dramatic. She spent her last days devastated because she got trapped in her "enlightened state", and when it dissapeared (because it was just an experience!), she thought she had "lost it". But if she had compared those strange experiences with the absolute dissapearence of them while in deep sleep, she would have realized that she lost that state every night, and, however, the formless Awareness that allowed her enlightenment and her former "unenlightenment" had never decreased.

Deep sleep shows us that our true nature does not include books, kundalini arisings,ideas, concepts, masters, meditations, etc., since all of them belong to the waking state only, but we ARE during deep sleep without the need of any of them.

Thanks for the reply.

[question]

Not sure why deep sleep is supposed to be so important. Try to look at it without the nonduality jargon. The brain takes a break and shuts off for a while, and nothing remains of a mind. In some rare cases some awareness is still present, in my case it is not. Even if awareness is present in deep sleep and is described as having no content, no form, no nothing, how do you know that it is absolute and completely independent of the body's (or more specific: of the brain's) functioning (same question applies to the samadhi states btw)? Rupert Spira touches on this in his article, but every time he tries to tackle this question he unfortunately digresses into nonduality language games.

[shannon]

Apr 23, 2010 20:02:32 GMT -5 question said:

Even if awareness is present in deep sleep and is described as having no content, no form, no nothing, how do you know that it is absolute and completely independent of the body's (or more specific: of the brain's) functioning (same question applies to the samadhi states btw)? .

Well, the answer is very clear. Does "no content, no form, no nothing" need a brain? Obviously not. You need it in order to perceive "content, form, something". But no "content, form or something" is what we are. We are the absence of all observable qualities.

I get your point, but it comes from a misundertanding of what "eternity" or "independent of the body" mean. It does not mean an "expansion in time". It means "out of space and time". That which is aware of my words now in you is not a thing, it has no borders, and having no shape, it´s not touched by time.

The problem is that most people imagine that eternity must imply a continuity in "perception", in being aware of something, and you would obviously need a brain in order to remain aware OF something.

But right now, if you search for an "I" you´ll discover it´s not possible to find it in space or time. And if it does not occupy a fragment of space or time, if it´s pure "nothing", what´s the need of a brain to keep being what you are right now?

That´s why deep sleep is important, because it gives you a taste of what consciousness without an object is. It shows what´s the realm of "no name, no form", something that´s very difficult in the waking state or dream state.

[enigma]

Apr 23, 2010 20:02:32 GMT -5 question said:

Not sure why deep sleep is supposed to be so important. Try to look at it without the nonduality jargon. The brain takes a break and shuts off for a while, and nothing remains of a mind. In some rare cases some awareness is still present, in my case it is not. Even if awareness is present in deep sleep and is described as having no content, no form, no nothing, how do you know that it is absolute and completely independent of the body's (or more specific: of the brain's) functioning (same question applies to the samadhi states btw)? Rupert Spira touches on this in his article, but every time he tries to tackle this question he unfortunately digresses into nonduality language games.

What Rupert seems to suggest is that mind cannot know a truth sought on the foundation of an illusion. Mind will formulate an assumption, and then ask for proof that the conclusion derived from that assumption is false. If I assume I'm the tree in my back yard, prove to me that I can't grow leaves. Obviously, I can. Another example would be, if God loves us, why does he let us suffer? Obviously, He does.

Hencely, it's necessary to challenge the assumption on which the question is formulated. If it is found that the assumption is not valid, the question dissolves and needs no answer.

In this case, the question as to how we know that Awareness is independent of body/mind is asked on the basis of the assumption that body/mind is independent of Awareness. Where is the evidence that this is so? Is something happening that you are not aware of? If so, how is it you are aware of this? If it is not so that something is independent of Awareness, what becomes of the question of whether Awareness can be independent of body/mind?

If that sounds like nonduality language games, it seems to be the best I can do.

[enigma]

I might as well toss in my two cents on the issue of deep sleep. Yes, I think it can be very useful to explore because it highlights the difference between objective experiencing and what we could call subjective being. From the perspective of mind, subjective experience is all there is, and all that is of interest. Truth/Awareness/Beingness/Isness is not only not in any way hidden, it's the ground on which you stand, the existence that makes all experience possible, the sky in which the bird is perceived, the canvass on which the painting is created. Nothing could be more obvious, and so even the seeking of it is the denial of it since the seeking arises from and within it and declares that it is not present.

Experience is movement. Something, either a sensory perception, or a thought or feeling, must be in motion, must be changing, in order to register that an event is occurring, and this event is compiled in the framework of a sense of continuity and recalled as an experience. It's not even necessary to assume anything is separate for this experience to occur, it's only necessary that it seem to move.

Awareness is the foundation from which, and within which, all movement is perceived, and itself is not moving, cannot be moving if such movement is to be detected. If it is not moving, it cannot be experienced as an event, and so nothing is happening, nothing is perceived. Awareness is clearly present because you are clearly aware, but it can never be experienced as an objective movement because it is the subject in which all movement is experienced.

The notion that consciousness is absent in deep sleep is not really so. Consciousness is required in order to know that consciousness is absent. It's easy to say that awareness knows this, but really, awareness doesn't know anything. Knowing is a quality we assign to the concept of consciousness, although consciousness and awareness are only separated conceptually. The experience of losing consciousness is an event occurring in consciousness, and the idea that some 'unconsciousness time' has elapsed, is also an idea occurring in consciousness. So, even consciousness is not absent in deep sleep, it's just that mind doesn't arise and so no experiences are recorded.

However, awareness of awareness is not an objective experience, and since subjective beingness does not have an experiential beginning, the question of it ending in deep sleep does not arise. IOW, it neither comes nor goes.

[Portto]

Excellent posts, Enigma and everybody.
I also consider important to look into deep sleep.
When we first hear that we are not the mind, we immediately ask what happens when the mind is turned off... Of course, using the mind to answer this question seems destined to fail.
While mystics use deep meditation and samadhi to answer the question, these states are not easily attained. Also, OBEs and NDEs are anecdotal.
On the other hand, deep sleep is easily accessible to everyone.

[karen]

My experience with awareness in deep sleep is when it borders wakefulness - either waking up from an alarm or when a dream begins. Afterward, it seems dark, but really that is only in contrast to the wakeful state. It does not sound like those "hundred dollar experiences" like how ZD has described them, but more like a 10 cent experience - very easy to forget or not notice at all (I mostly don't).

Nisargadatta has stated that the more one notices the periods of absent mindedness while wakeful, the more you will notice it in sleep. This seems to be true in my case at least.

Lastly, I'd like to point out the relying on the question of whether awareness is part of the brain or not seems to be based on the belief that the empirical world is somehow more real than the subjective world. However, reliance on the empirical world seems to be based upon ignorance of the primacy of one's subjective experience. No matter how much more concrete the empirical world might seem to be, it is entirely based upon our own subjective experience - at least our own experience and all that we can ever know - is based on our subjective experience. That is where the inquiry operates. To do it "out there" will make us circle some false center.

[enigma]

Apr 24, 2010 15:06:32 GMT -5 karen said:

Lastly, I'd like to point out the relying on the question of whether awareness is part of the brain or not seems to be based on the belief that the empirical world is somehow more real than the subjective world. However, reliance on the empirical world seems to be based upon ignorance of the primacy of one's subjective experience. No matter how much more concrete the empirical world might seem to be, it is entirely based upon our own subjective experience - at least our own experience and all that we can ever know - is based on our subjective experience. That is where the inquiry operates. To do it "out there" will make us circle some false center.

Well, i would suggest that there is an objective world from the perspective of the individual, which is subjective from the (purely conceptual) perspective of Beingness. So, there are effectively two levels of perception; that which appears as a kind of collective dream, and the individuated interpretation of that dream, which becomes the totality of ones individuated experience. IOW, what one subjectively thinks and feels ABOUT this 'objective' world is all that matters to the experiencer.

The significance of this is that ones experience of the world can radically change as the thoughts and feelings ABOUT it change, without anything in the world objectively changing.

Of course, this is not to imply that inquiry, or any sort of spiritual investigation, should be done 'out there'. Even this 'objective' world arises from 'in here'.

[lightmystic]

Hey ZD,

Yes, this experience is very different than Samadhi. Samadhi, from my understanding is experience of pure awareness that takes place my temporarily removing from the senses and the mind, so there is only pure Awareness (which can seem like sleep for even just spacing out when there is complete transcendence, but isn't really physiologically either of those things). My understanding is the value of meditation is to provide this experience and an intimacy with it, so that the Awareness experienced in samadhi can start to be recognized to be going on in activity as well.
This is, by contrast, actually the recognition that the impersonal awareness continues during deep sleep, it's just that the mind is in sleep state, so there are no thoughts.
Interestingly, the transcendental mediation movement did some studies in the 70's I think and showed that the samadhi state was physiologically different than sleep. That makes sense to me.

The coalescing of everything into oneness sounds, to me a bit different than how I understand samadhi, and is definitely different than awareness during physiological sleep. In both my understanding of samadhi and physical sleep, the mind must shut down. In samadhi the mind is absorbed in pure Awareness. In sleep, it's just resting. The Yoga sutras calls sleep "thought waves of nothingness". This is contrast to samdhi, which transcends the mind. What you are calling samadhi, though, sounds like not transcendence of the world, but actually a recognition of the relationship between that transcendence and the world. And that is something that the mind itself takes part in as part of the process, and so is not something that can occur within deep sleep.

Oneness is a recognition of the mind, as two boundaries must be created for them to even feel "unified." So, knowing you are the awareness which never sleeps, and the experience of that during sleep IS what I'm talking about. Yes, it's definitely not a oneness, because the mind would have to be active, even if just on some quiet level, to make that recognition.

I also agree that it doesn't seem to help people recognize themselves, and it's a side effect of knowing ourselves as pure awareness, not a cause. And it's one of many side effects. Additionally, it's something that's easy not to really notice, because the mind is not awake to notice it at the time. So, of course, it doesn't really matter, and neither is a sign of a high degree of Enlightenment integration, nor is a lack of recognition of that a sign of some lack of Enlightenment integration.

Apr 23, 2010 17:40:54 GMT -5 zendancer said:

LM: What you are saying seems quite different from the awareness experienced in absolute samadhi, which Zen calls "the falling off of body and mind." Entering samadhi there is a distinct sense that all separateness is coalescing into a unified state. After total unity occurs, and the separate observer has completely disappeared, there is still a clear and distinct sense of awareness during the entire time that the state continues. There is, however, nothing that one can say about that state of awareness because there are no qualities or aspects to it and there is nothing outside of it. It is totally undivided. My understanding is that that pure awareness is what Nisargadatta called the "primordial" and "monolithic" awareness of the Self.

The same kind of awareness in the waking state is what we experience on a daily basis (when the mind is silent), and, in the same way, absolutely nothing can be said about it. It has no qualities or aspects. It does not age; it does not need anything or seek anything; and it does not change in any way over time. It sees "what is" when there is wakefulness, but it sees nothing in absolute samadhi. Nevertheless, the awareness in samadhi is not subtle. It is just as clear and unmistakable as waking awareness, but without any kind of content. The only thing I can say about it is that it feels as if awareness slowly sinks to the bottom of a deep ocean and rests there in a state of total emptiness and equilibrium.

I have never experienced pure awareness in deep sleep in the same way that I have experienced it in samadhi or in normal wakefulness (when the mind is totally silent), but I assume that it is present because I have been awakened from deep sleep by the body's awareness of something happening externally that requires wakefulness. Pure awareness never sleeps, but I have never felt one-with it during deep sleep.

My speculation is that Nisargadatta so totally identified with pure awareness that eventually all transient phenomena receded into the background. At least he seems to speak about it in that way. If this is true, and I have certainly not yet verified it for myself, then perhaps awareness did not diminish in its clarity and intensity the same way that it seems to do for most of us when the body is in deep sleep. Has anyone other than Nisargadatta spoken about this?

I should probably mention that I do not think any of this is very important, and it has virtually nothing to do with seeing through the usual illusions that dominate most peoples' lives. It is simply another interesting aspect to be considered by those who are interested in self-exploration and self-discovery. It is turtles all the way down! LOL

This subject reminds me of the story told by a Zen Master who was sleeping outside of a cabin one night under the stars. (Have I told this story? If so, I apologize in advance.) She was sleeping facing away from the cabin. Out of a deep sleep she heard a voice say, "Take a look." She ignored the voice, but moments later it returned with more forcefulness and said, "TAKE A LOOK!" Again, she ignored the voice, but the third time this happened, she woke up and wondered what was going on. She turned over and suddenly saw that the cabin floor was on fire ignited by sparks that had jumped out of the fireplace. She spent the next hour or so putting out the fire and cleaning up the mess before she rested for a moment and suddenly realized the sequence in which everything occurred. She was halfway through a hundred day silent retreat at the time this event happened. Interesting story, huh?

[zendancer]

LM: You wrote: "What you are calling samadhi, though, sounds like not transcendence of the world, but actually a recognition of the relationship between that transcendence and the world. And that is something that the mind itself takes part in as part of the process, and so is not something that can occur within deep sleep."

I do not think that the mind is involved in samadhi in any way. If thoughts arise, samadhi instantly dissipates, and in deep samadhi there are no thoughts at all. It is an experience of unity because there is no observing entity. The sense that all separateness is coalescing into oneness only occurs preceding entry into samadhi. After samadhi has developed, only pure awareness remains. There is no sense of "I am;" it is beyond that. This is why it is impossible to say anything about it in retrospect. There is nothing to compare it to. As a side note, all sense of time ceases in samadhi, and after leaving that state, one has no idea whether five minutes or five hours passed until one has looked at a watch or clock.

I suspect that one of the values of samadhi is that it involves some sort of deep relaxation that loosens up mental constructs and allows the truth to be seen. Many people have reported resolution of various questions and issues following deep samadhi, and in my case, at least, three nights of deep samadhi preceded my first kensho experience--the experience that turned my world upside down.

In deep sleep I have never experienced any sort of awareness remotely similar to the awareness of samadhi. I simply wonder if Nisargadatta reached a state of wide-awake awareness in deep sleep that is the same as samadhi? The way he writes about it makes me suspect that to be the case, but I have no experience with which to confirm that. I know, I know; I know where that finger is pointing. LOL

The reason that all of this seems relatively unimportant to me (other than from a standpoint of existential curiosity) is that 99% of peoples' issues involve illusions and dramas that occur during their waking hours. Most of the people I interact with are being jerked all over the place by their mental habits, and their attachment to various thoughts. They remain stuck in the mind. Until the basic illusions are penetrated, samadhi and awareness in deep sleep seem like fairly esoteric issues by comparison. Furthermore, neither samadhi nor awareness in deep sleep is necessary for penetrating the illusion of selfhood. Those experiences might make it easier, but they are certainly not necessary. I think it is far more important to become silent, or to shift from thoughts to direct perception as often as possible, as a way of penetrating the usual illusions that make peoples' lives difficult. I would advise people to "Stop and be still", and wait to pursue the other stuff after freedom has been attained. Until the mind becomes a servant rather than a master, life is pretty much lived in a dream.

[Portto]

Excellent posts, Zendancer!
I love this thread.

My guess is that some sort of awareness in deep sleep would be a strong indication that we are not the body.
But I completely agree with you - we can continue with illusions and identifications even after having out-of-body experiences. I hear a lot of people saying they are traveling souls. They moved from the body into the soul, which seems cozier.
We are always looking for something - I guess this is how all this came to be.