what is bliss?

[Gem]

I think the main thing is to be at peace, which means peace with all that has past, and is passing. That balance in the mind is disturbed by craving bliss, and wanting more. The ability to be aware without the personal reactivity means no one is resisting all that is in passing, as it appears to one's own conscious awareness. If a person starts to practice, they cease to do anything, and there is no mantra, visualisation, breath control and so on. By intentionally ceasing all doing a person can see how their mind's activity, and reactivity, is habitualised, and how these habitual resistances as well as pursuits are agitating the mind, making it unbalanced and unclear. This signifies a shift from self-becoming (becoming more spiritual and so forth) to self awareness (knowing what is going on with you). Then, because no one is interfering with all that passes, the old things that became stuck can start to come out, as nothing is resisting or obstructing them anymore. At some time in that process things become clear enough and the 'bliss' starts to bubble up, but one needs to understand the underlying skill of equanimity which enables this opening up, or they will continue to be stuck in craving more bliss. In this way, the first day novice is doing the exact same practice as the seasoned monk, and there is no 'more advanced' practice. People will practice all sorts of things like pranayama and mantra and so forth, trying to make stuff clear, trying to increase the free flow, but a more careful observation will reveal the aversion toward ones life obstacles, and their craving to more of the blissful sensation. Hence the practice is in that observation which has the characteristics of conscious awareness with stable equanimity.

[revolver]

My personal experience of Bliss was when I experience that which is beyond the mind, or Awakening, my life has never been the same since, even through so called bad time the Bliss is still there bubbling away.

[Shivani Devi]

Originally Posted by WabiSabi

Like I said, I've experienced bliss; but I am of the opinion that such bliss arises from the ego. That it is a response to a feeling of connection, but that it is not essential itself.

From what I have experienced, reality itself is absolutely neutral. It does not judge between happiness and sadness, or good and bad.

It seems that you believe that bliss is an essential aspect of reality, rather than just an emotional state. So I am just wondering what your views on the subject are.

Exactly!

When ego and emotion is removed from the bliss, what remains? What happens (as in my case) if one says 'neti neti' to the whole bliss of being?

When I said that 'nothing' is there, I meant to imply that full awareness is only a neutral state, and I can only guess that this 'bliss' occurs in juxtaposition to the stress and worry of everyday, material existence which just doesn't exist anymore and so one is liberated from that and the feeling of joy and peace is more a feeling of sheer relief than anything else.

What I feel is total, abject ambivalence and there's a sort of complacency which arises from that state and I'm forever trying to drag myself out of it.

Like I mentioned before, Rumi isn't helping much (I never got much out of Rumi's teachings anyway) however, after reading some stuff by Pema Chodron last night there was just a slight stirring of something...after looking at images of babies worshiping Siva, there was a slight stirring of something...





According to the Upanishads, the bliss is our natural state of being (Satchidananda) and it must come effortlessly.

It's not like I have never experienced it, because I have. It's just that it's not something I can incorporate into my existence somehow without being in deep meditation or in deep devotion...and after experiencing it, the urge to meditate or worship has become seriously diminished because I'm like "been there...experienced that" and I think this is the root of my whole problem.

[running]

Originally Posted by revolver

My personal experience of Bliss was when I experience that which is beyond the mind, or Awakening, my life has never been the same since, even through so called bad time the Bliss is still there bubbling away.

yeah. its a strange pardadox once it has become past the coming and going. in that it just bubbling along despite what is. for me it took a while for my mind to be settled with the paradox.

great quote in your signature by the way!!!!

[blossomingtree]

Originally Posted by Shivani Devi

Exactly!

When ego and emotion is removed from the bliss, what remains? What happens (as in my case) if one says 'neti neti' to the whole bliss of being?

When I said that 'nothing' is there, I meant to imply that full awareness is only a neutral state, and I can only guess that this 'bliss' occurs in juxtaposition to the stress and worry of everyday, material existence which just doesn't exist anymore and so one is liberated from that and the feeling of joy and peace is more a feeling of sheer relief than anything else.

What I feel is total, abject ambivalence and there's a sort of complacency which arises from that state and I'm forever trying to drag myself out of it.

Like I mentioned before, Rumi isn't helping much (I never got much out of Rumi's teachings anyway) however, after reading some stuff by Pema Chodron last night there was just a slight stirring of something...after looking at images of babies worshiping Siva, there was a slight stirring of something...





According to the Upanishads, the bliss is our natural state of being (Satchidananda) and it must come effortlessly.

It's not like I have never experienced it, because I have. It's just that it's not something I can incorporate into my existence somehow without being in deep meditation or in deep devotion...and after experiencing it, the urge to meditate or worship has become seriously diminished because I'm like "been there...experienced that" and I think this is the root of my whole problem.

One of the problems with this thread, from my perspective, is the use and definition and application of the word "bliss".

Just as in peace, or joy, it can mean different things for different people.

Certainly, I believe, in a religious context, bliss is of course part of the equation, in that, in our true state there is great peace and joy - some may call this bliss.

Others use the word bliss to refer to some heightened state (and often these are people who are not tested).

In any case, if spirituality is relevant and real, how real can something be that comes and goes.

In Buddhism, it is said there is the Deathless. Ramana Maharshi speaks of bliss.

There is a real need to clarify and define in which context people who use the word are referring to.

Some are just referring to the many highs that are possible, but what comes and goes cannot be eternal, wherein we do seek for the eternal truth - which Sri Maharshi speaks of as finding the True Self.

Spirituality, in these forums, can also mean different things for different people. Some people think it is just about chilling out on a high, others see it as deep enquiry into the nature of the Universe and the very substance (and sustenance) of consciousness, others imagine it is talking to ghosts or having wild trips via astral projection.

Which is why, at least in my world view, I say go for the real teachers of spirituality: Sri Ramana Maharshi, Jesus, Buddha, Sri Aurobindo, St. Teresa, Rumi, Hafiz, Dogen, Rinzai etc.

And what is the commonality, in my opinion, across these major traditions and Saints? Love, compassion, Truth, and esoteric knowledge i.e. divine knowledge borne of bearing witness to Eternal Truth in one's heart, and through one's being. {with the esoteric Truths mirroring the Knowledge taught by these very Saints}. Then living this Truth that one has borne witness to in this life (for some the hard part ) - this invariably involves compassion, service and Love. The reason that spirituality supersedes and is superior to simply a self having some ecstatic experience is because the disciple is informed through wisdom. Wisdom of the true nature of the Universe, of consciousness, of identity (self and Self), many other revealings. In this way the Self is tempered and assisted into a very genuine and true spiritual transformation, which supersedes superficial inquiries such as variations of consciousness or insecurity/fears.

That, to me, anyway, is genuine spirituality.

YMMV.

BT

[blossomingtree]

Originally Posted by Gem

I think the main thing is to be at peace, which means peace with all that has past, and is passing. That balance in the mind is disturbed by craving bliss, and wanting more. The ability to be aware without the personal reactivity means no one is resisting all that is in passing, as it appears to one's own conscious awareness. If a person starts to practice, they cease to do anything, and there is no mantra, visualisation, breath control and so on. By intentionally ceasing all doing a person can see how their mind's activity, and reactivity, is habitualised, and how these habitual resistances as well as pursuits are agitating the mind, making it unbalanced and unclear. This signifies a shift from self-becoming (becoming more spiritual and so forth) to self awareness (knowing what is going on with you). Then, because no one is interfering with all that passes, the old things that became stuck can start to come out, as nothing is resisting or obstructing them anymore. At some time in that process things become clear enough and the 'bliss' starts to bubble up, but one needs to understand the underlying skill of equanimity which enables this opening up, or they will continue to be stuck in craving more bliss. In this way, the first day novice is doing the exact same practice as the seasoned monk, and there is no 'more advanced' practice. People will practice all sorts of things like pranayama and mantra and so forth, trying to make stuff clear, trying to increase the free flow, but a more careful observation will reveal the aversion toward ones life obstacles, and their craving to more of the blissful sensation. Hence the practice is in that observation which has the characteristics of conscious awareness with stable equanimity.

Stop making so much sense, Gem, it's boring for most

[running]

Originally Posted by blossomingtree

One of the problems with this thread, from my perspective, is the use and definition and application of the word "bliss".

Just as in peace, or joy, it can mean different things for different people.

Certainly, I believe, in a religious context, bliss is of course part of the equation, in that, in our true state there is great peace and joy - some may call this bliss.

Others use the word bliss to refer to some heightened state (and often these are people who are not tested).

In any case, if spirituality is relevant and real, how real can something be that comes and goes.

In Buddhism, it is said there is the Deathless. Ramana Maharshi speaks of bliss.

There is a real need to clarify and define in which context people who use the word are referring to.

Some are just referring to the many highs that are possible, but what comes and goes cannot be eternal, wherein we do seek for the eternal truth - which Sri Maharshi speaks of as finding the True Self.

Spirituality, in these forums, can also mean different things for different people. Some people think it is just about chilling out on a high, others see it as deep enquiry into the nature of the Universe and the very substance (and sustenance) of consciousness, others imagine it is talking to ghosts or having wild trips via astral projection.

Which is why, at least in my world view, I say go for the real teachers of spirituality: Sri Ramana Maharshi, Jesus, Buddha, Sri Aurobindo, St. Teresa, Rumi, Hafiz, Dogen, Rinzai etc.

And what is the commonality, in my opinion, across these major traditions and Saints? Love, compassion, Truth, and esoteric knowledge i.e. divine knowledge borne of bearing witness to Eternal Truth in one's heart, and through one's being. {with the esoteric Truths mirroring the Knowledge taught by these very Saints}. Then living this Truth that one has borne witness to in this life (for some the hard part ) - this invariably involves compassion, service and Love. The reason that spirituality supersedes and is superior to simply a self having some ecstatic experience is because the disciple is informed through wisdom. Wisdom of the true nature of the Universe, of consciousness, of identity (self and Self), many other revealings. In this way the Self is tempered and assisted into a very genuine and true spiritual transformation, which supersedes superficial inquiries such as variations of consciousness or insecurity/fears.

That, to me, anyway, is genuine spirituality.

YMMV.

BT

the problem is how people use things as tools of propaganda. nothing has caused so much destruction than that activity. people have the right to experience life in their own way. bliss beyond the coming and going is attainable to all. regardless of cultural back ground.

killing, torturing, and more commonly today being bullied with arrogance for being experienced but living their life, their way is absolutely ridiculious. since the begining of time common folks living ordinary lives have gone beyond the coming and going of bliss.

i agree with you on the goal is to get past the coming and going of bliss. but through coming and going comes beyond coming and going.

bliss in itself makes life tolerable, enjoyable, and is contagious from person to person.

[Shivani Devi]

Originally Posted by blossomingtree

One of the problems with this thread, in my perspective, is the use and definition and application of the word "bliss".

Just as in peace, or joy, it can mean different things for different people.

Certainly, I believe, in a religious context, bliss is of course part of the equation, in that, in our true state there is great peace and joy - some may call this bliss.

Others use the word bliss to refer to some heightened state (and often these are people who are not tested).

In any case, if spirituality is relevant and real, how real can something be that comes and goes.

In Buddhism, it is said there is the Deathless. Ramana Maharshi speaks of bliss.

There is a real need to clarify and define in which context people who use the word are referring to.

Some are just referring to the many highs that are possible, but what comes and goes cannot be eternal, wherein we do seek for the eternal truth - which Sri Maharshi speaks of as finding the True Self.

Spirituality, in these forums, can also mean different things for different people. Some people think it is just about chilling out on a high, others see it as deep enquiry into the nature of the Universe and the very substance (and sustenance) of consciousness, others imagine it is talking to ghosts or having wild trips via astral projection.

Which is why, at least in my world view, I say go for the real teachers of spirituality: Sri Ramana Maharshi, Jesus, Buddha, Sri Aurobindo, St. Teresa, Rumi, Hafiz, Dogen, Rinzai etc.

And what is the commonality, in my opinion, across these major traditions and Saints? Love, compassion, Truth, and esoteric knowledge i.e. divine knowledge borne of bearing witness to Eternal Truth in one's heart, and through one's being. {with the esoteric Truths mirroring the Knowledge taught by these very Saints}. Then living it (the hard part )

That, to me, is genuine spirituality.

YMMV.

BT

Yes, precisely.

In fact, some of the saints and sages never use the word 'bliss' at all. Ramana Maharishi and other enlightened beings have simply called it 'happiness'.

What is it that makes people happy? It is wide and varied until the whole distinction is made between those experiences which only create a transitory, fleeting happiness and those which make the happiness a lasting occurrence despite any external stimuli or premise to the contrary.

For some, bliss is equatable with unconditional love...love of Self and/or the Divine because that is the only thing which is eternal, unchanging and cannot be removed or influenced by anything.

There was once a time when I felt ecstatic agape, but it has totally faded in my being...and of course, I still love God, but that feeling has mellowed somewhat into "yeah, I still love you" and I know that it's still deep inside there somewhere...but bringing it out of me is like trying to extract water from a stone...my heart has gone cold.

For some people, they are inspired by the lives of those you mentioned, but for others like myself, it goes to a whole different level than that and those who inspire me spiritually are different.

I get my 'soul food' from those like Shankaracharya, Basavanna, the Siddhars of Tamil Nadu, Swami Laksmanjoo...and if there are any contemporary teachers which I find resonance with (or comes close) that would be Sri Sri Ravi Shankar from the Art of Living, Yogi Ashwini from the Dhyan foundation and recently, Pema Chodron.

I have been reading...studying their works and lives...but like I said before, the whole 'heart connection' has been lost and I've gone back into my mind again and what has happened to me has left me unable to feel any emotion whatsoever and 'trying' to feel an emotion isn't really feeling an emotion.

[naturesflow]

Originally Posted by Gem

I think the main thing is to be at peace, which means peace with all that has past, and is passing. That balance in the mind is disturbed by craving bliss, and wanting more. The ability to be aware without the personal reactivity means no one is resisting all that is in passing, as it appears to one's own conscious awareness. If a person starts to practice, they cease to do anything, and there is no mantra, visualisation, breath control and so on. By intentionally ceasing all doing a person can see how their mind's activity, and reactivity, is habitualised, and how these habitual resistances as well as pursuits are agitating the mind, making it unbalanced and unclear. This signifies a shift from self-becoming (becoming more spiritual and so forth) to self awareness (knowing what is going on with you). Then, because no one is interfering with all that passes, the old things that became stuck can start to come out, as nothing is resisting or obstructing them anymore. At some time in that process things become clear enough and the 'bliss' starts to bubble up, but one needs to understand the underlying skill of equanimity which enables this opening up, or they will continue to be stuck in craving more bliss. In this way, the first day novice is doing the exact same practice as the seasoned monk, and there is no 'more advanced' practice. People will practice all sorts of things like pranayama and mantra and so forth, trying to make stuff clear, trying to increase the free flow, but a more careful observation will reveal the aversion toward ones life obstacles, and their craving to more of the blissful sensation. Hence the practice is in that observation which has the characteristics of conscious awareness with stable equanimity.

I am hearing you. I have a few ponderings..
What about if it isn't craved as such Gem? But more a natural arising through process serving to burn up the old foundations as it seems to do for some. I wonder if the life people are living in this state is the reason it actually serves them. Where as the more you open to life in lots of ways, that this naturally shifts you into other means within yourself, to process differently and deepen beyond what your normal patterns are.

For example if your circle of friends are all into this and say you only walk to one shop to buy your food, pass few people and not notice life and how it moves you in lots of ways, one is bound to stay in the pattern they believe is the source of their greatest fulfilment?

[Gem]

Originally Posted by naturesflow

I am hearing you. I have a few ponderings..
What about if it isn't craved as such Gem?

That's good.

But more a natural arising through process serving to burn up the old foundations as it seems to do for some.

I don't think it works like that, and I think it's actually the equanimity of the mind that enables the purification.

I wonder if the life people are living in this state is the reason it actually serves them. Where as the more you open to life in lots of ways, that this naturally shifts you into other means within yourself, to process differently and deepen beyond what your normal patterns are.

I talk about opening up to life in the sense that the vitality of living energy can come through without being overly hindered, but that might mean emotional turmoil can surface without disturbing you, or it could mean a huge current of blissful energy flows through without creating a ripple.

I think people tend to be 'spiritual' in the public eye here, but in real life I suspect there are experiences that drive them to the limitation. For me there are. A blissful energy can be a roaring torrent that's very hard to bear, and stable mind is essential for that. We start our spiritual journey in emotional and physical pain but learn to keep the mind still, balanced and stable rather than becoming highly adverse as we were accustomed to being, and as we are able to let things be as they are as they pass, while remaining undisturbed, a more stable equanimity is cultivated or established, so when the whole thing starts opening up, we have the presence of mind for it.

For example if your circle of friends are all into this and say you only walk to one shop to buy your food, pass few people and not notice life and how it moves you in lots of ways, one is bound to stay in the pattern they believe is the source of their greatest fulfilment?

If people are pursuing fulfillment in the same patterned way, it's OK, they haven't quite consciously realised that there is no contentment in it, but they will at some stage. That's what it is like - things have to unfold in their own way...