Happiness is not State of Mind

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by luntrusreality

Happiness, because there is no lack.

So happiness is felt / expressed because one senses no lack and not because it is one's natural state . Happiness is the result of no lack .

Originally Posted by luntrusreality

Only something that has no opposites can by definition be our natural, ever-present state.

I understand what you are saying but suggesting a natural state by it's own merit suggests it's opposite . It could be said that every state is our natural state . If the self is all there is then every state that self entertains is natural . Otherwise a self in expression of anger is not naturally being angry in relation to self . Self in my eyes naturally feels what self feels in relation to whatever makes one feel as they do .

Originally Posted by luntrusreality

No, there is only the one natural state.
To say that being a separate entity is our unnatural state is not entirely true, because unhappiness or lack is not something a person has, it is what a person IS.
It just is this way. If we believe ourself to be a separate entity there will be seeking, lack and fear. How subtle it might be.

I would kind of agree that if we speak along the natural lines then there is only one natural state . That state encompasses all states .

Originally Posted by luntrusreality

The mind reflects this experience, yes. But thoughts just arise. There is no mind-entity who reflects for itself or engages in anything

Our point of awareness had is the point of reflection had . Your thoughts that happiness is our natural state is reflected upon such a point of awareness you have . Do you see, it's like looking in the mirror saying there is no reflection .

Originally Posted by luntrusreality

There is no experiencer other than happiness itself.

You relate to no experiencer and yet you relate to their being happiness . This can point to happiness being the experiencer of it's self, or happiness experiencing happiness . You are just shoving the experiencer out of the door and letting in happiness . We could just as well say 'self experiencing self' or 'awareness experiencing awareness' or whatever word suits .

Come what may there is experience happening, the experiencer, the observer, the witness, the self, God or whatever is digesting what is happening ..

The fact that you can relate to happiness being our natural state is illustrating my point . What you are is relating what you are to happiness being your natural state . Without a point in awareness one cannot reflect such a position .


x daz x

Originally Posted by God-Like

So happiness is felt / expressed because one senses no lack and not because it is one's natural state . Happiness is the result of no lack .

You could say it like that, yes.

Originally Posted by God-Like

I understand what you are saying but suggesting a natural state by it's own merit suggests it's opposite . It could be said that every state is our natural state . If the self is all there is then every state that self entertains is natural . Otherwise a self in expression of anger is not naturally being angry in relation to self . Self in my eyes naturally feels what self feels in relation to whatever makes one feel as they do .

Anger (or any emotion/feeling) is not our natural state because it arises in our natrual state of happiness/love/awareness.
Hate has its root in love. Love and Hate are not two equal polarities.
Hate arises out of Love. Love doesn't arise out of hate.
Sadness arises out of happiness, happiness doesn't arise out of sadness.
These are not polarities like day and night or birth and death.

Originally Posted by God-Like

I would kind of agree that if we speak along the natural lines then there is only one natural state . That state encompasses all states .

Exactly.

Originally Posted by God-Like

Our point of awareness had is the point of reflection had . Your thoughts that happiness is our natural state is reflected upon such a point of awareness you have . Do you see, it's like looking in the mirror saying there is no reflection .

These thoughts are not MY thoughts. This body, thoughts and emotions are not MY body thoughts and emotions. Just A body, thoughts and emotions.
They arise in the happiness of ME (and you, and everyone else because there is only one).

Originally Posted by God-Like

You relate to no experiencer and yet you relate to their being happiness . This can point to happiness being the experiencer of it's self, or happiness experiencing happiness . You are just shoving the experiencer out of the door and letting in happiness . We could just as well say 'self experiencing self' or 'awareness experiencing awareness' or whatever word suits .

Yes, you could use these words as well. They point to the same experience of peaceful, happy, aware being.

Originally Posted by God-Like

Come what may there is experience happening, the experiencer, the observer, the witness, the self, God or whatever is digesting what is happening ..

Yes, we are this experiencer, God, witness, obersever, awareness.
Because it doesn't lack anything and is complete in itself one could describe it as happiness or peace, or stillness. But these are just words.
Happiness can not be defined.

Originally Posted by God-Like

The fact that you can relate to happiness being our natural state is illustrating my point . What you are is relating what you are to happiness being your natural state . Without a point in awareness reflects such a position .

No what I am is not what is relating to happiness.
This relating to happiness just happens. Not from a point of awareness but IN awareness. There is nobody having a position. No entity separate from awareness, no chooser or experiencer separate from happiness.

Luntrus

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by luntrusreality

So happiness is our natural state, then somewhere down the line you mentioned peace, now love and awareness . So our natural state encompasses many things . It seems only the light and fluffy bits are natural and everything else is out the window . I understand that beyond mind there is no self so beyond mind there are no opposites .

The love that you speak of for example is within mind and is in relation to self or what you are within mind . In mind there are always opposites because we have a point of awareness that perceives what they are or what they mean to us in relation to what we are (or our point of perception) .

It's like saying I am oneness from a 'point' of perceiving oneness . A 'point' of awareness in mind cannot perceive oneness and be oneness . It's likened to being the sugar and tasting the sugar . The mind environment allows one to taste .

Originally Posted by luntrusreality

Anger (or any emotion/feeling) is not our natural state because it arises in our natrual state of happiness/love/awareness.
Hate has its root in love. Love and Hate are not two equal polarities.
Hate arises out of Love. Love doesn't arise out of hate.
Sadness arises out of happiness, happiness doesn't arise out of sadness.
These are not polarities like day and night or birth and death.

I haven't really touched on how things arise, maybe thats another thread in it's self but if we speak of the mind being the environment for experience then everything arises in mind . We can speak of hate not arising out of love and all that jazz or we could just say that love and hate arise in mind . Then one can relate what we are in relation to what arises .

Originally Posted by luntrusreality

Exactly.

But you suggest the natural states are the light and fluffy ones . All states include all states not just the light and fluffy .

Originally Posted by luntrusreality

These thoughts are not MY thoughts. This body, thoughts and emotions are not MY body thoughts and emotions. Just A body, thoughts and emotions.
They arise in the happiness of ME (and you, and everyone else because there is only one).

It doesn't matter who/m you relate the thoughts too or not, what is happening is that you have a point of awareness that makes sense of what our natural state is .

Originally Posted by luntrusreality

No what I am is not what is relating to happiness.
This relating to happiness just happens. Not from a point of awareness but IN awareness. There is nobody having a position. No entity separate from awareness, no chooser or experiencer separate from happiness.

In or of awareness is illustrating that one has a position in or of mind or a point in or of self reference . You see my point here . You have said what I am is not what is relating to happiness and yet this is a position attained by your very evaluation of it .

It doesn't matter if you relate what's happening to a person or a non person what is happening is there is relating happening . It doesn't matter if this relating is real or illusory or a dream of sorts . My point in making is that evaluation is being had in relation to what is happiness and what is our true nature .

This self reference is what is in experience .


x daz x

Originally Posted by God-Like

I haven't really touched on how things arise, maybe thats another thread in it's self but if we speak of the mind being the environment for experience then everything arises in mind . We can speak of hate not arising out of love and all that jazz or we could just say that love and hate arise in mind . Then one can relate what we are in relation to what arises .

The mind is not an environment for experience.
The mind is itself an experience. There is no real mind.
We are that which is aware of thoughts, feelings, emotions and perceptions.
All we know of these things is that we are aware of them.
We don't see a real thought that happens in a mind.
This thought we see is experienced as mind, not by a mind.

Originally Posted by God-Like

But you suggest the natural states are the light and fluffy ones . All states include all states not just the light and fluffy .

Our natural state is "light and fluffly" just by being itself.
It is at ease (light) and happy (fluffy).
What for example does the experience of sadness entail?
It is always in relation to a person. Awareness is never sad.
Awareness is "happy" because it lacks nothing and encompasses all emotional states.
There is a 24/7/30/365 Happiness in which sometimes even sadness can appear.
For example the death of a loved one can cause sadness, but there is still a peaceful knowing underneath (that is if we know ourselves to be this pure awareness, not a person) that nothing can ever be lost.
From a persons point of view death is real and the death of a familiy member for example is related to a story of "this person was a real person separate from awareness and is now gone forever". This is suffering.
Sadness , hate , anger are only real from the illusionary point of view of a separate entity.

Originally Posted by God-Like

It doesn't matter who/m you relate the thoughts too or not, what is happening is that you have a point of awareness that makes sense of what our natural state is .

This point of awareness is the One Awareness. There are not multiple points of awareness, only multiple eyes awareness has to experience itself.
But the eye (human or any other lifeform) itself has no individual awareness.
The one awareness is right now looking through "your" eyes and "my" eyes.
But "that" with which it knows, the consciousness itself is the same.

If we know ourselves to be this one consciousness what could be lacking?
What could be feared ? Therefore it IS happiness and not a state of mind.
Life IS Happy just because it is Life. A separate entity is not happy, there is no separate entity.

Luntrus

Everything is real in feeling for those walking through it in the moment..

People can still be open in joy/happiness and still be affected by ego. I would say more that we can experience a fullness and lasting expression of joy from our centre all the same when we are not tied to the painbody and its affect emotionally. When one is immersed in the painbody, love and joy can still be present. I wouldn't say it comes from ego, but more the nature of pain and love present in most interactions and people are loving those aspects and bringing joy into them, and that is always present one with the whole self.

I don't dispute how people find their happiness, of course opening to feel happy in this way allows people to build that feeling regardless of what or where it comes from. The capacity to let go through the external affects of happiness, can open the internal affects seeking happiness. So it all serves.

It doesn't matter how people seek to find happiness, the created path is created by them leading them home their way. And we know what home feels like..:)Some people need to relearn cause and affect in loving ways. And sometimes old ways of cause and effects and love need to be seen to see more. This what you saying may pertain to instant gratification and where and how that stems into adult behaviour...but that too is another subject..

The natural arising of joy for no reason. I can relate, but that natural connection has been made possible by the human experience so it all serves to the space of joy or happiness in the long run..

There is life knowing itself, through the whole self as it is in each moment of awakening to life.
Some of us feel and sense.The eyes can view and be still in presence of what is. The feeling arising in that view is the nature of connection and opening to connect. And that source without the painbody, is often emitting joy, love, peace, whatever you wish to call it..

Nature is in everything. We are nature in essence.

When you connect to the real nature of others you can love.
This is happiness. We don't have to go to nature to experience that. It is always in everything.

I don't mind what word you use. Your experience is your own.

yes you resonate with him in a shared meaning.

The mind is creating this, all this you are articulating. SO perhaps the mind can create anything to be anything. Yet pure direct knowing and pure direct feeling just is an arising from connection in feeling , to something that is connected also. All life is connected. All life is alive and a living breathing pulse is the thread connecting all..

Love is another whole different topic..

Love just is, you can love ten or fifty thousand. Love is seeking itself so the more you seek it through many you way, the more you have to reflect on in your external nature of love when you understand love and life is not personal.

Luntrus

Bed time and storm time here..summer storms can be quite intense..

[kkfern]

Originally Posted by luntrusreality

It is our natural "state". It can't really be veiled, only seemingly.
The sun is shining even when there are clouds.
Only when we believe to be on the earth looking up at the sun, we seem to not see the sun when its a cloudy day.


"I was happy before the body wakes up in the morning."
"Happiness is never personal. We have to understand that happiness is simply our true nature being aware of itself."
Francis Lucille about Happiness as our true nature. (3:30 min)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Usr5eLt57Q8

life is like this

some happiness and some pain.
some sunshine and some rain.

it is not that one is natural or predominate. they are both and many other things also. there is also the dark when we are away from the sun. the dark even has a good side or reason. i love to side in the dark and think. i love to sleep and rest. so even the dark is good.

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by luntrusreality

The mind is not an environment for experience.
The mind is itself an experience. There is no real mind.
We are that which is aware of thoughts, feelings, emotions and perceptions.
All we know of these things is that we are aware of them.
We don't see a real thought that happens in a mind.
This thought we see is experienced as mind, not by a mind.






Our natural state is "light and fluffly" just by being itself.
It is at ease (light) and happy (fluffy).
What for example does the experience of sadness entail?
It is always in relation to a person. Awareness is never sad.
Awareness is "happy" because it lacks nothing and encompasses all emotional states.
There is a 24/7/30/365 Happiness in which sometimes even sadness can appear.
For example the death of a loved one can cause sadness, but there is still a peaceful knowing underneath (that is if we know ourselves to be this pure awareness, not a person) that nothing can ever be lost.
From a persons point of view death is real and the death of a familiy member for example is related to a story of "this person was a real person separate from awareness and is now gone forever". This is suffering.
Sadness , hate , anger are only real from the illusionary point of view of a separate entity.



This point of awareness is the One Awareness. There are not multiple points of awareness, only multiple eyes awareness has to experience itself.
But the eye (human or any other lifeform) itself has no individual awareness.
The one awareness is right now looking through "your" eyes and "my" eyes.
But "that" with which it knows, the consciousness itself is the same.

If we know ourselves to be this one consciousness what could be lacking?
What could be feared ? Therefore it IS happiness and not a state of mind.
Life IS Happy just because it is Life. A separate entity is not happy, there is no separate entity.

Luntrus

This isn't really addressing my point (I am sure your answer is in your mind) .

My point is that you make sense of what you are saying in relation to your experience of what is happening . What is happening is you are relating what is our natural state and such likes .

If you say 'This point of awareness is the One Awareness'. Then surely the position you hold is of the 'one awareness' . This therefore is a position you hold in relation to what you relate your self to be .

If you actually home in on where your evaluations are happening and arising from then perhaps we can come to common ground .

Suggesting terms of 'just by being itself' and 'awareness of awareness' and such likes comes from a place where you make sense of them .

At the moment it is likened to what I said earlier in regards to there being something looking in the mirror suggesting there is no reflection .

It would be beneficial if I could just get this point of reference straight in my mind because it's kinda like talking to someone who suggests they are not there ..

Where is your point of reference had in relation to your experience and how do you make sense of your experience in relation to who/m or what you are .

x daz x

Originally Posted by God-Like

Where is your point of reference had in relation to your experience and how do you make sense of your experience in relation to who/m or what you are .

There is nobody that makes sense of anything.
You said it is like talking to someone who says he is not there, this is in a way true , if you are talking about a separate entity.
Also there is no separate entity Daz talking to me right now.
Everything - the talking - the "making sense of this experience" by the mind - all just happens in Awareness.
This awareness is not an entity, neither does it have a point of reference. A body/mind has a point of reference.
"I stand here- you stand there " referring to two body/minds. But awareness stands in both and neither.

Who do you adress when you ask me where my point of reference is? I guess you adress a body/mind, but this body/mind talks about not being a body/mind.
So it is indeed hard to find common ground in that :P


Luntrus

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by luntrusreality

There is nobody that makes sense of anything.

So this is your point of reference . Your reference point is a point where nobody makes sense of anything .

Originally Posted by luntrusreality

You said it is like talking to someone who says he is not there, this is in a way true , if you are talking about a separate entity.
Also there is no separate entity Daz talking to me right now.

Agreed no separate entity but a point of reference is in experience .

Originally Posted by luntrusreality

Everything - the talking - the "making sense of this experience" by the mind - all just happens in Awareness.
This awareness is not an entity, neither does it have a point of reference. A body/mind has a point of reference.
"I stand here- you stand there " referring to two body/minds. But awareness stands in both and neither.

Who do you adress when you ask me where my point of reference is? I guess you adress a body/mind, but this body/mind talks about not being a body/mind.
So it is indeed hard to find common ground in that :P

It all just happens according to the one that evaluates that it all happens . I say that if you evaluate something that I do not then you have made a point in reference regarding that which is referenced in relation to what you are .

I see the sun rise here, you see the sun set there at the same time . It may all be one awareness but there is reference made to the sun rising and one that is setting and to that which you are in relation to it .

When I address you I address you in relation to how I perceive myself . I am aware of an existence then I am aware of your existence . Call that existence an entity, or two or no entity matters not . One can only perceive self as they do and how they perceive self will be in relation to everything else .

One human being mirrors another, one spirit mirrors another, love mirrors love, fear mirrors fear .. etc .. what you see is what you get .


x daz x

I think I get closer to understanding what you mean by reference point, but not quite fully.

So the reference point is the human body/mind appearing in awareness?
With that I would agree.
But I wouldn't agree that we ARE this reference point. There is "one step" further so to speak.
This reference point of a human body/mind is just there. It is there like a chair is there.
The chair is seen from the reference point of a human body/mind but the reference point itself is arising in awareness.

So:

Pure Awareness -> Human body/mind or any other life-form -> Perceived objects/world from the point of view of a body

Pure Awareness doesn't split up into these other parts but they arise in it. A human body/mind reference point does not have its own independent consciousness.
When the separate entity is "dropped" all there is left is pure awareness. The body and mind are still there, but they are not personal.
Also this experience is not a personal experience of an individual body and mind.
With the end of the person, it is also the end of all persons.
There has never been an enlightened separate entity. That is impossible.