Anger can be a Gift

Originally Posted by JustASimpleGuy

From a linguistic perspective it's a seemingly fuzzy difference because language is dualistic, however it's the ego (Ahamkara) that proclaims it exists, is conscious and is blissful. It's the reflection in the mirror thinking it's the actual face...

It depends on how far you want to go with with this because it's all perceptual reality, 'I am' is the ego declaring its existence and if there was no ego there would be no consciousness of Existence, Consciousness or Bliss. There are also different understandings of what Existence, Conscious and Bliss are and that clouds the issue.

I've never came across a Sanskrit 'equivalent' but I dare say there is one. The Gnostic Christians used the word 'Gnosis', which at it most simple means 'knowing without knowing how you know'. There is a knowing of the mind/intellect and there is a knowing that 'feels' as though it has always been there. If that makes sense. Sat-Chit-Ananda seems to be on that same 'wavelength'. It's kind of like there's a difference that you know you exist and you know yourself as existence, and if I was going to do the comparisons of self and ego/Ahamkara then I would say knowing you exist is the differentiated consciousness of ego/Ahamkara while knowing yourself as existence is the undifferentiated consciousness of the self.

The image is the reflection, the mirror and the actual face and without one of the three there would be no image. One of the things that caught my attention in the definition I read - which I've been trying to find again - is consciousness beyond what is consciousness or not.

Originally Posted by running

technically yes. but in the process it takes time. from moments, to minutes, to periods of time, to there is no escaping it even if you tried. why? because technicality you are correct.

and when i say cultivate i don't mean it in any way other than how the process goes. from moments to always. which a practice can help with. such as meditation and so on.

Which is the reason I mentioned the ego/Ahamkara, because that is either one's greatest tool or fortified barrier. The process is more of a 'dismantling' of the structures we've built up and we need to begin the process of unknowing to allow our better nature to come through.

Originally Posted by running

there is also a little more to it. the energetic aspect of it that expresses through the nervous system has to clear through all the pathways enough to be able to maintain it. there can be discomforts along the way. if somehow somebody could just turn it on full power and hold it there i doubt somebody could physically survive that. which is the reason of there being a process. the body and the pathways have to become open and set up for that kinda power.

This is where you and I differ. The energetic aspect of it, like anger, is 'generated' by our unconscious and when you change the 'contents' of the unconscious you change how you perceive yourself. That changes your whole reality because how you perceive yourself is directly related to your unconscious. Hopw you perceive yourself is the 'result' of your unconscious.

For me there was no energy involved, there was just a dismantling of the perceptual framework that didn't serve me any more, to be replaced by something that is far more constructive. Certainly no feeling of power but certainly of being very psychologically disorientated.

Originally Posted by running

In my view if somebody is serious about spiritual growth and i dont mean psychological spiritual growth but actual spiritual growth.

“Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.”
Einstein

Jung's model of the ego is based on the Ahamkara and his model of the self is based on the Atman. The unconscious is Chitta or 'Lower Mind' and the Right Thinking of the Eightfold Path is constructive cognitive behaviour. There's more where that came from. There is no Sanskrit word for psychology because the ancients didn't perceive it to be separate from their religion and philosophy.

Thinking that psychology has nothing to do with Spirituality is the antithesis of all that Spirituality is supposed to be - enlightenment, self-awareness and moving past ignorance.

Originally Posted by Greenslade

The Gnostic Christians used the word 'Gnosis', which at it most simple means 'knowing without knowing how you know'.

I would say the second part of the Kena Upanishad gets at "Gnosis".

https://www.hinduwebsite.com/sacreds...arama/kena.asp

It begins with...

Part Second

I. If thou thinkest "I know It well,"...

And the crucial part being...

II. The disciple said: I do not think I know It well, nor do I think that I do not know It. He among us who knows It truly, knows (what is meant by) "I know" and also what is meant by "I know It not."

So "I do not think I know It well" is speaking to intellectual knowing and "nor do I think that I do not know It" speaks to Gnosis.

So I "know" It and also know I cannot know It (intellectually) nor express it (linguistically). Best I can do is analogy and metaphor (face, mirror, reflection). The Infinite is beyond the knowing of the finite (mind, intellect). It's simply not possible.

I would also say Self-realization is Gnosis in its truest sense.

[Ewwerrin]

Originally Posted by running

...using the power of the rivers in spirit....

Thanks for sharing the meditation. It is the most universally practical and beneficial practice and act of non-action. To align with the river of spirit, and the art of allowing, the flow.

[A human Being]

Originally Posted by JustASimpleGuy

It's just a matter of deconditioning mind. Of unbecoming what we are not. I emphasize just because it's a lifetime of conditioning that has to be overcome.

Indeed. I feel sometimes like I'm Andy Dufresne tunnelling his way out of prison with just a rock hammer

(Andy Dufresne is the central character in the film 'Shawshank Redemption', for anyone that doesn't get the reference.)

Originally Posted by JustASimpleGuy

So I "know" It and also know I cannot know It (intellectually) nor express it (linguistically). Best I can do is analogy and metaphor (face, mirror, reflection). The Infinite is beyond the knowing of the finite (mind, intellect). It's simply not possible.

Thank you, I've bookmarked it because it's going to need a bit of digesting but yeah, that's the one. There's certainly a difference between the intellectual knowing and the Gnostic knowing, as if they come from different 'sources'.

Originally Posted by JustASimpleGuy

I would also say Self-realization is Gnosis in its truest sense.

I don't know what is meant by self-realisation in Spirituality, it seems people aren't talking about the self at all but an agenda-based definition straight from the ego. Even a thread in how to tap into the unconscious didn't do so well.

Originally Posted by Greenslade

I don't know what is meant by self-realisation in Spirituality, it seems people aren't talking about the self at all but an agenda-based definition straight from the ego.

Call it Atman-realization (or Brahman-realization, God-realization, Christ Consciousness, Buddha Nature - it's all the same) and the reason Advaita goes to such lengths to make a distinction between sense of self (Ahamkara) and Self (Atman). Neti Neti, the Vivekas, Self-inquiry, etc...

It's a seeming paradox exploring non-duality by a dualistic investigation (self vs. Self - not this, not that) but the main tool of investigation (mind) is of and within duality (apparent reality). Saying all is one simply isn't enough. Anyone can say it. One has to "know" it and that comes from a "space" beyond mind, conscious or unconscious (these are just states of mind).

Vivekananda said one has to learn to work the machine (Maya) in order to be liberated from it, so use the tools of the machine to transcend the machine. Those tools are body, mind and the practices of the various traditions, and Advaita places much emphasis on knowledge (Jnana Yoga) though not exclusively.

I would also say, and this is just my opinion, it's a continuum from a tiny glimpse to full-blown Enlightenment, a glimpse doesn't necessarily lead to Enlightenment (in this life), it can be a journey of fits and starts, and the progression is exponential, not linear. Perhaps that last step to Enlightenment is more profound that all the preceding steps combined.

[A human Being]

Originally Posted by Greenslade

I don't know what is meant by self-realisation in Spirituality, it seems people aren't talking about the self at all but an agenda-based definition straight from the ego.

As I see it, to realise the self is to be released from the tight knot of fear that's at the root of egoic consciousness (relaxing that tight knot is what spiritual practice is all about, in my opinion).

[PureDevotionGirl]

I'm so angry today. I feel like everything is difficult for me and when I ask for help, no one helps me. I feel abandoned by the world.

I guess I feel more dejected than angry right now. Yesterday I was very mad though and it compelled me to work through my hunger just to produce something out of clay I might be able to sell for money. I lost steam very quickly though and haven't been able to work since.

I'm angry. I like it when I'm reminded that anger is there to tell you when you're not being treated the way you're supposed to. Anger is a form of self love. That makes me feel better when I'm so angry I want to destroy things.

*burns intensely*

[running]

Greenslade

The difference between the emotional experience and bliss.

the human body has a very powerful way of expression that is normally not tapped into. there are energetic pathways through the whole system that can become activated by the current of spirit. people do a lot of illegal and legal activities trying to mimic it. the real thing happens naturally and is far greater than anything imaginable. but in order for this to happen and in order for it to remain all the time, all of the pathways the current must pass through must be clear. or its a stop and go thing. here for a moment and then gone. during the process the power of that current and the power of that ecstatic joy push though, melt, dissolve, and blow out whats in the way. this is the process of being born again imo. we can call it a kundalini awakening, or whatever.

that process can make boot camp and other things seem like a walk in the park. its different for everyone but with similarities.

jumping ahead being in this power of ecstatic joy becomes the new normal. your mind and body adapt to this power. your joyful intoxication is like gravity. you are held in joy and silence. as they both work together. it over powers everything. except you can live in it. a new normal.


this is also where a guru works from. that deep silence and joy that is a great power. their students or visitors meditating with them if open will experience that power of joy and silence in them. that joy and silence will work in them teaching their system to become open to it. at some point the disciples will become entirely in the same power as their teacher. this has gone on since time immemorial.

i have spent time with a group in india and two gurus in the states. its all the same everywhere because this is universal and comes from the divine. people just speak to it differently from one place to another. some have more power from the silence and some more power from the bliss. but if they have the power they have both and if you or anyone else spends time with them to meditate and is open they will experience it in them.

now all of this can happen without a teacher. i had off and on experiences with it before my journey. spending time with gurus and all the time i could for the reason of this development brought me through the process to permanent. which is not the end but a new beginning.

if you understood anything i said. im not suggesting you didn't. you will know emotions and bliss are light years away from one another. entirely different things.

bliss and silence is a path in itself. not to be confused with psychological things of the mind. not that philosophy isnt a great tool. it is and can help immensely. the power is just not something that requires a certain personality, culture, background, or is manufactured by the mind.