Tag Archives: happiness

Q.344 – Death of the small I

Posted on by

Q: While I’m drawn to the apparent peace that sages such as Ramana Maharshi seemed to enjoy, I feel I’m failing to grasp something.

 Advaita seems, sometimes, to be totally nihilistic and bleak (although I accept that this would not constitute an argument against its veracity).

It’s all very well to say that the ‘self’ can’t die but this seems (from my perhaps benighted viewpoint) to be playing with semantics.

 If, with ‘my’ death, comes only oblivion such as in deepest sleep /anaesthesia, where is the comfort or meaning in this knowledge? The end of my small ‘I’ would seem to be, in effect, the end of everything since, without my consciousness to perceive it, how can anything be said to exist?

 Does one take comfort from the fact that other apparent ‘I’s continue to experience within the one reality? It may be that my existence is only apparent and that, whether it is followed by oblivion is irrelevant – but it doesn’t feel like that from where I’m sitting! Continue reading →

Discovering oneself: Part 2/2

Posted on by

creationSo how do we know how Brahman is? The teacher says that each object of experience has 5 aspects: asti, bhāti, priyam, rūpam, nāma. Asti = ‘is’. You know the meaning of the word ‘cat’, but not pay attention to the meaning of the word ‘is’, which means ‘isness’, which means ‘existence’. When you say ‘cat is’ you mean that the existence of the cat is. Any object of experience you can name is.

Existence is the intrinsic nature of Brahman, the Reality. In what form is Brahman? Continue reading →

Are you just happy or really, truly happy?

Posted on by

happy sam2Ānanda is of two types): ātmā ānanda and koṣa ānanda (we will retain the word ānanda without translation because it loses its expressiveness in translation). We need to understand the difference between these two types of ānanda before entering into the enquiry.

Ātmā ānanda means fullness – the very nature of one’s own self. Every individual’s intrinsic nature (svarūpam) is ānanda. Vedānta says: you are happiness, because you are fullness. Just as heat is the intrinsic, inseparable property of fire, so too happiness or fullness is the real nature of the individual. Continue reading →

Ānanda – our Svarūpam

Posted on by

When I went to a school, I asked the Children what are they in the school for? Someone said “to study”. I asked “Study for what?” “So that we can pass the examination with good marks” pat came the reply. “Why should you score good marks in the exams?” “So that we can get a good job?” “Why do we need a good job?” “So that we can earn a lot.” “Why do we need to earn a lot?” “So that we can buy things that we want.” “Why do we need to buy things that we want?” “So that I can be happy.”

What if you are Happiness here and now? What if Happiness is your Svarūpam? Please pause to think about the profundity of this possibility…..

Svarūpam, the word means one’s intrinsic nature. Like even heat and light are the intrinsic nature of fire.

Ānanda – it is a nuetral state; it is neither Happiness nor Sadness. It is neither bliss, for ignorance can be bliss. Ānanda is a state of equilibrium when one is at peace with oneself and the world.

We can logically arrive at Ānanda as our Svarūpam. How? Let’s analyze.

Continue reading →

Experience and Knowledge (Q. 321)

Posted on by

Q: ‘Experiential’, seemingly, is becoming a stumbling block in current discussions within spirituality and non-duality. There are the ‘experiential’, usually ‘anti-intellectual’ types (who deprecate ‘merely intellectual’, or ‘conceptual’ approaches), and those who defend the proper use of mind and the intellect, without denying the validity of experience.

 Would it be possible, though, to dispense with either of the two concepts: ‘knowledge’ and ‘experience’?; they appear to overlap, practically being synonyms and, indeed, one can say “I know pain in the belly”, or, “I know such and such emotion”, “I know (I am acquainted with) life”, etc., without resorting to the word ‘experience’ – the word ‘acquaint’, conveniently, is derived from the Latin via old French: cognoscere, gnoscere. The other alternative would be to dispense with the word ‘knowledge’ and use instead ‘real’/’unreal’, ‘reality’, which is, precisely, sat/asat in sanskrit – and expressions using these terms are quite frequent, as everybody… realizes (‘is cognizant with’, then, would have to be ruled out). Just today I wrote in a comment that true understanding is an experience, but now I have my doubts. Ultimately, certainly, the only Experiencer/Knower is brahman/atman (though he remains ever unmoved). Continue reading →

ANESTHESIA, DEEP SLEEP, DEATH AND CONSCIOUSNESS – Part 2/3

Posted on by

[Part 1/3      Part 3/3]

Before going into a consideration of Deep Sleep, once again a small detour.

Dennis raised in an e-mail the question of Sleepwalking. Where would it fit in the Model?

Some people amble around in sleep and even hurt themselves.  A few persons could commit heinous crimes in the state of somnambulism.  A well-known case is that of Kenneth Park in 1987 when he strangulated his father-in-law and killed his mother-in-law. However, he was let out by the court on the ground that he was sleepwalking when he harmed and killed people.  A similar case of acquittal also occurred in 1846. Apparently the body of the sleepwalkers is active but the mind seems to be asleep.

Neuroscientifically speaking, in the case of sleepwalking, the motor cortex of the brain is functional whereas the frontal lobe vested with executive functions is at rest. This means that a part of the mind (that propels the body to act) is active while the part responsible for reasoning and self-control is asleep. Continue reading →

Pleasure of Sex vs. Bliss of Self in Brain Scans

Posted on by

Khajuraho Temple Sculpture – 10th – 12th Century

Khajuraho and Kamasutra fire the fancy of any foreign tourist to India.  Add Spirituality and the heady mix becomes a killer app for seekers of quick-fix salvation for paying a visit to India!  Biologically sex evolved as a reproductive mechanism to possibly capture the advantageous heritable genetic traits from a partner.  Only humans and a few animals like bonobos and dolphins indulge in recreational sex.  Sex is closely tied to sensory perceptions and lies within the realms of the mind. Salvation transcends both senses and mind. “Rajneesh, the ‘horse’s mouth’ concerning the topic of enlightenment for Westerners for many years,” regrets James Swartz, “wedded two largely incompatible concepts, sense enjoyment and enlightenment.” One may lose ‘self identity’ and get enwrapped in an inexplicable joy in either of them as Brihadaranyaka Upanishad says. But the bliss of enlightenment and the pleasure of sensual gratification are totally different. Our brains can show it all very clearly!

Human brain is a mass of interlinked neurons piled up in three layers. At the bottom is the most primitive brain common to all animals. Continue reading →

Why do I Feel Unhappy? Why do I Feel Depressed?

Posted on by

Questioner: “I am Brahman” is the simple and straightforward message of Advaita. Brahman is synonymous with Beingness, Consciousness and Happiness. If I = Happiness, I should be always happy, should never be depressed. But I am overcome by the feelings of unhappiness, I get depressed. How come?

***

Well, the answer is “You” (I) can never not be Happy.

Out of Beingness – Consciousness – Happiness, the first two are self-evident. We do not require an external proof to tell me that I exist or that I am conscious. Can you ever say “I am not here” or “I am not conscious”? You have to be there and be present to say, “I am not here.” Similarly, I have to be conscious to say, “I am not conscious.”

In the same way, “I” can never ever be other than Happiness.

What is then the “feel” of unhappiness or depression that arises?

The “feel” cannot be “I” nor can it belong to “I”. That “feel” must obviously be something other than “I”. That is to say that such a feeling cannot be real because Brahman is the only “thing” that is Real. If the feeling is not real, it has to be an imaginary thing for, “I” would never say: “I am unhappy.”

But a Ramesam or a Tom or Dick do “feel” unhappy and say: “I am unhappy; I feel depressed. I am suffering.”

Continue reading →

Living rightly with others

Posted on by

Have you ever wondered why it is people find it so difficult to get on? From the outside it seems we are rigged for war. There is conflict between husbands and wives, parents and children, teachers and pupils, bosses and employees, fellow workers. So much friction and so much unhappiness. Is there something innately wrong in people that they can’t learn to live happily with one another?

According to my past training, I would have gone along with the common orthodoxy which tells us that that the cause of this friction and unhappiness is that we are suffering from low self esteem, lack of love, deep psychological problems, mental illness or the absence of the right kind of drug which is supposed to restore our brain chemistry to right functioning.

Since being introduced to the teachings of Vedanta, however, I now see that the root cause is that we are suffering from a misguided UNDERSTANDING of what is important in living a happy and satisfying life with others. As a consequence we have insufficient PRACTICE in living in a WAY which, in itself, brings about a quality of mind which is happy and is directly the result of a certain way of associating with others. Below is an extract from a longer article of mine entitled ‘Living Rightly With Others’. Continue reading →