Hi all--

This is a very valuable resource and I want to thank Phil and others who are involved in moderating these intriguing and useful discussions.

My question is this: Does Kundalini awaken before the falling away of self or after?

My experience is as follows. I generally used to have infusions from above into the crown and into the body. At one point, these experiences were pleasureable, I wouldn't say blissful, but definitely calming, causing an immobility in the mind so that the mind's thought process would slow down and almost stop completely, although they had less effect on the vicereal level, which seemed to be repressed, in my case.

After years of these experiences, I began to see that experiences were unnecessary. This insight came about about when I was riding my bike one day in the city in a prayerful state of attention and something like a veil decended from above. Very subtle, luminous, almost indefinable. The centre of my being fell away and I couldn't find an "I." I couldn't understand how I could pedal the bike, how anything moved when there is no "I." This thought was a ripple in this awareness. Everywhere I looked there was the centre of awareness. Nowhere and everywhere. This experience faded away. But a couple of monthes later I had dreams and there was this same awareness in the background watching. I awoke in that awareness and started doing things and had no idea how things were being done, how I was folding clothes, as there was no "I" centre. I sat down to do japa, my accustomed practice at the time, but the effort seemed absurd. There was simply this witnessing, there never was a self. So my question is, can this truth be realized and lived without a kundalini awakening, as I have no interest in experiences of grace, subtle energies, visions.

I will say that I had visions that were very real at one point in my life. The Blessed Mother came to me in dreams and taught me to pray the rosary and than when I opened my eyes She was at the foot of my bed. These were the beautiful experiences of my life as I was never a Christian in practice although I had cultivated a certain devotion (which I couldn't really understand at the time) for Christ.

At any rate, I have been having problems with subtle energies lately, but the process seems to be to turn away from them, ignore them and then something starts to open, a sense of detachment from the body and an awareness that this body is not "I." This is not a thought, but a movement of consciousness to it's true centre which is not the body at all. But it all seems pretty foggy still, there is simply an attempt to move into this no "I" without any sort of exuberant awakening. Is this possible God? He asks. Can you arrange the painless sadhana for me

Anyway, I've digressed.

Asher, your sense of no-I reminds me Bernadette Roberts experience of no-self. I don't know if you are familiar with her, if you don't I recommend you to read her book.

Regarding your question on K, I understand K as purification process to cleanse all junkes both at conscious and unconscious level. The experience of falling away of self is almost unknown phenomena. According to Roberts no-self is an experience comes after the unification of God and man and this unification has been the ultimate goal of mystics. I think awakening of K comes prior to this unification

Hi Grace--

I want to eddify that this was an experience; but it gave me a true gauge of what ego is. I guess what my question than is this: can one awaken to this standpoint of "no I" permanantly before the purification process? It seems the case (in this sense) that this "I-God" is a construct and that this other point of view exists before the psyco-spiritual or subtle body.

I have heard of such an experience happening before the purification/awakening of kundalini, noteably by Suzanne Segal--who went through phases of extreme emotional/purificication upheaval after her "awakening" but these were experiences that baffled her on some level, b/c there was no one home. She would go through crying spells during this time, even when there was nobody there.

The idea being that the body-mind is a construct (a necessary construct if we are to live, mind you!) that takes care of itself, when we gently disengage from energies, felt experiences, visions, all subtle phenomenon, which are afterall an enhanced dream. Kundalini as transformation seems different than experience, however. You note that it cleanes junk etc.

So in terms of Kundalini and its transformative aspects, I want to understand what the difference between feeling energies states and the actual Kundalini awakening is. I think they are two radically different things, the Kundalini being irreversible and the former being somewhat self-indulgent. Dunno, really, just various questions I wanted to raise.

Thanks for responding, Grace!

Asher

PS. I have read some of BRoberts in the past. I know she is for real, of course, but she doesn't seem to understand that this awakening into No Self is described in the advaitic tradition, and is not so isolated in human history as she thinks. I have no idea about what she means by "still point" in the beginning of her dark night; and at times (honestly) she seems a self indulgent naval gazer.

Wanted to add quickly that I believe there is a radical difference from the unitive state and the No-self. This has been elucidated by advaitic teachers throughout time. Basically they say that the bliss of the unitive state tapers down into peace and this peace (I believe) leads to the eventual falling away of I-God and is truly "the peace that passeth understanding." I have no clue as to whether this can happen before the unitive state, but people seem to claim it can. But Maharsi does talk about the Kundalini awakening at the right side of the chest and this experience seems to replicate itself in people who consider themselves his disciples. As opposed to awakening at the base of the spine, the awakening seems to begin in the heart and with it comes the beginning of the unitive life...however there is no sense of I-God in union rather it happens in a context of No I, simply a witness that exists before the I-God and all bodily experiences/trance/ecstasy/samadhi. From this standpoint, experiences happen, but there is no one to claim them, or to even project/postulate an I-God in union.

Asher, as you are noting, the kind of no-self experience you are describing is well known in Hindu advaitic traditions and in Buddhism. Suzanne Segal and Bernadette Roberts provide good descriptions of the experience from the perspective of two Westerners who come to this unwittingly. I know Bernadette and have discussed this with her extensively. As her use of terms like Ego and self are highly idiosyncratic, it becomes difficult to relate them to other psychologies, for example, or even to the writings of other spiritual writers. And yet I, too, have had times of "no-I," in which, as you describe, it seems as if "doing" is happening without an agent of choice operating. In my own case, however, I could never deny the continuing existence of a witnessing subject of attention that "belonged," as it were, to me, not to mention the responsibility I bore for my actions. Accounting for these experiences requires a metaphysical psychology along the lines of Hinduism's chakra system, but the Christian view of the soul can affirm them as well. St. Thomas of Aquinas taught, for example, that the energy and intelligence of the individual created soul wasn't completely bound up in the operations of the body, but could experience its own spirituality, at times. Also, the "interface" of the soul in the spiritual realm is cosmic, which could account for some of these experiences.

You ask about kundalini and its relation to these experiences, and I think Grace has given you some good feedback. Generally, kundalini seems to be about cleansing the various levels of our system so that we can embody higher states of consciousness. It's certainly possible for higher states to emerge and manifest before the cleansing is done; in fact, some zen masters do not even seem to report having kundalini process going, nor to value it much. So, perhaps in some, awakening to higher states isn't well integrated with the body? I don't know, but it could well be.

This article seems to come to come close to the experience that confronted me years ago. I hope I'm not wrong in posting it.

What is enlightenment, no, I mean really, like what is it?"
by Steven Norquist at Enlightenment.com in the archives.
July 01, 2003

Many friends and family have been after me for some time to write about my experience and understanding of this topic. I have hesitated to write about it not because enlightenment itself is so hard to describe, but because enlightenment tends to make one quite lazy. Before my change I was a busy beaver, reading and writing and playing music and sports and really actively getting out there. But after �the change� as I call it, there was a clear vision of how silly all this activity was and how much incredible effort is required to perform it.

But before I get ahead of myself let me lay out one basic fact, I am awake. I woke up about a year ago. I know what I am, what I have always been and what it is impossible to stop being. Some call this enlightenment or ultimate truth, unity consciousness, infinite mind and so on. But all those names don�t tell the non-awake what it is. Even I calling it "the change� is not really accurate because nothing really changed, yet paradoxically, huge change took place. In simple terms I was once Steve living his life but now I am the experience of Steve living his life. It is a shift in perspective. Before this perspective shift occurred I had practiced about three years of medium intensity meditation consisting of some breath watching, a little mantra repetition and some light self inquiry Ramana Maharshi style. These techniques were coupled with an intense desire to find and know the truth. I read everything on enlightenment I could get my hands on.

After about three years of this I had my first experience of �nonduality� as it is called. I had just read a passage in Ken Wilber�s �The Spectrum of Consciousness� where he points out that ordinary awareness is ultimate awareness. This struck a chord in me, I set the book down and stared at a paper that was sitting on the table in front of me, after about a minute or two an exciting and frightening thing happened, I disappeared! By that I mean the middle fell right out of the equation. Normally there would be Steve over here looking at the paper on the desk over there, now there was only the experience, "paper" but no Steve over here seeing it. It was clear that the middle that normally separated the paper from Steve did not really exist, there was only the experience, "paper."

Now let me try to make this more clear by giving an illustration.

Imagine as clearly as you can that you enter a large house that you have never been in before. You feel strange and kind of scared, there is furniture and drapes but no people. You wander around feeling the creepiness of being alone in this big house. You go from room to room not knowing what you will find. You start to get nervous and a little fearful being alone in this big house. You wonder how long it has been empty like this. In time the sense of the bigness and emptiness of the house starts to weigh heavily on your nerves. Finally, when you can not stand it any longer a shocking realization occurs to you, your not there either! Only the experience, "house" exists.

This is how nonduality feels and is the real truth of existence. Remember the question, "What is the sound of one hand clapping?" Now you know the answer.


You see, with enlightenment comes the knowledge that even though there is much activity in the world, there are no doers. The universe is in a sense, lifeless. There is no one, only happenings and the experience of happenings. Enlightenment reveals that the universe emerges spontaneously. It�s emergence and pattern are perfect in mathematics and symmetry and involve no chance. Nothing is random, everything emerges exactly as it has to. There is no random chance, or evolution based on chance. The universe is perfect, nothing is wrong or could be. There seems to be chance or unpredictability from a human perspective but that is only because our time frame reference can not see the universe emerge through its whole life span in a matter of minutes. If we could see that, then we would clearly see how every event was not only perfect and necessary but even predictable.

Now lets summarize so far, the universe is perfect, no one exists, yet the experience "universe" persists. How can this be? Consciousness. Consciousness is aware. If it were not, then there would be no universe. The very nature of existence implies consciousness. One can not exist without the other.

There can never be a universe that does not involve consciousness. There are no universes or dimensions where there is no consciousness. Matter and form would never arise without consciousness. Universe/Consciousness, Mind/Matter, Wave/Particle, call it what you will, the reality is that the manifestation, the very appearance we call the universe, is consciousness.

Now don't mistake me here, there is no observer. There are no persons in existence experiencing the universe, but more than that there is no Ultimate Person, God, Mind, or anything else observing the universe. There is only the experience of the universe being there with no experiencer.

This seems like a paradox but who cares, this is the way it is. Experience "is," that is all, that is the way the universe is, an experience by no one. The universe spontaneously arises out of consciousness yet at the same time is itself consciousness. We must lose the idea of matter being observed by something we call consciousness, that is not true. Some teachers talk of the Witness, the ultimate passive mind that observes all things moment to moment. This implies some level of separation, a witness over here watching the universe over there. It's not like this, there is only the experience, universe. There is no observer. Even if there were no manifestation the feeling would be the same. Once again let me make this clear: consciousness is not aware "of" the universe, consciousness is aware "as" the universe.

Now don't mistake that last sentence. Don't think, "Oh yeah Steve, I get it now, consciousness is not aware of the universe from a vantage point separate from it, like a disembodied soul, consciousness is instead aware of the universe as one of the billions of beings in it, like man, or dog, or fish." No! Such thoughts are false. When I say consciousness is aware "as" the universe I mean the very act of existence is consciousness. A carrot is itself consciousness, is itself awareness. There is not carrot aware of itself as carrot nor disembodied invisible consciousness aware of carrot as carrot, there is only the experience "carrot" and that is consciousness and that is enlightenment. There is no observer.

Let's talk now about how this fits in with human life. All people who do not know what's going on believe that they are the people that they are, an individual with thoughts and desires and hopes and dreams, a body and a house, a wife and a child. The list goes on but you get it.

Now the truth. Even though the above is happening, it is an automatic machine like emergence out of Universe/Consciousness and is following a strict nonchance pattern. More importantly, no one is performing any of the above and Universe/Consciousness is what is going on.

To make it more clear, stuff is happening but no one is doing it. Emergence proceeds and consciousness is aware. The unawake person, the person that doesn�t know what's going on believes that they are acting, that the human them exists. The reality is, the body exists, the thoughts exist, the memories exist and that is consciousness and that is all.

Someone might say consciousness has temporarily mistaken it�s experience of the body and the body�s memories as a person. But even though that answer may seem to explain the why, really there is no mistake at all. Universe/Consciousness has never been confused. The person can fall away at any moment restoring the original state of matter and consciousness which has never actually been obscured. This happened to me, but in that happening nothing was lost because there never was a me to lose, only a confusion to correct that never existed.

Knowing this, I mean really knowing this, not intellectually, but as a direct experience of everyday life is enlightenment. Now once this is known it is impossible to go back. Once you have drawn the curtain and seen who Oz really is you can�t cover him back up and pretend not to know the truth.

So how do we proceed once we know? We let experience manifest unmolested. As has been said, �The universe is perfect, intervene at your peril.� The enlightened person never acts. This is the riddle of karma solved, there is no karma, never was, never could be. There is no reincarnation, how could there be? Who is there to reincarnate? There are no persons, there is no birth or death, there is ultimately nothing except Manifestation/Awareness.

99.999% of the spiritual books and teachers out there are completely wrong. They are wrong for one simple reason, they are not enlightened, they don�t know what's going on. So in order to keep the illusion of personality, of the idea that there is something or someone, they invent stories, or theories, or ideas, wear special clothes, perform certain rituals and so on. They teach this stuff. But the truth is so simple, it is laughable.


Now let me make a clear distinction on one point, mystical experience is not enlightenment. You may have mystical experience, see God, get abducted by aliens, receive messages from an angel, contact your spirit guides, the list could go on. But always and forever, no matter what is going on the truth is, every experience, mystical or ordinary is a happening of Universe/Consciousness.

If I could teach the world a lesson it would be, no matter what you experience always remind yourself, �There is no experiencer, there is no observer.� If you do this long enough and often enough you will one day know what's going on. When that day comes you will realize nothing has changed, yet everything has changed. It is a feeling and a knowing. An inescapable falling away of untruth. If you think you know it then you don�t. When you know it, you do. And when you do know it, no one can take it away from you.

Some points to clear up. When I said the enlightened person never acts I did not mean such people sit in a cave and die of starvation and exposure. I mean the body can be quite active and manifest all manner of good and bad behavior, the mind can be racing with thoughts and feelings, but consciousness, now enlightened, knows no one is acting. It is only the universe blossoming forth spontaneously and perfectly.

As consciousness you are more aware of the feelings of the body, physically and emotionally. You don�t feel these things but you are aware of them because there is no division between them and consciousness. The Universe and Consciousness are equivalent, remember the formula, U=C. Also the thing we call personality or ego does not totally vanish. It can remain intact along with the body. It behaves and interacts and changes over time like any person would but the enlightened one knows they are not that ego.

Some schools emphasize the destruction of the ego as the only means of liberation. All that is really required is the realization that you are not that ego. That the ego really doesn�t exist, is an illusion of sorts that can be left to it�s own designs. It�s not really there, but it appears to be there and that is just fine, don�t worry. If the ego begins to fade that's ok. Remember, there is no experiencer.

Let me talk briefly about practice. Meditation and book study are useful and can ripen an individual towards awakening, but the most important thing is to change your perspective. You must learn to see what is really going on. Understand, in reality everyone is enlightened, but not everyone knows how to perceive this. The reason is, enlightenment is so natural, so obvious, that from birth we have become accustomed to ignoring it in preference to anything else that manifests. Mediation can train you to still the mind and gain concentration but it will not give you enlightenment. A radical shift in perspective must occur, the habitual focus of your awareness and your way of perceiving must be changed.

Study of books will not get you there, you need a shock. The easiest way I know is for an enlightened person to talk you into this perspective shift. The best books I have read were the ones that talked you into enlightenment. Feeling experiments such as the house scenario above are good to help evoke the feeling of enlightenment. Feel what it is like to not be there. The real breakthrough will come when you �feel� the truth.

It�s creepy, not blissful or ecstatic. It should scare you, the body should react defensively, or there could be uncontrolled laughter at how stupid you have been for so long. It�s like one of those 3D dot pictures, you stare and stare at those dots until bingo the picture emerges! After that, you can always see it, you can�t unlearn it. The same with enlightenment.

Basically any practice that can shock you into seeing what is really going on is acceptable. But understand, you want to know what's really going on, to feel it, to contact reality. It shouldn�t take long, a few years at most, less for some. If a practice or a teacher tells you it will take 10 or 20 years, find a new practice or teacher. Remember you are your own salvation, ultimately it is you who will wake you up. Any method that can shock you into seeing what is really going on is acceptable but the perspective shift must occur.

Let me try to bring some clarity to the subject of enlightenment and morality. It has been said that enlightenment produces compassion and love and that many enlightened ones forgo release into Nirvana and reincarnate again and again until all souls have obtained enlightenment, the Bodhisattva vow and such. None of this is enlightenment. Enlightenment is not about morality or vows, it is simply existence in the truth, that is all.

Enlightenment carries no requirements and expects nothing, the universe manifests and just that is enlightenment. We don't seek enlightenment to be happy or to give our lives meaning or to feel bliss or ecstasy. Loyalty to a flag is not enlightenment, love is not enlightenment, hate is not enlightenment. If you see these as the fruit of enlightenment then you are wrong. Instead each of these are enlightenment themselves. Each of these are spontaneous emergences out of and as consciousness. Action, feeling, creation, performance, love, hate, murder, salvation, compassion, each is enlightenment itself. There is no doer, no experiencer, only manifestation. This is the truth, this is enlightenment.

I want you to understand that while nothing ultimately changes, in human terms much change takes place. This happens because once you recognize what's going on the main motivations of life begin to drop away. The level of dropping away is no doubt unique to the individual but is directly proportional to how much you desire to resolve into reality. What I mean is that it is possible to be enlightened and still try to retain a level of unconsciousness in order to interact in human affairs. As time passes this state will be harder to maintain.

It is similar to suspending your belief when watching a movie. You pretend to believe the reality of what is going on. You cry with the characters, you laugh with them, you hope with them etc. You do this for the entertainment, to get your moneys worth. This is the way real life is with enlightenment. You know there really is no one. You know that it is just a display, a machine like emergence out of and as consciousness. Yet you must believe it at some level or you will simply lose the ability to interact in the world.

I can see why some enlightened ones have isolated themselves or become hermits. For the last year this has been an issue I personally have struggled with. How to know the truth and continue to interact with the world as if you believe it? You basically have to employ a little Orwellian 1984 doublethink. You have to pretend to believe while always knowing the truth. Some things are unavoidable of course, I was an avid reader but now can barely open up a book. I loved and played the guitar for years but now have zero interest in picking one up. Even writing these few words is a colossal effort. The reason is that deliberate effort is an affront to reality where nothing is deliberate, everything is spontaneous, and nothing at all is going on.

Don't mistake me here, I have not invented a rule of behavior where I have decided I must act less because to do otherwise would be an affront to reality, rather the natural outcome of enlightenment is less and less action, less and less thought. This is a natural development within the enlightened person. Eventually all action will be spontaneous and the person will not be acting.

Of course to say this is not ultimately true, because in reality no one ever acts. But from the human vantage point this is how it plays out. Memory is also a tricky thing, the memories of your life are still there and can be jogged into awareness but as time progresses and enlightenment begins to dissolve you, your access to them becomes more difficult. Your awareness becomes centered in the events of the present as they manifest, this is natural since these are the only events that actually exist. The person and the ego are simply dissolving. They don't really exist but the illusion that they do becomes less a part of awareness. You don't remember and you don't care.

Let me make a point about Zen breath watching. Most people just don't get it and most Zen schools don't make it any easier for students to get it. There are all kinds of books on Zen meditation, catalogs where you can buy all the cool silk clothes, cushions, gongs, incense and a host of other aids to Zen breath watching. But once you have all that stuff and finally sit your butt down, close your eyes and start watching your breath what exactly are you doing? Why are you doing that? I ask people this all the time and really piss them off, "Why do you meditate? What are you trying to accomplish? Why do you watch your breath?" I have never met anyone that has given me the correct answer.

The reason they don't know is because they are not enlightened. If they were, then they might not even meditate anymore, or they might, it would make no difference. You see, the simple truth that is missed by almost every meditator is this, the act of sitting there watching your breath is enlightenment. That is all. You are not doing something to gain something, just sitting there is enlightenment. That still state with calmed mind, just that is enlightenment, yet that annoying gossip over there interrupting your meditation, just that is enlightenment and that guy flipping you off in commuter traffic, just that is enlightenment. There is no doer, no experiencer, no one who acts. Manifestation emerges, actless, mindless and just that is enlightenment.

People meditate today because it is popular or because they want to have a mystical experience or just relax. The latter reason may actually be the most legitimate for the average person. But no one I know says they meditate because they are deliberately engaging in an actless act, or attempting to resolve a false sense of being into a beingless existence. And of the many meditators out there, I suspect that the majority would be shocked if I told them the guy flipping them off in traffic is more enlightened than they.

The point I'm trying to make and have been trying to make is that enlightenment is so natural and so easy that any attempt at deliberate practice towards it will get you farther from it, yet paradoxically, you have never once not been enlightened and no matter how strained and deliberate your efforts towards it, you never once acted!

So in closing, Enlightenment can be talked about, it can be understood, it is not mysterious nor does it need to be cloaked in a secret "Boy's Only" club language. Enlightenment is the feeling/knowing that no one exists including you and that everything that happens does so spontaneously and perfectly. Enlightenment is the feeling/knowing that what exists is Universe/Consciousness, they are the same, U=C. Existence is itself consciousness and that is why there is something rather than nothing. This is the real state of things and because it is so natural, so simple and so obvious,

"So, perhaps in some, awakening to higher states isn't well integrated with the body? I don't know, but it could well be."

Hi Phil,

Before I begin with your comment above, I want to thank you for being a moderator here and to add quietly, that there is tangible sense of Grace that emerges from talking about these issues, and that the process itself awakens as I read your words, even though I feel somewhat at the edge of an abyss, currently!

At any rate, yes, I have read accounts (much like the one posted above) where this shift from doer to no "I" happens spontaneously, but generally it is preceded by a significant physically felt experience in the heart, generally the right side of the heart.

I will say that I studied under a Hindu teacher who said the kundalini awakening wasn't necessary. He said that kundalini can be awakened in the tantric way, which he deemed dangerous, or could happen in the Vedantic way, which he said was safer.

As I understand, the advantage of the Vedantic approach (as if one can choose!) is that the vision of Reality (God as he is in Himself, as Augustine puts it.) is perceived and one simply surrenders to That, as it gradually unfolds. Then, as Maharshi puts it, the body takes care of itself. I think this means that transformation happens naturally...in a radically different context. So the two: awakening into no self (or movement towrads that) and transformation can happen at once. There are people however, who don't believe in transformation or the body after this radical reversal. This I think is not necessarily wrong, but what God wills for them at that time. They have to make a choice whether to be in the world (like the person above struggles with) or to leave the world. But who is there to decide? It simply becomes obvious in the moment, so there is no saying that one is right and one is wrong, I think.

Generally, I think this awakening will transform the body in its own time and its own way, although I don't quite see why (from the standpoint of No self) one would give this transformation much importance, unless God wills them to serve in the world. Then the body becomes a conductor of this grace-transmission.

Wow, thanks for letting me air these feelings out. One feels totally isolated when there is no community to discuss these issues!

Asher, thank you for sharing your experience. I must say that your experience is very unique for me and it is effusive. When I say awakening of K I use it in its ordinary usage i.e. awakening of Serpent at the base of spine but if I understand you correctly you are talking about another type of kundalini awakening which starts around heart or chest. Very interesting. Let me tell you something from my experience.

Direct after the awakening of K at the base of spine I encountered with the image of Christ and Maria. Although my background is Catholic to encounter Christ and Maria in this way was a great surprise for me. Because I have never anticipated to be influenced by Christ and Maria. Again to my surprise (positively) my spiritual journey became very rich and deep after this incidence. Now when you mention about the awakening of K at heart it reminds me my own experience. Recently I became attracted to the heart of Christ and I feel my heart is immersed in him. The feelings of love and bliss is indescribable. What I observed in this process is all chakras especially those chakras above heart became integrated to heart (not to the heart chakra). My mind asks what is it? In my little knowledge of K I have never heard about K awakened around heart. However, it makes sense.

You asked "can one awaken to this standpoint of "no I" permanantly before the purification process? "

I believe that every individual have its unique type of spiritual experience. In the case of Susan it seems she experienced the I-no expereince before awakening of K. My impression is when we come to this world we already have differet levels of spiritual experience. It seems she already attained a high level of expereince and in her case it may not be necessary to undergo the purification process prior her no-I experience.

Small point of order -- Asher, could you post a link to the article by Steven Norquist above instead of posting the article? Unless you have permission from enlightenment.com to reproduce his article, we need to observe copyright laws here.

Carry on . . .

"What I observed in this process is all chakras especially those chakras above heart became integrated to heart (not to the heart chakra). My mind asks what is it? In my little knowledge of K I have never heard about K awakened around heart. However, it makes sense."

Intriguing, I have heard it said by a sufi teacher that all chakras exist within the heart, so this is true in your experience it would appear. The heart is what Aurobindo calls the "psychic being" or simply the seat of the soul. He equates it with all the feelings that you describe--the bliss that is very subtle, like silk. What you describe strikes me as congruent with Theophan's (spelling?) talk about the decent on the mind in the heart. I believe what you write about is the intergration of psyco-spiritual self with the psychic being, or what Aurobindo calls the soul. Beautiful and blessed.

In terms of the uniqueness of each individuals experience and presumeablely "credentials" I would tend to agree. I recall Yogananda saying to one of his disciple's that it was not necessary for her to have the samadhi she desired, as she had had it in another life.

Wow send me some of your bliss, I could use it!

Grace, nice name.

Peace,

Asher

Want to quietly add that there are (as far as my readings go) different levels in the heart. The centre of the heart is the place of individual soul, described by Grace (I believe), but the advaitic teachings always point to the right side. The awakening of right side (they say) results in an intensely blissful state that tapers off into peace and is irreversible; it is the falling away of the self. In contrast, the awakening in the centre of the chest leads to the ascension of consciousness above the head.

Obviously there are no maps but I just wanted to point out the differences.


PS

ps. apology for posting the article. I'm a newbie in the cyberworld.

"Wow send me some of your bliss, I could use it!"

Who is that "I"?

Enlightenment is the feeling/knowing that no one exists including you and that everything that happens does so spontaneously and perfectly. Enlightenment is the feeling/knowing that what exists is Universe/Consciousness, they are the same, U=C. Existence is itself consciousness and that is why there is something rather than nothing. This is the real state of things and because it is so natural, so simple and so obvious

OK, I think this gets down to the crux of the matter, East and West, and although we've explored it on other threads, maybe a little more here is in order.

- see this thread for some of my views on enlightenment vs. Christian spirituality. This is a new thread, so let's discuss those issues there and continue processing the issues Asher raises here.