|
Samadhi
Having not spent any time following other
teachings or reading their philosophies, I am not qualified to interpret these
foreign (to me) words. However, I do have a good fiend, Dr Nitin Trasi, author
of The Science of Enlightenment, who replied to a question from a visitor to
this site about what the word really means.
I have posted it on this site as I feel it is a
valuable description of the truth behind these ancient words.
_________________________________
Dear Nick,
Where does traditional samadhi/ananda/bliss fit in for
you, as that was something I aspired to long before I came across advaita, and
somehow believe the two are different ways in to the same place, however
different the philosophy?
David
(paragraph above is from an email forwarded to Dr
Nitin Trasi, who replied, see below)
|
  The Science of
Enlightenment
by Dr. Nitin Trasi
A good friend of Nick's, met
shortly after nick began teaching.
"Dr. Trasi
is ideally positioned to examine this subject from both a scientific and
traditional perspective, to strip away much of the surrounding confusion
and fallacy. A
reference book to 100 university libraries all over India."
The Science of Enlightenment |
Dear David,
The word samadhi, as I wrote earlier, can be used with many different meanings.
Relevant to your question, I think we are dealing with 2 different states. One
is a state of temporary bliss such as you have described, which is reached
through a form of 'sitting' meditation. If you are interested, the technical
terms "kevala savikalpa samadhi" and "kevala nirvikalpa samadhi" have been used
in Sanskrit to denote its 2 successive stages. This is a temporary, blissful
state achieved through a form of meditation.
However, the state of the awakened person has also been referred to as samadhi,
and this is a different state altogether, the actual technical term being "sahaja
samadhi" (sahaja meaning "natural, spontaneous"). This is the natural,
spontaneous state in which the awakened one finds himself, and is permanent or
rather his "default" state. This is a state whose basic feature is contentment.
Your query therefore relates to this basic difference between bliss and
contentment. Bliss is a temporary, pleasurable state and the opposite of misery.
On the other hand, contentment here is taken to mean not the opposite of any
unhappy state, but rather the basic nature of our essential awareness (of "who"
we really essentially are, beneath the layers of who we think we are) which is
said to be contentment (you might have heard of the Sanskrit description
Sat-cit-ananda). It is difficult to describe, but to give a very rough example,
picture a newborn baby at rest or a dog at rest. Their essential nature can be
said to be contentment. It does not need anything from outside to achieve it. It
is already always there. Only the child/dog is content without consciously
knowing this, whereas the awakened one can knowingly bask in its glory.
Overlaying this basic contentment, the awakened one may experience other modes
of mind, including bliss (which may be more frequent, more easily induced, and
more lasting in his case, whatever brings it on, and whenever, but even here the
bliss itself will still be temporary). It can also include sadness or
disappointment. This sounds strange, for how can anyone be contented and sad at
the same time? But remember that sadness here is a superficial emotion (and is
recognized by him as such). Again to give a rough example, imagine a happily
married man fully content with his family and job etc. He roots for his favorite
soccer team which loses. He feels disappointed - for a time, but he still
remains basically a contented individual throughout. That does not change.
Another way to understand this is by the concept of Consciousness and its
content (for which I am indebted to Gary Schouborg of USA). What we really are,
is Consciousness, which is "what is doing the thinking" (as St Augustine put
it). What we think of, including what we think we are, is the content of
Consciousness. Now, bliss is a state which is within Consciousness, that is, it
is a content of Consciousness and it appears on the fulfilling of certain
requirements. Contentment, on the other hand, is the very nature or property of
the Consciousness itself. To the inexperienced, it is therefore only fully
apparent when the Consciousness is devoid of content, or nearly so (like when
overwhelmed by a beautiful sunset). But basically it is always already there and
does not need anything to bring it "on." This is so in ALL people, including
you, right here, right now.
As for your opting not to go for enlightenment if it is not going to be
blissful, I can say 2 things:
1) As I said earlier, occasions of bliss may be more frequent, more
easily induced, and more lasting after awakening and in fact may not even need
formal sitting meditation to induce them. They could be induced by something as
trivial as seeing a falling leaf, for example.
2) I do not think there is a real choice. I do not
see Enlightenment as something resulting from conscious efforts on our part.
Rather I see it as a form of psycho-spiritual evolution of our nature, which
happens (to some) just as adulthood happens to us, regardless of whether we want
to grow up or not. If it is to happen, it will, whether you want it or not.
Please let me know how far I have answered your
queries.
Best wishes,
Yours truly,
Nitin Trasi
www.geocities.com/nitin_trasi
|