click tracking
Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
running

the moral case for bliss

Recommended Posts

everybody has an idea of how they want the world to be.

everybody has an idea of how they want people around them to be.

everybody has an idea of how God is on their side.

may i suggest that this self rightiousness is about control?

may i suggest control is the contributing factor of conflict?

may i suggest bliss is liberty?

the nature of bliss is joy.

everybody is searching for their happiness. usually by ways of CONFLICT. im not suggesting from my view to not. im suggesting that if everbody acknolwedged that history rhymes, and took it upon themselves to spend some time going towards the source. the source being bliss. opening themselved up to their own source of joy.

bliss is experienced as a joyful feeling all over the body and in the mind by ones own nervous system. not by synthetic means such as drugs and alcohol. but by opening up to spirit where she as in shakti activates the nervous system naturally expresssing herself as joy.

in the beginning one may get glimpses of the experience. here and there. over time it could go beyond that. where one becomes a living of experince with the divine aspect of bliss.

for eons people have used techniques to open up to it. such as meditation. yoga. pranayama. trance. sound. and many more. it in my view is a test and tune thing. locating what works for the individual to open up to its grace. good luck to those whom give it a shot one day!
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/14/2019 at 6:19 AM, Tom said:

Very beautiful,

Thank you running.

thank you  jonesboy!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/12/2019 at 10:37 AM, running said:

may i suggest bliss is liberty?

This is interesting, in juxtaposition to being of a self righteous mindset (discerning good and bad in others and the world, and perhaps seeking to establish greater justice).

On the other hand, does right and wrong vanish because we feel joyful? That doesn't seem to be the case.

I understand the dichotomy between a clamping down of the mind and spirit with a mindset that is constantly judging and seeking to control all, versus one that is liberated and opened up by being attuned to bliss and one's true nature.

Is it possible to feel this bliss, while also being discerning and establishing order in the world as best we can? I think so.

losdos.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Aetherous said:

Is it possible to feel this bliss, while also being discerning and establishing order in the world as best we can? I think so.

 

Do you think that establishing order in the world is more of the ego?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think so too. Also wonder if there’s different kinds of bliss

 

To me, bliss can lead to liberation. What I experience as bliss of the body is energy hitting structures and blockages - it feels good. If one allows the energy/bliss to flow through, it will clear out those blockages.  

Then there’s a second kind of bliss, which to me represents the natural state of being, which is more of a peace feeling than bliss, but is definitely rooted in a grounded but optimistic place. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Tom said:

Do you think that establishing order in the world is more of the ego?

It can be.

I personally tend to not think about ego vs no-ego when it comes to these subjects. I don't view the sense of oneself as an obscuration of bliss, or the buddha nature, although Buddhism does:

"Any thought involving subject, object and action,
Is held to be a cognitive obscuration." - https://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Four_obscurations

Also, I don't think that just because our perspective is subjective, that it's by definition, untrue. Some subjective viewpoints might be objectively true, and others might be objectively false. So, one's impressions of right and wrong in the world might be objectively correct.

Regarding what I could consider to be "the ego" in a problematic sense - a person who is ignorant and hypocritical. They would be wrong to try and establish (their ignorant version of) order and justice in the world.

So, having the notion of oneself, and the fact that our opinions are subjective, to me both aren't necessarily "the ego", and don't stand in opposition to the liberating experience of blissfulness. But "the ego" in the conventional usage of the word doesn't correctly perceive right and wrong, and it'd be better if that person didn't make any attempts at righting the wrongs of the world...because they'll most likely be wronging the rights.

Aside from philosophizing about this, let us just think: if you see someone being seriously harmed and wronged, you want to help them. It's not the ego that takes action. Someone who has attained bliss, or some other higher spiritual state of being, doesn't need to become inactive and unhelpful to others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, FaXin said:

To me, bliss can lead to liberation. What I experience as bliss of the body is energy hitting structures and blockages - it feels good. If one allows the energy/bliss to flow through, it will clear out those blockages.  

Then there’s a second kind of bliss, which to me represents the natural state of being, which is more of a peace feeling than bliss, but is definitely rooted in a grounded but optimistic place. 

I think I remember that Paramahansa Yogananda wrote about his teacher saying that the experience of bliss in the body = the experience of God.

I'd have to pull out Autobiography of a Yogi again, but that concept always stuck with me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Aetherous said:

It can be.

I personally tend to not think about ego vs no-ego when it comes to these subjects. I don't view the sense of oneself as an obscuration of bliss, or the buddha nature, although Buddhism does:

"Any thought involving subject, object and action,
Is held to be a cognitive obscuration." - https://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Four_obscurations

Also, I don't think that just because our perspective is subjective, that it's by definition, untrue. Some subjective viewpoints might be objectively true, and others might be objectively false. So, one's impressions of right and wrong in the world might be objectively correct.

Regarding what I could consider to be "the ego" in a problematic sense - a person who is ignorant and hypocritical. They would be wrong to try and establish (their ignorant version of) order and justice in the world.

So, having the notion of oneself, and the fact that our opinions are subjective, to me both aren't necessarily "the ego", and don't stand in opposition to the liberating experience of blissfulness. But "the ego" in the conventional usage of the word doesn't correctly perceive right and wrong, and it'd be better if that person didn't make any attempts at righting the wrongs of the world...because they'll most likely be wronging the rights.

Aside from philosophizing about this, let us just think: if you see someone being seriously harmed and wronged, you want to help them. It's not the ego that takes action. Someone who has attained bliss, or some other higher spiritual state of being, doesn't need to become inactive and unhelpful to others.

Ego to me is the identification with for example Tom and all that makes up that person.

Helping others in need is a very good thing. The problem is when one starts to enforce there beliefs on what is right and wrong on to others. History is filled with the killing of millions because someone had the view that what they were doing was the right thing.

I have found that working on yourself, that when you change yourself, letting go of your issues and fears, the world changes with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Tom said:

Ego to me is the identification with for example Tom and all that makes up that person.

Yep, the Tibetan Buddhists (well, the ones who are into Maitreya) would agree that such a thing is an obscuration.

I wonder about this - if a person is fully enlightened, where the Buddha nature and its wisdom is totally unobscured, then if they were to think of their identity, would it all vanish and they would be unenlightened for as long as the thought is happening? I tend to not think so.

It seems to me that concepts of oneself can coexist with bliss, and that the two aren't opposite ends of some spectrum or a duality.

6 hours ago, Tom said:

Helping others in need is a very good thing. The problem is when one starts to enforce there beliefs on what is right and wrong on to others. History is filled with the killing of millions because someone had the view that what they were doing was the right thing.

It seems to me to be a logical fallacy to say that just because others have committed great wrongs while thinking they were right, that anyone who thinks they're right will likely end up doing the same, and should therefore not have opinions on right and wrong, and not try to establish order and justice. Like I said before, some subjective viewpoints may be objectively true.

What if as society we tried to not enforce our beliefs about killing being wrong onto others... and so, if someone committed a killing they would be free to walk and wouldn't have to be imprisoned. I'm not sure that would be a good solution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I think that identity and bliss can coexist but would not identify with it. For instance I would know objectively people see me as Jon but I would neither be Jon, nor not be Jon. It would be a non issue. I could be wrong, and I don’t claim to be enlightened. :)

the DDJ says “Morality is for those who lose the Dao” 

My view is we still want what is good for someone. Truly loving people means wanting what is best for them, but not imparting our own judgements or beliefs about what that is. 

The difference between wanting what is best for them, and what we think is best for them. Part of our inner work is to know the difference imo.  The former example  relies on having no attachment to the outcome, as it is ultimately not up to me to decide. It is out of my hands.

Edited by FaXin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Aetherous said:

What if as society we tried to not enforce our beliefs about killing being wrong onto others... and so, if someone committed a killing they would be free to walk and wouldn't have to be imprisoned. I'm not sure that would be a good solution.

This reminds me of a Daoist story my kung fu teacher told me.

 

There was once a Daoist warrior monk sitting by the campfire near a road, talking to some younger people about peace and how to live a quiet Daoist life.  He was extolling the virtues of non violence when, out of nowhere, three bandits sprung upon the group.  Without thinking, the monk drew his sword, sliced the head off of one of the bandits, sheathed his sword and sat back down again.  The other two bandits were shocked at the speed of the warrior monk, and fled for their lives.

The monk's audience were terrified.  Once the shock wore off, one of the people managed to ask the monk, "How can you preach about peace, non violence and the Dao when you are so quick to kill a man, with such ease?"

The monk replied, "I did not kill the bandit, the Dao did.  I did not think about killing him, it just happened.  If I had chased after him and killed him, it would have been wrong.  Maybe I could've reasoned with him, or maybe they would've killed us all... that would not have been natural."

 

I thought it was a cool story

 

Edited by FaXin
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, FaXin said:

I thought it was a cool story

Pretty cool...makes me wish there was a like button here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...