UnbornTao

Just another incomprehensible quote by Ramana. Incomprehensible as in not currently realized/experienced.

@Yimpa Hello there!

Sure, thanks. By directly conscious, what's meant is an awakening. To add to what you said: it is easier to be happy than to suffer. Suffering requires doing something, whereas happiness may simply be the realization of your completeness in the present. But why limit the consideration to a psychological framework? Suffering is about what you do in your experience, while happiness is an unknown, although psychological well-being is clearly foundational for the conventional kind of happiness. You - You are the one who uses your mind. It is not an it that comes up with stuff on its own, as if it were an external force out of your control, like the weather. It's an activity one actively engages. I think the depth of what a concept is still eludes us, though we do have concepts about it. Pain is a concept. How do we reconcile that fact with the way we currently hold concept to be? So, we can see that it is much deeper than a mere idea or frivolous notion.

Brian is wrong! Anyway, thanks for that.

I wouldn't be so quick to presume what being conscious means in this context. You may be referring to being aware or cognizing things. Realizing what something is is direct. That's something to find out for oneself. It's about the truth of you now, so why separate that from our so-called "real life"? Questioning can occur at any time and under any circumstances. This may help shift our relationship to how we experience things - or reframe them, as you said. Doesn't the subtext of this whole thread suggest that we don't actually know what happiness is in an existential sense? We still reduce it to an achievement within the realm of survival. This isn't to imply that "being happy all the time" is realistic for most people, or even that it's what we imagine it to be. In that sense, it's more about "freedom." There's no reason why we couldn't be happy in that regard. Simply realize you are complete now - it isn't elsewhere or separate from you. Definitely. This includes training how we use our minds - not engaging in disempowering thoughts or actions. This suggests that happiness may actually be our natural condition, as hard as it might be to see in the midst of daily life. In any case, it's better to set everything aside and begin investigating the matter from scratch.

@Joshe I hid your duplicate post.

A pleasurable sensation is fleeting and physiologically based. If happiness were like that, it would be limited to a temporary sensation or "high," similar to what one might feel after eating a piece of chocolate cake. That is pleasure. "Bliss" is a new distinction to make here. Consider Ramana once again: from our perspective, his experience may have seemed lacking or poor, and yet he was said to be quite happy regardless. It may sound fantastical, but it gives us a sense of what that condition might have been like.

Real happiness is different from pleasure, gratification, and relief. It doesn't seem to be a feeling or the result of getting one's needs and desires met either. Notice that pain underlies both the search for pleasure and the act of desiring. That's about survival. Nothing wrong with it, but it's a process aimed at persistence, not happiness. A mouse running on its wheel, chasing a piece of cheese that is never meant to be reached — it's just there to keep the mouse running. Happiness, on the other hand, could be seen as being happy with, and independent of, your experience. There's an aspect of it that makes it "independent of self." This is more related to Being, whatever that is.

Partially enlightened. How many mosquitoes? The main question is: Are you conscious of your nature? The "bliss" might be a side effect of that consciousness - though it's probably still a mystery for us (for now). I suspect it wasn't really an emotion or a state for him, but something closer to freedom from everything: a transcendence of self and existence. That said, day-to-day happiness matters, too - things like being healthy, doing functional stuff, controlling one's mind, meditating, and being complete right now. Unasked advice, but there you go.

Okay, thanks!

Don't just adopt a cosmology. Tell the truth, particularly to yourself, about your experience just as it is. First, you've got to find out what the truth of experience - and you - is.

For instance, there are stories of Ramana being in bliss while insects bit his body. He also lived in a cave, barely eating or moving. This may suggest a different view of this condition. Perhaps it is more aligned with Being, already complete and not separate from you. Who knows?

Sure. Even then, it can be examined more deeply - not as pleasure, gratification, relief, or 'winning.' If it exists independent of experience and is not a state, then this notion of happiness departs from common usage. In that sense, we don't really know what it is. For example, wanting happiness appears to be an assessment of unhappiness. In doing so, we place happiness outside ourselves, making it unreachable. Moreover, when we speak of 'being happy,' we're often making an assessment based on survival rather than freedom - which might be something entirely different. Notice that such assessment is almost always conditional. Real happiness would be a bit like breathing - to put it poetically - instead of fulfilling a desire or similar. By 'mind,' did you mean internal dialogue? She will likely 'have' a mind insofar as that distinction is operative for her. But mind doesn't seem to be an objective reality one can possess, like having or lacking lungs. It's the "place" in our experience where we say domains of thought occur. Otherwise, it's already non-existent. Perhaps. Some random considerations.

Happiness might turn out to be a condition - synonymous with your nature - rather than a passing state, though this will likely sound fantastical to most of us. Conventionally speaking, it might better be described as willingness to go through one's experience exactly as it is, no matter what it is. "Acceptance" sounds lame, though, but it contains some kernel of truth. You are essentially assigning responsibility for your inner experience to external circumstances. Yet notice whenever anger arises: what is it actually caused by? You can actually create states at will with no outside factor seemingly causing it for you. You already create your states, and circumstances may help you in that process. Think of the craft of a good actor. Their art rests on the ability to summon the appropriate emotional state at will. My suggestion is that we are already like such an actor, though for the most part we do it unconsciously. What is happiness, anyway? Is it the same as the relief or sense of victory that comes about when something wanted is accomplished, or something unwanted is successfully avoided?

We could start with the observation that happiness is caused by you.

Good question. You contemplate it and tell us what you find.

Until you personally have an awakening, you can simply trust that it is possible. It might seem paradoxical or nonsensical, and yet it is possible - for you and everyone else, just as they are now. After all, you already are you, and you are conscious. What's that about? Be wary of mistaking the failure to grasp something for its being impossible. Particularly in this context, belief is detrimental. Relying on hearsay is worse than worthless. The truth is unknown; deepen that recognition. Become aware that, in your present experience, you really do not know - you aren't directly conscious of what existence is. Doing so should help you open up beyond your current knowledge and assumptions. From this state, you can question in a more real and powerful way. The investigation is about what is actually true now. So, what is my nature? That is the core question to ask oneself. A breakthrough is the goal - not a conclusion, fantasy, philosophy, experience, idea, conviction, or worldview.

Turned the moon into a boomerang: Meditation's paying off.

"Being too broke too soon"

As a background sense or subtle form of fear, sure. You're asking about "being oneself" in a social context, which seems to show up in the character and behavior you present to others, although we could get clear on what that business consists of. I don't think this struggle is uncommon.

Then, discover what everything is - at any level. It's not an ideal; it's simply whatever is already the case, about anything. We can start with our experience as it is, right now. For example, since you mentioned it: What is bias? Also, begin to notice anything within you that is inauthentic - any form of pretense, phoniness, affectation, and so on - and drop it. That act of letting go alone already calls for a transformation of oneself. At the same time, pursue absolute consciousness: What am I? What is another? What is life? Just a few suggestions off the top of my head.

We could start by acknowledging what's what in our experience. A principle consistent with that would be calling things by their name. Avoid the common trap of idealizing "the truth." Start with what's right in front of you. Recognize that what's true - the nature of anything - is often actually unknown. That shift in perspective can help steer us in a more useful direction. For example, as a grounded exercise, consider your experience of a particular emotion. Telling the truth about anything requires being conscious of it in the first place - personally experiencing what it is. In the case of anger, for instance: what is it made of? Why does it exist? Once we discover that for real, we can begin to communicate what anger is from a place of genuine insight. And we also have 'ultimate Truth' as a possibility to be personally realized.