Happiness is simply peace of mind

[Maharani]

I've posted this in the spirituality sub-forum as well, but I feel like this framework really fits under self-actualization as well since it is very practical-minded.

Disclaimer: All of these are just concepts, which can never be "truth". They are just pointers meant to aid reflexion of your own experience. Your experience is the only "truth" there is.

This is my clumsy summary of a conceptual framework laid out by Roger Castillo in satsangs uploaded to his YouTube channel Being Lived. Roger is a student of Ramesh Balsekar, who was himself a student of Nisargadatta.

***

What we are really looking for is happiness in daily living.

The flow of Life will always be a mix of (physical and emotional) pleasure and pain*.

Human unhappiness ("suffering") is our psychological attitude towards the flow of Life.

Happiness is unbroken peace of mind regardless of circumstance.

Peace of mind is simply the absence of suffering.

Suffering manifests as 1. guilt, 2. blame, 3. pride, 4. worries & anxiety, 5. expectations & attachment to outcomes.

The root cause of all suffering is our false belief in personal doership.

When we examine how thoughts & decisions come about, we find that they are always the result of a person's genetic make-up & conditioning through Life.

Our feeling of free will is both an illusion and a gift.

The experience of being alive as a human is meant to feel as if we are free to do whatever we choose in each moment.

Our own free will is never different from the will of Life (or "God's will").

When we deeply feel and understand that Life unfolds according to "destiny" (cause & effect), our attitude of doership & attachment falls away and peace of mind persists on a continuous basis.

***

In Roger's words, non-dual awakenings (such as those brought about by 5-MeO-DMT or DPT) are simply means to an end: to find happiness in this human lifetime. The happiness that's available ("enlightenment" or liberation, which are synonymous in this framework) is simply the absence of our psychological attitude towards pleasure and pain: unbroken peace of mind regardless of circumstance.

* Painful emotions include anger and sadness, which we only tend to know with psychological suffering layered on top: Anger plus blame, sadness plus guilt. Even after "enlightenment", we still experience emotional pain, except without the additional layer of uncomfortableness that is suffering.

Edited February 16, 2020 by Maharani

[AlphaAbundance]

Is this perspective suggesting that unconditional happiness can happen without enlightenment?

[Maharani]

This framework suggests that enlightenment, liberation, and happiness are synonyms because all we're really looking for (and the only unconditional happiness that is available for the human being) is peace of mind. All that is needed to "get there" is for the belief in personal doership and the attachment to outcomes to fall away, which happens as a result of new conditioning (such as non-dual teachings, classical 5-MeO-DMT-style awakenings, meditation, whatever works for you).

Edited February 16, 2020 by Maharani

[28 cm unbuffed]

Check these videos, they were really helpful for me: 

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=aaron+abke+peace

[SOUL]

20 hours ago, Maharani said:

All that is needed to "get there" is for the belief in personal doership and the attachment to outcomes to fall away, which happens as a result of new conditioning

So how does one bring about this 'new conditioning' in non-doership if one has no free will to choose it? Hint.... this is a trick question.

[Maharani]

Despite it being a trick question, I'll answer it anyway... The new conditioning, just as the prior conditioning, is brought about by Life. The body's natural intelligence moves it toward the books, videos, substances, practices it finds interesting. Of course, Life puts all of those in place. We didn't create the books, videos, substances, and we didn't have an option of being drawn toward or "stumbling upon" different ones.

[SOUL]

8 hours ago, Maharani said:

Despite it being a trick question, I'll answer it anyway... The new conditioning, just as the prior conditioning, is brought about by Life. The body's natural intelligence moves it toward the books, videos, substances, practices it finds interesting. Of course, Life puts all of those in place. We didn't create the books, videos, substances, and we didn't have an option of being drawn toward or "stumbling upon" different ones.

It's obvious to say it's brought about by life, what conditioning isn't.....but 'the body's natural intelligence'? You put much trust into something that has produced very little results. There are untold numbers through the millennia who are miserable with self suffering their whole life and so few that are liberated.

The natural instinct is to attach to identity, to sustain self so motivate us to keep the body alive and to transcend that drive is despised and rejected by the ego. This notion that we have no option in it echoes the Christian concept that god predetermines the 'chosen' and not we choose to be drawn to god....curious. Hm

These concepts you describe may be your experience but not what I be and I experience liberation from self suffering. You say in your initial post about your words that it can never be 'truth'.....in that I would agree. This isn't to say you don't share some helpful insights, you do but consider there are many paths to the mountain top.

Peace.

Edited February 18, 2020 by SOUL

[Maharani]

7 hours ago, SOUL said:

'[T]he body's natural intelligence'? You put much trust into something that has produced very little results. There are untold numbers through the millennia who are miserable with self suffering their whole life and so few that are liberated.

By the body's natural intelligence I simply mean the "Life force" that moves us at any moment. When there is hunger, it searches for food. When there is an interest in composing symphonies, it is drawn to that and listens to symphonies by other composers. When there is an interest in "enlightenment"/liberation, it is drawn to that and investigates it. All the same, these urges and interests are always a result of the organism's genetic design and conditioning (say, a general interest in music and spirituality because that's what our parents and peers were into).

7 hours ago, SOUL said:

This notion that we have no option in it echoes the Christian concept that god predetermines the 'chosen' and not we choose to be drawn to god....curious. Hm

We don't have to look at it from an esoteric "God chooses" standpoint (although that might be valid, too). "Pre"-determination really just describes that in each moment, Life unfolds according to cause & effect, and that when it comes to human thoughts & decisions, the cause is always our genetic design and conditioning (including the present-moment circumstance). Roger likes to give the example of conception: The sperm and the egg meet and the organism starts growing based on its genetic blueprint. It doesn't choose to grow its limbs, heart, brain. Even in the womb, it is constantly subject to conditioning (the mother's movements, for instance). At what age does free choice enter the picture, and based on what dynamics? Is there ever another factor beyond our design and conditioning? Do you start to consciously move white blood cells through your body, digest the food you eat, beat your heart? Do you choose to dream at night? How are your thoughts & decisions different?

7 hours ago, SOUL said:

This isn't to say you don't share some helpful insights, you do but consider there are many paths to the mountain top.

Of course! Peace to you as well.

Edited February 18, 2020 by Maharani

[SOUL]

6 hours ago, Maharani said:

esoteric "God chooses"

...you just prefer the esoteric "life force" that "moves" us story....it's just another expression of the imagination.

6 hours ago, Maharani said:

Do you start to consciously move white blood cells through your body, digest the food you eat, beat your heart? Do you choose to dream at night? How are your thoughts & decisions different?

Do the words from books force their way into our mind? Does food crawl into our mouth and chew itself? Do symphonies get composed by us without our participation? Everything can be framed to fit a story.

We can also transcend the separation of the free will/no choice dualism upon awakening to the oneness as it is.....or at least that's how the story goes.

Peace

Edited February 18, 2020 by SOUL

[Maharani]

On 2/18/2020 at 6:53 AM, SOUL said:

...you just prefer the esoteric "life force" that "moves" us story....it's just another expression of the imagination.

For sure. It all comes back to truth being inexpressible with words. Stories are the best we can do (although of course the "goal" of spiritual teachings is ultimately to get rid of the psychological story in our heads - at least according to the story I'm offering here ).

On 2/18/2020 at 6:53 AM, SOUL said:

Do the words from books force their way into our mind? Does food crawl into our mouth and chew itself? Do symphonies get composed by us without our participation? Everything can be framed to fit a story.

This framework suggests that these things happen "through" us rather than by our "doing". But as you've said, it depends on what story you're trying to tell. The goal of the framework is to bring about peace of mind. If someone finds it to be inutile for that purpose (or disagrees that peace of mind is the "purpose" of spirituality), a more appropriate teaching will probably present itself

On 2/18/2020 at 6:53 AM, SOUL said:

We can also transcend the separation of the free will/no choice dualism upon awakening to the oneness as it is.....or at least that's how the story goes.

Not to belabour the point, but this framework does intend to "resolve" it: feeling of free will in each moment (even after the story falls away); simultaneous deep understanding of "I'm not the one doing Life" (as in, the one who grows the body or chooses to dream at night, nor even the one who creates thoughts or makes decisions - in the sense that all the decisions we make are inevitable, anyway). But as I've said, it being a paradox, it can't be resolved "intellectually".

Peace

Edited February 20, 2020 by Maharani

[SOUL]

@Maharani The difference is in the story being told. In the 'no self' story it is believed that the physical experience we have that feels like we have some agency is 'false' and that the experience that one would have in the imagination of no agency is 'true'. So resisting the physical experience for the one that happens in the imagination.

The story I'm telling is that I make no conclusive judgments about agency or not, my physical experience behaves as if I have some agency so I accept it as it is. There are plenty of limitations and influences to this agency and I use inner work to become aware of them and not be blindly controlled by the self.

While others have the perception in imagination that once they transcend the physical the self is transcended so it doesn't exist and along with it the feeling of agency. In my perception once the self is transcended the limitations and influences of self are transcended so the ability of agency increases.

I don't say one experience is true and another false or the perception is an illusion or real. I also don't allow the priming influence of others to frame the conceptual perspective I view. Although, this perspective allows me to be actively and intimately involved with the peace of mind I experience.

[Maharani]

On 2/20/2020 at 10:59 AM, SOUL said:

In the 'no self' story it is believed that the physical experience we have that feels like we have some agency is 'false' and that the experience that one would have in the imagination of no agency is 'true'. So resisting the physical experience for the one that happens in the imagination.

The story I'm telling is that I make no conclusive judgments about agency or not, my physical experience behaves as if I have some agency so I accept it as it is.

I feel like we're saying the same thing in different words The only truth is one's own experience, which behaves as if we have agency. The story about "no agency" doesn't intend to be a truth, just a pointer at the underlying dynamics of psychological suffering. It's not a belief that needs to be held in place, especially if suffering has already fallen away (as it seems to have for you?).

Let me try another angle: Would you agree that peace of mind is the absence of an attitude of guilt, blame and expectations, and if yes, what would you say causes us to experience that attitude?

Edited February 23, 2020 by Maharani

[Moreira]

"The root cause of all suffering is our false belief in personal doership."

 

Breaking this belief is the hardest thing in life. Because we observe that we have control to choose different actions. This debatable sense of free will give us the certanty that we are the "doer".

Its esier to silence negative thnking, or learn to quiet the mind rather than changing thius belief.

[Maharani]

2 hours ago, Moreira said:

Its esier to silence negative thnking, or learn to quiet the mind rather than changing thius belief.

The latter leads to the former. The good news is that we don't have to do the changing

The only practice Ramesh used to suggest (and even then, "only if you feel like it") was this: At the end of the day, sit down with a glass of sherry (for instance) and look at one action you performed that day that you are convinced was your doing. Enquire what led you to do it. (The "suggested" answer being, your genetic make-up and conditioning through Life in each moment - but again, the only truth is your own direct experience)

[hyruga]

Ok peace

Edited February 24, 2020 by hyruga

[Maharani]

All of those would be described as emotional pleasure in the context of this framework. They make Life more pleasant, but they are not necessary in order to be happy.

[SOUL]

On 2/23/2020 at 2:25 AM, Maharani said:

I feel like we're saying the same thing in different words

Possibly.

 

On 2/23/2020 at 2:25 AM, Maharani said:

The only truth is one's own experience

Well, truth just means the state of being true and being true, in the context of spiritual experience, means loyal to one's own beliefs and belief just means what is trusted as true.

There is an objective aspect to experience and a subjective aspect to experience with them overlapping in our consciousness and perception of it. Truth in the context of the objective and the subjective with regard to our perception of experience can diverge to a great degree.

On 2/23/2020 at 2:25 AM, Maharani said:

The story about "no agency" doesn't intend to be a truth

Yet very many purport it to be a 'truth' and even though you say it isn't meant to be a 'truth' your words reveal you clearly trust it is true.

On 2/23/2020 at 2:25 AM, Maharani said:

just a pointer at the underlying dynamics of psychological suffering. It's not a belief that needs to be held in place, especially if suffering has already fallen away

Do you suggest that the feeling of agency is responsible for psychological suffering and that it is unnecessarily 'held in place' by someone that experiences liberation? It appears you do and if you do may I ask what leads you to hold those beliefs?

On 2/23/2020 at 2:25 AM, Maharani said:

Would you agree that peace of mind is the absence of an attitude of guilt, blame and expectations, and if yes, what would you say causes us to experience that attitude?

I'm not sure what you mean by 'peace of mind' but in my own experience I view peace of mind as agreement between the conscious and subconscious.... of course there could be agreement on guilt, blame and expectations so that could create self suffering.

Again, I'm not sure what you mean by 'attitude' but I suspect you mean a psychological perspective and what causes one to have an 'attitude' is a slowly evolving process from effects of experience.

[Maharani]

9 hours ago, SOUL said:

There is an objective aspect to experience and a subjective aspect to experience with them overlapping in our consciousness and perception of it. Truth in the context of the objective and the subjective with regard to our perception of experience can diverge to a great degree.

I agree completely with the first sentence. When I say "the only truth is your own experience", that statement is not the truth either, it just points at the fact that objective truth can never be subjectively known; the only truth that can be known is our subjective experience.

9 hours ago, SOUL said:

Yet very many purport it to be a 'truth' and even though you say it isn't meant to be a 'truth' your words reveal you clearly trust it is true.

In my case, I do trust it and hence "hold it as a belief" because, even though I do not have unbroken peace of mind, this teaching framework resonates with me deeply and is delivered by someone I intuitively trust to know what they are talking about. (I would also say that I trust it to be "accurate" rather than "true"). However, even though, in the absence of direct experience, this is still only a belief on my part, I like to put forward the framework for the sake of argument, anyway (with the disclaimer that it is not intended to be "true").

9 hours ago, SOUL said:

Do you suggest that the feeling of agency is responsible for psychological suffering and that it is unnecessarily 'held in place' by someone that experiences liberation?

It's not the feeling of free will that is responsible for suffering, it is the belief that we are separate and independent from Life, that we (and everyone else) could and should have acted differently in the past, and that circumstance needs to be pleasant in the future in order for us to feel complete and happy. The feeling of free will (according to this framework) will remain in place even after that belief system has fallen away. The feeling of free will doesn't need to be "held in place" after liberation; in fact, we can't rid ourselves of it even if we try. What I said was that the "no-doership-story" (i. e. this framework) doesn't need to be held in place as a belief system after liberation.

9 hours ago, SOUL said:

I'm not sure what you mean by 'peace of mind' but in my own experience I view peace of mind as agreement between the conscious and subconscious.... of course there could be agreement on guilt, blame and expectations so that could create self suffering.

Again, I'm not sure what you mean by 'attitude' but I suspect you mean a psychological perspective and what causes one to have an 'attitude' is a slowly evolving process from effects of experience.

Happiness, or peace of mind, is defined in this framework as the absence of suffering. Suffering is defined as our psychological attitude towards circumstance (pleasure and pain), which manifests in the form of 1. guilt, 2. blame, 3. pride, 4. worries & anxiety, and 5. expectations & attachment to outcomes. As you've suggested, this attitude evolves as a part of our growing process (around the time we learn to speak when we are two or three years old) as a result of our conditioning through Life. The complete falling away of this attitude (which occurs as a result of different conditioning, such as psychedelic peak experiences, meditation, spiritual teachings, etc) is referred to as liberation.

Edited February 25, 2020 by Maharani

[SOUL]

11 hours ago, Maharani said:

When I say "the only truth is your own experience", that statement is not the truth either, it just points at the fact that objective truth can never be subjectively known; the only truth that can be known is our subjective experience.

You say your statement about the only 'truth' isn't the truth? That means it isn't the truth that the only truth is your own experience...... so why even say it at all? This double speak makes the 'pointer' virtually useless. There is a difference between contradictory and paradoxical..... if you are unaware of the difference maybe at some point you will.

11 hours ago, Maharani said:

(I would also say that I trust it to be "accurate" rather than "true"). However, even though, in the absence of direct experience, this is still only a belief on my part

Well, one of the meanings of 'true' is something being 'accurate' so there is no real difference between trusting something is 'accurate' rather than 'true'. Both fall within the meaning of belief.

11 hours ago, Maharani said:

The feeling of free will doesn't need to be "held in place" after liberation; in fact, we can't rid ourselves of it even if we try. What I said was that the "no-doership-story" (i. e. this framework) doesn't need to be held in place as a belief system after liberation.

If this sense of 'doership' is natural and we can't get rid of it as you suggest then why tell oneself a 'non-doership story' at all? It sets up an environment of conflict within our inner life and how does one find peace through a path of conflict? Which is why I suggest an 'attitude', to use your word, of acceptance of what is instead of resisting what naturally happens.

If one does transcend this sense of 'doership' through whatever methods works so also perceives a 'non-doership' which you say won't erase the natural 'doership' anyway then it can be realized in it's completeness, or oneness. It also opens the potential for the purpose and usefulness of this sense of 'doership' and state of 'non-doership' to be revealed to those who are perceptive to it.

11 hours ago, Maharani said:

Happiness, or peace of mind, is defined in this framework as the absence of suffering. Suffering is defined as our psychological attitude towards circumstance (pleasure and pain), which manifests in the form of 1. guilt, 2. blame, 3. pride, 4. worries & anxiety, and 5. expectations & attachment to outcomes.

Agreed, except I like to make the distinction of self suffering, what you call psychological suffering, and how physical suffering continues in life even though one ceases self suffering in liberation. In liberation our toe still hurts when we stub it and we still feel the pangs of hunger but we don't self suffer because of physical suffering.

11 hours ago, Maharani said:

The complete falling away of this attitude (which occurs as a result of different conditioning..........} is referred to as liberation.

Which brings us back full circle to my initial point in the form of a question I described as a 'trick'... or would it be more accurate to call it an illusion? Yes... it may be.

I tell a story of acceptance of what is and teach that we can use this natural sense of 'doership', even if one ultimately views it as an illusion, to create a different conditioning that can lead to the cessation of self suffering in liberation. This offers a coherent path to those who may be vexed by the apparent contradiction of 'doership' and 'non-doership' which may be serving as a stumbling block to their liberation from self suffering.

It's not a matter of one story or another being right or wrong, true or false, it's more about what works and I see very little evidence in the lives of seekers that the story of 'non-doership' as it is being widely taught by the 'non-dual' teachers through the millennia is working to lead very many people to liberation.

Edited February 25, 2020 by SOUL

[Maharani]

7 hours ago, SOUL said:

You say your statement about the only 'truth' isn't the truth? That means it isn't the truth that the only truth is your own experience...... so why even say it at all? This double speak makes the 'pointer' virtually useless.

I disagree. All spiritual concepts are only ever just words. You can't describe truth with words. Classical advaita uses much more radical "double speak", such as "all there is is consciousness", "you are not the body", "the ego (person) needs to dissolve", etc. These are all perfectly valid and useful teaching concepts with the purpose of dissolving suffering. They are not and cannot be truths.

7 hours ago, SOUL said:

Well, one of the meanings of 'true' is something being 'accurate' so there is no real difference between trusting something is 'accurate' rather than 'true'. Both fall within the meaning of belief.

I would say "accurate" contains an implied notion of relativity. It is relatively accurate to say that the total live biomass of Earth is about 600 billion metric tonnes. Can you objectively know the "true" biomass of Earth?

7 hours ago, SOUL said:

If this sense of 'doership' is natural and we can't get rid of it as you suggest then why tell oneself a 'non-doership story' at all? It sets up an environment of conflict within our inner life and how does one find peace through a path of conflict?

This teaching framework uses different terminologies for the feeling/sense of "free will", and the belief in "personal doership". The former is a permanent feature of the human being, the latter can be dissolved by de-conditioning. It is a paradox, but Life is paradoxical, what can you do? Best to be up-front about it, and precise about the way you define things.

Roger likes to give the example of ordering food from a menu: In the moment, you feel completely free to choose whichever item you feel like eating. But when you look at your decision, you will find that your genetic make-up and conditioning determined what you ordered. For instance, you felt like getting strawberry cake because you've always liked strawberries and the picture on the menu looked appealing. If the menu included chocolate cake, but you're allergic to chocolate, that's your genetic design determining your choice for strawberry cake. If you absolutely love chocolate cake, but it's not on the menu, that's present-moment circumstance determining your choice for strawberry cake (or leaving and going to a different restaurant). Your choice always feels free, but is always determined by your genetics and conditioning.

7 hours ago, SOUL said:

Agreed, except I like to make the distinction of self suffering, what you call psychological suffering, and how physical suffering continues in life even though one ceases self suffering in liberation. In liberation our toe still hurts when we stub it and we still feel the pangs of hunger but we don't self suffer because of physical suffering.

The framework makes this same distinction, but labels "physical suffering" as pain. The circumstantial flow of Life is always either pleasure or pain. That includes momentary emotional pain such as anger or sadness, which only feel "uncomfortable" if there is an added load of (attitudinal/psychological) suffering: Anger plus blame, or sadness plus guilt. Even intense pain is a lot more bearable if our attitude towards it has fallen away.

You said you agree that (psychological) suffering manifests as an attitude of guilt, blame, pride, worries and expectations. What, then, would you say is the cause of this attitude? Aren't guilt and blame based on a belief that you and everyone else could and should have acted differently?

Edited February 26, 2020 by Maharani