bliss vs bliss

What is the difference between a bliss state - such as might be
experienced at times during meditation or during devotional practice or during jhana practice...
and the bliss which is a natural quality of awakening?

That is, I've heard teachers caution students against grasping or
clinging to bliss that arises during (earlier stage) meditation, because
it is a distraction. Yet there is a kind of bliss that seems to be a natural quality of awakening - for example the bliss that can arise after A&P or other moments of opening during practice.

Is the issue that there are different kinds of bliss? Or is it just that bliss is one of those things it's easy to get overly attached to and thus grasp at and therefore sabotage the development of equanimity?

Does my question even make sense?

Ona, yes - your question makes sense.

Here's one way to look at it. Bliss can be the side effect of preliminary practices, as a condition of simply settle the gross mind. It can also result in a more subtle form during access concentration and jhana practice, which is also conditioned, resulting from absorption in the subtle mind. Because these states are still, shall we say, corrupted by dualistic forms, getting caught up in the resulting bliss that can arise in these states is a sure way to stall one's further development toward nondual awakening.

Now, when a nondual state experience is happening, there can be a very subtle bliss. Even here, the bliss is only a problem is one begins to delight in it, and thus contract back into being "me" experiencing great "bliss". But, even if the yogi doesn't contract, and thus remains open, the bliss can remain and isn't a problem.

It's hard to describe the qualitative difference between bliss in either case. But, as with most things, it's only a problem when it keeps you from realize the way things are.

Moral of the story: when bliss comes, "know, then let go." It might stay, it might not, but keep the practice going.

Hm. Yeah, I'm not sure it's that easy (or necessary) to use different words. Sort of like saying how sweet or salty something tastes?

One thing I wonder is whether some things are quite extreme when they are unfamiliar, but seem more subtle when they are more common. So the bliss a person might feel as a powerful ecstatic sensation in both body and mind during a practice (when that has not previously been a common experience) might just knock their socks off, where a year later the same kind of experience might just feel like a pervasive, wonderful contentment with some tingly sensations?

I like Chris's use of the word serenity, it feels like a good description of the feeling that comes up in the background when I try some of Kenneth's direct mode practices. It's different from jhanic bliss in several ways: it's somehow simpler, it's gently pleasant and not as engaging and it seems to stay as in the background of experience, never the foreground. It's kind of like the joy of taking a walk on a sunny day, just there in the background, humming along...

Hm. Background foreground idea is perhaps useful. I certainly have used those terms a lot in practice.

Also this what Jackson said earlier seems worthy of further ponder: " bliss is only a problem is one begins to delight in it, and thus contract back into being "me" experiencing great "bliss"."

So is "background" when bliss just is? And "foreground" when it is an object?

@chris - serenity works. bliss connotes a bit more intensity perhaps, ecstasy even more. either way...

"Also this what Jackson said earlier seems worthy of further ponder: " bliss is only a problem is one begins to delight in it, and thus contract back into being "me" experiencing great "bliss.""

Yet another reason to stick with the word "serenity" when talking about the dropping away of the ol' obscurations


-cmarti

but the same issue applies, no? one can delight in serenity, contracting into being "me" experiencing "serenity" no?

No, I hear you. But if a beginner came to you as teacher and said "oh my god I experienced a remarkable serenity yesterday" (that perhaps sounded like a glimpse of the nondual or whatever), you still would caution against seeking it, etc. no? Like "pay no attention, continue with your practice!"

What I neglected to mention was that, in my experience, if a separate "I/me" (identification) arises to delight in one or more facets of experience, those facets fade pretty quickly into dullness. This actually relates to the web article you (Ona) posted from Ken McLeod, where Mahamudra pointing out instructions were given.

The first identification o arise out of wide-open nondual awareness is the "ground of experience" talked about in the article. It's a sense of conscious knowing, but there is a dullness to it. It can drop away when we recognize the awareness that knows this dullness. When identification drops, the radiant clarity of empty awareness - our own mind essence - is known. At some point we get excited about it, or scared of it, and contract back into the various layers of identification.

Back to bliss/serenity... the serenity of nondual awareness persists so long as identification is released. That's why this kind of bliss is considered by some to be itself a facet of the unconditioned. The bliss of conditioned states fades in and out of consciousness based on how well we exclude external phenomena and suppress the hindrances. There is no suppression happening in the realization of nondual awareness - none!

It's really difficult to describe all of this, because when it hasn't been tasted directly it seems like "bliss is bliss, right?" The difference has everything to do with whether or not one is awake in the moment when bliss/serenity is present.

No, I hear you. But if a beginner came to you as teacher and said "oh my god I experienced a remarkable serenity yesterday" (that perhaps sounded like a glimpse of the nondual or whatever), you still would caution against seeking it, etc. no? Like "pay no attention, continue with your practice!"


-ona

Oh, sure! I would do something along those lines, yes.

-cmarti

As would I.

What I neglected to mention was that, in my experience, if a separate "I/me" (identification) arises to delight in one or more facets of experience, those facets fade pretty quickly into dullness. This actually relates to the web article you (Ona) posted from Ken McLeod, where Mahamudra pointing out instructions were given.
The first identification o arise out of wide-open nondual awareness is the "ground of experience" talked about in the article. It's a sense of conscious knowing, but there is a dullness to it. It can drop away when we recognize the awareness that knows this dullness. When identification drops, the radiant clarity of empty awareness - our own mind essence - is known. At some point we get excited about it, or scared of it, and contract back into the various layers of identification.
Back to bliss/serenity... the serenity of nondual awareness persists so long as identification is released. That's why this kind of bliss is considered by some to be itself a facet of the unconditioned. The bliss of conditioned states fades in and out of consciousness based on how well we exclude external phenomena and suppress the hindrances. There is no suppression happening in the realization of nondual awareness - none!
It's really difficult to describe all of this, because when it hasn't been tasted directly it seems like "bliss is bliss, right?" The difference has everything to do with whether or not one is awake in the moment when bliss/serenity is present.


-awouldbehipster

That one's getting cut and pasted to my personal notes.

Yes, I think serenity is a good word for unconditioned bliss. For me the big difference is the generalizability. As you pointed out Jackson the varieties of conditioned bliss such as occur in jhanna or witness practice seem to depend on the supression of the hindrances. I was going to post something to this effect but felt I had too little experience cultivating those states to make that comment. But those conditioned blisses seem ungeneralizable in my experience.

In contrast, unconditioned serenity-bliss is entirely generalizable in my experience. It's hard to put in words but it can... "perfume"? "pervade"? "claim"?... any kind of arising. While it is often first discovered and nearly always stabilized in the context of an extraordinarily calm state in which, while not being suppressed, the hindrances yet drop away spontaneously, it's been my experience that this great ease of the natural state can actually arise as irritation, dullness, confusion, and etc without being "lost". It's an extraordinarily down to earth experience. The hindrance functions differently when it arises as empty/clear/easy energy of nondual serenity of course, since it has absolutely no power to compel any acts of thought, speech or body, unlike ordinary dualistic hindrances. I've expressed this before as a phenomenological difference (change in how content presents) rather than a phenomenal difference (change of content). Conditioned blisses in my experience are or are dependent on phenomenal changes from ordinary perceptual modes while unconditioned bliss depends on a very subtle phenomenological shift (although this is often accompanied by phenomenal shifts, at least at first).

Ona, this is an excellent topic you have raised. I affirm what has been said already about the difference between "conditioned" bliss that is a result of efforts and "unconditioned" bliss that is concomittant with non-dual awakening. What Jackson [awouldbehipster] said about non-dual bliss ending when we start "contracting into me" is vitally important. Contraction is the core gesture of the ego-process. That process does not end at stroke with fundamental awakening. It continues at a reduced level for a long, long time after the more gross forms of contraction have already been eliminated. Our practice must focus on the ever more subtle ways in which we tend to contract. The ego is a wily beast!

It's interesting, a colleague who comes from a background where bliss is deliberately cultivated pointed out that in her tradition the idea is that bliss is considered "a fundamental aspect of our nature" which practitioners are taught to seek to connect with (through devotional practices for example).

By focusing on that, one gradually begins to see that that bliss (which is divine) is there even in things you thought unattractive, ugly or annoying...

Which is true. Just another door to the same perspective, perhaps, presuming one doesn't get lost in the bliss. But one can get lost lots of ways.

Somewhat apropos to this discussion, a friend sent me a link to a dharma talk by Joseph Goldstein on rapture:
[url]
In it he discusses the various types of rapture that can be felt, from gross to sublime, and also talks about the issues around identifying with it as opposed to just experiencing it. It kept popping into my head as I read the various posts here.


-tomo

Ah, he really does distinguish rapture (piti) and sukha (happiness)...

One thing is I suppose you can have both, layered, so it makes for quite a continuum.

Mike (Gozen): "The ego is a wily beast!"

JW: It sure is! Thanks for offering this point of view. Also, I enjoy the eloquent flavor of your posts. It demonstrates that dharma doesn't have to be overtly dry, technical, or boring. Live words, I say!

Ona: "... a colleague who comes from a background where bliss is deliberately cultivated pointed out that in her tradition the idea is that bliss is considered 'a fundamental aspect of our nature' which practitioners are taught to seek to connect with (through devotional practices for example)."

JW: I'm glad you brought this up, Ona. This is a side of the bliss issue we haven't yet explored here.

First of all, what tradition is your colleague coming from?

The idea that one can follow natural bliss to the fully awakened state is not unlike the nondual practices that point out ever-present awareness and then "trace back the radiance". From the Mahayana forward (and perhaps further back, but hard to say) the idea of there being "three bodies" to reality - the gross/waking, subtle/dreaming, and causal/witnessing (to use Ken Wilber's Vedanta-inspired terminology) - is woven into the fabric of both the philosophy and technologies of spiritual practice. The subtle/dreaming body is often associated with "bliss", and is also what could be meant by "Sambhogakaya", which is translated as: body of bliss, body of enjoyment, deity dimension, astral body, etc. (all taken from the Wikipedia article ). It is also the realm of the jhanas.

In the nondual traditions, this subtle body is retained as an expression of awakening, or even as an inseparable facet of such (e.g. in Dzogchen, the cognizant aspect of Emptiness is referred to as Sobhogakaya).

All that to say that I can see why "bliss" in your colleague's tradition would be used as a vehicle of practice, the same way that jhana can be used as a vehicle to realizing the unconditioned. The latter was the path taught by the Buddha as depicted by in Pali canon.

Side note: there are a number of traditions that only pay attention to developing the subtle body after cutting straight through to realization of the causal, unmanifest state. Examples might be the the more radical forms of Zen, as well as hard core noting-style vipassana. Advaita Vedanta (the newer types, in particular) can also be quite unforgiving of the subtle body, seeing it simply as "illusion" to be dispelled on the way to liberation. Needless to say, there are pitfalls to both approaches.

She practices siddhayoga ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siddha_Yoga ), which I know little about except through a few conversations with her. But I had been having this bliss discussion with her, and she offered that example.

From the wikipedia article, these pointers seem to indicate what she was referring to:

The Siddha Yoga Vision:

"For everyone, everywhere, to realize the presence of divinity in
themselves and creation, the cessation of all miseries and suffering,
and the attainment of supreme bliss." [4]

The Siddha Yoga Mission:

"To constantly impart the knowledge of the Self." ( Shiva Sutras III.28) [4]

Three aphorisms express three essential teachings of Siddha Yoga: [5]

"Honor your Self. Worship your Self. Meditate on your Self. God dwells within you as you." --Swami Muktananda

"See God in each other." --Swami Muktananda

"The heart is the hub of all sacred places. Go there and roam." --Bhagawan Nityananda

I've probably told this story before.

Back in 1985 my boss at the IRS Service Center in Austin, Tx was a Swami Muktananda devotee. He was a "seasonal" employee and would spend the non "tax season" time of the year with Muktananda in Inda.

He told me that the first time he met the swami, Muktananda shoved his thumb in my friends eye and held it there for several minutes. My friends said that during that time and for days afterward he experienced a profound bliss that he'd never before knew was possible. I always thought that he'd basically turned into an addict to whatever effects Muktananda's presence had on him.

Also, Muktananda was Bubba Free John (Adi da?)'s first main guru.

I've probably told this story before.Back in 1985 my boss at the IRS Service Center in Austin, Tx was a Swami Muktananda devotee. He was a "seasonal" employee and would spend the non "tax season" time of the year with Muktananda in Inda.He told me that the first time he met the swami, Muktananda shoved his thumb in my friends eye and held it there for several minutes. My friends said that during that time and for days afterward he experienced a profound bliss that he'd never before knew was possible. I always thought that he'd basically turned into an addict to whatever effects Muktananda's presence had on him. Also, Muktananda was Bubba Free John (Adi da?)'s first main guru.

-michaelmonson

Muktananda was the first main guru of Adi Da [then known by his birth name of Franklin Jones]. Muktananda gave him the dharma name of Dhyananda and authorized him to teach, writing in a formal letter "the shakti is active in you."

Shakti is the blissful energy that your friend got hooked on. The guru gives "shaktipat" through various means: a touch of the hand or foot, a glance, even by his mere presence, or through an object he (or she) has "empowered."

I have experienced shakipat from Adi Da (back when he was called Bubba Free John) so I know what your friend was talking about. It comes in various degrees, ranging from a mild feel-good blissfulness to a total, out-of-body rush into the formless realms. Words cannot convey how amazing it was to experience this.

And Bubba/Adi Da was critical of it. He told people they were misusing his gifts if they did nothing more than sitting around "eating bliss cakes." They had to engage inquiry and devotion rather than simply clinging to blissful experiences.

This is precisely the problem that we have discussed in terms of addiction to the jhanas. Entering and passing through the jhanas is a sign of advancement in practice. Seeking to dwell in the jhanas is a sign of getting stuck or attached. And we all know what that means.

-- Mike "Gozen"