| I would like to give you some information on states of consciousness. This
information comes from several sources, which I will try to identify as I
go along. Mainly, however, it is a compilation of my experience over the
last 20 years of studying the subject. I would like to start out by saying
that I do not want to appear to be an authority on the subject, I'm just
another pilgrim on the path, groping for answers and taking alot on faith.
Faith I define as belief in something that has not been directly experienced,
but "feels" right.
Many times, it is good to start with an analogy. The one I will use is this:
Try to describe color to a blind person. You can use every word in any
language you choose, but the blind person will still have to accept the
concept of "color" on faith. You can liken blue to cold and red to hot,
and the blind person will overlay their experience on your definitions, but
will still not directly experience those colors. Now, just because the
blind person does not experience blue or red for themself does not mean
that those colors do not exist, does it? In other words, our perception
of reality does not limit reality nor does it change the truth of what
reality is.
When we attempt to describe reality, we use these things called words. Words
create boundries and boundries limit our perception. This is as it should be.
Otherwise, we would not be able to communicate our perceptions to others.
The problem lies in the difference in perception between the communicator
and the person receiving the information. One person's perception of
reality may be different (more or less bound) than the other's.
Remember the blind person? When he hears about color, his perception may
not be as the one talking, so what is interpreted is something different from
what is said or described. Keep this in mind as we discuss consciousness.
Descriptions of different states of consciousness are like describing color
to the blind person. And I admit right here that I'm just as blind as you
are. So, any descriptions that I may make in this discussion are ones that
I have heard, interpreted and am now relating -- lots of translations there.
Next, it would be useful to define some terms, and processes that we go thru.
All that we perceive in this physical world is what is called "The Relative".
The Relative is a manifestation of "The Absolute". The Absolute is that
unchanging, unmanifest oneness that is like the ocean - only it is limitless
without shape, form, or motion. Like the ocean, waves arise and give form
to what we perceive as our universe. We are like drops which have risen up
from the ocean and seem to be individuals in the Relative. Actually though,
we are still the Absolute - we just have become caught up in the Relative,
and have "forgotten" what we essentially are. What is religion? Well, the
word comes from the latin "re-" and "ligere" meaning "to bind back". To me
this means to bind ourselves back to the Absolute.
Now, a contradiction naturally arises here, a paradox if you will. How can
we be a part of the Absolute - that unchanging unchangeable oneness and at
the same time be part of the Relative - that ever changing separateness?
This is the problem with language that I alluded to before - you cannot
describe "higher" states of reality without resorting to allusions and
metaphors. Even then you run into paradoxical situations - things which
on this level seem to have no "logical" answer. So, the element of faith
or acceptance because it feels right comes into play. Well, what feels
right to me might be utter nonsense to you - this is a risk I have to take,
with the hope that someday you will have expanded your awareness to the
level that I speak from. Much as the person describing color wishes that
the blind person can someday be cured, and see blue and red.
Why do things "feel right"? Either they relate closely to what you yourself
have come close to experiencing or you accept the wisdom and knowledge of
a teacher who has demonstrated their elevated state. I suppose this is
where I have gleened most of this knowledge - from those I consider more
advanced than I am. More on this later.
Let's return to the aspect of the Relative and Absolute and how they came to
be and what our place is in the scheme of things. As I said before, the
Absolute is unchanging, and unmanifest reality. It is not emptiness, but
fullness, it is infinite potential. The Relative, on the other hand, is
finite, and kinetic. It is the Absolute, manifested. (Try to overlook the
paradox here). Now, most of the books I have read say that the Relative is
an illusion. It doesn't really exist. We have "tricked" ourselves into
believing that we are limited, finite, and relative. WHY? The answer
is very simple - for fun. The Absolute chooses to manifest into the Relative
for the experience - to play in the game called "life" - be it rocks, plants,
stars or human beings. We ARE the Absolute - we have just forgotten.
There are several interesting side lights here. One is "death". How can
we "die" or "cease to exist" if we are essentially a "drop" of the "ocean"
of the Absolute? Answer: we can't! We just change clothes and go on to the
next playhouse (life). Sounds like reincarnation doesn't it? "Death" is
just a period of unconsciousness between lives. So why don't we remember
past lives (or at least the vast majority of us?) Well, it seems that if
you remember all the times that you were confronted with a particular
situation, you would be paralyzed by inaction trying to choose the reaction
to that situation. So, fortunatly, we don't remember, so that we can
experience the game in all of it's infinite variety. The whole purpose of
life is enjoyment and paralyzation is not enjoyable. But really the purpose
of life according to "religion" is to become one with "God" or the "Absolute".
Some religions just don't want you to have fun doing it. Of course the
definition of "fun" is open to interpretation too.
Most of what I have read concerning methods to get back to the Absolute come
from the teachings of Eastern "masters". Those who have discovered or
recovered ways to do this through anceint teachings. The word "yoga" means
"union". (Kind of sounds like "to bind back" doesn't it)? There are three
main kinds of yoga - Gnana, Bhakta, and Karma yoga. Gnana (gee-ya-na) yoga
is the path of knowledge. Bhakta is the path of devotion. And Karma is the
path of action. Hatha yoga (physical exercises) is a part of karma yoga.
The path of knowledge requires study under a master - something not readily
available to us here in the West. The path of devotion requires a renunciation
of worldly goods - like the Hare Krishnas - don't laugh, they are really
sincere, they just don't "fit in" to our society or culture. So the only
path that seems available is the path of action. "Path" means the way to
"get back" or "become one with" the Absolute.
When this eventually happens - and it will to all of us someday, it is like
the drop of water dissolving back into the ocean. The drop loses it's
"individuality", but gains the fullness of the ocean. The ocean gains the
drop and all of the experiences that the drop went through in its journey
since it left the ocean.
So, the path of action. It seems like that is what our culture is all about
doesn't it? Everybody rushing here and there trying to find "happiness".
Eventually, though, even the "one with the most toys" finds that life is
empty without that glimpse of the Absolute, or "spiritual awakening". Once
this happens, the person becomes somehow "fuller" and the Relative loses
some of its charm. The person then becomes pointed in the direction of
getting "bound back". Unfortunatly, in today's society there are several
seemingly sincere people touting methods to do this. And one could waste
alot of time in their quest by selecting the "wrong path". So how do I
know which is the "right path"? Well, it gets back to experience, faith, and
acceptance that the one who taught me a method knows what he is talking
about. The method I use is Transcendental Meditation (TM). It is taught
by Maharishi Mahesh Yogi. If you want to know more about it, just contact
a local TM Center.
The following discussion on states of consciousness comes from Maharishi's
teaching. I believe it is the best description that I have heard, and
I have experienced some of it myself, so I'm not entirely "blind". Alot of
what I will describe has been backed up by some pretty sound scientific
research going back 20 years.
The "first" state of consciousness is deep sleep. It is characterized by
a rested, inactive body, and an inactive mind. It can be physiologically
diferentiated from the next "state", that of dreaming. The third "state"
is wakefulness. In deep sleep we are not "aware" of anything, in dreaming,
we are "aware" of a phantom world, and awake we are fully "aware".
There is a problem here - what is "awareness" and "what" is aware? It is
because we are "aware" that we know anything about the world at all. To
know anything about "awareness" seems to demand an impossible relexive act
like trying to see your own eye. Philosphers down thru the ages have asked
"How can the knower be known?" Here then is the ultimate question: one
we have often asked ourselves -- "Who am I?" Without going into an
exhaustive disertation, let us postulate that there is "awareness" -
the act of being aware which require an object and a knower. The knower -
in this case, us, is composed of what? Well it seems that we have a body,
and a "mind", which do the perceiving. But can there be a state of
"pure awareness" that is, awareness itself without the components of body
and mind? There are many people - thousands of them all over the world -
who unanimously assert that they have attained to this complete vacuum of
mental contents, but that what then happens is quite different from a lapse
into unconsciousness. On the contrary, what emerges is a state of pure
consciousness - "pure" in the sense that it is not the consciousness of any
empirical content. It has no content except itself.
This state of "pure" awareness is different experientially and physiologically
from the other three. It is a fourth state of consciousness. The other
three states can be thought of as "projected" upon, or reflected in the
underlying reality of the fourth state, pure awareness. It can best be
explained by an analogy. Suppose you are in a theater where a movie is being
shown. In terms of the analogy, this corresponds to the ordinary waking state.
Next, suppose the movie is replaced by a surrealistic film with strange
images; this corresponds to the dreaming state. Third, suppose the projector
breaks down and the theater is plunged into darkness. This corresponds to
the state of dreamless sleep.
Notice that in none of these circumstances have you seen the actual screen,
but only, at best, the images projected upon it. But now imagine that the
projector comes on without any film in it, so that a white light falls on
the screen. Only now do you see the screen itself. This state of affairs
corresponds to the fourth state, pure awareness.
How does one reach this state of pure awareness? It is at this point that
we come to Maharishi's most important insight. That insight depends on the
basic postulate of all interiorly oriented schools of thought: that the
state of pure awareness is, in its own nature, blissful. Therefore,
movement towards it must be natural. It is to be reached not by control,
but by letting go; not by concentrating the mind, but by letting it expand.
It is rather like falling asleep when one is tired -- except for the
vitally important difference that during the process awareness increases
rather than decreases.
Thus the principle that underlies Transcendental Meditation is that one
does not TRY to gain the state of pure awareness, but allows oneself to be
drawn in that direction naturally. Bliss supplies the motive power that
draws the attention inward, as gravity draws matter toward the center of
the earth.
The attention is constantly searching for happiness. In cybernetic
parlance, it is a scanning mechanism, looking for happiness in the
external world through the senses. But since the external world is in a
constant state of flux, the happiness which the mind discovers there
can never be permanent. The inner pure awareness is permanent happiness,
however, and therefore if the attention is once pointed toward it
no deviation will occur.
The process of contacting pure awareness Maharishi calls "transcending".
To use a spatial analogy, it is like "diving" through finer and finer
layers of thought until the finest level is reached. Physiologically,
one experiences a reduction in the metabolic rate. As the mind
experiences finer levels of thought, the body automatically follows.
Indeed if the body did not cooperate in this way, finer mental states
would not be experienced. One can describe the meditative state or
fourth state of consciousness as "restful alertness". That is, the
mind is fully alert as in wakefullness, but the body is in a state of
deep relaxation. There is a limit to the length of time that the body
cas sustain this reduced state of metabolism which accompanies this
transcendental state, and the mind "returns to the surface" after the
"dive".
What are the benefits to practicing this type of meditation? Quite a few,
not the least of which is increased energy, alertness, health, etc.
It seems that this is a technique for allowing the body to take
exceptionally deep rest so to cope better with the problems of
living in an increasingly stressful environment. Scientific studies
suggest that this is indeed the effect of meditation.
I'm not going to proselytize here, if you are interested in what I've
explained about TM, please contact your local TM center.
So, four states of consciousness right? Yes, but there's more. The best
way to explain them is by analogy. The best one I've heard goes like this:
When you take a white cloth and dip it into a yellow dye, then set it
out into the sun, the sun bleaches away the color. But with repeated
dipping, and drying, eventually the color becomes permanent. Like this,
with repeated contact with pure awareness, it eventually becomes a full
time reality in one's life. So that even in sleep, dreaming or awake,
one does not lose the reality of pure awareness. This state of consciousness
is called "cosmic consciousness" by Maharishi. As far as I can tell,
it is called "enlightenment", "realization", "nirvana" and other names
by others throughout history.
Returning to the discussion of "soul", "death" and "reincarnation", this
state of consciousness is that in which the person has achieved the end
of their journey. They are no longer bound to the wheel of reincarnation.
Buddhists teach that no one should take the "final step" until all are
ready. They are saying that since we are all one (the Absolute), we
should wait for our brethern, then all merge into the Absolute together.
Those who are enlightened should continue to return to teach others. I
suppose this is why I have always looked at Buddhists as nobel people.
Hindus on the other hand, make no such restrictions. Who is to say which
is right/better?
I would like to return to my discussion of the Absolute. The first thing
to say about it is that there is nothing that can be said about it! As
Eastern literature puts it - "neti, neti", not this, not that. All
positive statements by implication exclude what is not stated, and therefore
can never be true about the Absolute, which is all-embracing. However -
and this is the crucial paradox - the Absolute does after all have attributes
that is, manifests in certain ways, and these manifestations can be
looked upon as attributes. In Eastern philosophy, there are said to be three
of them: Being (sat), consciousness (chit), and bliss (ananda).
The Absolute is discovered by experience to be blissful, because it
represents the dissolution of all tensions and oppositions. One point is
perhaps worth making: according to Maharishi, bliss is only experienced at
the moment of contact with the Absolute. Once one has, as it were,
entered the Absolute, all differentiation has ceased and so there is no
one left to experience bliss. An analogy is that of a fish which has
been taken out of the water then returned; it might, I suppose,
experience joy at the moment it re-entered the water, but once it was
swimming in its own element, it would cease to feel the contrast.
Now consciousness. Here is a most illuminating idea: individual
consciousness is produced by a reflection of the Absolute in a given
nervous system. The Absolute itself is, as it were, a mass of pure
undifferentiated consciousness "waiting" for a nervous system to be able
to manifest. Here the analogy which comes to mind is that of radio
waves, which fill empty space with potential sound that cannot be heard
unless there is a suitable receiver. Moreover, the quality of the
receiver will affect the sound which reaches one's ears. In the same
way, the nervous system does not produce consciousness, but it allows
it to become manifest; and the nature of individual awareness depends
on the quality of the nervous system which is acting as a reflector.
I would like to end this rather lengthy discussion with a quote from
a book written by Anthony Campbell called "Seven States of Consciousness"
published by Harper & Row c 1974. (Yes Virginia, there are more states
of consciousness).
"For my part, I would say that the greatest gain I have had from
meditation is something which is remarkably hard to put into words.
Perhaps I can best ilustrate it by a practical example. Before I
meditated I used to be appalled by the thought of death. Now, so far
as I can discover by introspection, this is no longer so. As far as
I can tell I am curious about death but not afraid of it except insofar
as it may entail suffering. Yet this loss of the fear of death is not,
I think, related to any new-found certainty about survival; rather,
it is part of a general increase in what perhaps can best be described
as a sense of inner security and stability. This is not to say that
the vicissitudes of life no longer affect me, far from it.
Paradoxically, there seems to be an increas in sensitivity but a
decrease in the liability to be thrown off balance by sudden changes
in fortune, good or bad. On the intellectual level many questions
remain, but increasingly I come to see that the way to resolve them
is not by reading or discussion but rather by deepening one's
awareness through meditation.
"At bottom, our problem in life, it seems to me, is always the same --
fear. Fear of death, fear of illness, fear of old age, fear of pain,
fear of war - the list is endless. What is the source of fear? The
Upanishads say: "Fear comes from a second". Here, surely, is the
key to the abolution of fear.
"The person who has achieved full enlightenment has come to see that
his Self is present in everything. In this state of consciousness
there can be no "second" and hence no fear. The Self is beyond
suffering and fear. No doubt for most of us there is a long way to go
before we reach this total freedom from fear. But at least we are
now on the right path".
|