Utility

Swami-G & David Spero in Conversation, Part 2: Jan 21, 2010

Recorded on: 
21.01.2010

David: Well, sahaja samadhi, since you brought that term up, as I understand it, is the end of all awakening. There’s nothing to awaken to, or beyond, after the dawning of sahaja samadhi, which is just a natural state of living moment by moment, fully at ease in that Divine Recognition-- something that is Self-Maintaining, what I call Self-Activating; you are constantly being activated into eternal Enlightenment, without ever having to look back and adjust.

Swami-G: Yeah. There’s nothing to adjust in the Sahaja. But there are different types of sahaja samadhis.

David: Let’s talk about that.

Swami-G: Yeah. Let’s go into that. There’s a sahaja samadhi that’s a nirvikalpa sahaja Samadhi. And in the nirvikalpa sahaja samadhi there’s no more mental rambling there. The mind is basically quiet, in quietude. And so, the only thing that is present at that time is that Pure Awareness. That pure awareness is present. And it’s nothing that one needs to convince themselves off. It’s absolutely apparent. It doesn’t mean that there may not be a stray thought here and there, but there is no longer any running dialog that remains. The mind is quiet - quietude. Then there’s another type of a sahaja samadhi, that’s the savikalpa sahaja samadhi. And in that state it’s effortless and it’s more geared, I would say, towards a oneness, or there’s more mental activity and things within that. But it’s effortless, again it’s an effortless seeing. It’s not something that one has to try to make happen or cling to or remember in a past memory. It’s just what takes place as it is and remains so effortlessly.

David: OK. So, the distinction then between what you call nirvikalpa sahaja samadhi and savikalpa is again basically that there’s a quiet element always established in the mind, in this eternally Self-Recognized State. And what is the distinction then between that and Savilakpa? There would be no quietude?

Swami-G: No. In the savilakpa it’s more towards that oneness and the bliss. In the nirvikalpa, it’s not so much of that overwhelming bliss that’s there. It’s more quiet, more quiet, more quiet. It’s like you know Ramana speaks of these, there’s keval nirvikalpa. And you can go into nirvakalpa states into viewing of the Divine and have, you know, sometime, but when you come out of meditation, the mind starts back up and you’re right back in persona. So then it has become just an experience. And maybe one can talk about it, but it’s not realization because there’s still the driving vasanas, the driving desires, the driving things that are pushing and/or continued around this ego. And when I use the term ego, I mean that which is convinced it is a body, something separate, ok, something separate that has a beginning and end. .OK

David: Yeah. For me, when I use the term sahaja samadhi, I sometimes attach a word as a prefix. I use the word amrita. It’s not something I’ve ever seen in any scripture. And one of the reasons I’ve done it is because the literal definition of sahaja samadhi seemed not fit my experience. And what I recognized and why I chose to use that term is that I felt as though within that natural state of Eternal Awareness, there was also a continued movement of bhakti or devotion. That there was -- as if -- a Self-Worshiping Energy going on inside the Being, always eternally bowing to Itself. Now, we might have a different experience or a different understanding here. I’m not sure. One doesn’t have to be true and the other one false, but certainly if you’re using the Ramana as a basis for comparison, that someone will be right or wrong. Someone will be in line with that or not in line with that. And perhaps your definition does in fact align more closely with Ramana, I’m not sure. I’ve not read Ramana that deeply. I’ve read him fairly well. But perhaps you’re more of a scholar in that area. But the amrita sahaja samadhi that I have understood also contains the movement of a nectar-like substance, even, what I would call soma or nectar, through the nervous system, which is eternally delighting every facet of Consciousness. I would not say it’s an experience of oneness, but it is being saturated in a Bliss-filled, Ecstasy-based, God-intoxicated movement, that is not itself a flash of Enlightenment. It is something that is eternally going on, like an eruption, a lava flow deep within Consciousness. And I would also connect the presence of Kundalini Shakti in that as well. So, you can even call it amrita kundalini sahaja samadhi, if you want to. But maybe we can get more clarity on this as we continue to discuss.

Swami-G: Yeah. I have a student that remains in that. His name is Amrit. And he does have the soma that’s always going. And in realization one can put the consciousness within that heart center of bhakti and can go into that bliss state. So yeah, that’s possible. And can remain within that bliss state effortlessly.

David: OK. But if you’re putting your heart in there and you’re doing it, then it’s a doing.

Swami-G: Oh, it’s just that that’s where the consciousness resides, that’s all.

David: See, for me, the creation itself, outside of your experience or mine, has tremendous Love in it. That Love is not something that the human emotional being projects into Existence. That Existence Itself is Love. Existence Itself is faultless samadhi. Existence Itself is the movement of Shakti or Energy.

Swami-G: Right. That first projection is love. Right. That’s the first projection.

David: But for me these are all eternally radiating -- all eternally radiating out of That Which I am. So, for me, this movement of sahaja samadhi is a multi-faceted and multi-dimensional consideration. It’s not simple quietude, mental quietude. It is not something that is confined to some kind of experience. In fact, it has nothing to do with anything I experience. I could come out as an angry maniac and still be radiating the full force of God.

Swami-G: Oh, absolutely.

David: It has no connection at all with human individuality.

Swami-G: No. No. It doesn’t have anything to do with that.

David: That’s my Realization.

Swami-G: What you’re talking about is you can either be, how to explain that, immersed in the quietude or one can be in the projection, that first projection into world, which is bliss. And both of those is quite valid in Realization.

David: Or all and none of them.

Swami-G: Yes. Exactly.

David: Could this be a very mysterious condition? Something that is really mind boggling in its mysteriousness, its profundity, its absoluteness, and yet its ability to tolerate this crazy and even sometimes chaotic relative play. This whole world of nature is happening in That. It’s not happening somewhere else. It’s in this unified condition. But, yet, these two things seem to cancel each other out into some indescribable and inexpressible flow or condition.

Swami-G: Well, that’s what remains at the end, this flow. It’s just this flow.

David: And we’re in the grip of this, huh?