Is Bliss an Emotion?

[Joseph Maynor]

Truth (Existence), Consciousness (Awareness), Bliss a.k.a Sat, Chit, Ananda

 

What's the difference between happiness and Bliss, if any?  Does Bliss have anything to do with the experience of pleasure or pain?

 

Corollary issue: Does the Self feel emotions?  Is the Self (or Awareness) a feeler?  Who or what is feeling?

Edited May 30 by Joseph Maynor

[Phil]

What’s found in this regard in direct experience? 

[Joseph Maynor]

1 hour ago, Phil said:

What’s found in this regard in direct experience? 

 

Who is having the direct experience?

[Phil]

@Joseph Maynor

Isn’t the inquiry about bliss, happiness pleasure & pain, emotions & feeling? 

[Joseph Maynor]

3 minutes ago, Phil said:

@Joseph Maynor

Isn’t the inquiry about bliss, happiness pleasure & pain, emotions & feeling? 

 

Yes.

[Phil]

@Joseph Maynor

So what’s with answering the question with a question? It’s your inquiry isn’t it? 

[Joseph Maynor]

I think this inquiry also presupposes a question -- what is a feeling?  Until that is determined I don't see how that can be compared in relation to anything, including Bliss.

 

What is a feeling?  Who is feeling it?  Is Awareness (of the Self) feeling feelings?  Is the ego feeling feelings?  I don't see why feelings would be treated any differently than thoughts in this respect.  

 

There seems to be a characteristic  a subject-object duality, e.g., [I (subject)] [am feeling pissed off (object).]

 

Is there a way to feel without duality?  Is there nondual feeling?  We might call this Feeling -- with the uppercase 'F'.  I'm still puzzled about this, that's why I'm asking the question here.  

Edited May 29 by Joseph Maynor

[Phil]

Feeling is appearing as thought & perception. 

 

[Joseph Maynor]

This quote from Shankara jumped out at me when I read it: (He's kind of mocking Yoga with the terminology I think -- the duality between Purusha and Prakriti).  He says "Purusha's birth" at the end of the quote.  The Self, which is basically Purusha without Prakriti, is not born.  For Advaita Vedanta,

 

"[T]he True and Immutable Purusha = All-pervasive Reality." -- Adi Shankara, Commentary on Mundaka Upanishad.

So, basically he warns about the Self being seated in the body (Prakriti) or tied to/linked with the body as a trap.  The Self (Purusha) is only seated in itSelf.  

• "Because Purusha, the experiencer, is seated in Prakriti, in avidya or nescience, -- that is to say, because he identifies himself with the body and the senses which are emanations of Prakriti, -- he experiences the qualities born of Prakriti, manifesting themselves as pleasure, pain and delusion; he thinks, "I am happy, I am miserable, I am deluded, I am wise."  His attachment to (i.e., identification of Himself with) what He experiences, -- namely, the qualities of pleasure, pain and delusion -- form the main cause of Purusha's birth." -- Adi Shankara, Commentary on The Bhagavad Gita, Sastry Translation, Pg. 359.
• "Avidya, --spoken of as (Purusha's) being 'seated in Prakriti,' -- and Kama* [pleasure, enjoyment, desire, love] or attachment for qualities, together constitute the cause of Samsara." -- Adi Shankara, Commentary on The Bhagavad Gita, Sastry Translation, Pg. 360.  

*Kama
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kama

Edited May 30 by Joseph Maynor

[Jane]

16 hours ago, Joseph Maynor said:

Truth (Existence), Consciousness (Awareness), Bliss a.k.a Sat, Chit, Ananda

 

 

 

Corollary issue: Does the Self feel emotions?  Is the Self (or Awareness) a feeler?  Who or what is feeling?

Truth is neither subjective or objective; it is Absolute.
 

You cannot know the absolute - you can only be the absolute. 
 

To know the absolute would require you to split into two, into knower and known, subject and object. But that’s the dream, and the dream is all there is absolutely. Dream characters know nothing of their existence.

 

The one asking the question here doesn’t exist. A question can only arise to the artificial sense of a separate self, aka the ego, aka an illusion.

Edited May 30 by Jane

[Joseph Maynor]

This is ChatGPT's answer to:

What is the Difference between Love and Bliss in Advaita Vedanta?
 

"In Advaita Vedanta, the concepts of love and bliss are understood in the context of the ultimate reality, often referred to as Brahman or the Self.

 

Love (Prema): Love in Advaita Vedanta can be seen as a manifestation of the underlying unity of all existence. It's a recognition of the oneness of the Self in all beings. This love is not based on individual desires or attachments but arises from the realization that everything is a manifestation of the same divine essence. It transcends personal preferences and biases and is often described as unconditional.

 

Bliss (Ananda): Bliss, or Ananda, is one of the inherent qualities of Brahman, the ultimate reality in Advaita Vedanta. It is the state of pure, unbounded joy that arises when one realizes their true nature as Brahman. Unlike happiness, which is dependent on external circumstances, bliss is an inner state of being that remains constant regardless of external conditions. It is the natural result of recognizing the unity of the Self with Brahman and experiencing liberation from the illusion of individuality.

 

In summary, while love in Advaita Vedanta reflects the recognition of the unity of all existence and manifests as selfless compassion and connection with others, bliss arises from the realization of one's true nature as Brahman and is experienced as a state of unbounded joy and fulfillment. Both love and bliss are considered essential aspects of the journey towards self-realization and liberation in Advaita Vedanta."

// My Commentary //

I feel like the Love definition is kinda wrong because there aren't any beings.  I like my definition of Love better.  The Bliss definition is pretty good, it's along the lines of what I thought.  Bliss is different than happiness, which is also what I thought for the reasons ChatGPT provided.  The Self does not pursue happiness.  It does seem to suggest that Bliss is an emotion, the stable emotion of joy.  That's interesting.  I'm not sure that's correct either.  It's more like a recognition of Liberation than joy.  Joy is fleeting, it's not joy.  It's the realization of the illusion of Maya.  It's more like placidity than joy.  So, placidity is there despite the churnings of pleasures and pains of Maya.  I would say Bliss means something more like that, which is not an emotion.  It's a kind of Peace notwithstanding conditions of Maya.  Peace is not really an emotion.  It's more like knowing that you can't be affected by the movie.  That's not an emotion.  It's not even contentment, because that's an emotion.  Bliss sits up underneath emotions.  If you guys disagree with any of this, I'd love to hear it.

Edited May 30 by Joseph Maynor

[Phil]

@Joseph Maynor

Feeling is appearing as thought & perception. 

This of course includes thoughts about feeling being found in, thoughts. (Teachings, concepts, etc).

More so, the believing of thoughts one actually is a teacher. 

It’s nonsense. 

It’s all aversion. 

Suffering. 

 

Looking in thoughts for feeling is looking for water in a mirage.

[Jane]

@Joseph Maynor I agree with you.

 

And maybe (Bliss) is just another word for the state of (Turiya) ? 😊

 

(“In Hindu philosophy, turiya (Sanskrit: तुरीय, meaning "the fourth"), also referred to as chaturiya or chaturtha, is the true self (atman) beyond the three common states of consciousness (waking, dreaming, and dreamless deep sleep). “)

 

 

[Joseph Maynor]

40 minutes ago, Jane said:

@Joseph Maynor I agree with you.

 

And maybe (Bliss) is just another word for the state of (Turiya) ? 😊

 

(“In Hindu philosophy, turiya (Sanskrit: तुरीय, meaning "the fourth"), also referred to as chaturiya or chaturtha, is the true self (atman) beyond the three common states of consciousness (waking, dreaming, and dreamless deep sleep). “)

Exactly!  Peace outside of space and time.  Eternal Peace.  Placid is the word that Shankara used.  Placid might be a better word.  I like Peace too though.  Like a deep-down Peace that sits underneath all emotions Witnessed. Turiya is the word.  I like how in Hinduism there usually is a word that fits.

From ChatGPT:

What is Turiya?
 

"Turiya, a concept in Hindu philosophy, refers to a state of consciousness beyond the three common states of waking (jagrat), dreaming (swapna), and deep sleep (sushupti). The term "turiya" translates to "the fourth" in Sanskrit, indicating that it is a distinct state of awareness.

 

Key Characteristics of Turiya:

• Transcendence: Turiya transcends the normal states of consciousness. It is not confined to the dualities experienced in waking, dreaming, or deep sleep.
• Pure Awareness: It is described as pure consciousness or pure awareness, where the observer and the observed become one.
• Non-duality: Turiya is characterized by non-dual awareness, often described as a state of oneness or unity, beyond the subject-object dichotomy.
• Bliss and Peace: It is associated with profound bliss, peace, and an intrinsic sense of wholeness and completeness."

 

Edited May 30 by Joseph Maynor