Beyond the spiritual heart

[Bindi]

I have been wondering for many months about the precedence of the ‘inner heart’ or ‘spiritual heart’ in various philosophies, and came across this article today which gives me a possible answer to my question, ‘is there a spiritual location beyond the spiritual heart.’ According to Muktananda, there is, and it is located in the crown…

 

The Blue Pearl

Swami Muktananda, the Sage of Ganeshpuri, says that seekers should make the best of life because it is only through the human form that one can meditate intensely and rise to the highest level of consciousness, the supra-causal state.
Seekers who are steadfast in their practice of meditation and who have deep faith in inner self-will would eventually be able to delve deep into the subtle realms of consciousness. Here, they begin to perceive the scintillating Blue Pearl, the ultimate goal of spiritual sadhana.

In the initial stages of meditation, the seeker perceives the red aura that represents the gross, physical body through which the waking state of consciousness is experienced with the aid of five senses of perception. The body is the vehicle by which one experiences pleasure and pain; in fact it is through the body that sins are committed or good deeds are performed. The individual soul in the physical body is seated in the eyes and is known as vishva.

As the seeker makes further progress in meditation, he begins to perceive the white flame that represents the subtle or astral body of the size of the thumb. The dream state of consciousness is experienced through the astral body. The individual soul in the [astral] body is called taijasa and is seated in the throat.

The next stage in meditation is marked by the appearance of black light that represents the causal body through which the deep sleep state is experienced. This is a testing time for the seeker because a deep, terrifying and unending darkness is experienced in this state, forcing seekers to abandon their meditation. The individual soul [in the causal body] is called prajna which is seated in the heart and is the size of a fingertip.

The seeker who remains absolutely fearless in meditation and has surrendered him/her self unconditionally to Mother Kundalini receives Her choicest blessings. Having purified the seeker at the physical, subtle and causal levels, Shakti begins to operate at the supra-causal level within the sahasrara in the crown of the head where the seeker, to his utter amazement, perceives the infinitely beautiful and sparkling Blue Pearl, the size of a sesame seed. Sant Tukaram says: "The lord of the universe erects a house the size of a sesame seed and lives within it."

Despite it being tiny, the Blue Pearl is the seed that contains the entire universe. It represents the supra-causal body through which the supra-causal state of consciousness is experienced. It moves like lightening and the seeker can see it emerging from the eyes with rapid speed. Blue Pearl is the vehicle through which the soul leaves the body after death and travels to different astral zones, depending upon one's stage of spiritual evolution.

Swami Muktananda says: "One day, after the Blue Pearl has remained steady for a long time, it will expand infinitely, and its light will fill the universe. Then, with intense wonder, you will see that the whole universe is shimmering and scintillating with the Blue Light. You will realise that you yourself are that light, and the feeling of smallness will vanish once and for all".

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/life-style/The-scintillating-blue-pearl/articleshow/10301372.cms

 

Swami Muktananda regarded the stable visualization of the "blue pearl" to be the primary evidence of supreme realization.

Edited December 1, 2015 by Bindi

[3bob]

something to remember is that most of the high or deep flyers along these lines are also nuns or monks - through either fact or in effect, and not to many of us here are talking about that kind and level of sacrifice for service and attainment... btw, there is nothing wrong with being a householder and its dharma which can attain part way but not normally as far as being a monk or nun, thus neither really being able to do double duty as both (so to speak) without hurting one dharma or the other

[Bindi]

It is my experience that black light is not verification that one's spirit is traveling toward the crown.

 

Have you come across black light somewhere?

 

There are other things about this article that I haven't come across before, and I don't know what I think of, such as the individual soul being in the eyes at the physical level and the throat at the subtle or astral level.

 

The black light reminded me of St John of the Cross's Dark Night of the Soul.

 

I also read a description recently that described God/Om as an illuminated inky blackness, and in this sense black light would seem to be beyond even the 'supra-causal' level. 

[Bindi]

something to remember is that most of the high or deep flyers along these lines are also nuns or monks - through either fact or in effect, and not to many of us here are talking about that kind and level of sacrifice for service and attainment... btw, there is nothing wrong with being a householder and its dharma which can attain part way but not normally as far as being a monk or nun, thus neither really being able to do double duty as both (so to speak) without hurting one dharma or the other

 

Indeed, the challenge at the causal level would apparently overcome even most monks or nuns -

 

"This is a testing time for the seeker because a deep, terrifying and unending darkness is experienced in this state, forcing seekers to abandon their meditation."

 

Nonetheless, did Muktananda himself see deeper/further than the inner heart?

[3bob]

there is a no man's land which is not a place to get stuck...

 

otherwise there is no fear, no doubt, no sorrow, and Truth with Joy beyond all forms of phenomena

[Nikolai1]

"This is a testing time for the seeker because a deep, terrifying and unending darkness is experienced in this state, forcing seekers to abandon their meditation."

When we are in deep meditation we lose our sense of self. Interpretation of our experience therefore changes.

 

We all have a darkness when we close our eyes.  In meditation this inner darkness can suddenly feel like outer darkness.  It feels like we are travelling through a realm as dark, as vast and as endless as outer space itself.

 

The light does not literally lie at the end of this darkness.  But once the light is known, we see that the darkness was the darkness of unknowing...the 'cloud of unknowing' as the famous phrase goes.

 

All sorts of normally known sights and sounds can become strange and unknown when we see them through the eyes that are not our usual eyes.

[Jetsun]

This just makes me realise how varied the spiritual experience can be, because I have read hundreds of spiritual accounts and studied many maps of the territory and many of them vary considerably and not many I have found have mentioned a blue pearl. Another thing I have realised through my own training is that people can differ greatly in their fundamental perceptions of life, so some perceive energy or the spiritual realms very visually, or more through the third eye, and some like myself perceive things in a more tactile way like a body sense or feel of the subject without much visual input. So it is possible that one person could perceive a blue pearl from a completely different perception yet still be talking about the same thing. There are many highly developed adepts who don't have spiritual sight or vision, that is more like a skill that can be learned or a gift rather than a necessity. 

 

My own path has been about diving in beyond the spiritual heart which in my experience is guarded by a veil which reflects consciousness (which it is how the sense of being a separate someone comes about). But beyond that when the veil breaks down in my experience it isn't a physical place in the body or energy, because the sense of being a separate self breaks down it is more about moving out of the localised energy field into higher dimensions towards the source of where it comes from.

Edited December 1, 2015 by Jetsun

[dawei]

I have been wondering for many months about the precedence of the ‘inner heart’ or ‘spiritual heart’ in various philosophies, and came across this article today which gives me a possible answer to my question, ‘is there a spiritual location beyond the spiritual heart.’ According to Muktananda, there is, and it is located in the crown…

 

It seems to me even in daoist traditions, the spirit relates to both the heart (MDT) and head (UDT)...  you can find 100 links and never solve the varied use.... well, that is at least my experience.

 

But there is something fundamentally very deep about the idea that the chinese word "Xin" means 'Heart-Mind'...  that there is an inseparable connection.  

 

I think we would be remiss to not also then see the connection between the three dan tians... but why stop there, also the seven chakras.

 

We can explore these energy centers/containers are separate entities but when we explore them as fundamentally combined and a unity, then something new arises.  The word 'Xin' seems to be an obvious hint in that direction. 

 

I just want to give a shout @Jetsun... I think that was a great post

[Geof Nanto]

I just want to give a shout @Jetsun... I think that was a great post

 

Agreed!

[Bindi]

It is my experience that black light is not verification that one's spirit is traveling toward the crown.

 

This might be slightly clearer about Muktananda's reference to black:

 

"The whole body is like a lotus which has four petals of four kinds, colours, and sizes....The first is the gross body, its colour is red. The second petal is the subtle body, in which we sleep and experience dreams. It is the size of a thumb, and its colour is white. The third petal is the causal body. It is the size of the tip of third finger, and its colour is black. The fourth petal is the supracausal body, which is as small as a sesame seed. Its colour is blue....It is very brilliant; it is the foundation of sadhana; it is the highest inner vision."

[Bindi]

This just makes me realise how varied the spiritual experience can be, because I have read hundreds of spiritual accounts and studied many maps of the territory and many of them vary considerably and not many I have found have mentioned a blue pearl. Another thing I have realised through my own training is that people can differ greatly in their fundamental perceptions of life, so some perceive energy or the spiritual realms very visually, or more through the third eye, and some like myself perceive things in a more tactile way like a body sense or feel of the subject without much visual input. So it is possible that one person could perceive a blue pearl from a completely different perception yet still be talking about the same thing. There are many highly developed adepts who don't have spiritual sight or vision, that is more like a skill that can be learned or a gift rather than a necessity. 

 

My own path has been about diving in beyond the spiritual heart which in my experience is guarded by a veil which reflects consciousness (which it is how the sense of being a separate someone comes about). But beyond that when the veil breaks down in my experience it isn't a physical place in the body or energy, because the sense of being a separate self breaks down it is more about moving out of the localised energy field into higher dimensions towards the source of where it comes from.

 

From the siddhayoga glossary, the blue pearl is defined as “the point of pure Consciousness within each individual that is the core of our true identity and the source of all our powers of perception and action.” So where he is referring to a point of pure consciousness, you seem to be referring to an experience beyond consciousness. Where he sees an 'identity', you see 'no self'. 

 

I think this is an interesting point of difference, about what people are seeking. 

 

Muktananda regarded "the stable visualization of the blue pearl to be the primary evidence of supreme realization" - I gather he discounted people's claims of spiritual attainment or self-realisation unless they had experienced the blue pearl in this very specific way. 

 

edit: Of course, people who disagree with this can just discount Muktananda...

Edited December 2, 2015 by Bindi

[Bindi]

It seems to me even in daoist traditions, the spirit relates to both the heart (MDT) and head (UDT)...  you can find 100 links and never solve the varied use.... well, that is at least my experience.

 

But there is something fundamentally very deep about the idea that the chinese word "Xin" means 'Heart-Mind'...  that there is an inseparable connection.  

 

I think we would be remiss to not also then see the connection between the three dan tians... but why stop there, also the seven chakras.

 

We can explore these energy centers/containers are separate entities but when we explore them as fundamentally combined and a unity, then something new arises.  The word 'Xin' seems to be an obvious hint in that direction. 

 

I just want to give a shout @Jetsun... I think that was a great post

 

I do believe that they need to be explored as separate first, for me it is jumping the gun to explore them as combined first. In Daoist thinking, the Dan Tians have to be filled, one at a time, starting in a certain order. A Daoist would surely laugh at the idea that they might be explored as a combined unity before they were fully established individually. I personally believe the same of chakras, ie. clearing and opening in order from 1-7, but there are so many ideas about this that this becomes just an obscure personal belief. 

 

Perhaps Muktananda was talking about the blue pearl as proof of a station on the way, and yes probably there is more, but i agree with his sense that one has to get to this point at least, before going on to the next. 3bob said in an earlier post that to attain this level was not possible for a householder, while you ask why stop at this low level? 

[Tibetan_Ice]

something to remember is that most of the high or deep flyers along these lines are also nuns or monks - through either fact or in effect, and not to many of us here are talking about that kind and level of sacrifice for service and attainment... btw, there is nothing wrong with being a householder and its dharma which can attain part way but not normally as far as being a monk or nun, thus neither really being able to do double duty as both (so to speak) without hurting one dharma or the other

It is important not to become prisoners of beliefs. I'm glad you said "normally" because exceptions to rules invalidate the rules.

 

Here is a wonderful book by a female householder whom attained levels higher than most monks and nuns.

 

Upasika Kee was a uniquely powerful spiritual teacher. Evocative of the great Ajahn Chah, her teachings are earthy, refreshingly direct, and hard-hitting. In the twentieth century, she grew to become one of the most famous teachers in Thailand--male or female--all the more remarkable because, rarer still, she was not a monastic but a layperson. Her relentless honesty, along with her encouraging voice, is one reason so many contemporary Buddhist teachers recall Upasika Kee so fondly, and so often. With this book, readers seeking something reminiscent of the classic Mindfulness in Plain English can receive instruction on meditation practice as they become acquainted with the legacy of a renowned Buddhist figure. Pure and Simple, the first widely-available collection of her writings, will be gratefully received not only by those who knew Upasika Kee, but by anyone who encounters her for the first time in its pages.

 

http://www.amazon.com/Pure-Simple-Extraordinary-Teachings-Buddhist/dp/086171492X

[3bob]

right about the use of "normally",

 

Btw, I like the Upanishads for pointing to and giving inspiration about this kind of stuff - stuff which we can not really lay claim to knowing about per what someone else has to say about it..... thus until we have some experience of our own I'd say there is no point in getting to far ahead of ourselves

Edited December 2, 2015 by 3bob

[Bearded Dragon]

The spiritual heart or center has no location. How could it when it was never created to begin with? It only has a location if you're still giving it one.

[Bindi]

In yoga references, the spiritual heart is considered to be "a psychospiritual structure corresponding to the heart muscle on the material plane." 

http://hridaya-yoga.com/hridaya-yoga-articles/hridaya-philosophy/significance-of-hridaya-the-spiritual-heart/

This is the sense in which I am using the term.

On various yoga sites it is described as being located in slightly different places, but always somewhere near the physical heart, for example "It is located at the center of your chest and it is where your true self (also known as spirit or atman) is located."

http://www.padmacahaya.org/our-heart/what-is-our-heart

According to Ramana Maharshi, “The godly atom of the Self is to be found in the right chamber of the heart, about one finger-width’s distance from the body’s midline. “Here lies the Heart, the dynamic Spiritual Heart. It is called hridaya, is located on the right side of the chest, and is clearly visible to the inner eye of an adept on the Spiritual Path. Through meditation you can learn to find the Self in the cave of this Heart.”
 
It is clear that there is much disagreement in yoga traditions about the exact location. I would be inclined to follow Ramana Maharshi's placement, as he is more likely to have personally seen it with the inner eye.
 
Perhaps in different traditions the spiritual heart has no location, maybe it depends on what tradition you're coming from.

[3bob]

a thing to maybe ponder about is a matrix....  with soul and aspects of a human being acting as a matrix for Spirit to effect that which such a matrix is connected to and active with.   Thus such a matrix may have or could be said to have (depending on one's frame of reference and how deep they can see into the matrix) a location --- but Spirit is all pervasive and can not be nailed down per just one particular location or part of the matrix.

Edited December 2, 2015 by 3bob

[Jonesboy]

What is called the heart is no other than Brahman. (Ramana Maharshi, SE, answer to question 8.)

 

Call it by any name, God, Self, the Heart or the Seat of Consciousness, it is all the same. The point to be grasped is this, that HEART means the very Core of one's being, the Centre, without which there is nothing whatever. (Ramana Maharshi, MG, 72.)

 

[The Heart] is the Centre of spiritual experience according to the testimony of Sages. The spiritual Heart-centre is quite different from the blood- propelling, muscular organ known by the same name. The spiritual Heart-centre is not an organ of the body. All that you can say of the Heart is that it is the very Core of your being, that [with] which you are really identical (as the word in Sanskrit literally means), whether you are awake, asleep or dreaming, whether you are engaged in work or immersed in Samadhi. (Ramana Maharshi, MG, 73.)

 

The Heart … is different from the blood vessel, so called, and is not the Anahata Chakra in the middle of the chest, one of the six centres spoken of in books on Yoga. (Ramana Maharshi, KOL, 150.)

 

This heart is different from the physical heart; beating is the function of the latter. The former is the seat of spiritual experience. That is all that can be said of it.

 

Truly speaking pure Consciousness is indivisible, it is without parts. It has no form and shape, no “within” and “without.” There is no “right” or “left” for it. Pure Consciousness, which is the Heart, includes all; and nothing is outside or apart from it. That is the ultimate Truth.

 

From this absolute standpoint, the Heart, Self or Consciousness can have no particular place assigned to it in the physical body. What is the reason? The body is itself a mere projection of the mind, and the mind is but a poor reflection of the radiant Heart. How can That in which everything is contained, be itself confined as a tiny part within the physical body which is but an infinitesimal, phenomenal manifestation of the one Reality?

 

But people do not understand this. They cannot help thinking in terms of physical body and the world. For instance, you say "I have come to this Asramam all the way from my country beyond the Himalayas''. But that is not the truth. Where [is there] a “coming” or “going” or any movement whatever, for the one, all-pervading Spirit which you really are? You are where you have always been. It is your body that moved or was conveyed from place to place till it reached this Asramam.

 

This is the simple truth, but to a person who considers himself a subject living in an objective world, it appears as something altogether visionary!

 

It is by coming down to the level of the ordinary understanding that a place is assigned to the Heart in the physical body. (Ramana Maharshi, MG, 73-4.)

 

 

It goes on from there

 

http://www.angelfire.com/space2/light11/diction/ramana.html#11

Edited December 2, 2015 by Jonesboy

[Bindi]

What is called the heart is no other than Brahman. (Ramana Maharshi, SE, answer to question 8.)

 

Call it by any name, God, Self, the Heart or the Seat of Consciousness, it is all the same. The point to be grasped is this, that HEART means the very Core of one's being, the Centre, without which there is nothing whatever. (Ramana Maharshi, MG, 72.)

 

[The Heart] is the Centre of spiritual experience according to the testimony of Sages. The spiritual Heart-centre is quite different from the blood- propelling, muscular organ known by the same name. The spiritual Heart-centre is not an organ of the body. All that you can say of the Heart is that it is the very Core of your being, that [with] which you are really identical (as the word in Sanskrit literally means), whether you are awake, asleep or dreaming, whether you are engaged in work or immersed in Samadhi. (Ramana Maharshi, MG, 73.)

 

The Heart … is different from the blood vessel, so called, and is not the Anahata Chakra in the middle of the chest, one of the six centres spoken of in books on Yoga. (Ramana Maharshi, KOL, 150.)

 

This heart is different from the physical heart; beating is the function of the latter. The former is the seat of spiritual experience. That is all that can be said of it.

 

Truly speaking pure Consciousness is indivisible, it is without parts. It has no form and shape, no “within” and “without.” There is no “right” or “left” for it. Pure Consciousness, which is the Heart, includes all; and nothing is outside or apart from it. That is the ultimate Truth.

 

From this absolute standpoint, the Heart, Self or Consciousness can have no particular place assigned to it in the physical body. What is the reason? The body is itself a mere projection of the mind, and the mind is but a poor reflection of the radiant Heart. How can That in which everything is contained, be itself confined as a tiny part within the physical body which is but an infinitesimal, phenomenal manifestation of the one Reality?

 

But people do not understand this. They cannot help thinking in terms of physical body and the world. For instance, you say "I have come to this Asramam all the way from my country beyond the Himalayas''. But that is not the truth. Where [is there] a “coming” or “going” or any movement whatever, for the one, all-pervading Spirit which you really are? You are where you have always been. It is your body that moved or was conveyed from place to place till it reached this Asramam.

 

This is the simple truth, but to a person who considers himself a subject living in an objective world, it appears as something altogether visionary!

 

It is by coming down to the level of the ordinary understanding that a place is assigned to the Heart in the physical body. (Ramana Maharshi, MG, 73-4.)

 

 

It goes on from there

 

http://www.angelfire.com/space2/light11/diction/ramana.html#11

 

Between what I quoted and what you quoted from Ramana Maharshi it is clear that he said different things on different occasions.

 

Personally, I cannot help thinking in terms of the subtle energy body as overlaid upon the physical body, with correlations that can be made between the two. For instance chakras are subtle energy vortexes associated with definable places on the physical body. Nadi’s are subtle energy channels, again associated with definable places on the physical body. For example Ida and pingala are out from the centre in the subtle energy body. Sushumna is central, corresponding with the spine.

 

Muktananda is talking about stages of spiritual attainment going from the physical, subtle and causal levels, to the supra-causal level within the sahasrara in the crown of the head. These stages depend on prana moving through specific nadi’s in the subtle energy body in highly defined locations that can be referred to by their correlation to the physical body. Muktananda suggests that when consciousness fully arrives at the heart level, it exists at the causal level. For Ramana Maharshi to be so adamant that the spiritual heart is the core of one’s being suggests to me that he simply never discovered the supra-causal level. Only when consciousness travels through the most central nadi’s, higher than heart level, can it enter the supra-causal level, where the blue pearl lies in the sahasrara chakra in the crown.

 

I of course contend that Muktananda saw correctly when he identified the blue pearl in the sahasrara as the core of our true identity. I love how he explains that the blue pearl expands infinitely and that if consciousness is one with the blue pearl and that expansion, so one realises being infinite. I find this doctrine to be incredibly clear and practical and concrete. It demonstrates to me the underlying energy structures of self-realisation.

 

Though clearly what thrills me in terms of definable subtle energy structures is anathema to many. Oh well.

[Nikolai1]

 

 

 

Though clearly what thrills me in terms of definable subtle energy structures is anathema to many. Oh well.

I must admit I feel a little uneasy at the way you discuss them.  This stuff is basically undescribable; and therefore wll vary widely in how it gets described.

 

If you try and turn this into some sort of empirical enquiry - like a kind of science - you will certainly miss the mark. 

[Jonesboy]

I would say it is very clear Ramana did not say different things at different times.

 

If you read what I posted it is perfectly clear.

 

It shows how ones depth can influence what one perceives.

 

At the highest level you are awareness.

 

At the lowest level you are a person with a body.

 

At the highest level you are all things.

 

At lower levels you are a physical body noticing spiritual things.

 

With your quote he is showing where as one becomes more and more engulfed in thoughts one seeks a physical location and he shows it to you.

 

My quote he is showing the highest point and working it down to the physical level. Showing how depth and clarity make a difference in perception.

 

All the best,

 

Tom

[Bindi]

I must admit I feel a little uneasy at the way you discuss them.  This stuff is basically undescribable; and therefore wll vary widely in how it gets described.

 

If you try and turn this into some sort of empirical enquiry - like a kind of science - you will certainly miss the mark. 

 

Apparently my way of thinking makes most people uneasy, you're not alone there. 

[Jetsun]

I must admit I feel a little uneasy at the way you discuss them.  This stuff is basically undescribable; and therefore wll vary widely in how it gets described.

 

If you try and turn this into some sort of empirical enquiry - like a kind of science - you will certainly miss the mark. 

 

At the ultimate level it is indescribable, but it doesn't mean all the other levels are indescribable. The worry I think is about getting too rigid about a particular description or map, or getting fixated on a particular manifestation rather than keeping on going. The advantages of creating a good description or map is that it can help relate to peoples experiences and help with things like healing and working out the fundamentals about the way things manifest. 

[Nikolai1]

Bindi

 

I do share your interest in phenomena that might be called 'milestone experiences'.  They differ so widely, but I think they come in two broad categories:

 

a) Things appearing as objects, that others can't see.  This is a beautiful example of where the objective and the subjective have merged.  They are distinctly seen, but it must be admitted at the same tim that they are for our eyes only.  The blue pearl is like this.

 

b Objects taking on highly subjective traits.  Everyone in the car can see the daffodil at the side of the road, but only you can see it 'from the inside'.  Only you have kinship with the flower, know its thoughts and feel its essence.  You know the flower just as you know yourself.

 

I think genuine milestone experiences all fit into one of the two categories.

 

When a bunch of people all go to a talk and listen to some meditation about how to see some blue pearl, it is guaranteed that they will see it before long.  But this is just business as usual.  The blue pearl jus becomes part of the shared world, and as a sight, is no different that going to Sydney in the hope of seeing the Opera House.  Of course it will happen!

 

But when a true milestone happens to us, completely out of the blue and not at all suggested to us...then it marks progress and is tremendously exciting.  How can it not be? We are only human!

Edited December 2, 2015 by Nikolai1

[Kubba]

According to Ramana Maharshi, “The godly atom of the Self is to be found in the right chamber of the heart, about one finger-width’s distance from the body’s midline. “Here lies the Heart, the dynamic Spiritual Heart. It is called hridaya, is located on the right side of the chest, and is clearly visible to the inner eye of an adept on the Spiritual Path. Through meditation you can learn to find the Self in the cave of this Heart.”

 

It is clear that there is much disagreement in yoga traditions about the exact location. I would be inclined to follow Ramana Maharshi's placement, as he is more likely to have personally seen it with the inner eye.

 

Perhaps in different traditions the spiritual heart has no location, maybe it depends on what tradition you're coming from.

 

I tend to think that this vary between people more than between traditions. I've read in Sri M's autobiography that the "Lotus of the heart" is manifested in different centres for different people. This would explain why some teachers contradict each other taking about the location of the heart. Ramana said that it is on the right side, bur Ramakrishna Paramahansa mentioned the left side.