Samadhi is becoming a mysterious and incomprehensible term, and loanwords like "zenjo" and "sammai" are being used as approximations, which further increases the confusion.

For example, in Theravada Buddhist texts, it is written as follows:
"At that time, practitioners who attained zenjo (samadhi) through samadhi meditation entered vipassana (observational) meditation to overcome the cycle of rebirth and attain enlightenment. Nowadays, there is no need to take such a roundabout route, and vipassana meditation is practiced directly. Vipassana meditation alone provides the concentration and various wisdom necessary for enlightenment." (From "Shamonka-kyo" by Alomulle Sumanasara)

When I first read this, I thought, "Hmm, hmm," but now I can read it differently.

As a personal opinion, I believe that samadhi and vipassana are the same. Based on this, it seems that samadhi generally has two meanings.

Those are the states of "sine" and "tekchu" in Tibetan Dzogchen. Perhaps, generally, both are called samadhi. I feel that there is confusion in this area.

In Dzogchen, the states of "sine" and "tekchu" are explained as quite different, and I think that the same word, "samadhi," has two meanings.

- State of "sine" → Samadhi (misunderstanding)
- State of "tekchu" → Samadhi

Therefore, when you say "samadhi," you have to interpret the context to understand whether it refers to the state of "sine" or the state of "tekchu."

The story in the Theravada Buddhist text above is about the state of "sine."

And, in my personal opinion, I think that the state of "sine" is not samadhi, but it is generally misunderstood as samadhi.

It's really complicated.

Therefore, I think that the story that you cannot attain enlightenment through samadhi is often heard from vipassana adherents. That's because the state of "sine" is still just the beginning, so the path ahead is long. The problem is that people misunderstand it as samadhi, but since it has been understood as samadhi for a long time, it probably makes sense to some extent.

When you look at the definition of samadhi written in the classical Yoga Sutra, it is described as a state where the two-dimensional movements of the mind stop and the distinction between the object and the self disappears. This clearly refers to the state of "tekchu," and since the state of "tekchu" is a vipassana state, you can understand that it is the same as samadhi. In that sense, the story in the Theravada Buddhist text is a confusing story, but if you understand that samadhi has two meanings, you can interpret it.

Once you understand that "zenjo" refers to the state of "sine," and "sammai" is a loanword for samadhi and also has two meanings, it becomes easier to listen to stories and read literature.

- State of "sine" → Samadhi (misunderstanding), Sammai (misunderstanding), Zenjo
- State of "tekchu" → Samadhi, Sammai, Vipassana

Vipassana meditation is a type of observation meditation, but it seems that in general, when people talk about Vipassana meditation, they mean observing the body or breath.
However, in reality, I think that is more like Samatha meditation (concentration meditation).

I have thought this for quite some time, and I had already come to a similar conclusion, but recently, I feel like I have gained a deeper understanding of this.
It is true that when you are in a Vipassana state, things may appear in slow motion, and you may be able to feel sensations within your body, but if you are told to observe the body or breath as a meditation technique, then it is simply Samatha meditation (concentration meditation).
I would not say that it is a waste of time to imitate the practices of enlightened beings and observe the body or breath with a specific goal in mind, and I think it can be very effective. However, I think that the effect is that of Samatha meditation (concentration meditation), rather than Vipassana meditation.
I think that people who practice Vipassana meditation can be classified into two types:
One is those who teach Samatha meditation techniques and other methods to their disciples and students, claiming that it is Vipassana meditation, even though they know that it is not actually Vipassana meditation. The other is those who do not understand it well and mistakenly think that they are practicing Vipassana meditation based on a superficial classification.
In reality, mystical practices often have effects that are different from their apparent names, so it is probably not a problem from the perspective of spiritual practice if you do Samatha meditation thinking that it is Vipassana meditation. However, I am the kind of person who is concerned with such details.
In my opinion, in the initial stages, no matter what you do, you will accumulate experience as Samatha meditation. Therefore, whether you observe the body or breath as Vipassana meditation, or focus on the space between the eyebrows as Samatha meditation, you will likely follow a very similar growth process.
I think it would be best to choose the method that is easier for you, based on your individual preferences and personality.
In the words of the Dzogchen tradition, you first enter the Shiné state, calming the mind, and then, in the Tekchö state, you transition to the state called Vipassana or Samadhi. Therefore, Samadhi or Vipassana cannot be reached without the Shiné state.
For example, some organizations may underestimate the initial Samatha meditation, which corresponds to the Shiné state, and start with what appears to be Vipassana meditation (an imitation of it), resulting in a lowering of the boiling point of anger and a breakdown of the mind.
On the other hand, I sometimes think that Theravada Buddhism may be teaching what is called Vipassana, but is actually Samatha meditation. However, I don't know what to do about that, so I don't bother to ask.
However, especially in Japan, there are a certain number of people who are said to be from the celestial realms, and a considerable number of people are born already in the Tekchö state, living in a Vipassana state. Therefore, there may be people who cannot understand things like "how meditation works" or "how the Shiné state is." In other words, they cannot understand the lower states.
Therefore, some people may be in the Tekchö state when they are told to observe the body or breath. In that case, it may be appropriate to call it Vipassana from the beginning. However, for people who want to meditate, it is generally quite common to start with the Shiné state.

In the past, I felt it as if it was the entire body, or the entire head, but recently, I have been feeling something like telepathy in a part of my head tilted backward, or in a small area on the upper part of the back of my head. Well, it's not really telepathy, but rather the feeling that someone I know is talking about me or thinking about me. I think I can read other people's thoughts quite easily (bitter smile).

I wrote before that there seem to be two types of telepathy. This time, it's the case where thoughts are transmitted.

When auras come into contact and information is transmitted, it feels more like "mixing," and I think the other person can sense it.

However, as a hypothesis, I'm starting to think that this might be the same thing, just a difference in how subtle the aura is.

My hypothesis is that there is a coarser aura that is close to the density of the physical body, and information is transmitted when it is close. In addition, there is a subtle wave that transmits thoughts, which is telepathy. In the case of aura contact, it is quite intense, but in the case of telepathy, it feels like sensing a subtle wave.

Well, it might not be that different... I've been thinking that recently.

Even with thoughts, they are directional and coming towards me. The difference between that wave and an aura is that, although there may be differences in density and quality, the nature of them might not be that different.

This is a hypothesis, and I will continue to examine it further.

I often hear that the era of retreating to the mountains for training is over, but what people say is often based on their own convenience and preferences, and there are many people who would benefit from retreating to the mountains.

Now is an era of freedom, so it's not a one-size-fits-all approach to say "come out of the mountains." People who want to retreat to the mountains should do so, and those who want to leave should do so.

In other words, it's a matter of personal preference. People should do what they like.

I see people who proudly emerge from the mountains, and I feel a certain narrowness in their perspective. This is a common trait among spiritual beginners (who may not even realize it).

Whether or not someone should retreat to the mountains depends on their individual circumstances. For example, to reach the state of "śīnyā" in the tradition of Zokuchen, it's better to retreat to the mountains. However, if one transitions to the state of "teku," which is a state of "vipassanā," then they can live in the city like a hobby.

However, even that is a matter of personal preference, so I won't say it's unimportant, but people should do what they like.

The state of "śīnyā" is a state where distractions are eliminated or suppressed, so to achieve that state, it may be necessary to go to a quiet mountain or, even if staying in the city, to quit one's job and spend a few quiet years. At this point, it's already a matter of personal preference.

The state of "teku" is a state of "vipassanā" where one can be active while remaining in a calm state, so if one reaches that state, there is no need to retreat to the mountains, and one can enjoy the changes in the city. Even then, one can choose to retreat to the mountains, and either way, it's a matter of personal preference.

Before reaching the state of "śīnyā," if one lives in the city, they are more likely to be influenced by others, so I personally think it's better to retreat to the mountains. However, even in the city, one can practice spiritual training, and that is a matter of personal preference.

I have my own perspective and understanding of what should be done at certain times, but that doesn't necessarily apply to everyone.

There are many people who live and enjoy life in the city at the state of "teku," so living in the city is not necessarily a bad thing.

Well, in any case, this world is made up of hobbies. I sometimes wonder if retreating to the mountains is an interesting hobby.

When I recall my past experiences, I don't think that the current era is particularly spiritually advanced. In fact, time is an illusion, and a soul living in the current era may be reincarnated into a past era. Therefore, I don't think that the past or future are particularly relevant.

In every era, there are advanced cultures and spiritual practices, and each soul chooses where to live based on their own preferences. That's all there is to it.

Recently, while games have smooth movements, I've been feeling that reality is gradually becoming more like a game as my perception of everyday life appears in slow motion.

For example, when my vision started appearing in slow motion, I began to notice the subtle vibrations in my field of view as my body moved up and down. In some 3D games with a first-person perspective, the field of view moves up and down in sync with the character's walking, and this movement is very similar to the vibrations I'm now perceiving in reality, making me feel like I'm the game's protagonist.

I often hear people say things like, "This world is a giant game," and recently, I've been feeling that way.

In the past, I couldn't perceive my vision in slow motion; I was only aware of about 3 frames per second, so I didn't notice the up-and-down movements as much. But recently, I've been able to grasp these movements in detail, so it feels like reality is becoming more like a game.

It wouldn't be surprising if there's a player controlling me somewhere (laughs).

Everyone is living this reality quite seriously, but it feels like they're all playing a game of being serious. But I'm starting to get a little tired of it. It's not that I'm completely bored, but rather that I'm losing interest.

Even in games, it's fun to find ways to overcome challenges or discover hidden techniques.

Yoga and Vedanta appear similar but form subtly different systems of thought.

While "yoga" in India encompasses various schools, it generally refers to the Ashtanga Yoga, based on the classical text "Yoga Sutra," rather than the gymnastics or stretching commonly associated with yoga in Japan. Vedanta, on the other hand, is based on the Upanishads, the concluding part of the Vedas.

It seems that Yoga Sutra and Vedanta have a subtle, almost antagonistic relationship in India (laughs).

They seem to be arguing over minor details, but to me, the differences don't seem that significant. It's like a distant commotion. Recently, people who have studied in India have brought this conflict and ideological differences to Japan, creating a sense that they are importing a foreign fire.

As mentioned before, the basic concept of yoga is to "extinguish the activity of the mind," and as a result, a state of mental tranquility (samadhi) and bliss are achieved.

On the other hand, the basic concept of various Vedanta schools is that it is not necessary to extinguish the mind in order to attain enlightenment; simply knowing the truth accurately is sufficient.

As I have mentioned several times recently, there are different views on whether samadhi is the Sinee or Tekutsu state in Zen Buddhism. Generally, it is understood as the Sinee state. Therefore, the claim of various Vedanta schools that the Sinee state is not the ultimate goal seems correct, and I don't think that even people who practice yoga consider the samadhi, which corresponds to the Sinee state, as the ultimate destination.

In reality, there are arguments between yoga and Vedanta based on whether or not to extinguish the mind. Yoga practitioners point out the mental instability of the Vedanta school, while, conversely, the Vedanta school argues that extinguishing the mind is not necessary for yoga practitioners.

However, to me, that seems irrelevant. Since both will realize the same thing by transcending the Sinee state and reaching the Tekutsu state, they should meditate instead of arguing about such things (laughs).

Both sides agree on the need to control the mind, so Vedanta also recognizes yoga as a useful practice. While some people who follow Vedanta may abandon yoga training based on its claims, I feel sorry for them.

For the Vedanta school, there may be cases where they do not recognize any "effect" of such a state. However, I would like them not to bring such extreme stories to Japan. Please discuss such things in India (laughs).

Therefore, when reading stories from India, it is a good idea to listen or read them with the following adjustments:

- When listening to stories from the yoga (Yoga Sutra) school, listen to the stories about achieving enlightenment through samadhi with a grain of salt.
- When listening to stories from the Vedanta (Upanishad) school, listen to the stories about the unnecessary nature of extinguishing the mind in yoga with a grain of salt. Listen to the arguments against the Yoga Sutra with a grain of salt. Listen to the stories about the unnecessary nature of asanas and meditation with a grain of salt.

That's about the right amount.

With that much adjustment, you can listen to the following statements from Vedanta:

Yoga is not a goal but a means. The cessation of consciousness is merely a means. Vedanta says that attaining samadhi is not an absolute necessary condition for attaining enlightenment. This is often misunderstood by others. (Omitted) They say that the realization of the absolute does not necessarily mean that a person is in samadhi. Because, if samadhi is a state of mind, we must transcend the mind, and a mere state of mind is not the highest state. "Spiritual Practice" (by Swami Prasannanda).

While this story seems to suggest that yoga is unnecessary when read with a misunderstanding of yoga and samadhi, it is regrettable if someone interprets this as meaning that yoga is unnecessary. To me, Vedanta is also a means, not a goal. Both are the same. The difference is only in perspective.

People who think that adhering to principles is important will focus on the differences, but both are means, so they should be used conveniently. When someone says that their principle is different and that their principle is not a means, I wonder if that statement is valid.

Vedanta is based on the Advaita, a non-dualistic view, and according to that view, the following points are important:

From a non-dualistic perspective, we must only realize the reality of the self. All other things should be understood as mere appearances. (Omitted) Only Brahman is real; everything else is an illusion. (Omitted) For a knower, there is no difference between being in samadhi and being awake and active in the world. That is the claim of the non-dualists. "Spiritual Practice" (by Swami Prasannanda).

This is a difference in perspective, and I can certainly understand such a story. Since different schools of thought have different viewpoints, it's unnecessary to point that out, so I think it's good to listen gratefully with a "hmm hmm" and deduct a certain amount from the story in my own mind.

This kind of thing happens because the person who said it initially understood it correctly, but as time passes and it becomes a game of telephone, it deviates from the truth, so it's probably okay to listen with a certain amount of deduction.

From what I've seen, the Yoga Sutras also say similar things, and recently, some people have come to understand that Samadhi and Vipassana are the same. Ultimately, whether you look at it from which perspective, the destination is the same, which is the state of Shinen or Tekchu in the Tibetan Buddhist tradition.

Sometimes, there are people who, without a common understanding of what Samadhi is, hear the word "Samadhi" and come up with Vedanta-related stories, and then deny Samadhi. I feel that's a bit strange. I don't want to bring the confusion in India, which is common in the Vedanta school, to Japan... So, I wrote this a little.

I'm trying to understand that when the Vedanta school says that the extinction of the mind is not necessary, it means that if you aim for the ultimate state of Tekchu, the extinction of the mind is just a passing phase. If you have that basic understanding, people who practice Yoga should be able to understand what the Vedanta school is saying, and there doesn't seem to be much to argue about.

Well, I wrote a little about it recently, but differences in ideology are ultimately a matter of personal preference. You should choose the ideology and methods that suit your own preferences. Even growing or not growing is a matter of personal preference. So, I think these differences in schools of thought are just a matter of personal preference. I'm taking it that lightly.

I have relatively good eyesight, but I noticed that when I enter a slow-motion Vipassana state, the sense of depth in my field of vision disappears.

When I am riding a bicycle or other vehicle, I have difficulty judging the distance when passing other objects, which is quite dangerous... I am somehow managing to pass by without incident now, but I feel like I understand how people who often collide with cars or bicycles feel.

My field of vision feels like a flat screen, like a television or computer monitor, and I sometimes wonder if the world is even three-dimensional. I used to take it for granted, but now I don't feel it.

Even when I watch videos of the Earth from space, I don't get a sense of how round the Earth really is. I used to think it was obvious.

Perhaps, in the Middle Ages, people who believed the Earth was flat had a similar lack of depth perception in their field of vision? It is said that even in the past, perspective was not used in paintings. A hypothesis could be that the perception of depth was restored because the Vipassana state has been lost recently.

I wonder why the sense of depth disappeared... While observing my field of vision further, I suspect it might be due to the following:

Previously, images were recognized about three times per second, like a flipbook, and the difference between each frame was significant, so there was a noticeable difference between the "before" and "after" states. I think the difference in the field of vision between the left and right eyes allowed for the perception of depth.

Now, in the Vipassana state, images are recognized much more finely, almost like a slow-motion video, so the difference between the "before" and "after" states is not as significant, and similar images are recognized continuously, which may be why I don't feel much depth.

Alternatively, as I mentioned earlier, the "third eye" (or "fourth eye") is likely monocular, so I initially thought that might be the cause of the loss of depth perception, but now I think the reason is more likely what I described above.

For example, when I look at something far away on the road, I used to intuitively feel that it was far away, along with a sense of depth. Now, it is simply recognized as a flat image, and it feels like I could reach it with my hand. Of course, I know that is not possible, so I don't try to reach it, but my field of vision makes the world feel flat, and the sense of depth is lost.

In this state, it is also difficult to tell if something is actually in front of me.

Sometimes, as is theorized, the idea that what we see in the distance is just an image or a hologram might not be entirely false.

Well, perhaps it's not that it's far away, but rather that it's almost in the same position, but just slightly shifted.

In any case, what is certain is that the sense of depth is diminishing, and as that happens, I also find it harder to distinguish between myself and others. If everything is an image or a hologram, there is not much difference between myself and the other person. Both are just images, or both are just holograms... In that case, the concept of "self" disappears.

Well, for now, that is my understanding. There is no need to judge whether this is good or bad. For now, I will continue to explore this state.

During meditation, I have recently experienced a few times where a rainbow-colored frame, like a different space, appears in my field of vision. The actual colors are much more vivid and smooth.

Recently, I have been experiencing a slow-motion state of Vipassana meditation, where my sense of distance is diminishing. When I observe my field of vision as if it were a flat screen, like a television or display, I occasionally notice a rainbow-colored frame, like a different space, appearing in a part of my field of vision.

It is unclear whether this has been happening all along and I simply hadn't noticed it, or whether it has recently started appearing.

Initially, I believe it appeared slightly above my right eye, and the second time it appeared slightly to the center of my left eye.

A hazy, rainbow-colored, slightly horizontal oval or rectangle appears, and it feels like a part of the display in my field of vision is malfunctioning and not displaying the intended image.

Beyond the hazy rainbow colors, I can only see something like clouds, and I don't know what is there.

I have a feeling, intuitively, that there is another space beyond that.

Alternatively, it is possible that the current world is an illusion, and that the true world lies beyond the hazy rainbow colors.

Well, I will continue to observe what happens in the future.

Recently, I have been writing about Vipassana meditation, the cessation of thought, and the observation of the body and breath. Now, I would like to summarize what I have written.

Regarding the stages of meditation, I will quote from the stages of Zokuchen.

1. The state before reaching the "Sinee" stage of Zokuchen.
I do not consider this state to be Vipassana meditation, although some schools call it Vipassana meditation.
Personally, I consider this to be Samatha meditation.

2. The "Sinee" stage of Zokuchen.
Similarly, I do not consider this to be Vipassana meditation, but some schools also call it Vipassana meditation.
Personally, I consider this to be Samatha meditation as well.

3. The "Tekuchu" stage of Zokuchen.
Personally, this is the only thing I consider to be Vipassana meditation.

In addition, I will add how it is generally called in the world.

1. The state before reaching the "Sinee" stage of Zokuchen.
The well-known Goenka method in Japan calls it Vipassana meditation from the beginning, and involves observing the body and thoughts. Although Samatha meditation is performed for the first few days, it is often undervalued.
In Theravada Buddhism, the practice involves stopping thoughts. Theravada Buddhism calls this Vipassana meditation, but since it is a concentration meditation, I personally interpret it as being equivalent to Samatha meditation.
In Samatha meditation, one focuses on stopping thoughts. This is similar to the Yoga Sutra style.

2. The "Sinee" stage of Zokuchen.
It is probably difficult to reach this stage with the Goenka method. The Goenka method aims to go beyond the "Sinee" stage and reach the "Tekuchu" stage, essentially mimicking the Vipassana state of the "Tekuchu" stage. Observing bodily sensations through meditation can have the effect of making the senses more sensitive and prone to outbursts. However, the actual "Sinee" stage requires suppressing the senses, which is the opposite, so it is unlikely to reach the "Sinee" stage.
I believe that it is possible to reach this stage in Theravada Buddhism. Although they call it Vipassana meditation, it is actually equivalent to Samatha meditation. I personally think that Theravada Buddhism may be intentionally calling it Vipassana meditation, even though they know it is Samatha meditation. Nevertheless, the explanation can be confusing, and there is a risk of the same problems as with the Goenka method.
By concentrating in Samatha meditation, one can reach the "Sinee" stage. Personally, I think it is best to start with Samatha meditation to suppress the senses.

3. The "Tekuchu" stage of Zokuchen.
If one continues in the "Sinee" stage, one will be led to the "Tekuchu" stage. However, one may not notice the existence of this stage if one is simply doing Samatha meditation. One may mistakenly believe that the "Sinee" stage is the ultimate enlightenment.
In the Theravada Buddhist method, the focus is not on the destination, so one will naturally continue to train towards the "Tekuchu" stage.
The Goenka method enters meditation by mimicking the Vipassana meditation of the final "Tekuchu" stage, but aiming for the "Tekuchu" stage without going through the "Sinee" stage makes it difficult to achieve, and can lead to mental breakdown, as the senses become too sensitive.

When I investigated these matters, I realized that Theravada Buddhism has a correct understanding within the schools that practice Vipassana. There are many books and seminars on Vipassana meditation and mindfulness, but few truly understand the "Sinee" stage and the "Tekuchu" stage. For example, the following book:

"The Vipassana meditation is to stop thoughts and fantasies. In other words, you should not think. (Omission) The method is to 'narrate' what you are doing in the 'present moment.' When you start narrating, you become unable to think. You become unable to fantasize, it is a simple method. (The Book of Awakening: A Guide to Mindfulness Meditation by Albumulle Samanera)."

This is actually different from the meaning of the word Vipassana meditation, and this explanation is actually for Samatha meditation (concentration meditation). Therefore, I personally think that Theravada Buddhism knows this and is intentionally calling Samatha meditation Vipassana meditation. On the other hand, the Goenka method completely misses the stage of reaching the "Sinee" stage, which is the cessation of thought.

This is the difference in understanding between Theravada Buddhism, which has a deep understanding of meditation, and Goenka, who started meditation as a businessman.

I am not trying to denigrate the Goenka method, but I think that people who have reached the "Sinee" stage or are close to it can benefit from the Goenka method. However, since many people are meditating without being close to the "Sinee" stage, there are people who experience mental breakdowns, people who develop strange sensations during long meditations and consider them special, people who become proud of their "challenge" and cause their meditation to expand their ego, and people whose anger threshold lowers and become more prone to outbursts.

Therefore, I do not recommend the Goenka method at all. It is acceptable to use it as a venue, and it may be acceptable to take it after reaching the state of Samadhi, but basically, I do not recommend it. This is because, apparently, the policy is to reject people who are doing other types of meditation. I often hear rumors of people who are doing yoga meditation and secretly attending it.

My understanding is that Vipassana meditation, in its original meaning, appears after the state of Samadhi, and whether to call other types of meditation Vipassana meditation depends on the policy of each school, but in reality, it should be the stage of practicing Samatha meditation. I think it is better to choose a school that properly teaches Samatha meditation. However, Theravada Buddhism, which is supposed to have a deep understanding of meditation, calls the Samatha meditation stage Vipassana meditation, which causes confusion, and I think it would be better to directly practice Samatha meditation. However, that is not something I should comment on. The Goenka method aims for the state of Tekchu, skipping the state of Samadhi, so it is not relevant.

Therefore, personally, I think it is better to practice Samatha meditation, which is a concentrated meditation such as yoga, until reaching the state of Samadhi, and then practice Vipassana meditation.

A common criticism of Samatha meditation is that you cannot attain enlightenment even if you stop thinking. However, even if you are practicing Samatha meditation, if you reach the state of Samadhi, it is not the end, and you may know that there is more to it, so it is just a matter of transitioning to Vipassana meditation. Therefore, I think you should use the method that is convenient for each stage. It is clear that Samatha meditation is faster in terms of growth at the beginning, so I think you should practice Samatha meditation at the beginning.

It seems that some Buddhist schools in Southeast Asia that practice Vipassana meditation also focus on Samatha meditation at the beginning. The Goenka method also briefly practices Samatha meditation for the first few days, but it gives the impression that it is being downplayed. Personally, I think that most people would be fine with practicing Samatha meditation from beginning to end for the entire 10 days. That is what it is. I don't think you can really practice true Vipassana meditation. If that is the case, practicing Samatha meditation for many years, or even until death, is sufficient, so there is no need to bring up Vipassana meditation.

I think that if I write an essay about Vipassana meditation like this, most people would probably think, "What is this?"
If that is the case, it may be acceptable for a school to call it Vipassana even though it is actually Samatha meditation, just like Theravada Buddhism.

In the world, there are talks about dimensional ascension and such, but based on my observations in a slow-motion Vipassana state, it seems that instead of dimensions rising from 3D to 4D or 5D, they are diminishing to 2D and then 1D, essentially disappearing. It might just be a difference in expression.

When it is said that dimensions rise from 3D to 4D, it seems that this "depth" is maintained, and time is added to it. When it reaches 5D, it is expressed as parallel worlds, and I don't really understand what happens at 6D, but in any case, it seems that the 3D world with depth and perspective is maintained.

If that is the case, my perception is the opposite. If the place where we are currently living is a 4D world where we can feel depth and time, then time itself can be said to exist in parallel, or that all time exists simultaneously, and it is like an illusion, so time disappears first.

Regarding perspective, it disappears in a Vipassana state, and it becomes 2D.

If you continue in a 2D Vipassana state, your consciousness expands, and you no longer understand the spatial distance. This can be said to be 1D or 0D, where everything exists simultaneously and everywhere, and yet, when you try to pinpoint a location, it is unclear, and it is like "this here" might be the same as "that there," or not the same, and it is a strange feeling without distance. That is 1D. It might be possible to use the analogy of 0D, but for now, let's just call it 1D.

In this way, the dimensions decrease, and the world converges or expands into a state that is hard to understand, such as a point, a plane, or spacetime, where everything exists simultaneously and everywhere.

Therefore, what is often talked about in the world, such as dimensional ascension, might be true from a certain perspective, but even if it is, it might just be an illusion that is an extension of the current world, and it might just feel like there is a dimensional ascension, but the true reality might be a world with a dimension of 1 (or zero).

I don't think many people will understand this.

In general, there is a lot of excitement about dimensional ascension and such, but personally, when I recall memories of the Lemurian era, I feel like there was a time when everyone was together and "ascended" in an instant, but even so, I still feel that the true reality is in this 1D (or 0D) dimension.

I have noticed that the perception of space and the perception of time are quite similar.
Recently, I have been experiencing a state of vipassana, and my sense of depth perception has been diminishing. I believe that we perceive space by comparing two images and recognizing the difference between them.

Generally, it is said that we perceive depth by seeing things from different perspectives with two eyes. I used to think that was true, but recently, in my vipassana state, there is little difference between seeing with two eyes and seeing with one eye; it feels like looking at a flat image. Incidentally, I have perfect vision in both eyes.

In the vipassana state, the ability to perceive space with both eyes seems to be reduced. Therefore, my sense of distance is slightly off, and I have to be careful not to collide with things, but that has not been a major problem.

I think that the idea that we perceive space by the difference between the two eyes is partially true, but it is not the whole story. I believe that we perceive space by comparing the current image with the image from the previous moment in our minds.

Before the vipassana state, I was perceiving several frames per second, so there was a noticeable difference between the current frame and the previous frame, and I think that the brain processed this difference to perceive space. Now, I am perceiving things in slow motion, so the difference between the current frame and the previous frame is small, which makes it difficult to perceive space.

This is about the perception of space, but I think the same applies to time.
Do humans not perceive time?
Perhaps, just as we do not actually perceive space itself, but rather process the difference between the current image and the previous image in our minds to perceive space, we do not actually perceive time itself, but rather process the difference between the current sensation and the previous sensation to perceive time.
If that is the case, then space and time may be illusions.
In fact, this kind of topic often comes up in physics and spirituality, and I think that we cannot perceive space and time as they are. If space and time are just what we feel they are, that would be a relief. I suppose that is probably the case.
I have heard about this kind of topic for many years, but I only recently began to understand its meaning from a different perspective through the vipassana state. Until now, it was a topic that I understood but didn't quite understand.
If we perceive things in slow motion in the vipassana state, the number of frames that can be distinguished increases, which reduces the difference between the current frame and the previous frame, and as a result, space gradually disappears, and time also disappears.
At the same time, my vision becomes flat, my sense of distance disappears, and I have difficulty distinguishing myself from others. I feel like I am taking a step back and watching television or a monitor. It feels like the essence of what I see is the same, so I feel like myself, others, and everything else are the same or both are like illusions. The space that distinguishes myself from others disappears, and since perception always occurs continuously in each moment, we do not perceive the past or the future, but only the present.
The past and the future are created by thinking with the mind. Space is also created by thinking with the mind.
This is not saying that the past, the future, or space do not exist or disappear completely, but rather that their essence is as described above. I am not denying the laws of physics.
... If the essence of space and time is like that, perhaps we can manipulate it to perceive space by jumping over it or to perceive time by transcending it.
The fact that I think that is possible means that it probably is. My future hobbies will likely be in that area.

When I touched my body, I could feel it, but when I tried to sense my body with my consciousness, I couldn't feel anything.

In meditation books, it often says, "The sensation of the body disappears," and I used to read that and think, "Ah, that must be what it means when the sensation of the body disappears during meditation," and I would often just skim over it. However, compared to the sensation I had this morning, it felt slightly more transparent, and the feeling of "nothingness" was subtle but definitely different.

I was wondering what this means... Then, I thought, perhaps, recently, I've been continuously resetting the tension in my body through Vipassana meditation, so the tension in my body has been significantly reduced.

Another point is the expansion of consciousness. Until now, I thought my consciousness was centered around myself and the area around my body, but now, it feels like my consciousness is expanding outwards, like an ellipse centered on myself, like the Milky Way. It feels like my consciousness is spreading out horizontally, like a flat layer, centered on myself while I'm sleeping.

When I woke up, I still felt the usual stiffness in my body, so it doesn't seem like my body has completely become soft. Therefore, I think this is mainly a problem of consciousness.

I interpret that originally, various parts of my body were stiff due to the tension of consciousness, and then, as consciousness is reset and the tension of consciousness is reset, the tension in my body gradually decreases, and as this cycle progresses, my consciousness gradually expands.

If what is meant by "the sensation of the body disappears" in meditation is actually a state like this, then perhaps I haven't reached that state before. It really feels like my body is hollow. I can still feel the sensation of my skin, so I know my body is there, but the consciousness within my body is becoming hollow.

My inner guide suggests that this is a state that is difficult to express in words, so I should simply experience it.

If Vipassana is objective, then non-Vipassana, especially a more gloomy sensation like Tamas, is subjective, and it seems to create a sense of immersion.

The immersive state of being absorbed in things and the relatively realistic, objective Vipassana may be likened to men and women.

In the world of yoga, the gloomy sensation of Tamas is explained as a growth model in the order of Tamas -> Rajas -> Sattva. Tamas is a gloomy sensation, Rajas is a sense of activity, and Sattva is a sense of purity. Therefore, it makes sense and is easy to understand that growth proceeds in the order of Tamas to Rajas, and then to Sattva. However, if there is a god, perhaps Tamas was planned by him.

To make things gloomy, slow them down, create a sense of immersion, and allow for careful observation of things. Perhaps that was the god's plan... I vaguely feel that.

Of course, there is no evidence or basis for this, it's just a feeling.

If that is the case, then Tamas, which is considered something to be avoided in the world of yoga, may be the best state for slowly and gloomily perceiving reality and properly assessing the situation.

The state of Tamas is a state of ignorance and falling into the abyss, but if there was someone like a god in this world, perhaps he made humans fall into a Tamas state and made them a slow and gloomy state so that they could observe things carefully... I'm starting to think.

After understanding, there is no need to stay in the state of Tamas, so you return to the pure state of Sattva.

If that is the case, then does a person who continues to be in the state of Sattva not "understand"? This hypothesis may be true. Perhaps that is the case.

Humans seek the pure state of Sattva, but perhaps that is a state of not knowing anything or a state after understanding. In order to understand, it may be necessary to fall into Tamas and observe, rather than being in Sattva.

In chemical experiments, physics experiments, or computer tests, if things are moving quickly, it is difficult to understand what is happening. On the other hand, by slowly allowing liquids to soak into something like sand, using a catalyst, or making a computer execute steps slowly, we can understand the inside.

If that assumption is correct, then perhaps the purpose of men is to fall into Tamas and explore the truth, and the purpose of women is to maintain Sattva as a lifeline so that the men can return.

If that is the case, then the image of women being awake, realistic, Sattvic, and always enjoying life may not be helpful to God if they live that way alone. The role of women is to be a lifeline for someone, and the role of men is to go down to the bottom of the valley and explore.

Perhaps, until recently, the roles of men and women were functioning properly. I feel that.

Putting aside the future way of life, at least the past image of men and women can also be classified and interpreted in this way.

It may be easily misunderstood, but when I say "can observe well," I am talking about what is important to God. With Tamas, the person themselves feels gloomy and cannot see anything. With Sattva, the person feels pure, comfortable, and peaceful. However, since God transcends both, perhaps Tamas is more interesting to God.

Well, I'm just thinking that myself. It's just a hypothesis.

In Theravada Buddhism, the second meditative state is called Samadhi.

There can be confusion because the word "Samadhi" is sometimes used as a translation of "meditation" in Buddhist and spiritual texts. I personally understood that "meditation" and "Samadhi" are not the same thing, but it seems that Theravada Buddhism interprets them in the way described above.

When one reaches the second meditative state, (omitted) at this time, it is called Samadhi. "Meditation Scriptures Compilation" (by Albumulle Sumanasara).

Here is a brief list of the four stages of meditation in Theravada Buddhism:

- First meditative state
The five hindrances: desire, anger, drowsiness, restlessness, and regret and doubt, are removed, and the mind becomes extremely clear and concentrated. (omitted) There is a pure feeling of joy and happiness. "The Ladder of Enlightenment" (by Akira Fujimoto).

- Second meditative state (Samadhi)
Since there is no thinking, concentration improves even further. "Meditation Scriptures Compilation" (by Albumulle Sumanasara).
Transcending the effort of "concentrating the mind," concentration continues naturally, and a true state of "mindfulness" is born. "The Ladder of Enlightenment" (by Akira Fujimoto).

- Third meditative state
The feeling of "joy" disappears, and only "ease" is felt. "Meditation Scriptures Compilation" (by Albumulle Sumanasara).
The mind becomes peaceful (Shanta), detached from joy. "The Ladder of Enlightenment" (by Akira Fujimoto).

- Fourth meditative state
The feeling of "ease" also disappears, and only a feeling that can be called "peace" remains. Concentration becomes stronger in accordance with the order of meditation. "Meditation Scriptures Compilation" (by Albumulle Sumanasara).
Even the last remaining feeling of happiness disappears. (omitted) The mind becomes a truly pure and peaceful state of Shanta. "The Ladder of Enlightenment" (by Akira Fujimoto).

My understanding of the definition of the word "Samadhi" is different from the one used here, but I didn't know that Theravada Buddhism interprets it this way, so I suppose it's unavoidable.

Personally, I don't quite understand the Buddhist concept of Samadhi. I base my personal interpretation on the definition used in yoga.

The content I wrote before about the two meanings of the word "Samadhi" is based on my personal interpretation and not the Theravada Buddhist definition, so it may cause some confusion for the reader.

Well, in some Vipassana schools, Samadhi is not emphasized much, so it's unavoidable that my interpretation, which equates Vipassana and Samadhi, is different.

Siddhi refers to several supernatural abilities, often called psychic powers. The way these abilities manifest seems to be quite similar across different sects.

In Buddhism, it is said to appear after the fourth dhyana (meditative state).

In yoga, it is said to appear through samadhi.

In Tibetan Dzogchen, it is also said to appear through samadhi.

These are quite similar, but only Buddhism uses the term "dhyana," while in Japanese, "dhyana" can be a translation of "samadhi," but it also has different meanings depending on the context.

"Samadhi" is a transliteration of "samadhi," so it refers to the same thing.

These, whether they are called "dhyana" or "samadhi," it is said that supernatural abilities appear in such a state of altered consciousness.

According to Theravada Buddhism, it is said that enlightenment can be achieved with the fourth dhyana. It is also said that siddhi appears in that same fourth dhyana.

Even based on the definition of the fourth dhyana that I quoted recently, it is a mystery how siddhi appears.

In addition to these orthodox siddhis, there are also siddhis in the spiritual or mediumistic sense.

Among the spiritual practices, those related to witchcraft are surprisingly similar to yoga and often follow orthodox methods. However, mediumship is somewhat different from the orthodox approach.

The orthodox approach strengthens the aura so that abilities naturally emerge. However, the methods used by mediums and indigenous peoples involve destabilizing one's own aura and inviting spirits, such as ancestors, into that unstable state to move one's body or mouth, or to receive inspiration.

I am not very interested in these mediumistic techniques and am only interested in the orthodox yoga methods.

However, generally, when people think of witches or magic, they often imagine mediumistic techniques. Indeed, abilities may appear more quickly with those techniques, but they are not under one's control and depend on the mood of the cooperating spirits. Also, one must keep one's aura unstable, which can be very dangerous if malicious spirits interfere.

Well, if someone wants to do it, they can do it as they please.

Because accidents and incidents that can instantly undo the growth accumulated over countless lifetimes can occur, it is better not to easily engage in such esoteric practices.

On the other hand, I think that abilities based on samadhi are not so dangerous. That is the case, as far as I can remember from past lives. I hope to confirm this later.

Similar things were written in Zokuchen's books.
Similar things are also written in the Buddhist scriptures and the Yoga Sutras.

Until recently, I had doubts and a desire to explore whether that was all there was, and whether there were other mysteries. But recently, I've been experiencing a state of stillness, a sense of slow motion, and a feeling of connection with everything, so if this is the ultimate state, it's samadhi, and if I continue, I may eventually develop siddhis, I have a feeling.

In the past, even when I read the same passages, I couldn't feel that they were connected to siddhis.

Especially recently, I've become less doubtful about the path I'm on.

I still don't have many siddhis, but I feel that the abilities described in the Yoga Sutras, Buddhism, and Zokuchen are not secrets and are actually true.

It seems that siddhis are not secrets, but are openly revealed in books, which is why they seem mysterious and difficult to achieve.

The Yoga Sutras describe siddhis along with the mysterious method of samyama. I think it's difficult to achieve siddhis just by reading this. I've tried to understand samyama before, but it's like an application of samadhi.

Even samadhi, as described in the Yoga Sutras, seems to be not fully explained.

Therefore, even if what is written in the Yoga Sutras is correct, I don't think it's possible to reach the destination just by reading the Yoga Sutras.

The Buddhist scriptures also have mysteries surrounding meditation and samadhi. I don't think siddhis will appear just by reading Buddhist scriptures.

However, Zokuchen clarifies these things, and as a result, my doubts about samadhi have been resolved. I personally believe that doing vipassana with a sense of non-duality, which is what I think is called samadhi, is what will lead me to the next stage.

"Sewa" means "to mix" in Tibetan. It means to blend one's state of samadhi into every action of daily life. (Omitted) Of course, this requires a firm state of samadhi. Otherwise, the very act of integrating something into something else is meaningless. (Omitted) The phrase "without even a trace of doubt" means this. "Rainbow and Crystal" by Namkai Norbu.

I haven't been able to find a human teacher (although there are some), and my judgment of whether my state is truly samadhi is just my own assessment. However, even if it's not samadhi, I clearly see that there is more to come, so it's just a matter of continuing to move forward. I have almost no doubts about that. Whether or not to call that state samadhi is not that important.

According to the same book, the following changes appear when samadhi is incorporated into daily life:

1. Cherdol
2. Shardol
3. Landrul

The first ability is (omitted) Cherdol, which means "to liberate oneself by observing." It is likened to a water droplet evaporating under the light of the sun. (Omitted) Just maintain awakened wisdom. Then, everything that arises will liberate itself. (Omitted) Shardol is an intermediate ability (omitted) and means "to liberate oneself simultaneously with arising." (Omitted) The ultimate ability of self-liberation is called Landrul. This means "to naturally liberate oneself." (Omitted) This is an instantaneous, momentary self-liberation that transcends duality. The separation between subject and object naturally collapses, and the habitual way of seeing, the trap of the self, is released into the manifestation of existence (dharmakaya), which is like emptiness. (Omitted) When an object arises, it is recognized as being empty, just like one's own state of emptiness. (Omitted) In other words, both subject and object are empty. Duality is completely overcome. This does not mean that the subject or object does not exist. It is a continuous state of samadhi, and through the practice of self-liberation, one becomes free from the limitations of duality. "Rainbow and Crystal" by Namkai Norbu.

According to the same book, siddhis are byproducts of this process.

In other words, siddhis appear only after overcoming duality.

Therefore, even if the content of the Yoga Sutras is difficult to understand, since samadhi is a state of non-duality, it is natural that siddhis appear in samadhi. Similarly, if we assume that the fourth dhyana in Buddhism has reached a state of samadhi with non-duality, it is natural that siddhis appear.

A part of me that had been unclear for a long time was clarified by the Zocheng.

The important thing is to reach the state of non-duality, so I think that recently, it is important to not doubt anything, no matter what you rely on, until you reach that state.

The Yoga Sutras sing of the cessation of the mind, but if you doubt its effects, doubt samadhi, and so on, where will you end up?

In Buddhism as well, I think it is important to not doubt things like the Eightfold Path.

When you read these things in writing, they are written in very simple words, and you may inadvertently overlook them as such simple and obvious things.

However, so-called enlightenment or happiness is in that extremely obvious and natural place, and I especially think so recently.

The root of this is the state of non-duality, which is what is called samadhi. Some people may imagine something supernatural when they think of samadhi, but it can also be said to be simply a purified mind. If you purify your mind through the Eightfold Path, things will become clear, you will be able to see things without distractions, and you will be able to see things as they are, and that state is what people call samadhi.

Of course, there are criteria for what is called samadhi, and there are times when you think you are in samadhi, but you are not.

However, the basic thing is that it is in a very obvious place.

It is not something that you can reach by doing something special or mysterious.

Therefore, the important thing is in the obvious place, and I think that recently, the most important thing is a mind that does not doubt that.

This obvious state is easily lost, and it tends to become something like mere teachings or morality, and what is considered the profound teachings is a collection of things like the Yoga Sutras, the Upanishads (the final profound teachings of the Vedas, Vedanta), or Buddhist scriptures.

However, there are various methods of practice depending on the individual's nature, and you can choose what you like. I don't think you will automatically grow just by not doubting. But the basics are around here, I think.

Recently, I have been focusing on Vipassana meditation, which feels like a form of training in daily life.
The concept of "samadhi" that I use is the same as Vipassana meditation.

I am practicing in a way that is similar to 24-hour meditation. When I am caught up in thoughts in my daily life, I either put them aside or quickly come to a conclusion, and then return to a Vipassana state. This is the same as what I call "samadhi." I try to maintain this "samadhi" state, which feels like experiencing things in slow motion.

I can feel that the depth of observation varies from day to day. What I mean by "depth" is how smoothly I can perceive the visual field, measured in frames per second.

As I mentioned before, this is similar to video editing. The basic Vipassana state is when the visual field is perceived as a relatively smooth image, like 24fps or 30fps. When I am tired or feeling down, and my cognitive abilities are weakened, I feel like I am perceiving the visual field at 8fps or 12fps. The smoothness of the visual movement is clearly different, so I can objectively determine my own state.

When I am thinking, I feel like I am either seeing the scenery in front of me or not. When I realize that I am thinking and bring my awareness back to the visual field, I return to a state of perceiving the visual field at 24fps or 12fps, depending on my condition.

Therefore, even though it can be considered a form of training, I have recently been trying to be mindful of noticing when I am thinking, and if it is something important, I quickly come to a conclusion. If it is just a random thought, I stop the thought and return to perceiving the visual field, which is the "samadhi" state, the Vipassana state.

Therefore, while I still do some seated meditation, I feel that recently, this daily Vipassana meditation and the resulting "samadhi" are more important.

Both are necessary, but I don't feel the need to do seated meditation for as long as I used to, and I am trying to practice this daily Vipassana meditation for as long as possible.

Basically, Vipassana meditation and "samadhi" are the same thing, but when I am simply perceiving the visual field in slow motion, I call it Vipassana meditation, but since there is no non-dual awareness, it may not be appropriate to call it "samadhi."

However, I think that if I continue in the Vipassana state, non-dual awareness will quickly arise and lead me to "samadhi," so I think it is not a big problem to say that they are the same.

These terms are confusing, so it may be difficult to apply my context to the definitions of other schools of thought. This is just an explanation of what it feels like when I apply my understanding of Vipassana and "samadhi."

Just as Tamas creates a sense of immersion, it seems that the more Tamas there is, the more a sense of perspective is created. This is the opposite of the phenomenon where perspective disappears in Vipassana meditation. If we consider that the more one deviates from a Vipassana state, the more perspective arises, which is a state of Tamas, then it seems very logical.

Western civilization recently discovered the technique of perspective, and white civilization has claimed that Asia and past civilizations were inferior. However, if perspective is actually like what I described above, then the white civilization that discovered perspective is a civilization of Tamas, far from Vipassana, and far from God. This hypothesis can be established.

The development of science and technology is also rooted in techniques like perspective. Therefore, Tamas is not necessarily bad, and if the pursuit of truth through Tamas is common, then the interpretation that recent Tamas is the will of God can also be established.

If the recent civilization has pushed us into a state of Tamas, a state far from God, then the hypothesis that this is the will of God, to see what will happen as a result, can also be established.

On the other hand, what about the other two Gunas in Yoga, Rajas and Sattva? Rajas has a moderate sense of perspective, and the Sattvic Vipassana state has less perspective. However, Sattva may be compatible with perspective in terms of accurately grasping things.

Therefore, it is possible that perspective was not created solely by Tamas, but by a combination of Tamas and Sattva.

Perhaps, science and technology have been created by extreme Tamas and Sattva. Such a hypothesis may arise.

If the general public is Rajas, then extreme Tamas is created by the will of God, and when it combines with the Sattvic consciousness of God, awareness is born, and civilization and science and technology develop.

In the world of Yoga, Tamas tends to be portrayed as the bad guy, but when you think about it, Tamas is not necessarily a bad thing.

At least for me, when thoughts or ideas arise, the slow-motion Vipassana state is released.

In many meditation books, it is written that when thoughts or ideas arise, you should not reject them but simply observe them as they are. However, at least for me, this is difficult.

Perhaps these kinds of statements are a mixture of two things:
- Do not reject thoughts or ideas.
- Be aware of the fact that your consciousness is directed towards thoughts or ideas.

This is a basic concept in meditation.
However, when it is said "observe," I feel that the wording is incorrect. I don't think it is "observation." It is just a difference in expression.
When I hear "observation," I tend to interpret it as observing thoughts without hindering them in a Vipassana state, which I think is for advanced practitioners. For me, it is completely impossible to observe in that way.
I can maintain half of my consciousness in a slow-motion Vipassana state while using the other half of my consciousness to observe thoughts or ideas. However, in that case, the number of frames of the scenery that can be recognized in slow motion decreases by about half, and the vision is perceived as jerky and discontinuous.
Therefore, I cannot perfectly observe thoughts or ideas simultaneously while being completely aware in slow motion. However, even if I could, I think it would be for advanced practitioners.
I can observe thoughts properly, so it is not entirely wrong to say that I am meditating on thoughts in Vipassana. However, because it is difficult to determine how quickly I am perceiving them, it is difficult to determine whether I am truly in a Vipassana state.
Thoughts are what the mind perceives. In a slow-motion Vipassana state for the visual field, the mind stops, and the awareness that lies deeper than that is activated to perceive the visual field in slow motion. Therefore, if that is the case, observing thoughts by the mind is somewhat different from the slow-motion Vipassana for the visual field.
Perhaps, when observing thoughts in a Vipassana state, it is not a recognition of the mind that governs logic, but a type of recognition that intuitively grasps something more fundamental. This is still a hypothesis.
However, I seem to remember that some meditation records written by relatively advanced practitioners mentioned observing and dealing with thoughts. So, from that context, it is possible that observing thoughts (thoughts and ideas) in slow-motion Vipassana also exists, and I have that in the back of my mind.

This daily life has many risks of energy depletion.

There are many things that are considered "good" by common sense, but in reality, there are many things that are better not to do.

One of them is "sympathy and agreement with others."

Of course, it depends on the time and circumstances.
Agreeing with someone of equal standing or someone with a more admirable aura is fine, but if you constantly sympathize and agree with those of lower standing, you will eventually fall to the bottom.

There are "lies" that drain energy in this world, so it is important to recognize and avoid such lies.

Well, when I say things like that, there are always people who will say, "That's a sense of separation," or "Everyone is truly connected," but in reality, this world is a jungle where beasts roam, so if you constantly sympathize and agree with others, you will eventually fall to the bottom.

In order to survive in this jungle, it is essential to sympathize and agree with those who share the same intentions and get on the same boat, and there is no need to agree with everyone and conform to them.

And that is ultimately for the benefit of the other person.

Because if someone who is about to fall to the bottom is suddenly helped by someone else, they will not be able to truly experience that bottom, to the very core of their being.

Therefore, let those who are at the bottom experience the bottom.

Of course, you should not push them down. They are falling on their own, which is an act of free will, so trying to pull them up by saying things like "This is good" or "Let's go to the world of light" is unnecessary.

To be honest, this world is perfect, including both good and bad things, so falling is like a hobby.

You can do whatever you want.
The world of light is also like a hobby. I personally enjoy the world of light, but there are others who don't.

There is no need to tell others that the world of light is good, and if someone is telling you that, it may be an ego to control the other person.

Basically, each person should live as they like, so they can fall or rise as they please.

Those who fall often try to take energy from others, but I don't enjoy dealing with that, so I take precautions to avoid having my energy stolen and pay attention to energy depletion.

There are healers in the world, but even that is like a hobby. If you decided to give energy to others and became a healer, then you can do it as you like. There is no need to boast about it, and not everyone needs to be a healer.

That is also like a hobby.

This is a wonderful world where you can do anything you want.

There are many people who heal through their own aura, but my group soul, which has reincarnated from a parallel world, possesses healing techniques that do not use their own aura.

There are various methods of healing.
- Healing by connecting one's aura to the other person and sharing one's aura.
- Healing by receiving energy from the heavens or the earth, and then passing it through one's own body to the other person.
- Healing by directly giving energy from the heavens or the earth to the other person.

Most of the time, healing involves passing through one's own aura. However, healing that does not pass through one's own aura has the advantage that one's aura does not mix with the other person's aura, so it does not stagnate.

There is also a story that healing is done directly by one's guardian spirit or guardian angel, but this is not much different depending on whether or not one has a physical body, so I will omit it here.

When receiving energy from a guardian spirit or guardian angel and passing it through one's own body to the other person, it is quite similar to the second method mentioned above, so it can be included.

As a healing technique, it is better to use energy from the heavens because the energy from the earth tends to be stagnant. However, in order to use energy from the heavens, one must first connect to the heavens.

First, one must connect to the heavens, and then extend one's aura like tentacles, reaching all the way to the heavens. From there, a new energy pathway is created from the heavens to the person being healed, for example, the person in front of you.
Once the energy is connected from the heavens, all that remains is to release the energy. The initial connection is difficult, but once it is established, it is not very difficult to maintain. You just need to occasionally use your consciousness to maintain the pathway so that it does not break.

This can be used not only for healing people but also for healing places.

When used for healing a place, the people who pass through it will automatically receive healing from that pillar of light.
In other words, it is a process of making the place a place of healing.

If not maintained, the pillar of energy may be cut off, so it is necessary to maintain it from time to time.

When created artificially, it disappears in a few minutes or at most a few hours, so it is essential to maintain it when making a place a place of healing.

Considering the effort involved, one can understand that the efforts of those who protect sacred places are extraordinary, but that is another story for another time.

When I first started meditating, I heard the analogy of the water surface, but I felt like "I guess so," but it didn't really resonate. I could understand it intellectually, but it didn't feel real.

The analogy of the water surface is a metaphor for the mind. When the mind becomes calm, it's like the ripples on the surface of a lake becoming still, and just as the ripples settling allows you to see what's beneath the surface, it allows you to see your true self, your Atman, which is hidden deep within your mind, or it reveals itself. This is also often compared to a mirror.

This analogy is well-known and often used by spiritual people and others.
However, the origin of this analogy is likely from the classical Yoga Sutras.

Recently, this analogy has become more than just a metaphor; it's become something I can actually feel.
It's still the same old analogy, but it's changed from being just a metaphor to something I can actually experience.
Before, I would think, "It's just a metaphor. Hmm, hmm. I understand. Yes, that's right." But now, I feel like, "This is what it means," and I can feel it in my mind.

My current mental state is like a "mirror with grime," a "slightly cloudy mirror," a "mirror with dirt," or a "water surface with slight ripples from a breeze." I can clearly see the state of the "cloudiness" on the surface of my mind.

I realize that experiencing this feeling means that there's still a long way to go.
If we consider the mental state before starting yoga or meditation as 100, then, according to the Tibetan Buddhist tradition of Dzogchen, the mental state when the mind is unified is 10. Recently, when I enter a slow-motion Vipassana state, the mental state is around 1 to 2. But even then, there's still a long way to go.
I can feel that when the mental state is 1, the visual field is recognized with a smoothness similar to 24fps in a video, and when it's 1.5 to 2, it's recognized with a slightly choppy feeling, like 8 to 12fps.

If the depth of Vipassana changes depending on the degree of mental "ripples" or "cloudiness," then it's possible that further changes in the mind could lead to even greater mental transformations.
In the past, when I heard about the water surface becoming calm, I imagined it as something like a secret technique used in magic or meditation to control the mind. I had a preconceived notion of what the mind was. But now that my mental state has changed so much, I think it's possible for even greater changes to occur.
If the water surface or mirror analogy represents that there's more to the mind, then it's not just a one-dimensional analogy, but an image that represents a deeper understanding of the mind.
The analogy is only one aspect of understanding, and the actual state of the mind is something real. Therefore, the mind is something that goes beyond the analogy.
If this were just an abstract concept that cannot be grasped by the mind, then it would be explained as an analogy and that would be the end of it. But because we can grasp the mind through meditation, and because it deepens, the mind is something that goes beyond the analogy.
It's becoming difficult to even say whether this is the mind or the "mind" as we know it. But even so, I feel that there is a quiet consciousness that is deepening, existing alongside or in a hierarchical relationship with the conscious mind, the so-called thinking mind or "mind" that we are aware of.

Recently, I have been observing my surroundings in a slow-motion manner, as if in a Vipassana state. As the on/off state and depth of this state change, my daily life has gradually become something with a rhythm, like a movie.

I often feel that even ordinary scenes can feel like a scene from a movie or drama.

For example, in the crowded Shibuya area, I focus my gaze on the distance.

In a Vipassana state, the whole scene feels like slow motion. However, I intentionally add rhythm by focusing my eyes on the distance. Then, the foreground becomes blurry.

Previously, when I was not in a Vipassana state, when I looked at the distance, I was only conscious of the distance.

Depending on my condition, my field of vision is now quite wide, so even when my focus is on the distance, the foreground is blurry, and I can sense the movement of people.

This feels like watching a movie or drama where the focus is on the distance and the foreground is blurred.

It's like I'm watching a movie or drama in the real world!

If I focus my gaze on the foreground, the distant scenery becomes out of focus and blurry, which feels like looking at a bokeh photograph.

When I look at the landscape with a wide focus (all-focus state), both the foreground and the background appear flat, which is enjoyable in its own way.

I've started to think that it would be nice if my entire field of vision was a beautiful place.

After all, movies and dramas should have beautiful scenery, right? It's the same thing.

As I enter a Vipassana state, I've also started to pay more attention to my own room.

I often visit art museums and museums, but now that I'm in a Vipassana state and my perspective has changed, I'm starting to think that it might be a good idea to reset my previous experiences and approach the works with a fresh perspective, focusing more on the concept of beauty.

As I continue meditating, the physical sensations have become rounded, like a daruma doll or Doraemon. Especially the lower half of the body from the neck down feels rounded, and I have the impression that a small Doraemon head is on top.

Previously, collecting aura was unstable and I was emotionally unwell. Therefore, even when I concentrated the aura on my head during meditation, I often had to lower it to my chest and abdomen before finishing. However, now I have a stable sensation, and there are no particular problems even after finishing meditation.

In the past, the vertical aura was unstable, and it was often difficult to concentrate it around the center of the eyebrows. However, currently, the whole body is calm, and the aura naturally gathers around the center of the eyebrows. This is not concentration, but I am unintentionally in that state.

The purpose of meditation is not only to consciously collect aura in the head, but also to aim for a natural state, which also applies to breathing techniques. It is possible that, in order to achieve the ultimate goal, the master teaches the disciple specific methods, but in reality, it is only about conveying that state itself.

Previously, I used expressions such as "collecting aura" or "concentrating on the eyebrows," but now I feel that expressions such as "collecting aura with the palm of my hand on the top of my head" or "the upper half of the head is hollow and the aura is collected around it" are more appropriate.

In the past, when the Manipura chakra was dominant, I didn't feel the sensation of the Anahata chakra, and energy didn't flow much into it. Now, I don't feel any sensation in the upper half of my head, in the Ajna chakra, so it seems that energy is not flowing much into the Ajna chakra, and I am trying to gather energy in the Ajna chakra. Based on the experience before the Anahata chakra became dominant, if we assume that the Ajna chakra will follow a similar process, then perhaps I am now in a state where energy is finally starting to flow into the Ajna chakra.

The term "chakra" is often described as "opening," but while "opening" is not entirely incorrect, it feels more like energy is flowing there. So, if the current state is that energy is not flowing into the Ajna chakra, and the "boundary" of the Ajna chakra is now being recognized, then this is similar to when the Manipura chakra was dominant, and I felt the lack of sensation and the boundary of the Anahata chakra, and then energy started to flow into the Anahata chakra. Feeling the boundary and the lack of sensation in the Ajna chakra as energy begins to fill the area below it, causing the aura to become like a dumpling, is probably a good sign.

As my consciousness calms down, I've become aware of subtle sensations nearby. Currently, it's roughly within a radius of 50cm.

Could this be called "expansion of consciousness" in some way?

Previously, when I talked about "expansion of consciousness," it felt like the mind or intellect was expanding.

Now, my mind seems to be shrinking, and a more subtle sensation is spreading outwards.

If I were to express this in meditation terminology, it would be like I'm doing Samatha meditation (concentration meditation) because the mind is concentrating inwards, and at the same time, a more subtle sensation, perhaps even beyond the five senses... or something that feels more subtle than the sensation of the skin, is spreading outwards, which could also be considered Vipassana meditation (insight meditation).

Many people seem to think that meditation involves either Samatha meditation or Vipassana meditation. However, in this case, I'm simultaneously practicing Samatha meditation, which focuses the mind, and Vipassana meditation, which observes subtle sensations.

The mind in Samatha meditation seems to be at a level similar to or slightly more subtle than the five senses.

On the other hand, the sensation of observing outwards that is spreading subtly in Vipassana meditation probably goes beyond the five senses.

When meditation is described as "expanding consciousness," there's probably a difference between expanding within the layers of the mind, senses, and intellect, and expanding beyond those layers.

Recently, the distinction between these has become quite clear in my meditation practice. Previously, the distinction was much more ambiguous. It may become even more clear in the future.

What I'm referring to as the distinction is that, during meditation, the sensation of something near the body, which is often referred to as an "aura," and the subtle sensations that spread outwards were previously quite mixed up, but now the part that settles and the part that spreads outwards have become quite clear.

It seems that the more firmly the mind is anchored near the body, the more subtle sensations or observational aspects emerge.

Therefore, the common explanation that "Vipassana meditation is observing sensations like those of the skin" doesn't quite resonate with me. If you're using the five senses to observe, that's Samatha meditation (concentration meditation). This may just be a characteristic of a particular school of thought, but if the five senses are mistakenly considered Vipassana meditation, it could lead to people becoming overly sensitive, and potentially produce a large number of people who, like some practitioners of a certain school, have "very low anger thresholds and are easily angered." However, I believe that if you focus on Samatha meditation to suppress the senses and anchor the mind near the body, such things will not happen.

Currently, I think that it's best to focus on Samatha meditation and naturally transition into a state of Vipassana observation.

If that's the case, perhaps it's better to just focus on Samatha meditation without worrying too much about Vipassana.

As my consciousness expands, I have begun to feel the boundaries of the aura surrounding my body.

When my mind becomes calm and my consciousness expands, the boundary between my body's aura and the outside world feels like a shimmering surface of water.

It may be the guardian of the threshold, as Steiner describes, or it may simply appear as a wall of aura.

The body and the aura surrounding it are on the inside. The boundary between the aura and the outside world feels like a blurred, shimmering surface, or a gray cloud.

From the inside, it is the shimmering of the aura's boundary, and beyond that lies a vast world.

If expanding consciousness means becoming aware of feeling the outside, then what I see from the inside out, as Steiner says, may be the guardian of the threshold.

Just as you can't see clearly outside when looking through frosted glass, you can't see the outside clearly through a clouded aura.

Steiner may have called the initial stage of not being able to see the presence of guardian spirits, friends, and acquaintances standing outside the guardian of the threshold. I somehow feel that.

Before starting spiritual training, the aura was completely clouded, and nothing outside could be seen. But gradually, the aura becomes purified, and the color of the clouds gradually turns white. Even though it is still cloudy, the fog gradually clears, and you can barely see the outside. At that time, when you first see the outside through the clouded aura, it may look like a blurred, cloud-like spiritual body. Perhaps that is what he called the guardian of the threshold.

While Steiner is the one who talks about the guardian of the threshold, it may indeed look like that when looking at the outside through a clouded aura. This is speculation, as Steiner is no longer alive.

Steiner talks about breaking through the guardian of the threshold to open the door to the spiritual world.

If that is the case, then that stage may refer to the state where consciousness gradually becomes clearer, and there is only a little cloudiness left, and the outside world finally begins to be seen.

The fleeting shadow of a demon that I saw during meditation may be similar to that.

If this speculation is correct, then it is not a great thing called the guardian of the threshold, but rather it is the stage where what you see can be interpreted in that way.

I think this may be similar to the state of Tekchu in Dzogchen. Tekchu is not completely clear, but it is somewhat clear, so it seems similar, and it also fits the stages.

Well, I can't ask him directly, so it's just a guess. But I feel that way.

As I have written several times, when I was a child, I experienced out-of-body experiences and wandered through the past and future for a long time, where I learned the truth and learned from higher selves and guardian spirits. At that time, or perhaps later, I remembered dealing with the so-called "Year 2000 problem" in my dreams.

At that time, I was still a student, about to graduate, but the era was filled with excitement about the IT bubble and the Year 2000 problem.

Specifically, I did not deal with that era... which may be misleading, but this is what happened.

Furthermore, about 7 or 8 years ago, I had my first out-of-body experience, and at that time, I traveled through time, learning various things and entering the consciousness of the future to make decisions.

This is a difficult concept to understand, but after the out-of-body experience, I could travel to the past and future, so I usually moved to nearby eras, but I could also travel to distant times.

The consciousness space during the out-of-body experience was connected, so, for example, a few years after a certain out-of-body experience, I connected to the same space in a dream and connected to the same consciousness to make a decision. Both were the same space, so the decision made during the out-of-body experience a few years ago and the decision made in a dream later were both the same will at the same moment.

People may say things like "only the present exists" or "the past and future do not exist," but regardless of the wording, the space of will is connected, and that space can slide to the past or future depending on the focus of consciousness. Therefore, at a certain moment of consciousness sliding, I focused on the Year 2000 problem.

The consciousness of my out-of-body experience discovered an era where the focus was on the Year 2000 problem.

As mentioned above, it is unclear whether it happened during the out-of-body experience or in a dream, but since it is connected to the same space, both are correct. However, it can be said that either I solved the Year 2000 problem during an out-of-body experience or I solved the Year 2000 problem in a dream.

In any case, this is a story about out-of-body experiences, so please consider it as a dream story. There is no evidence for it.

Therefore, please consider what I am going to say as a story I saw in a dream.

In an out-of-body experience or a dream, I was drifting in a certain timeline.

I saw a society in chaos due to the Year 2000 problem.

A major problem was in Europe, probably in the west, such as France or Spain. The power system problems led to a dark night, causing instability in people's minds and leading to a world of panic and conflict. There were also problems in the United States and Japan. Of course, my memory is from over 20 years ago, so it is vague, but I think there were problems with nuclear power plants, and there were even situations close to a meltdown.

Therefore, at that time, my consciousness strongly felt that "this is not good."

I believe that my consciousness was not instructed by anyone, but perhaps there was a higher will. At least, within the consciousness of my out-of-body experience, I was partly "experimenting" and working to investigate and solve the problem.

Even though it is called "investigation," I could travel through the timeline, so I basically learned the reasons from the content of news programs in the future.

After a few months or a few years, the investigation would progress and be reported in detail on television, but at that time, the problem was so big that various stories were being broadcast on television within a month or a few months.

The fact that the investigation could be completed so quickly means that the countermeasures were probably implemented in a relatively short period of time. However, the scars left on society were significant, and it seems that the IT revolution, which is so prevalent today, was not as active, and the Year 2000 problem may have stifled the IT bubble, leading to less funding for IT and the preservation of traditional industries. I haven't seen this properly, so half of it is an impression. However, regardless of the situation, I think that the world as a whole was greatly affected by the Year 2000 problem, and it became a dark world. At least, that was the timeline I saw.

After identifying the cause, I would then go back in time to the research institute or development office that was the cause of the problem, and implant the problem into the consciousness of the researchers or developers, repeatedly working on their consciousness until it was resolved. Once they realize the problem, they are experts, so they should be able to deal with it appropriately.

And so, the Y2K problem was almost resolved, and the New Year's Eve of 2000 passed quietly. People said that it was a night of excessive celebration, mocking the fact that nothing happened, but in reality, it should have been a much bigger deal.

Speaking of which, prophecies by people like John Titor were popular around that time. I don't know if that person was genuine, but at least some of the things he said, including the Y2K problem, strangely matched the timeline I had seen, so I watched them with interest at the time.

Well, whether or not he was a time traveler, I think it's possible for consciousness to travel to the past or future based on my experiences with out-of-body experiences, and I don't think there are many temporal constraints in the world of consciousness.

Even though we're talking about out-of-body experiences, I don't see many stories about transcending time in other people's accounts, but I think that's because they are too accustomed to earthly life and their consciousness is bound by temporal constraints, and that if they tried to transcend time, they could. What do you think?

In any case, the Y2K problem was avoided, and a large amount of money was invested in internet companies during the IT bubble, and as a result, the world has become a place where internet companies have the highest market capitalization.

In this modern era, people say that the monopoly of internet companies is a problem, but if you compare it to a different timeline where traditional industries are maintained and there are more conflicts around the world than in this timeline, and where internet companies exist on a much smaller scale, then even though this timeline has various problems, it might be a relatively better timeline.

Well, you don't have to believe any of this.

As I wrote above, it's a story I saw in a dream.

I had completely forgotten about it for a while, but I suddenly remembered it, so I wrote it down.

If we apply the three stages of Zokuchen, there is a stage of Tugal after the stage of Tekchu. However, based on my considerations over the past few months, I have speculated that I am currently in the Tekchu stage and may be moving towards Tugal. Recently, I came across an interesting description in a book regarding the experience of "consciousness" in Vipassana meditation, which is described as a "water surface" being calm.

The book cites a statement by Tetsugen Doko, a figure in the Obaku school of Zen Buddhism, to explain the experience of Vipassana consciousness:

"The experience of the mind becoming a clear, vast sky is not yet an enlightenment experience. It is simply a misunderstanding of consciousness as the Buddha-nature/the essence of the mind." (Omitted) "Even if this consciousness is the entirety of the original mind, it is still said to be 'not the original mind' because it is attached to the sleep of ignorance. Even if it is not said to be 'the original mind,' it is still a state where various delusions have disappeared, so it is not simply delusion. If a practitioner reaches this point, they should strive even harder in their practice. It is a precursor to the true enlightenment that will soon manifest." ("Reading Enlightenment Experiences" by Shin Takeuchi)

This seems similar to the explanation of the transition from Tekchu to Tugal in Zokuchen.

In Zokuchen, Tekchu is described as the state where the "uncovered mind" appears. However, when comparing this with the above description, the "uncovered mind" or "original mind" appears in the Tekchu stage, but there is still a slight impurity, whether it is called ignorance or tamas, depending on the school of thought. Therefore, to reach the Tugal or enlightenment stage in Zokuchen, another step is necessary.

However, I remember reading a description in Zokuchen that Tekchu and Tugal are continuous, and that if one can reach Tekchu, one will naturally be guided to Tugal. If that is the case, then perhaps, as mentioned in the Buddhist interpretation, it is a continuous process that leads to enlightenment.

Even though the darkness of delusion has cleared, if one understands that "this is not it," and without discarding it, nor rejoicing in it, and without waiting for enlightenment, one simply remains indifferent and empty, and diligently continues, then suddenly true enlightenment will manifest, illuminating all dharmas, as if a hundred thousand suns appear at once. ("Reading Enlightenment Experiences" by Shin Takeuchi)

Indeed. I feel that the path is shown here.

Several habits seem to hinder the so-called slow-motion Vipassana state.

- Overeating
- Meat
- Mushrooms? (Needs verification)
- Fried foods (tempura, etc.)

These overlap with foods that are said to be undesirable in yoga.

Recently, before reaching the slow-motion Vipassana state, it didn't seem to have much of an impact.

Therefore, I thought that the dietary habits mentioned in yoga, etc., were largely cultural. At least, I thought so until now.

In terms of diet, I had naturally stopped eating meat, and the amount of food I ate had also decreased. I thought that I should just follow the natural changes in my diet, but it turns out that there were habits that have been affecting my diet much more than I realized.

Well, it could be said that this is also a natural change, but it's a clearly identifiable sensation, unlike the feeling of gradually not wanting to eat something.

Because it clearly hinders the Vipassana state, I can clearly tell that it is not good.

Mushrooms are questionable, and they seem to have some impact. Beef is better, but pork is quite bad. Chicken is also not very good.

I have been avoiding meat based on sensory experiences, and when there are no other options, I sometimes eat meat, but I often regret it. I have also stopped drinking alcohol recently.

Previously, even if it was said to be harmful, it was only a slight feeling of heaviness. But recently, the specific state of the slow-motion Vipassana state has become the criterion for judgment, so I can clearly see that incorporating such harmful foods hinders the Vipassana state.

Therefore, I sometimes hear stories like, "Once you reach a certain level, you can eat whatever you want," but until recently, I thought that I might be at that stage. However, it turns out that I am not at all in that state.

Is it possible to be unaffected by food even in the final stage? I'm starting to think that there is no such thing as being completely unaffected.

Logically, it is obvious that eating something means taking in its aura, so it is natural that if you take in the aura of impure food, your own aura will become impure.

Of course, from a higher level, both impure and pure auras are the same "I," but I don't know that level yet.

Therefore, as long as I live on this earth, eating is taking in the aura of something, so I think it is better to be careful about what I eat.

Perhaps, this story started with a mass-oriented explanation that "you can eat whatever you want" for those who don't understand.

In terms of lifestyle, the environment around you is also important. Even if you give a mass-oriented explanation like "you can live however you want," in reality, a clean and pure environment is necessary for the Vipassana state to be maintained. This can also be explained by aura, and even if I don't need such an explanation, I think it is natural, but I feel that it is necessary to say "that's okay" to the masses who are seeking "understanding."

On the other hand, there are clear criteria for what is good and what is not, and those who understand should follow them.

The choice of whether to follow or not is a matter of respecting free will, so you are free to live as you please.