The definitions vary depending on the school of thought, and there are differences in terms such as Samadhi and Vipassana.

For example, Swami Muktananda Yati, whom I watched online today, said the following:
- Samadhi is stopping thought. (Definition from Patanjali's Yoga Sutras)
- Vipassana is observing the breath. Vipassana is the entrance to Samadhi and is experienced.

There are various ways of saying it depending on the school of thought. Also, it seems that he is choosing simple explanations depending on the listener.

When listening to him, it seems that the meaning of the words Samadhi and Vipassana is different from what this Swami understands.

In the world, there is a misunderstanding that you can attain enlightenment with just one Samadhi or just one Vipassana, but this Swami uses the words Samadhi and Vipassana as explanations representing one aspect of meditation.

As an explanation of meditation, it is more complex, and Samadhi is only used to explain "stopping thought," while Vipassana is only used to explain "observing the breath."

There is also such a perspective.

It seems that in the world, there is a confrontation between Samadhi and Vipassana, and some people are enthusiastically discussing which is superior or which can lead to enlightenment. However, the essence is meditation itself, so sometimes the words Samadhi and Vipassana are used to explain one aspect of meditation.

First, try meditation, and there are various things that can be explained, and at that time, the words Samadhi and Vipassana are used as elements of meditation, but Samadhi and Vipassana are not the goal.

Although the definitions of the words are different from what I usually use, I get the impression that this Swami understands very well from the content of the explanation.

Therefore, it may be true that the definition of words is ultimately not important.

...This Swami (Swami Muktananda Yati) seems to be related to the ashram I attended, but I have never met him, so I don't know the details. I suppose someone else might know.

Only those who don't understand something fully tend to insist on it.

There's a misunderstanding that ideologies must be "believed."
There's a misunderstanding that religions must be "believed."
There's a misunderstanding that spiritual practices must be "believed."

For example, even with an ideology like "materialism," which is simply a theory, some people treat it as an absolute truth, much like a religion.

Darwin's "theory of evolution" is often spoken of in Japan as if it were an absolute truth of science, but it's just a theory. Since proving something requires evidence, it would take tens of thousands of years to actually prove the theory of evolution. Unless we invent a time machine, proving it remains far in the future, so it's essentially just a theory.

When it comes to major figures in science, we hear about Nobel Prizes, but not for fields like biology, where the theory of evolution falls. Despite this, people in Japan often believe that the theory of evolution is an absolute truth and are caught up in the overwhelming atmosphere that it "must be believed." This is not much different from religion. To outsiders, it might seem like a religious organization that insists on believing in the theory of evolution.

Ideologies are simply superficial ideas created by the human mind.

Religions also have superficial aspects, and those aspects are creations of the human mind.

Spiritual practices also have superficial aspects that are creations of the human mind.

Ideologies originally formed within mystical groups like the Pythagorean school, so they are similar to religions. Many people think of ideologies as science, but ideologies are more like religions.

Spiritual practices are also created by someone's mind, so they are like religions.

In any case, when something is newly created, it's often flexible and close to the essence, but over time, it becomes rigid, loses its original essence, and people start to avoid it.

Nowadays, religion is often avoided, but when religions were first created, they were closer in meaning to what we now call "ideologies."

Nowadays, spiritual practices have a new image, but when religions were first created, or when ideologies were first created, they had a new image.

Whatever it is, there's a good image associated with something newly created, and old things are avoided. And new things are alive, while old things die.

Ideologies become old and die, religions become old and die, and eventually, spiritual practices will also become old and die.

However, whether you choose an ideology, a religion, or a spiritual practice, the essence remains the same.

Some people believe that you must choose only one religion, but in this world, many things, such as apprenticeship systems and different schools of thought, require you to choose only one. So, it's a bit strange to avoid only religion.

There have always been many new religious movements, and they haven't increased recently. What used to be mystical gatherings called "mystery circles" are now taking the form of religious organizations.

Cults have always existed, and they are not limited to religious organizations; they are also common in ideological organizations.

Ideologies and religions are not that different.

In the past, they were mystery circles, but now, not only voluntary organizations are considered religions, but also strange organizations that use religious organizations as a cover for tax avoidance. The fact that religious corporations are used for profit is not entirely pure, but such financial misappropriation has been happening since a long time ago.

There aren't many religions that actually require you to "believe" something. They often tell beginners that they "must believe" something, but in reality, it's about understanding and experiencing things for yourself.

Once you become an intermediate or advanced practitioner, you won't be told that you "must believe" something.

With ideologies, you think for yourself.
With religions, you meditate and try to understand the essence.
With spiritual practices, you explore and try to understand and experience things with your own mind.

They are all quite similar.

If we expand the scope, yoga can also be included in the broad categories of ideology, religion, and spiritual practice.

Of course, Buddhism and Shinto are also included. Christianity is the same. Whether it's a monotheistic or polytheistic religion, the essence is the same, just the way it's conveyed is different.

The different aspects are simply a reflection of the environment you live in and your personality.

In ideologies, religions, and other fields, there will always be someone who leads the way, and whether they are called a teacher, a guru, a religious leader, a professor, or a doctor is just a matter of perspective.

In any case, organizations that want to control others have their own limitations, and organizations that want to understand the essence also have their own limitations.

Some people say that because they have their own religion, they cannot practice other religions. However, I think that the essence is the same, so you don't have to be too concerned. However, it is also true that if it's your first time, it's better to fully immerse yourself in one religion or ideology.

It might be a good idea to thoroughly master one school of thought and then deepen your understanding of other schools based on that understanding.

In any case, the essence does not change.

Recently, during meditation, I've been experiencing reactions and sensations in various parts of my head. Lately, I've particularly noticed a throbbing sensation in the back of my head and a tingling sensation in the tip of my nose.

When I chant mantras during meditation, these reactions are especially pronounced.

When I chant ancient mantras, I experience reactions throughout my head and body, particularly in the lower body. So recently, I've only been chanting them a few times. Lately, I've been enjoying the mantra "Ajikari-mun (Adhimarikam)."

When I chant this mantra, I feel a reaction in the back of my head, and a sensation of movement, as if something is about to start moving.

Sometimes, I try to move the muscles in the back of my head, rotating them horizontally or moving them to the sides, like a stretch. It's easier to do it in the lower part of the back of my head, but I also try to do the same "brain stretching" a little higher up, around the area inside the hairline.

As a result of my daily meditation, I've noticed a throbbing sensation on the surface of the back of my head, just below the hairline, as if my blood circulation has improved.

I've felt similar pulsations in the nape of my neck and other areas before, so I think it's probably something similar.

I suspect that the energy was stagnant in that area, and that the area has become more active energetically. It's probably the effect of meditation.

I've also noticed changes in my vision. Recently, I'm almost always in a Vipassana state, but there are subtle differences in the intensity and appearance of my vision. Specifically, the clearer my consciousness is, the more clearly and in slow motion I perceive my surroundings. To clarify, it's not that time is slowing down, but rather that I perceive the movements in fine frames, creating a smooth motion. I use the term "slow motion" as a metaphor for this.

The more my brain is activated through meditation, the more finely I perceive my vision, and it feels like I'm watching a slow-motion image in real time. The passage of time doesn't change, but it's perceived as a slow-motion video.

This perception is related to my state of consciousness. When I'm a little sleepy and groggy, my perception is different, and when I'm in a clear state of consciousness after meditation, my vision is perceived in finer frames.

I can clearly see the connection between these perceptions and the throbbing sensation in my brain. The more my head is activated through meditation, the more finely my perception becomes.

In order for perception to become more fine, it's necessary for consciousness to become calmer. However, being perceived in slow motion doesn't necessarily mean that consciousness is particularly activated. It's more like a state of... well, it's a bit misleading to say "dull," but consciousness is activated, and that activation is not for intense thoughts or emotions, but rather a continuous series of moments where information is received and processed instantaneously.

Therefore, when Vipassana meditation first started, there was quite a bit of surprise and novelty, which raised my awareness somewhat. However, now that I'm used to it, I'm mostly just calmly identifying things.

Now that I'm accustomed to Vipassana, my brain is becoming more active, and I sometimes feel a throbbing sensation, and my nostrils often tingle. However, I'm also used to that, and the feeling of discomfort has lessened.

At this point, the excitement and anticipation that I had when I first started meditating have almost disappeared. However, I probably still have a sense of expectation, although it's a different kind of expectation than the general one. It's closer to a prediction than an expectation, and it feels more like a prediction than an expectation. So, if you call that expectation, it might be, but it's different from the common expectation.

It's a subtle change, but it shows that there's still more to come.

These kinds of pulsations and tingling sensations could be used as "hints" or "signs" to understand a person's state.

The third eye is often talked about, but while it's called an "eye," it's not actually a visual field like the physical eye; instead, it sharpens intuition. Therefore, it doesn't allow you to see the spirit world in the same way that the physical eye sees minute details.

Beyond the third eye, there's what's commonly called the "force eye," which allows you to see the surroundings and transcend time and space. The ability to see yourself from the outside is not a third eye ability, but rather a force eye ability.

However, some people refer to that as the third eye. This varies depending on the school of thought.

Recently, I listened to a lecture by a Swami who lives in Rishikesh, and he said that the third eye is not about vision, but about intuition and positive energy. Therefore, it doesn't open up a visual field.

This is a case where the actual form is the same, but the expression is different.

Some schools of thought do not refer to intuition or positive energy as the third eye, but that's what the Swami I heard in Rishikesh said.

In my own words, it's similar to what this Swami said: intuition falls within the realm of the third eye, while transcending time and space or seeing your surroundings from a free perspective is a force eye-like ability.

Even with the third eye, it's possible to transcend time, but it's a passive ability. It's more about the ability to receive intuition rather than actively searching for it. The entity sending the intuition could be your future self, your past self, or a guardian spirit, and the ability to receive that is the ability of the third eye. There is an ability to send, but if it's only this much, I don't think it's that powerful. The basic ability of the third eye is to send and receive sensations.

Beyond the third eye, there's the force eye, which is similar to the third eye in its initial stage, but a crystal core is created in the astral realm, and that crystal sees the surroundings and transcends time and space. It's like an airplane, a drone, or a satellite orbiting the Earth, or a spaceship, sending images from a distant location to your third eye. That's the force eye.

This ability is only manifested when both the basic sending and receiving ability of the third eye and the astral crystal are created. If it's only the former, it's the third eye, and some people also call the latter the third eye, but I feel that calling it the force eye is more appropriate.

The third eye is "3rd Eye" in English, and the force eye is "4th Eye." It's not the Force from Star Wars. It might be a good idea to call it that because it's a good pun.

There are meditation techniques that involve observing your breath, but concentration is more essential for meditation than observation.

Recently, there have been many people who are overly intellectual, and with the rise of Vipassana meditation, there is talk of "observational meditation." However, the basic principle of meditation is concentration, not observation.

Some meditation advertisements claim that "concentration meditation is not the essence, but observational meditation is the essence." It is beneficial to avoid being swayed by such claims.

Meditation has a history of thousands of years, and the basic form of meditation is concentration meditation.

Those who disregard this basic principle and are misled by phrases like "Actually, meditation is not about concentration, but about observation" will likely have a negative experience.

Meditation is something that is done internally, so it can sometimes lead to confusion without one realizing it.

Many people who have been misled by irresponsible advertisements and tried "observational meditation" have experienced negative psychological effects because their concentration has been neglected.

This is where the importance of history comes in. The meditation practices of various schools throughout history are different from those of people who have recently started teaching meditation.

When asked "What is meditation?" those who answer "concentration" understand the essence.

The answer "observation" is not incorrect, but the basic principle is concentration.

In reality, meditation involves both.

For beginners, it is not wrong to say that "meditation is concentration," and it is acceptable to say so when talking about "meditation for beginners."

The source of this idea varies, but some people claim that "observational meditation" is the essence, citing things like "Buddhist teachings" and intellectual arguments.

People are drawn to novel things. They may be swayed by such claims and think, "So, concentration meditation is not the essence. Observational meditation is the essence."

Indeed, for intermediate and advanced practitioners, observational meditation may be the essence.

However, most people are beginners in meditation. The fact that they are asking questions like "What is meditation?" or "Is meditation about concentration or observation?" indicates that they are beginners. In that case, the answer "meditation is concentration" is sufficient.

Some people who have only superficially studied meditation in books may feel disappointed or think that "concentration" is "old-fashioned" when they hear that it is the essence.

However, meditation is ultimately about "concentration." Whether or not one understands this is crucial.

Those who say that "meditation is about concentration" are considered "old-fashioned," and that "meditation is about observation" are likely beginners. Only beginners say such things.

Some people go through a long process and eventually realize that "meditation is about concentration."

It would be faster to start with the classical approach of "meditation is concentration." People are drawn to new and novel things, so they may think, "Meditation is not about concentration, but about observation!"

The world of meditation and spirituality is full of pitfalls, and it is easy to turn someone into a psychological slave by manipulating them. Some people may try to attract people by using such manipulative tactics, or they may simply have a misunderstanding about meditation. In any case, it is best to ignore such manipulative claims and start with the classical approach of "concentration."

For example, breath awareness meditation is a form of concentration meditation. While intermediate and advanced practitioners may engage in observational breath awareness, for beginners, it is about concentrating on the breath.

In meditation, it is often said to "avoid exerting force." However, this is also something for intermediate and advanced practitioners.

Beginners need to concentrate with considerable effort in meditation, otherwise their minds will wander. They need to work hard to concentrate. If one takes the advice to "gently observe" too seriously, the benefits of meditation may not be realized, especially if one is not in a hurry. If one wants to solve problems quickly, they should start with concentration.

Skin awareness meditation is the same. This is a form of concentration meditation for beginners, while intermediate and advanced practitioners may engage in observational skin awareness.

Regardless of whether one is observing their skin or something else, it is all within the realm of the five senses. Even if there are differences in strength or weakness, it can all be considered either concentration meditation or observational meditation. The distinction between the two is ultimately meaningless.

There is a stage where consciousness beyond the five senses emerges, which is sometimes called Vipassana (observational) meditation. However, that is a more advanced concept. Even if one gently observes their skin, it is still an observation within the five senses. Therefore, it is better to focus on the basic principle of concentration meditation rather than getting caught up in whether it is considered observational or not.

The definition of Yoga in the Yoga Sutras:

(1-2) Stilling the fluctuations of the mind is Yoga.
(1-3) Then, the observer (the self) abides in its own true nature.
From "Integral Yoga" by Swami Satchidananda.

The first part indicates calming the restless and turbulent aspects of the mind.
The second part shows that when the mind is calmed, a pure consciousness emerges from within.

Therefore, the common criticism of the Yoga Sutras, such as "If you lose your mind, can you still be considered a human being?" does not apply.

This refers to the first part mainly discussing Dharana (concentration) and Dhyana (meditation), while the second part refers to Samadhi.

When the goal is firmly grasped not only by the physical eyes but also by the mind's eye, that is called true concentration, which is the attainment of Dhyana.
From "Yoga Hōhō Chūden" by Sekiguchi Noriko.

Dharana is primarily one-pointed concentration using the physical eyes or the mind. By continuing this, one reaches Dhyana, where the object of concentration occupies the mind. Then, the "observer (the self)" appears, which is Samadhi.

There are various misunderstandings regarding this, with some people mistakenly believing they are in Samadhi when they are only in Dhyana, and different schools have different names for it. Some say there is something beyond Samadhi, while others say Samadhi is the ultimate state.

However, if we consider the ultimate goal of the Yoga Sutras to be the manifestation of the "self (Atman)," then there may be something beyond that, but it is certainly sufficient as a final destination.

Since it is difficult to reach that state, it is better to focus on practicing for a certain amount of time rather than getting caught up in theoretical discussions.

Indeed, the manifestation of the "self (Atman)" is not enlightenment itself, but it is undoubtedly an intermediate point leading to enlightenment, so the Yoga Sutras are a good guide. There is no need to deny it.

Experienced practitioners can maintain the state of Samadhi on a daily basis, but for someone like me, I need to meditate for 30 minutes to an hour occasionally to maintain a clear state of consciousness.

At that time, initially, the consciousness is somewhat hazy, but after meditating for 30 minutes to an hour, the consciousness suddenly converges, and then a pure consciousness emerges.

These are two completely different qualities.

When I say "hazy," it is in comparison. Normally, one doesn't notice it. It is the kind of realization that comes only after meditating and the consciousness converges, allowing one to realize that what was previously hazy.

That Samadhi is also a state of Vipassana, similar to slow motion. However, fatigue and daily activities gradually release one from that state, so it is necessary to meditate regularly to return to a state of pure consciousness.

Perhaps experienced practitioners do not need to do that, but I require regular maintenance.

Here is a passage about Samadhi that is worth referencing:

The "human mind," when viewed simply as a physiological function, cannot transition to the state of Samadhi. Humans have a "physiological mind" separate from that, and there is a "Buddha's mind" that transcends it. It is only through the self-manifestation of this Buddha mind that the state of Samadhi emerges.
From "Yoga Hōhō Chūden" by Sekiguchi Noriko.

I recently obtained this book, and it precisely describes what I had previously suspected, making it essential. It feels like the hypotheses I had formed within myself have been confirmed.

I wondered what kind of person the author was, and it turns out that she is a disciple of Yogaanda. That explains her perspective, and it is understandable. There are not many people who can express such profound insights.

When the sea is calm and the wind disappears, creating a tranquil water surface, a similar state of stillness in consciousness can occur during meditation. This is also a state of pure consciousness.

While it might be described as "pure," I think "stillness" is a more accurate term. Some people might call it "transparency" or "emptiness," but it's clear that nothing has disappeared. It's not "emptiness" in the sense of being void; rather, consciousness exists, but it's in a state of stillness. You can clearly feel the calmness of the fluctuations in consciousness.

When you chant "Om" in your mind in this state of stillness, you can clearly perceive which part of your body it resonates with.

"A" resonates in the space between the eyebrows.
"U" resonates in the chest.
"M" resonates in the lower abdomen.

Originally, "Om" was chanted in three parts in ancient times. In my case, chanting only "A" in my mind feels pleasant.

When consciousness is in a state of stillness, and you chant "A," you feel a tingling sensation in the space between your eyebrows.

This tingling sensation can also occur when chanting mantras or practicing asanas (yoga exercises), and sometimes it appears during meditation.

However, when you bring consciousness to a state of stillness and chant only "A," it feels very purely as if only the space between your eyebrows is reacting. With other mantras, you can sustain this sensation for a longer time, but chanting only "A" in this state of stillness can feel too strong. The reaction in the space between the eyebrows is that intense. If you try to continue it forcefully, you might feel dizzy.

Through various trials, I've found that these two steps are very effective and seem to be good for changing one's own consciousness.

How it changes will be discussed later.

I intuitively feel that these two steps are good.

1. Meditate until you reach a state of stillness in your consciousness. At this time, do not chant any mantras.
2. In the state of stillness, chant the mantra (in your mind).

By doing this, it feels as if the mantra goes beyond being a mere recitation in the mind and directly affects deeper levels.

The tranquility of consciousness appears in several stages during meditation.

When a cluttered consciousness becomes calm and reaches a state of tranquility, that state is maintained for a while. Eventually, it transitions to an even more tranquil state. After a while, it transitions to the next state of tranquility.

This transition of consciousness is not linear, but changes gradually over a certain period of time.



The tranquility of consciousness appears in several stages during meditation.

When a cluttered consciousness becomes calm and reaches a state of tranquility, that state is maintained for a while. Eventually, it transitions to an even more tranquil state. After a while, it transitions to the next state of tranquility.

This transition of consciousness is not linear, but changes gradually over a certain period of time.

The tranquility of consciousness arrives gradually, but even when distracting thoughts arise, a deeper, peaceful consciousness exists beneath them.

As I wrote before, the change in consciousness occurs in a short time, around 3 seconds. However, there is a period of change before and after this, and during that period, while observing the distracting thoughts that arise, the deeper consciousness becomes peaceful, and the distracting thoughts continue.

Distracting thoughts likely originate from the deeper consciousness. Therefore, once a state of peaceful consciousness is reached, new distracting thoughts are less likely to arise. However, the distracting thoughts that were present before the change may persist for a short time after the change.

This state involves simultaneous concentration and observation.
It is not just concentration, nor is it just observation.

There is no need to suppress distracting thoughts; the consciousness is focused on the forehead. Distracting thoughts are like sounds heard in the ear; simply don't pay attention to them. Distracting thoughts are merely superficial mental voices. They are not "you," and they are only temporary.

By focusing consciousness on the forehead and not paying attention to distracting thoughts, just as one becomes less aware of sounds heard in the physical ear, one becomes less aware of distracting thoughts.

This is a state that some traditions refer to as "samadhi." It is a state where the consciousness beneath the distracting thoughts and mental voices is active.

Superficial consciousness includes distracting thoughts, arguments, and logical thinking. Beneath that lies a deeper, more expansive consciousness.

In the Yoga Sutras, dharana (concentration) is a superficial concentration, dhyana (meditation) is a state of transition from superficial to deeper consciousness, and samadhi is when the deeper consciousness begins to function.

By focusing consciousness on the forehead with the deeper consciousness, a gradual change occurs.

Many traditions say, "Do not fight against distracting thoughts; if you observe them, they will disappear." This is generally correct. However, if the distracting thoughts are truly strong and draining, it may be better to "eliminate" them rather than simply fighting them.

In other cases, by concentrating and meditating with the deeper consciousness, a state of peaceful consciousness will arise, and the distracting thoughts will decrease accordingly.

Some people talk about which is "better," concentration meditation or observation meditation. However, meditation has both aspects, so both are necessary.

Concentration is "controlling the deeper consciousness freely."
At that time, the deeper consciousness is "observing" the distracting thoughts and the senses.

■Other Matters
Some may call the former "samatha meditation" (concentration meditation) and the latter "vipassana meditation" (observation meditation). However, neither can exist without the other. Frankly, I think they are the same thing. It's just that different traditions have different names for it.

For example,
A common criticism of samatha meditation (concentration meditation) is that "nothing happens if you only concentrate." This is because the deeper consciousness is not yet active. In short, it means "the training is not sufficient." That person is immature for blaming it on meditation.

Another common comment is that
Many people become strange after practicing vipassana meditation (observation meditation). This is because they skip the foundation of samatha meditation (concentration meditation) and imitate vipassana, which causes their consciousness to become distorted. People who misunderstand observing the senses as vipassana may observe the skin, or they may take advanced advice such as "feel your whole body" or "feel your surroundings" too seriously, and those who only use their senses become overly sensitive and easily irritable.

Meditation is something that is done within one's own mind. Beginners tend to think they are "doing well" quickly, and recently, there are places that teach only techniques as mindfulness, separated from religious history and traditions. However, places that teach meditation with a shallow history are dangerous because they cannot handle anything that might happen.

For example, even if you develop kundalini syndrome, can you deal with it with mindfulness? Will you simply say, "That won't happen. It's not proven. Mindfulness is safe"? That's not the end of the story. There is a difference between saying "it should be safe" and what to do if something actually happens. Because meditation is something that is done within oneself, it requires someone with sufficient knowledge to determine whether it is the correct meditation or not. A "teacher" who only teaches "techniques and theories" is not sufficient.

Many people believe that mindfulness is safe because it is not a religion. However, this is the opposite of the truth. It is because entering into religious topics through meditation is taboo that the information being conveyed is shallow, prioritizing worldly benefits and not teaching the essential aspects. Mindfulness is a therapy that stabilizes the mind, and its purpose is to improve work efficiency. However, without delving into religious knowledge, the essence cannot be understood. People who say that mindfulness is fine because it is not a religion are essentially admitting the limitations of their own awareness. Whether it is religion or ideology, if you understand it deeply, they all become the same. Therefore, if someone says, "Religion is bad," or "Mindfulness is fine because it is not a religion," it means their understanding is shallow. There are religions that allow you to understand and experience things for yourself, and there are ideologies that force you to believe blindly. Both are similar. There are religions that are profit-driven, and there are religions that are not. There are ideologies that are profit-driven, and there are ideologies that are not. Meditation is also similar, and it depends on the situation. The difference lies in whether or not it has a legal entity.

When listening to talks about meditation in various places, it is often difficult to understand whether the speaker is talking about the techniques of a particular school or about the essence of the matter. The terminology is not very unified, and you often have to interpret it based on the context. Because of this, there are many people who fall into various traps. If everyone understood the essence, they should be able to understand each other. The essence does not change easily.

However, personally, I believe that all of life, including success and failure, is perfect. Therefore, if you can enjoy life by experiencing and learning various forms of meditation, that is perfectly fine.

There are many troublesome stories related to meditation, but basically, I think everyone should do what they like.

This article also serves as my own record, so my understanding may change later, and that is perfectly acceptable. However, for now, I understand meditation as described in the first part. How you interpret that is up to you.

雑多な心を眉間に向け、同時に微細な意識も眉間に向けます。

これらを合わせて「集中」と表現することもあります。
後者は「眉間の観察」とも言えますが、伝統的には「眉間に意識を集中する」という表現が一般的です。

この「集中」は、無理に力を入れることではありませんし、また「集中することだけで観察する」というわけでもありません。

実際には、雑多な心にも観察の要素が含まれており、微細な意識にも観察だけでなく「思考」という心理的な要素も含まれています。

同様の心の働きが、雑多な領域では五感と関連して働き、微細な領域では細かな変化を感じて働くことがあります。これらの働きは、意識と呼ばれることもあれば、場合によっては片方を「心」と呼んだり、「観察」と呼んだりすることもあります。

したがって、最初の文は以下のように言い換えることができます。

雑多な心で眉間に集中し、同時に観察する。
同時に、微細な意識で眉間に集中し、同時に観察する。

しかし、瞑想においては、前者は「集中」という側面が強く、後者は「観察」という側面が強いため、最初のように解釈する方が適切でしょう。

このあたりは、流派によって表現が異なるため、文脈に応じて理解する必要があります。

特にヨーガでは、これらの瞑想を「集中」と説明していますが、実際には上記のような状態です。

流派によっては、一定以上の教えを門下生以外には教えないという方針を取っているところも多く、ヨーガはその傾向があります。そのため、一般の方から質問された場合、「瞑想とは集中することだ」と答えて詳しく教えないことが多いようです。実際には、初心者向けの回答としてはそれで十分ですが、それが原因で、一般の方々がヨーガの瞑想を誤解している面もあります。

ヨーガに限らず、多くの流派において、奥義は簡単に人に教えられません。

奥義の本質は教えないにしても、その根幹となるものは常に表面に出ています。重要なのは、その本質に気づくかどうかです。瞑想で言えば、「瞑想は集中である」という言葉を聞いて「ふーん」と思うのか、その奥に奥義を見出すのか、という違いがあると言えるでしょう。

もう少し詳しく説明すると、以下のようになります。

雑多な心を眉間に向けます。これは、リラックスした集中で構いません。
同時に、微細な意識を眉間に向けます。これは、意識的に認識し、できるだけ集中します。

後者は、最初は感覚がはっきりしないかもしれませんが、次第に感覚が明確になっていきます。後者を集中するためには、集中が必要です。
しかし、前者は、リラックスして眉間あたりに意識を置くだけで十分です。

後者に集中しようとすると、どうしても前者に力が入ってしまうことがありますが、それはできるだけ力を入れないようにします。

理想的には、微細な意識だけに集中します。その時、雑多な心は、既にリラックスして弱くなっているはずなので、なるべく干渉しないようにします。その時、「観察」は常に働いています。

雑多な心は、観察するだけで、後は自然に任せます。
同時に、微細な意識を眉間に集中させます。微細な意識で観察は常に働いています。

このような状態を目指して、最近は瞑想を試みています。

In the world of yoga, there is a saying that even if kundalini is activated, it will eventually "return to normal." Similarly, there is a saying that even if bliss appears, it will "eventually return to normal."

This may seem like a "regression" if you simply hear it, but in reality, it is said to be progress.

It is difficult to explain the logic, but using Buddhist teachings, it can be explained like this:

"In the early stages of practice, when you see, hear, or touch something, the form or shape appears first and becomes clear." - "Meditation in Myanmar" by Mahasi Sayadaw.

On the other hand, as the practice progresses, the clear appearance of form decreases, and you begin to recognize fleeting thoughts.

At first, you may think, "This is bad," or "I'm not meditating well," or "Have I regressed?" I thought so too. However, as mentioned in yoga experiences, or as can be inferred from Buddhist teachings, it is a correct process of growth.

This is what has been said in traditional teachings:

"When form manifests, reality is latent.
Conversely,
When reality manifests, form is latent." - "Meditation in Myanmar" by Mahasi Sayadaw.

Form → Surface appearance, shape, impression
Reality → The essence of everything being impermanent

It seems that when the surface impression or shape is present, the essence is latent, and when the essence is recognized, the surface impression or shape becomes less noticeable.

According to the same book, this means that "the mind has become pure."

The idea that the fact that something is no longer clearly felt actually indicates that "it has become pure" is something that you would not be able to realize unless someone told you.

In my case, when I experienced these states, I initially thought that I had regressed and tried various things. In addition to my usual meditation and yoga, I even tried things that would hinder my practice, such as playing video games, to see what would happen.

What I learned was that there is a clear difference between the hazy, dull state of the past (in yoga terms) and these "states that are difficult to describe, where I feel like I'm not meditating well, or something is wrong."

Once, I temporarily created a dull state by playing video games, and then I remembered the familiar dullness of the past. After that, I meditated again and carefully confirmed the changes step by step, returning to the original, strange state.

As a result, I realized again that the "strange, hazy, and somewhat unwell state" is clearly different from the dull state.

I am conscious at night, and I wake up relatively early in the morning, but it is a different kind of strange, hazy feeling than the dull state I used to experience.

I haven't consulted with many meditation or yoga teachers about this, because I doubt they would understand. I think they would just say, "That's tamas." However, I believe that while the difference may be subtle on the surface, it is very different internally.

I think it is true that "it is because you have become pure that this strange, somewhat unwell state arises."

It may be that I am taking a step forward, then slowly and gradually retreating, and then taking another step forward, repeating this process.

In the distant past, I don't think it was common for a state of mental tranquility to appear during meditation.

Recently, even when I'm not feeling well, a state of mental tranquility begins to manifest after about an hour, whereas normally it takes only 5 to 15 minutes.

After that, depending on the day, it sometimes occurs repeatedly several times, about every 5 minutes.

The time is vague because I am in meditation, but it seems to occur repeatedly several times within an hour or 30 minutes, so I can roughly estimate that it takes about that long.

Sometimes, I notice a mass of consciousness, or aura, rising from the back of my head to the top of my head, reaching the area around the Sahasrara. After that, the aura quietly dissipates from the top of my head, and the time it takes is roughly about 1 minute.

A state of mental tranquility seems to be easier to achieve when I am not chanting a mantra.

Therefore, the basic flow is to first achieve a state of mental tranquility and then chant a mantra.

This is not very strict, and I tend to change it based on how I feel at the moment.

If I feel that the aura is unstable, I do not chant a mantra but meditate on mental tranquility. When a state of calmness is achieved, I confirm that state, and if I feel that further calmness is needed, I continue the meditation on mental tranquility. If I want to activate a particular chakra, especially the Ajna chakra or the back of the head, I chant a certain mantra to activate that area.

I feel that there is a significant difference in effect between chanting a mantra after achieving a state of calmness and chanting a mantra from the beginning.

In particular, Ajapa Japa (Ajimarika) after achieving a state of calmness is effective.アー"Only this" is also fine.

The chakras that respond to mantras are different, so recently I have been choosing mantras that only activate the Ajna chakra and the back of the head.

Slow-motion Vipassana meditation began, and gradually, the novelty of the rapid frame rate in my vision diminished. Subsequently, the sensation of seeing fine details decreased, and my vision returned to a normal speed.

My vision is returning to normal, but it is clearer than before. However, it feels somewhat blurry.

On the other hand, my bodily sensations have become more subtle, and it feels like I am in a state of Vipassana meditation.

This bodily sensation probably existed since the beginning of the slow-motion Vipassana meditation, but I was focusing on the visual sensations because they were interesting.

I believe that I was consciously using my eyes intensely, and as my interest in my eyes decreased, less energy was directed towards my vision.

At the same time, regarding my eyes:形状が表面化すれば現実が潜在する、と言う昔からの教えI think this might be the case. At first, reality was manifesting clearly, and it seemed like reality was in slow motion. However, after that, the shape and superficial impression of the field of vision began to decrease, and the "elusive thing" (essence) began to surface, which is why the field of vision seems blurry.

At first, I thought that the loss of clarity in this field of vision might be a decline. However, if we follow the teachings of the past, this is not a decline, but growth.

At the same time that the sensation in my eyes became blurry, I began to feel sensations throughout my body.

This sensation is slightly different from the sensation of the skin, and it is a feeling that leads to the realization that there are definitely subtle bodies controlling the entire body.

Until now, I have felt the subtle body as a feeling of heat, a sensation of the skin, or an increase in energy. However, it seems that this has become a sensation of the subtle body itself.

I am gradually starting to feel that when I move my body, it is not so much that I am moving my body, but rather that I am moving the subtle body, and that is what moves the body.

What I have realized from this sensation is that this is probably normal, and that the basic principle is that the subtle body and the physical body are locked together and cannot be separated. Therefore, out-of-body experiences are probably quite irregular.

Over the past few months, I have tried various things, but the most effective thing is meditation that brings about a sense of peace of mind in several stages. I feel that this is what leads to this sensation.

Yoga-related samadhi and Buddhist or Vipassana-related samadhi differ in content.

The basic outline is as follows:
- In the Yoga system, samadhi is the ultimate goal, and there is nothing beyond it.
- In Buddhism or Vipassana, samadhi is a passing point, and enlightenment is achieved after reaching the state of observation (Vipassana).

This contains various misunderstandings.

From this alone, it might seem that Buddhism is the ultimate goal, but in reality, the Yoga system and Buddhism are saying essentially the same thing.

In particular, Yoga is secretive and only teaches the essence to disciples, so the explanation for the general public and the explanation for disciples are different. Buddhism teaches everyone, so when comparing the explanations of the two, you must compare the disciple-oriented explanation, which is the secret teachings and esoteric knowledge.

In the Yoga system, samadhi is generally understood as concentration, but in reality, it is a state of observation (Vipassana). Although it is now commonly written in books, this kind of information was only taught to disciples after a considerable amount of training and when their meditation had deepened. For this reason, I think there are many misunderstandings.

In the Yoga system, samadhi is achieved when something appears that can be interpreted as "the mind of the Buddha that transcends the human mind," and it is not simply "concentration." Concentration is a general explanation. It seems that they judge that it is sufficient as a general explanation because it is not wrong to say that increasing concentration leads to samadhi.

In Buddhism, it uses the general explanation of samadhi and constructs arguments based on it, so people who have studied Buddhism tend to interpret the word "samadhi" as concentration. However, it is important to remember that the samadhi in Yoga has a different meaning, otherwise, the understanding of the conversation will be different.

The way words are used varies depending on the school, so it is necessary to interpret them according to the context.

Some people react immediately to the words spoken by others, but especially with these kinds of words, the interpretation varies depending on the school and the person speaking, so it is not possible to take them literally, and it is necessary to interpret them according to the situation, which is quite difficult.

Meditation helps to calm the mind and release tension through several stages.

This tension initially manifests in easily noticeable areas like the shoulders, and gradually, the tension in various parts of the brain also subsides.

The basic principle of meditation is to focus your awareness on the space between your eyebrows.いわゆる集中Meditation helps to calm the mind and release tension through several stages.

This tension initially manifests in easily noticeable areas like the shoulders, and gradually, the tension in various parts of the brain also subsides.

The basic principle of meditation is to focus your awareness on the space between your eyebrows.

By gradually relaxing each part of the brain through meditation, the brain eventually becomes soft and the stagnation of energy disappears.

I feel that energy is filling from the top of the head to the chest, and then to the lower body.

Originally, energy was filling up to the chest area, but recently, I have been feeling that consciousness and energy are concentrated in the head area, especially the back of the head and the area between the eyebrows.

This was a state where, after the Kundalini awakening, it started with the dominance of Manipura, then Anahata, and recently, it could be said that Ajna was dominant.

However, as the tension in the brain is released through meditation, it gradually becomes a state where, rather than Ajna being dominant, the Ajna in the head and the heart in the chest become one, and a large aura envelops the body.

If you want to express it in a simple way, perhaps you could call it "meditation that focuses on the heart."

It has long been said that it is important to feel the heart, but there are various ways to feel the heart.

Perhaps some people are born with the heart and Ajna already integrated.

However, for ordinary people, the heart and Ajna are not fused, and the heart after the fusion of the heart and Ajna is quite different from the heart before the fusion.

I seem to remember reading about something called "integrated chakras" in a book I read before.
Or, in another book, I seem to remember reading something like "climbing to Ajna and then descending to the heart."

Perhaps both are expressing different aspects of the same thing, but when I compare it to my own feelings, "integrated chakras" feels like a more appropriate expression than "descending to the heart."

Some schools of thought have practices that circulate energy to Ajna and then lower it to the heart, but this is not the feeling of lowering energy. Rather, the feeling of the chakras integrating and moving is more accurate. Perhaps the practice is to create this state, and when the practice is completed, the chakras become integrated.

In my case, I didn't do any practice of lowering energy, but simply by relaxing the tension in various parts of the brain through meditation, the chakras became integrated. Perhaps there are various ways to do this. Although it is not about lowering energy, I was activating the entire body from top to bottom using ancient mantras. Ultimately, both methods seem to activate the energy of the entire body in the same way.

The state of consciousness becoming calm occurred in individual areas of consciousness. For example, if it was the area between the eyebrows, the tension would release from the head, shoulders, and other areas, creating a sense of relaxation.

This was beneficial and a basic element of meditation, but there was a further state beyond that calm state: a deep relaxation of consciousness that reached far and wide.

There are several ways to enter this state. Initially, I continued meditating until I reached the calm state, and then I entered the state of deep consciousness relaxation.

However, as I continued meditating, this state gradually disappeared, and after about 5 minutes, I would return to the calm state, creating a gradual change.

At first, this change was like climbing stairs, but as I continued, the amount of change decreased, and I reached a critical point where consciousness could not become any more peaceful.

When the change is small, meditation reaches a point where it oscillates back and forth quite evenly.

This oscillating state is a state of calm consciousness, and I think it is important in its own way.

By continuing to meditate in a state of peaceful consciousness and a narrow range of oscillation, I suddenly realized, "Hey, I can relax even if I release all the tension in my body?"

Until then, my consciousness had been forced to work due to the anahata sound, and that function continued as a basic element. The anahata sound prevented sleep, which activated consciousness and advanced meditation.

However, at this point, I suddenly realized that I could relax even the "consciousness that is pulled by the anahata sound" itself.

I immediately tried it, and it felt like consciousness was lying on a bed of anahata sound.

The anahata sound continued, but consciousness was not pulled by it and remained relaxed.

Until then, consciousness had been rejecting the idea of lying on the bed of the anahata sound. This rejecting consciousness is the same type as the consciousness that is pulled by the anahata sound. Perhaps the mind (chitta) has a tendency to be drawn to something, and while that draws it away from distractions, it seems that as distractions decreased, that function was temporarily stopped, and consciousness was able to reach a state where it was not even pulled by the anahata sound.

By bringing the mind, which was being pulled by the anahata sound, back to its "center," a state of relaxation is achieved.

This can be metaphorically described as consciousness lying on a bed of anahata sound.

When this happens, not only the tension in the shoulders is released, but the tension throughout the body is released, and it feels like consciousness is becoming even deeper.

The anahata sound is not an enemy. It is a sign of purification. However, it is like a training wheel, which is helpful to some extent, but I feel that from here on, it is a realm that can be explored without that training wheel.

When you focus your awareness in the center, tension suddenly disappears and you can relax.

The meaning of "Hata" in Hatha Yoga is that "Ha" represents the sun, which is on the right side, and "Ta" represents the moon, which is on the left side. In terms of the energy channels (nadis) in yoga, Pingala is the sun on the right side, and Ida is the moon on the left side. Pingala is the energy of heat, and Ida is the energy of coolness.

Balancing these energies can relieve tension and promote relaxation.

This is one of the important understandings in Hatha Yoga and other forms of yoga.

You can also balance the left and right sides through pranayama, which is a breathing technique and energy control method.

Even if you simply do it as exercise, you will gradually develop these subtle sensations.

Awareness is not just awareness; it is a flow of energy. Therefore, when awareness is focused in the center, a different type of energy is generated.

According to some, when the energy of Ida and Pingala is balanced, Kundalini is awakened. I believe that this concept is correct.

Generally, it is understood that Kundalini energy exists independently of Ida and Pingala, but that is not the case. Rather, Kundalini is activated by activating and balancing both the left and right energies of Ida and Pingala.

In my case, Kundalini-like energy is constantly being generated, but in my basic state, I have more energy on the left side, and I am slightly pulled towards the center.

By focusing my awareness slightly to the right, towards the center, I can suddenly release subtle tension and relax.

Recently, I don't feel much tension, but even so, there are still subtle tensions in various places that I don't notice. By releasing these tensions, I can achieve an even greater state of relaxation.

And the key to this is the "center" of awareness.

Even if you try to focus your awareness in the center at first, it may not work. It is more effective to first bring yourself to a calm state and then use awareness in the center as a fine adjustment to release tension and relax. Sometimes, it may be possible to focus on the center from the beginning, but in my case, I often find that I am slightly shifted to the left, so I need to make adjustments.

This is not the suffering caused by distractions that occurred in the early stages of meditation, but rather a feeling of "suffering" that arises when one becomes aware of the moment when distractions occur, and it is a sign of growth.

It may be difficult to understand the difference between distractions and this type of "suffering" because when expressed in words, they tend to become similar.

The suffering caused by being overwhelmed by distractions is chaotic. Distractions keep coming, and one is tossed around by them, leading to fatigue, anger, or sadness. This is also a process of purifying karma.

In contrast, this type of "suffering" occurs because, in the basic meditative state, distractions do not arise very often. However, even when distractions occasionally arise, one feels the fluctuations of the mind at that moment and experiences "suffering."

The distractions do not appear completely on the surface, but rather, one feels "suffering" at the moment when distractions are about to arise, and by observing the appearance of those distractions, they quickly disappear.

It's like feeling the pain of ripples spreading on a water surface with almost no waves.

Although awareness is much clearer than before, it is not a state where all the clouds have been completely cleared. Therefore, while it is much clearer than the cloudy state of the past, there is still a slightly hazy state of consciousness.

Occasionally, karmic thoughts emerge from this hazy consciousness, and when they are perceived, they are recognized as "suffering."

However, it is a type of "suffering" that disappears quickly.

I was wondering what this was, but when I looked for books, I found the following description. This is a continuation of the ancient teachings that say that when something manifests, it is a reflection of what is latent.

■Kaimetsu Chi: Wisdom that understands that everything has ceased to exist.
As the wisdom gained through practice further develops and matures, the beginning of the object of thought, which is the "moment of arising," disappears from the object of wisdom, and only the "moment of cessation" remains as the next object of wisdom. It feels as if "everything is perishing at a rapid speed." It also becomes clear that "even one's own thoughts are constantly ceasing." ("Meditation in Myanmar" by Mahasi Sayadaw)

This Myanmar Vipassana meditation uses a technique of "labeling the current sensation," so the expression is in line with that. However, the key point is that it is sufficient to understand that if the moment of arising disappears immediately, then only the moment of cessation needs to be grasped.

Like a lamp that lights up and immediately goes out, the "lamp" of distractions arises in consciousness and immediately disappears, so only the recognition of its disappearance remains in consciousness. This teaching can be interpreted as saying that this is enough.

Furthermore, according to the explanation in this chapter, the hazy state that I am experiencing now occurs because meditation has progressed, and it is recommended to continue meditating.

If one diligently focuses, the mind will gradually become clearer, and eventually, feelings of dissatisfaction or impatience, and the desire to change one's posture will completely disappear. ("Meditation in Myanmar" by Mahasi Sayadaw)

In classical texts like the Yoga Sutras, it is said, "Stopping thought is yoga."

When read literally, this raises questions like, "If you stop thinking, can you even be considered human?" Also, the saying "I think, therefore I am" is well-known, so it may seem difficult to understand.

However, if we assume that the human mind has two aspects, the above statement can be understood as "stopping the lower consciousness is yoga."

There are various schools of thought in yoga and the Vedas, and some schools directly criticize this kind of statement.

There are cases where one school in India criticizes another school, saying, "If you stop thinking, can you even be considered human?"

Each school has its own claims, and the meaning of words varies from school to school. However, when reading texts, it is important to understand the terminology and claims of each school, otherwise you may misinterpret them. Even though they seem to be saying similar things, each school often claims that its own is the correct one.

Regardless of how it is expressed, humans have lower and higher consciousness, and the lower consciousness should be stopped, while the higher consciousness should be awakened.

The lower consciousness may be thought of as desires, but it is more accurately described as the sensations that belong to the five senses. Sensations beyond the five senses are the higher consciousness.

For example, cases of out-of-body experiences are a good illustration.

When experiencing an out-of-body experience, there are generally two patterns:

1. The lower consciousness is in a paralyzed state (trance state), and only the higher consciousness leaves the body.
2. The higher consciousness leaves the body while the lower consciousness is still active.

In the former case, the lower consciousness is not purified, and in order for the higher consciousness to function, the lower consciousness must be stopped.

On the other hand, in the latter case, the lower consciousness is sufficiently purified, so the lower and higher consciousness can function simultaneously. For example, when out of body, you can see a distant place or travel through the past and future, while at the same time, you can move your physical body and see the three-dimensional world with your eyes. In this case, if you try to see both, both become blurred. If you focus on the sensations of the five senses, they become dominant, and if you focus on the out-of-body consciousness, you almost forget about your body, and the extrasensory perception becomes dominant.

What is clear here is that the lower sensations that use the five senses of the body and the higher sensations that go beyond them are different things.

I think these are expressed in various words by different schools of thought.

- The mind of the Buddha and the human mind (Buddhism, etc.)
- Lower consciousness and higher consciousness (spiritual)
- Lower self and higher self (the meaning of "higher self" is different from what I mean)
- Christ consciousness and human consciousness (Christian-based spirituality)
- The consciousness/mind of angels and the consciousness/mind of demons (Christianity)

Many people live only with their lower consciousness, so it is understandable that they would question, "If you stop thinking, can you even be considered human?" However, if we assume that there are two aspects to consciousness, then even teachings like "stopping thought" can be easily understood.

Quite some time ago, before Kundalini energy began to move and before the Manipura chakra became dominant, a similar, naturally occurring state of stillness occurred.

At that time, I also reached a state of stillness and tranquility, but since Kundalini energy was not moving as much, it felt like the energy level was lower.

In that state of low energy, I experienced the state of stillness, and Kevala Kumbhaka was occurring at that time. However, after the Kundalini experience, I actually became less comfortable with Kevala Kumbhaka.

For about two years, I was generally in a state where I was not good at Kevala Kumbhaka. However, recently, since I have been able to achieve a gradual state of stillness, my breathing has suddenly become calmer, and Kevala Kumbhaka has started to occur again.

Looking back, the state of stillness at that time was a state of stillness achieved at a low energy level.

Now, it is a state of stillness achieved with Kundalini energy moving and with a certain amount of energy.

On the surface, both can be described as "a state of stillness," but I think the basic state is quite different.

The difference in the amount of energy is particularly noticeable. Before Kundalini energy began to move, I didn't feel as much positivity as I do now. This is because, as the saying goes, positivity increases as power increases, and distractions decrease. I think that even if you reach a state of stillness without an increase in the absolute amount of energy, it is a state of stillness achieved at that energy level, and that the difficulty of reaching that state of stillness increases as the energy increases.

Controlling energy that is high is more difficult, and a higher level of skill is required to stabilize that energy. Controlling various parts of the body is also difficult when the energy is high, and the difficulty of controlling breathing and heat sensation also changes depending on the amount of energy.

Also, in the previous state of stillness, my consciousness was not as active. While the awareness of feeling stillness was present, the clarity of that awareness was much lower than it is now.

In this state of stillness, my consciousness is always alive, and my body can become a state similar to sleep, even to the point of snoring, but I don't feel like I am sleeping, and I feel like my consciousness is moving. It may be similar to dreaming.

In meditation or yoga, I can easily enter this state. Also, in my daily life, if I just stay still, I can often enter this state.

In any case, based on the similarities in this state, I think that I am probably experiencing a cyclical pattern of growth, repeatedly experiencing similar states and growing.

When people talk about "telepaths," they are referring to people who can use telepathy, which is a concept often found in science fiction. However, in Japanese, "telepathy" can be more easily expressed as the ability to "understand" or "read the atmosphere."

Many people would probably say, "Oh, that's nothing. I can do that too." That's often the case.

Especially for Japanese people, "telepathy" is almost a natural ability. While there are differences in the strength of this ability, a significant number of people can be considered telepaths.

Even among Japanese people, there are those who cannot read the atmosphere, and such people are not telepaths. Similarly, if a foreigner cannot read the atmosphere, they are not telepaths. Of course, there are telepaths among foreigners as well.

This society is structured by people who are not telepaths, and I feel that there is a need to transform it into a telepathic society. In particular, systems that do not cater to telepathic tendencies may not be suitable for Japanese people.

For example, common issues in Japanese society, such as "lack of leadership" or "the top person not taking responsibility (assigning collective responsibility)," can be seen as characteristics of a telepathic society. Because telepaths have a way of sharing thoughts, the sense of "I" or "the other person" becomes less distinct. Even ideas can become unclear, making it difficult to determine whether they are one's own ideas or those of others.

When a non-telepathic social structure, such as a capitalist system where the top person reaps all the benefits, is introduced to these people, it is natural for the top person to say, "I didn't decide that." In a telepathic society, the emphasis is on the overall ideology, so it is more of a collective responsibility than the responsibility of the top person. Therefore, it can be said to be an irresponsible society.

Non-telepathic systems also have advantages, as they are well-suited for rapid and large-scale changes. This is generally well-known. However, it seems that talking about "leadership" to telepathic people may not resonate with them.

In particular, Japanese people need to be aware that they are telepaths, while many other ethnic groups are not. Many Japanese people say to foreigners, "You are people who cannot read the atmosphere," but because they are not telepaths, there is a barrier that they cannot overcome. Instead of lamenting whether or not someone can read the atmosphere, it might be better to learn how to interact with non-telepathic people.

This is not simply a matter of "foreigners not being able to read the atmosphere," but rather a fundamental difference in whether or not the society is telepathic. Many Japanese people believe that this is due to language or that communication gaps will be resolved if Japanese people learn English, but the problem is not there. It is important to understand that being a telepath or not is a fundamentally different concept.

Telepaths expect and demand that others be telepaths as well, but it is quite difficult and time-consuming (though not impossible) to expect that of foreigners. If Japanese people do not understand this, it may be difficult for them to succeed in the international community.

The basic principle of telepathy is simply to read the atmosphere, but it is also common to be able to read the background that the other person is thinking of. In fact, everyone is probably doing that normally. It is not a waste of time to know that there are many people on this earth who cannot do that, and who cannot read the atmosphere, meaning they are not telepaths.

Japanese people are unaware that they are telepaths, so when they are told not to "Consideration(anticipate someone's wishes)" (consider the feelings of others), it feels like they are being told not to be Japanese. That is because it is considered being too kind. If one is a telepath, they can understand the other person's feelings and automatically do something accordingly. Being told that this is wrong is the same as being told not to be Japanese.

In the past, there were witch hunts in the Middle Ages, but now it is the era of "Japanese hunts." People in neighboring countries do not understand Japanese people and find them unpleasant. Therefore, they want to exclude and erase them. This is the same structure as the witch hunts.

Because of this, some people who are "kind" also think, "Is it wrong to 'Consideration(anticipate someone's wishes)'?" and end up suppressing their telepathic abilities. I think that Japanese people are often naive and sheltered.

If one is a telepath, they should be able to understand the other person's feelings, and that should be something that politicians can do. If they cannot do that and attack the other person's "Consideration(anticipate someone's wishes)," then it can be called a "telepath hunt," which is a modern witch hunt.

Onmyoji (Japanese traditional practitioners of magic) were massacred and scattered during the late Edo period, and there are many ordinary people who can communicate with gods, guardian spirits, or understand the feelings of others, but they do not often talk about it. This is because there is a social trend that makes people seem strange if they talk about such things, and there is a reality where people who see things that cannot be seen are taken to psychiatric hospitals.

However, it is still thought that "reading the air" is natural for Japanese people, so there is some hope in that regard.

When you think of the people around you, you can understand their feelings, and you would call that "reading the air." That is the basic of telepathy.

Many foreigners cannot do that, and because it is rare, they are called "psychics" overseas. However, for Japanese people, "reading the air" is normal, so if you look at it from overseas, it seems that quite a few Japanese people are psychics. If a country like that existed, it would be understandable that people from other countries would find it unpleasant and want to eliminate the country and its people.

I think that Japanese people should be more aware that they are telepaths.

This world is dominated by non-telepaths, so Japanese people should not talk much about being telepaths, and they need to acquire the skills to deal with that. At the very least, they should be aware that there are forces in this world that are trying to eliminate Japanese people. The purpose is to "eliminate all Japanese people, or to eliminate the telepathic abilities of all Japanese people," so both must be prevented.

From that perspective, there are many traps set in school education, politics, and the social structure of companies. Once you understand this, you can see through things yourself.

As usual, I was meditating, and my consciousness gradually calmed down in stages. Because it was early in the morning, I was a little drowsy, but a bright consciousness was gradually emerging from deep within.

Normally, I would end my meditation at that point, but this morning, suddenly, I felt a small thunderbolt or a large object collapsing in the distance, and I heard a faint, heavy "zzzzzz" sound, and at the same time, I suddenly felt pressure on the back of my head, and a dull headache began.

Now that I think about it, I think I was having a dream, and I saw a single beam of light, like a fluorescent lamp.

At first, I wondered what it was, but I thought it looked like a fluorescent lamp. After looking at it for a while, I saw that it was attached to the ceiling. The fluorescent lamp was fixed to the ceiling at two ends. At first, I was just looking at it, but after a while, it looked like a glowing doorknob, not a fluorescent lamp. It was a glowing doorknob attached to the ceiling.

There were several string-like things hanging around the doorknob. Are they the strings for turning on the lights in the house? But there is no light itself, just the strings.

However, those strings are also interesting, but what I was most interested in was the glowing doorknob.

What is this? Without thinking, I reached out to the glowing doorknob and pulled it slightly.

It moved a little. The door was not completely opened, but it seemed to have opened slightly on one side. Then, immediately, I felt the sound of thunder in my forehead, and I was surprised and let go.

At that time, I was aware of both the visions of the meditation and the sensation in my forehead. I was looking at the doorknob and feeling the sound in the depths of my forehead.

Then, as I continued to look at the glowing doorknob from a distance, which was still not fully open, I began to feel pressure on the back of my head, and soon I came out of the meditation.

What was that?

In my past experiences, images like this are not just imagination, but are closely related to the actual state of the spirit.

I will gradually try to interpret it, but I think that the fact that it was "on the ceiling" suggests that it is related to the head or above.

Possible candidates are the ajna chakra or the sahasrara chakra, but the glowing doorknob appeared in a place that was not related to any part of the body, so all I know is that it was located above.

I will continue to observe the situation.

First, stop thinking.
As stated in the Yoga Sutras, stopping thoughts (and going beyond) leads to the state of samadhi.

However, over time, you will be able to maintain samadhi even with thoughts present.

Therefore, as a training method, stopping thoughts is effective for awakening the deeper consciousness that lies within.

So, the criticism of samadhi that you often hear, such as "even if you stop thinking in samadhi, you won't attain enlightenment," is true in a sense, but in meditation, samadhi is a path that must be traversed.

In yoga, samadhi is a state where deeper consciousness has awakened. However, there is a difference in the meaning of the word "samadhi" in Buddhism, where it simply means stopping thoughts.

If you don't interpret it according to the context, you may misunderstand what the other person is saying.

In yoga, samadhi is the highest state, and there are several types of samadhi. Even in that, the basis is the emergence of deeper consciousness.

In Buddhism, samadhi simply means stopping thoughts, and beyond that lies the state of observation, which is vipassana.

However, I think that what Buddhism calls vipassana is actually the same thing as yoga's samadhi.

Some people say, "Vipassana is superior to samadhi," but that is a perspective from Buddhism, and the way yoga expresses it is different.

Especially for spiritual beginners, there is a tendency to misunderstand their own practices as the highest and most special, but in essence, they are often not very different.

In any case, both start with stopping thoughts to awaken deeper consciousness, and once deeper consciousness has awakened, even if you move your thoughts, deeper consciousness will operate in parallel. At first, you can't awaken deeper consciousness unless you stop thinking, but as you become accustomed to it, deeper consciousness and superficial conscious awareness will operate independently or with emphasis.

Therefore, there is no point in arguing between Buddhism, vipassana, and yoga.

From my perspective, there is no need to limit yourself to a single sect. There are many sects that say that you should only practice within your own sect, but I think it is better to combine the good aspects of many different practices and grow.

I think that the tendency to restrict things is not based on spiritual principles, but rather on practical reasons such as the need to secure staff to operate, the cost involved, or the desire to collect membership fees. If that is the case, there is no need to be involved in such things.

However, this is different when it comes to a teacher. To build a deep relationship, you should attend regularly. However, I don't think it is necessary to be so particular about sects.