Previously, simply being aware of the Muladhara chakra would allow energy to flow up to the Sahasrara, the crown chakra. However, recently, the energy has been filling up to the area near the Sahasrara, so even when I focus on the Muladhara, I don't feel much of a change in the energy.

When I focus on the Muladhara, the energy used to rise to the back of my head or the tip of my nose. Now, the energy reaches the Sahasrara, but not quite, and the area below is quite full of energy. Therefore, I don't necessarily need to focus on the Muladhara because I'm already in a state where energy is naturally flowing towards my head.

So, there's no need to consciously focus on the Muladhara to direct the energy to the area between my eyebrows, although focusing on it slightly might make me feel some energy movement. However, the effect is not as noticeable anymore. I think there is an effect, but because the energy is already quite full, the difference is not that significant, so it might feel like there's not much movement.

Similarly, when I focus on the tip of my nose, I used to feel energy filling up. However, since I already have a certain amount of energy in my head, there's not much need to consciously focus on the tip of my nose to fill it with energy. I think it might have some effect, but I'm not feeling it as much anymore.

I interpret this not as a decrease in sensitivity, but simply as a result of the energy difference becoming smaller.

Previously, the energy in my head wasn't as high, so I felt the need to focus on the Muladhara, the tip of my nose, or to fill my body with energy from the heavens.

Even now, I still think focusing on energy from the heavens is somewhat effective, but I don't rely on it as much as before. I have a sense that I'm starting to connect with the heavens.

It's still early days for the Sahasrara to be fully activated, but as this progresses, the body is constantly filled with energy, and the lack of energy difference suggests that the energy work is nearing completion. At least, the energetic movements below the Sahasrara seem to have settled down.

Now, I often feel a slight tingling sensation, like static electricity or a feeling on the skin, near the Sahasrara. It's probably more of an energy flow than static electricity.

This is also accompanied by a change in awareness, and I'm experiencing "awareness" more automatically than before. I'll write more about this later.

When the Sahasrara chakra is filled with energy, one enters a state of stillness, which allows the subconscious mind to surface. In this state, the subconscious mind "directly" governs one's senses.

This state is sometimes referred to as "the true nature of the mind (rikpa)," "vipassana (observation)," or "samadhi," depending on the school of thought. Previously, this state seemed to appear only temporarily, especially after a period of focused meditation. After meditation, one would enter a state of observation (vipassana), and sometimes this state of stillness would continue to some extent in daily life.

These are all just different ways of expressing the same thing. It can be said that the subconscious mind is surfacing, or that the true nature of the mind (rikpa) is emerging, and so on.

This is a matter of degree, but recently, these states have begun to appear naturally when the Sahasrara chakra is filled with energy.

In terms of energy, simply filling the Sahasrara chakra with energy leads to these states. From an energetic perspective, the focus during meditation was to raise energy, and by concentrating on the forehead, one gathers energy and directs it to the Sahasrara chakra. Depending on the degree to which energy flows to the Sahasrara chakra, one enters a state of vipassana (or rikpa, or a state where the subconscious mind emerges).

Previously, the flow of energy to the Sahasrara chakra was not very strong, so the vipassana state was also limited. However, recently, there has been a constant sensation of a slight tingling in the Sahasrara chakra, so when one feels this sensation in the Sahasrara chakra, it seems that the senses are also in a state of vipassana observation.

This can also be described as a state where "the subconscious mind is surfacing." Some people may recognize this not as the subconscious mind, but as a different kind of consciousness. Some people might call this the "higher self" or "middle self," but these terms have different definitions depending on the person, and some people may be using them with similar meanings.

However, at the current stage, it is only a slight surfacing of the subconscious mind. One cannot keep the things recognized by the subconscious mind in conscious awareness for long, and quickly forgets them.

Although one can often recognize that the subconscious mind is working, the inability to remember it suggests that the subconscious and conscious minds are somewhat connected, and that the conscious mind can grasp the subconscious mind, but they are not yet connected very strongly.

I didn't think I was on a journey of self-discovery, but the recent situation where energy fills the Sahasrara chakra and the subconscious mind emerges can be said to be, in a sense, "living as your true self."

I was simply meditating, and my purpose was not specifically self-discovery. I had an out-of-body experience as a child and saw past lives and the future, knowing my life's purpose. Until recently, I thought that self-discovery was already over at that point. Now, I interpret that I am at the stage of re-experiencing a certain level of awakening based on the knowledge I gained then, and verifying the steps towards enlightenment.

Therefore, I didn't intend to or expect to "search for myself" at this point, but the state where energy fills the Sahasrara chakra is what can be described as "your true self," which seems like the destination of the "journey of self-discovery" that people who engage in spiritual or wandering journeys often hear about.

However, to avoid any misunderstanding, I would like to clearly state that self-discovery is just a passing phase. Even if you find yourself when energy fills the Sahasrara chakra, it is simply "returning to normal," and it doesn't seem like something particularly amazing.

I have a feeling that I haven't been truly integrated with my true self until now.

And that is simply because things were not right until now. There is nothing to be proud of even when you find your true self; it is simply that.

The self of the past would probably think that the current self is wonderful, but that may be true. However, in reality, the current self is not particularly special; it is simply a return to normalcy.

What I learned when energy filled the Sahasrara chakra was just that, a simple, small thing.

It feels like the Sahasrara chakra is appropriate for a natural feeling, such as looking down at the wild mountains after the storm from a small hill, looking up at the clear wind and bright light, and the blue sky, and looking around at the earth.

It seems that even though consciousness has gathered in Sahasrara, and even though consciousness has become free to some extent, allowing for observation of the entire body, it has not yet attained the freedom of understanding.

Through meditation, I realized this.

I also realized again that as long as this freedom of understanding is not attained, a certain fixed religious perspective remains.

Even when consciousness gathers in Sahasrara, after a while, consciousness seems to rise to an even higher level, suggesting that there is still more to go.

At this stage, even though the body can be observed to some extent and consciousness is relatively free, it doesn't seem like I have attained a state where logical reasoning naturally emerges.

If we were to study the experiences of someone who has attained enlightenment, similar logical insights would emerge, as if they were also attaining this freedom of understanding. However, if one has not yet attained this freedom of understanding, there remains a certain dependence on written materials.

Only when logical reasoning emerges freely and naturally in one's own words, independent of written materials, can one reach a certain, albeit preliminary, level that could be called enlightenment (although there is still more to go). Without reaching that level, there is still much to be done.

It seems that even if one feels light and tries to understand existence, it is still one step short of attaining this freedom of understanding.

Depending on the day, if the energy reaches Sahasrara, consciousness becomes calm and in an observational state (Vipassana). However, there are also days when it doesn't.

On days when it doesn't, meditating for a while, such as 1 or 2 hours, may cause the energy to reach Sahasrara and result in the same state, but that's not always the case.

This situation seems to be similar to what is described in yoga as Rudra Granthi.

Granthi refers to an energy block, and it is said that there are three main ones. The names and locations may vary slightly depending on the school of thought, but a well-known one is Rudra Granthi, which is said to be located in the Ajna chakra, between the eyebrows.

This is sometimes interpreted as hindering the opening of the Ajna chakra, but generally, it is interpreted as simply an energy block, where the energy route from Ajna to Sahasrara is blocked.

Ajna corresponds to the end of the spinal cord, where three nadis converge, forming a knot-like structure. This knot is called the Rudra granthi or the Shiva knot. "Esoteric Yoga (by Hiroshi Motoyama)"

Because of this, the energy is divided near Ajna, making it difficult to rise further.

This is different in stages, but after the Kundalini experience, although Manipur became dominant, it was not yet Anahata dominant. In that state, there was also a granthi between Manipur and Anahata. I think this granthi was probably Vishnu Granthi. The conventional understanding is that Vishnu Granthi is located in Anahata, but in my case, it felt like it was blocked not within Anahata, but between Anahata and Manipur. Regardless, after that, Anahata became dominant, and during that time, the Vishnu Granthi seemed to be broken.

In this case, there is a feeling of a block not exactly at Ajna, but slightly above it, between Ajna and Sahasrara. Although the conventional understanding is that Rudra Granthi is located within Ajna, the feeling is slightly different. However, I interpret that it is okay to consider this as Rudra Granthi for now.

When I think about the time when Manipur became dominant and then Anahata became dominant, I was doing energy work to raise the energy from Manipur to Anahata, but it was a similar situation to what is happening now between Ajna and Sahasrara, where the energy was not quite reaching Anahata.

The energy is full up to the level of Ajna, and even with energy work, the energy can temporarily or somewhat continuously fill Sahasrara, but this varies from day to day, and it doesn't yet feel like Ajna and Sahasrara are stably connected.

If the situation is similar, it feels like the energy connection between Ajna and Sahasrara may become thicker in the future. Well, what do you think?

In Samadhi, whether the mind is active or still, the so-called "rikpa" (the true nature of mind) observes its own senses and mental activity, so there is no need to specifically practice "shamatha" (calm abiding).

Whether the mind is active and thinking, or whether thoughts arise, or whether the mind is still, there is no difference; the true nature of mind (rikpa) is constantly observing these things.

Here, I used the word "observation" for explanation, but the word "observation" seems to imply a distinction between "something to be observed" and "something that is observed." However, in the state of Samadhi, there is no such distinction. Samadhi is often described as "non-dual awareness," and it is a state of awareness without such distinctions.

However, as a part of practice, shamatha (calm abiding) is necessary to enter such a state of Samadhi.

This is not necessarily required, and some schools do not practice shamatha (calm abiding).

However, in many schools, shamatha is practiced before reaching Samadhi.

The meaning of the word "Samadhi" also varies depending on the school. Some schools define Samadhi as simply concentration (such as in Vedanta), but in many yoga schools and Tibetan Buddhism, Samadhi is defined as non-dual awareness, and it is not simply concentration.

Therefore, if Samadhi refers to non-dual awareness and the true nature of mind (rikpa), then shamatha (calm abiding) is a prerequisite. (This positioning does not apply to schools that define Samadhi as "concentration.")

Indeed, in the state of Samadhi, whether the mind is active or still is irrelevant, and that is the true nature of things. However, shamatha, as a stage, has been traditionally incorporated as a method of practice.

At first glance, the state of Samadhi and the state of shamatha may seem contradictory. However, from the perspective of Samadhi, whether one is in shamatha or not is irrelevant; it is the same. Therefore, shamatha is not very important from the perspective of Samadhi. One can have shamatha or not, and it doesn't matter.

Therefore, from the perspective of Samadhi, shamatha and Samadhi are not contradictory.

However, from the perspective of shamatha, Samadhi may seem contradictory.

Or, people who only understand Samadhi through books may feel a contradiction between Samadhi and shamatha.

However, as mentioned above, from the perspective of Samadhi, whether or not one has shamatha makes little difference. Nevertheless, for those who have not yet reached Samadhi, shamatha can be helpful in reaching it.

Some schools seem to deny shamatha without any reason. I don't really understand that. Since there is little difference between having shamatha or not when one reaches Samadhi, there is no need to particularly deny shamatha.

It is simply a matter of using shamatha if it helps in practice.

Surprisingly, there are many schools that deny shamatha, and some of them even deny it hysterically, which I cannot understand. However, I think like this.

This is not an opinion directed at others, because I believe that others are free to think and believe whatever they want. Others should be free to do as they please, and if they think shamatha is bad, they are free to think so. They should be free.

However, I sometimes write about the necessity of shamatha because I am concerned that some people may be discouraged from practicing shamatha by such statements.

I don't know how much of what I write will be understood, but I have said what I have to say.

There are schools of thought that believe that understanding is the only way to achieve liberation (moksha), and that experience is temporary and therefore not important. For example, the Vedanta school in India.

In reality, experience is not important only from the perspective of moksha or samadhi, but I think that experience is necessary to reach moksha or samadhi.

Even in schools of thought that emphasize understanding as the means to achieve liberation (moksha), there are practices that resemble training. In reality, what is called training or experience is often simply referred to as understanding or study. It seems to me that they place emphasis on the word "understanding" on the surface, but in reality, they are emphasizing practice and experience, and there is not much difference in substance.

For example, some schools call chanting mantras "practice," but schools that emphasize understanding as the path to moksha often call it "puja," "prayer," or "meditation."

In reality, everything is perfect as it is. From my perspective, these differences in interpretation are not significant, and such differences seem to be nothing more than differences in taste or culture. However, there are situations where people argue and point fingers, claiming that one side is right and the other is wrong, based on these minor differences.

While it is true that moksha and samadhi are important, the preceding stage of samatha (tranquility) is also important. However, schools of thought that emphasize understanding and deem experience unnecessary tend to deny samatha (tranquility), which is equivalent to practice and experience. From the perspective of moksha or samadhi, whether or not one is in a state of samatha (tranquility) does not make much difference, but samatha (tranquility of mind) is necessary to enter samadhi.

When schools of thought say that samatha (tranquility) is not necessary for moksha or samadhi, it is interpreted by those who have attained moksha or samadhi as meaning that whether or not there is samatha (tranquility), there is moksha or samadhi. However, those who have not yet attained moksha or samadhi tend to deny samatha (tranquility). It is not that samatha (tranquility) is unnecessary; it is a significant difference.

Some schools of thought that emphasize understanding as the path to moksha argue that schools that practice samatha (tranquility) are wrong, leading to disputes.

Reading only texts may lead to a misunderstanding that denies samatha (tranquility), but in reality, as mentioned above, whether or not one is in a state of samatha (tranquility) does not matter when one has attained moksha or samadhi. It is not a question of whether samatha (tranquility) is necessary.

In reality, samatha (tranquility) is useful as a preliminary stage for reaching moksha or samadhi, and basically, one reaches moksha or samadhi after going through samatha (tranquility).

From a logical point of view, samatha (tranquility) is control of the mind (manas in yoga), so I think it is impossible for someone who does not have control over their mind to attain moksha or samadhi. Is it possible to attain moksha or samadhi without controlling the mind?

I cannot understand why some people insist so strongly that only understanding is important and specifically deny samatha (tranquility). If they emphasize understanding, they should explain it in a way that everyone can understand. In reality, I have asked these questions many times, but I have not received clear answers. I often hear answers like "understanding is important," "you must understand thoroughly," "you don't understand," or "you need to study more." Perhaps that is the case, but I find the interpretation I have described above more convincing.

From my perspective, such misunderstandings are foolish. However, I believe that everything is perfect as it is, so I think people can do whatever they want, even if it is foolish. These interpretations may be my own misunderstandings, but even if they are, I think they are perfect.

It is a matter of degree, but as you continue meditating, the difference between seated meditation and daily life gradually disappears.

When you meditate and have energetic or conscious experiences, for a while after starting meditation, those experiences were somewhat utilized in daily life, and awareness was maintained, but it didn't feel like they were completely integrated into daily life.

After meditating or doing yoga, you sometimes feel refreshed, but after a few hours or a while, you eventually return to your normal state of daily life.

This is a change that occurs over months or years, but these transitions seem to have gradually become less pronounced.

Especially in the beginning, the gap between meditation/yoga and daily life was significant, but recently, they have become quite continuous.

It's not just about having a calm state of mind (shamatha, stillness), but even the so-called meditative state, vipassana, or samadhi (observational state) can be brought into daily life.

In reality, this kind of samadhi in daily life is a form of practice, a method of training to maintain a constantly awakened awareness.

As practice progresses, if samadhi continues not just for a limited time but continuously, it is called "great samadhi." However, for beginners, there is a distinction between being in samadhi and not being in samadhi. "Tibetan Meditation Techniques" (by Namkai Norbu).

As you go about daily life, you may gradually fall out of the state of samadhi, but at that point, you can consciously try to regain awakened awareness, or if it's difficult to return to that state in daily life, you can meditate again to return to an awakened state.

Seated meditation is the basic practice, but connecting daily life and meditation is the next stage of practice.

What is written in scriptures is only one aspect, and even if it is something wonderful, if you blindly accept and believe it, you will lose sight of the truth.

I'm not saying you should doubt everything, but the truth lies within yourself. So, even if it is written in scriptures, it is not an answer that comes from within you, but rather a hint.

However, serious people tend to take scriptures too seriously and become attached to them.

This is part of the process of how religions develop, and while it is an interesting process, there is a risk that those who seriously study scriptures will be unable to confront the truth that the answer lies within themselves.

For example, the Yoga Sutras state "cessation of thought" as the definition or goal of yoga. Some people interpret this literally, while others understand it loosely, saying "Maybe so? Perhaps." In reality, the latter group tends to progress faster.

Whether it's the former or the latter, the basis should be a feeling that comes from deep within yourself, but often, the former group tends to be fixated on the literal understanding of the text. Of course, this may vary from person to person, and the opposite may be true.

Another example is that the Yoga Sutras say something like "When a negative thought arises, think of the opposite." However, serious people try to do this constantly, but this is a misunderstanding. When you have many distractions, it is good to suppress them in this way, but when you have progressed significantly and are close to samadhi, you no longer need to suppress them.

However, serious people tend to take the text literally and interpret it as a method that is always necessary and applicable, but they often fail to understand that it is only one aspect of the truth.

The answer lies within yourself, so you should do it if you think it is necessary, and you should not do it if you think it is not necessary. However, people who do not understand that the answer lies within themselves tend to cling to the methods described in scriptures, which means they do not understand that there is an answer within themselves.

This idea that "the answer lies within yourself" is often mentioned in recent spiritual teachings, especially in the realm of spirituality related to the universe. However, this is not something that is said in classical yoga, religion, or the Vedas. In classical fields, there is more emphasis on the diversity of options, which encourages people to choose.

There are so many different options, and the differences between scriptures are significant, so you have no choice but to choose for yourself. And the criteria for choosing are based on your own experience. Whether it is recent spirituality or classical fields, relying on your inner feelings is the same.

However, serious people tend to be fixated on the text. And they may say that people who offer their own interpretations are "twisting the interpretation" or are "wrong." It is not a matter of being right or wrong, because the answer lies within yourself, and everything is true. Therefore, if the answer comes from within yourself, it is perfect. There may be some misunderstandings due to differences in expression, but that is not important. The important thing is to accept the answer you came up with yourself.

This is something that serious people find difficult to accept. Personally, I think that pursuing the truth requires a certain degree of seriousness, but perhaps it is better not to be too serious. It may be better to have a base of ambiguity, like the O blood type, combined with the stance of finding the truth within yourself.

During meditation, I often see light, but interpreting it can be quite difficult.

In yoga, it is said that each chakra has a different color, but I personally haven't often seen those colors during meditation. However, some people say they see the colors of the chakras during meditation, so that may be possible.

Some yoga schools state that the light seen during meditation is not important and should be ignored. Interpreting the colors seen during meditation is difficult, so it may be a useful way to prevent disciples from making unnecessary inquiries or from mistakenly believing that they have made significant progress in their practice.

Personally, I find a three-stage interpretation that combines yoga and theosophy to be the most fitting: gray/black (or purple), light.

In Tibetan or Dzogchen teachings, there is something called "tikle." This seems to correspond to the third stage of light mentioned above.

When I first started meditating, I often saw a gray, hazy feeling, which felt like simply looking out through my eyelids. Sometimes, I would also see flashes of light. Beginners often interpret these flashes as "light," but in reality, seeing such flashes occasionally is quite common.

Therefore, it can be said that some yoga schools' approach of stating that "light is not important" is practical and reasonable.

However, I personally believe that it is important to carefully assess one's own position, so I think it is a waste to discard such clear "signs" as "light." Since the degree of progress can be measured by how the light appears, I believe that we should use what is available.

Personally, the three stages I mentioned earlier, gray/black (or purple), and light, resonate with me. Recently, I have often seen faint flashes of light, like the light from a lamp, in various parts of my vision during meditation. In my daily life, I also often see what is called "tikle" in Tibetan (or Dzogchen) teachings.

Tikle is similar to seeing small specks on the surface of your eye when you look up at a clear blue sky, as if they were on a screen. You might also see flashes of light or particles of light moving like shooting stars in various directions.

I have seen this kind of tikle since I was a child, so it is not particularly new to me. However, in Tibet, this tikle is used as a meditation technique.

When you search for "tikle," you will find descriptions of people who were surprised to see this kind of tikle for the first time after starting meditation. However, I have seen tikle since I was a child, and while I was not familiar with the word "tikle," I had seen similar things in a television program about Tibet, and I vaguely understood that it was related to meditation.

Therefore, some people say that you will see tikle-like light as you progress in meditation, but I don't necessarily think that is always the case. I believe that there is a phenomenon and technique of seeing light, and separately, there is light that appears during meditation.

Tikle has two meanings. The tikle you see when looking up at a clear blue sky is the light that appears as a technique, while the tikle that appears as you progress in meditation seems to be something slightly different. However, tikle simply means "drops of light," so perhaps they are the same thing.

In any case, interpreting light can be a bit difficult, so it is not entirely wrong to say that it is "not important," as some yoga schools do, from a practical point of view.

In the Yoga Sutras, there is a passage that says, "If unfavorable thoughts arise, think of the opposite (good) thing."

This literally means to think of the opposite thought, to think of something good.

However, if written this way, a certain number of people may misunderstand it as simply negating bad thoughts.

It means that when negative thoughts arise, you should not negate the negative thought itself, but rather focus on generating positive thoughts.

Ultimately, you no longer need to make an effort to think of positive thoughts, and you naturally become positive. However, if negative thoughts arise, either let them be, or if possible, send them love, and focus on positive thoughts to reduce the negativity.

This is quite different, even though it may seem similar.

(2-33) To suppress thoughts that hinder yoga, one should generate the opposite thought.
For example, when a wave of anger arises in the heart, how should it be controlled? By generating the opposite wave. Think of love. "Raja Yoga (by Swami Vivekananda)"

If you negate negativity, suppressed thoughts can be unconsciously pushed down and may erupt at any time, making you more irritable. Your boiling point for anger decreases.

However, this is a matter of degree in everyday life. When interacting with others in social life, it may be necessary to temporarily suppress negativity and not let it show.

However, as a basic principle of meditation, negativity should not be negated, but rather accepted, and by accepting it, the negativity will disappear.

The basic principle is to be indifferent to bad thoughts. This is also said in Buddhism.

(1-33) Friendship, compassion, joy, and indifference should be felt towards objects that are happy, unhappy, good, and bad, respectively, to calm the mind. (Omitted) If the object of thought is something unhappy, one must be compassionate towards it. If it is something good, one must be joyful. If it is something bad, one must be indifferent. "Raja Yoga (by Swami Vivekananda)"

This is a basic principle in meditation, so the basic principle is to be indifferent to negative thoughts, and in addition to that, to generate positive thoughts.

However, in reality, you don't always have to consciously generate positive thoughts, and the emergence of negative thoughts often indicates a low level of energy. As energy increases, you naturally become more positive, and even if there was some suppression of negativity along the way, it will be resolved along with the increase in energy.

An increase in energy simply means "becoming energetic." It's a common-sense story that if you become energetic, you become positive.

Therefore, the fundamental solution is an energetic solution, but since that takes time, techniques like the ones mentioned above are necessary.

In terms of yoga, an increase in energy is the activation of kundalini, but generally, there are various ways to achieve it, such as exercise, positive thinking, eating foods with high energy, etc.

Even though the fundamental solution requires an increase in energy and the activation of kundalini, there is a technique called "generating the opposite thought."

In certain schools of thought, people who are practicing meditation within that school sometimes experience effects that are the opposite of the purpose of meditation, such as becoming "easily angered," having "a low boiling point for anger," or "looking down on others."

This is because, in meditation, they are susceptible to self-hypnosis, and while they actually are not meditating effectively, they believe that "they are able to meditate." However, in reality, they are suppressing their emotions and creating a state that appears to be meditation. When those suppressed emotions are triggered by some stimulus, they quickly reach a low boiling point for anger and become angry, or feelings of looking down on others may arise.

I use the word "suppression" here, but it can also be replaced with "imagination."

They "imagine" that they are able to meditate.

However, in reality, meditation is something that "naturally arises," and it is not something that one's mind imagines.

For example, when doing concentration meditation, a meditative state naturally arises.

By focusing the mind on a single point, a deep awareness that was previously hidden emerges. This emerges "naturally," and it is not something that is imagined.

In some schools, people meditate by observing bodily sensations. However, the sensation of "observation" is prone to misunderstanding. The act of observing itself, which is done with the mind, belongs to the five senses, but the "observation" that arises in meditation is something that transcends the five senses.

On the other hand, some people mistake the observation of the five senses for a meditative state, and in that case, they tend to "imagine" that they are "able to meditate" or "able to observe," and they can sometimes fall into self-hypnosis.

In reality, the state of imagining or observing the skin is completely different from actually being in a samadhi or vipassana state, but it is difficult to distinguish between the two, especially for beginners. In such a state, people may fall into self-hypnosis, believing that they are able to meditate simply by observing the five senses.

This is not necessarily a bad thing, and it is quite common for beginners. Even such misunderstandings can be properly observed and used as a step to move on to the next level.

Some schools point out such beginner misunderstandings and say that they are wrong or are simply imagination, and sometimes even use humiliating guidance. However, from my perspective, this is an important "sign" that shows that the beginner has reached a certain stage, and it is a sign of progress. If they had not made sufficient progress, they would not even reach that point. I think it is sufficient progress.

However, it is not good to stop there and mistakenly believe that they have reached the final destination. Sometimes, it is necessary to point that out.

However, if someone is inquisitive, they will think, "Something is not right. Is this the final destination? Compared to that, my awareness is only at this level," and they will continue to explore further.

The interesting thing is that they are exploring on their own.

They are not necessarily seeking an answer.

The answer itself is written somewhere in the books.

However, what is interesting about meditation is that it involves exploring each step based on one's own sensations. If only the final answer is given without going through those steps, it would be disappointing or uninteresting.

I believe that self-exploration is the essence of meditation.

In spirituality, you often hear things like, "Only the present exists," or "The past and future do not exist," or "The past and future are all part of the present." However, I don't think it's a good idea to take these statements too seriously.

This is just my personal opinion. Of course, you are free to believe whatever you want.

Generally, the past is considered something that has passed and cannot be changed, while the future is something that has yet to come and is something we create.

Even if we were to develop the ability to travel through parallel worlds and transcend space and time, this fundamental nature would not change.

From my own experiences with out-of-body experiences, where I was able to freely travel to the past and future, I found that while some of the claims mentioned earlier have a certain truth to them, they are often quite misleading.

Time exists to allow us to observe the progression of events in detail, so we can carefully assess things. If the past and future didn't exist, it would hinder our ability to understand. The entity that created this world, whether you call it God or a creator, likely intended for us to "understand," and the creation of time, with its divisions, may be a way to facilitate that understanding.

Therefore, the past and future do exist.

However, while the past is often considered fixed and the future is thought to be fluid and changeable, the "present" is actually quite fixed for many people. It is commonly believed that we freely create our future with our own will, but for most people, the present is simply a tracing of a predetermined timeline, unrelated to free will.

In reality, for many people, "the past, present, and future are all fixed."

Those who have become somewhat spiritually awakened can detach from the "present" and see both the past and the future. It is only then that they can truly "break free" from the predetermined timeline and exercise their free will. Until their consciousness reaches that level, they are simply following the predetermined timeline.

It is also possible for consciousness to focus on a specific point in the past. When consciousness focuses on that point in the past, it becomes "the present" from the subjective perspective of that consciousness. However, from the perspective of the original time and space, it remains "the past." Regardless of the subjective perspective, it is still "the past" relative to the entire timeline. While it may be "the present" from a subjective viewpoint, it does not mean that "the past does not exist." Therefore, it is correct to say that the past exists.

The same applies to the future. The future exists, and when consciousness focuses on the future, it becomes "the present" from the subjective perspective of that consciousness. However, from the perspective of the original time and space, it remains "the future." Therefore, it is incorrect to say that "the future does not exist."

From the perspective of "will," the "present" is simply where our "consciousness" is focused at this very moment. The "present" I am referring to is literally the current instant, and that focus creates the perception of the present... although that phrasing might be misleading. It is simply the act of observing the present moment.

For ordinary people, the past is fixed and unchangeable, the present is fixed, and the future is fixed. Therefore, even if someone hears spiritual teachings about "everything is the present" and nods along, their reality will not change, and it will likely seem irrelevant to them.

Instead, if you can break through the limitations of time and project your consciousness outside of time, you can begin to create reality and exercise true "free will," breaking away from the fixed timeline. That is what is truly important, and the nature of time is just a minor detail.

When consciousness is transformed, the past, present, and future become fluid. You can then influence the past to create a better timeline, and the future changes based on your current actions, so it is not uncommon for a future that once existed on the timeline to disappear.

That being said, that is a story that comes after a certain level of spiritual understanding. Before that, the past, present, and future appear to exist as fixed things.

When I am tired, my soul and senses are slightly out of sync, and I feel like my soul is being dragged by my movements. When I can perceive the movement as a sensation without any lag, and simultaneously, my consciousness is clear and I am energetic.

When I am tired, my soul is slightly out of sync with my body's movements, creating a pendulum-like movement where my soul is momentarily pulled before returning to alignment.

Initially, I interpreted this misalignment as something undesirable. However, in reality, this misalignment can be a good clue for recognizing my soul and body. While being tired is not ideal, temporarily creating this state or occasionally experiencing fatigue can help observe this misalignment.

When I am energetic, my manipura chakra (solar plexus) functions well, and the energy in my dan tien (energy center) flows throughout my body. Consequently, my observational state is continuous and reaches every part of my body without any lag.

This is undoubtedly a desirable state. However, when I am tired, although this rarely happens in my daily life, I can experience this misalignment between my body and soul when I go hiking, take a long walk, or cycle for an extended period.

This state, which has both positive and negative aspects, is because the soul and body are fundamentally meant to move together. While observation is a fundamental aspect, it can be separated. By separating the soul and body, we can achieve a complete state of separation and observation.

This may be a misrepresentation. The word "separation" in spiritual contexts is often perceived negatively, but what I mean by separation here is independence. The soul is inherently pure and untainted, but it is being pulled by the body. While different schools of thought interpret the soul's form differently, the Atman, as described in yoga and the Vedas, is an eternal and immutable entity. However, it may appear as if it is being pulled by the body, or a veil is covering it, causing it to be dragged along.

I believe that experiencing the sensation of the soul being dragged by the body's movements in a "slightly tired" state can provide valuable insights for separating the soul from the body.

For those who have not undergone any training, the body and soul are quite separate. I am not suggesting returning to that untrained state of separation, as it is an uncontrolled separation. In that state, the veil (tamas) covering the Atman is thick and dark, obscuring the Atman.

On the other hand, after some training, the Atman becomes visible, and the meaning of these concepts emerges when the soul (Atman) and the body become integrated. In this state, the soul (Atman) and the body move together as one, with minimal separation. This integrated state becomes the foundation, and occasional fatigue creates a slight separation, which, in turn, provides a key or clue for moving towards a constant state of complete separation and observation.

In this state, there is a tendency to excessively pursue the integration of the soul (Atman) and the body. It becomes common to move the body freely or observe the body and mind in detail while in an integrated state. Maintaining this state of observation (vipassana) itself can become the goal. In reality, the human body is temporary, and even the body should be a means to gain knowledge. However, the focus shifts to mastering the techniques of manipulating the body and integrating with it, leading to a trap of continuously manipulating the human body.

Therefore, intentionally or occasionally experiencing fatigue creates a "fluctuation" in these states of vipassana, creating a temporary "separation." This "separation" is the key to breaking the current state and moving towards the next state: a constant state of observation through complete separation from the body.

Recently, spiritual and Buddhist teachings have emphasized that ascetic practices are not good. While I agree that traditional ascetic practices are not ideal, I think they might be useful as a starting point.

However, these are very misunderstood concepts, so I would not recommend them to others lightly, and I do not know if what I have written here is beneficial to others. I am simply taking advantage of the current environment, so there is no need to intentionally create such a state of separation.

That being said, I will record it as a meditation journal.

The sensation is like riding an elevator that ascends to a high-rise building, and consciousness moves towards the ajna or sahasrara chakra.

Originally, when the body and senses are unified, the manipura chakra tends to be dominant. I often observe the sensations of the eyes and skin in a vipassana state or a kanika-samadhi state.

However, when consciousness is focused on the ajna or sahasrara chakra, while I continue to observe the five senses, it becomes slightly detached from the feeling of unity between the body and consciousness.

In spiritual terms, separation is often seen as a negative thing, but here, separation refers to the need to separate the body and soul from the state where they are perceived as one due to "ignorance."

What I want to emphasize is that I am not saying that the soul and body are completely separate entities. Rather, if we look at the very subtle levels, such as the level of atman or brahman, they are ultimately one. However, in terms of their coarser or relatively subtle aspects, they exist as distinct entities. Therefore, it is necessary to recognize that the coarse body and the relatively subtle soul are different entities, but that at the most subtle level, they are the same.

In other words, the body, which is perceived as a coarse physical entity, and the slightly more subtle soul (which is not called the soul in yoga) have different qualities, and it is necessary to separate them from the state of mistakenly perceiving them as the same.

Metaphorically, it is like seeing things as they are. However, I suspect that this may sound like a profound statement that is difficult to understand.

Specifically, it is the transition from observing the sensations of the five senses, such as the eyes and skin, and feeling that those sensations are one with oneself, to a state where the sensation and the self are separated.

In yoga, the eyes of the five senses are said to be governed by the manipura chakra. On the other hand, the eyes of intuition are the ajna chakra.

Separating the soul from the body is like transitioning from the eyes of the five senses to the eyes of intuition, and moving the subjective consciousness from the manipura chakra, which governs the eyes of the five senses, to the ajna or sahasrara chakra, which is the seat of intuition.

When meditating and the soul is slightly separated from the body, it is an opportunity. If you guide the soul with your aura, consciousness begins to rise and detach from the five senses, like riding an escalator in a high-rise building or a parachute or balloon carried by an updraft, steadily ascending to higher altitudes. When consciousness reaches the ajna or sahasrara chakra, the sensory perceptions become sharper. At that time, you become slightly detached from the feeling of unity between the five senses and yourself, and the state of observation becomes dominant. However, the physical body is still present, so the five senses do not disappear, and the feeling that there is something called "I" still exists. However, the feeling that those five senses were "me" becomes much weaker, and you feel like you are looking at those five senses from a slightly higher vantage point.

In reality, you actually gain certainty that the soul and body are completely separated and that you can view the world from a perspective other than your own. However, this is only the stage of having gained that certainty, and it does not mean that the soul and body are actually completely separated. It is simply the stage of having literally gained that certainty.

Nevertheless, it is a significant advancement compared to the state where the body and soul were previously unified.

In previous meditations, even when consciousness was focused on the sahasrara chakra, the body and soul were still in the manipura or anahata chakra, and the aura only extended to the sahasrara chakra. However, this time, the center of consciousness has temporarily shifted to the ajna or sahasrara chakra, which is a significant difference.

Metaphorically, before the aura gathers at the sahasrara chakra and the state of observation is achieved, it was like hiking or climbing a mountain, but you could hardly see the summit. The state of the aura gathering at the sahasrara chakra is like looking at the summit of the mountain from the ridge or the foot of the mountain and saying, "It's wonderful." This time, it's like actually climbing a small mountain and feeling, "It's wonderful." There are still many wonderful mountains to climb, but there is at least that kind of difference.

Generally, it is understood that experiencing Kundalini leads to spiritual growth, but in reality, it is not that simple.

Some people do not experience Kundalini, while others do.

However, having a Kundalini experience does not necessarily mean that someone is spiritually superior to those who do not.

In fact, many souls are reincarnating on this Earth, and those who have come from the world of angels or gods have their aura activated in the upper regions, specifically above the Ajna chakra, while the lower regions, such as the Manipura chakra and below, are not as active. In such cases, it is common for people not to experience Kundalini.

On the other hand, souls who have grown up on Earth have their lower aura activated, starting with the Muladhara chakra or even earlier. In this case, when the Muladhara chakra awakens, it is recognized as a Kundalini experience.

Comparing these, it can be said that souls who have come from the world of angels or gods are more advanced than souls who have grown up on Earth, even if they do not have a Kundalini experience.

In modern times, Kundalini is often romanticized, and it is believed that experiencing Kundalini leads to enlightenment or awakening, or that Kundalini awakening is dangerous. This understanding of Kundalini often includes misconceptions.

In reality, Kundalini is an energetic awakening, and some people are born with a certain amount of energy. The quality of this energy varies from person to person, and this quality is largely determined by the soul's journey and where the soul came from.

Therefore, in Japan, there are people who are born with a certain level of awakening, and many souls have come from the world known as the Japanese spiritual realm. For this reason, it may not be necessary to worry too much about Kundalini in Japan.

Of course, there are people who experience Kundalini and achieve wonderful results, and there are also people for whom it is irrelevant.

I have observed that the myth of Kundalini is strong among people who practice yoga, and some people worry because they have not yet experienced Kundalini. However, I do not think there is any need to worry about that. After all, why would someone who is already somewhat awakened be so concerned with Kundalini? It feels like a slightly amusing comedy.

For those who have come from the world of angels or gods, their aura is concentrated in the upper regions, so for them, learning about the Earthly, lower aura, lower chakras, such as the Manipura, Swadhisthana, and Muladhara, can be a learning experience.

On the other hand, for souls who have grown up on Earth, the learning process starts from the lower regions and gradually moves towards the upper regions.

In the past, there were more souls who grew up on Earth, but that is not necessarily the case in Japan today, so it may be better not to apply the old patterns too rigidly.

The proportion of souls who have come from the world of angels is not that high, but there are a considerable number of souls who have come from the so-called Japanese spiritual realm, and many people who seem like "typical Japanese" are often from the so-called Japanese spiritual realm. In the Japanese spiritual realm, the chakras that are most active are around the Manipura chakra.

It may be confusing and difficult to understand, but there are people who start with the upper chakras and study the lower chakras, and there are people who start with the lower chakras and study the upper chakras.

For angels and gods, it is the former, and for souls who have grown up on Earth, it is the latter. That is the basic principle.

However, in reality, it is more nuanced. While it is generally true for angels, there are various types of gods, and some gods have chakras that are activated in specific areas, while others have chakras that are activated throughout the body. In the case of the so-called Japanese spiritual realm, the lower chakras are activated, starting with the Muladhara chakra, and the activity reaches the Manipura chakra. In this case, Kundalini may or may not be activated.

Furthermore, the Kundalini experience can occur at different chakras, such as the Muladhara, Manipura, Anahata, or Ajna chakras. Even when it is called "Kundalini," the situation can be different. For one person, the Kundalini experience may be something that happens naturally from birth, while for another person, it may be an experience that occurs at the Ajna or Anahata chakra.

Therefore, there is no need to place too much importance on the Kundalini experience. Instead, it may be more beneficial to observe the current state of a person's energy.