Previously, it felt like the aura was "rising" towards Sahasrara.

Until recently, the aura was full up to the area around Ajna, but there was a feeling that the aura didn't reach the Sahasrara region. It was like a balloon that wasn't fully inflated, or like watering a garden where the water didn't reach the far end, or like a shallow area where the water wasn't completely filled. I often didn't have a sense of Sahasrara. And when I meditated for 1 or 2 hours, the aura would suddenly flow into Sahasrara like a dam breaking, and at the moment the aura filled Sahasrara, I would reach a state of stillness.

Then, over time, it would return to its previous state, where the aura was full up to the area around Ajna, and then I would meditate again to fill the aura in Sahasrara.

However, recently, the aura has been filling Sahasrara quite often. Although it varies from day to day.

The barrier between Ajna and Sahasrara has disappeared. This happened quite suddenly, and I noticed it when I woke up in the morning. It might just be a continuation of the meditative state from the previous night, but even so, before, if I slept for one night, the aura would often dissipate from Sahasrara, but now, even after sleeping for one night, the aura doesn't dissipate from Sahasrara.

When I start meditating in this state, I notice that there is a mixture of the feeling of fullness in Sahasrara that leads to a state of stillness, and the sensations of the five senses. This means that previously, when the aura filled Sahasrara, the five senses would fade away, leading to a state of stillness.

Now, there is a feeling of coexistence between the deep sense that creates the state of stillness and the sensations of the five senses.

I interpret this as a state of "middle ground," where both the good and the bad are accepted.

Previously, the boundary of the aura was between Ajna and Sahasrara, and when the aura dissipated from Ajna, it didn't stay in Sahasrara, but gradually dissipated upwards or around.

Now, I still feel that the aura is faintly connected to the area around Sahasrara, but I don't feel that the aura is "dissipating."

Previously, when the aura dissipated from Ajna, it would go beyond Sahasrara and radiate outwards. Now, I feel that the aura is staying near the top of Sahasrara.

At the same time, it is faintly connected to the surroundings.

It seems that the relatively coarse energy that is close to the physical body, which is called aura, is becoming less likely to escape from Sahasrara, and yet, it is connected to the outside world in subtle ways.

This is similar to the feeling of Muladhara, where the aura gathers and doesn't seem to dissipate, but is faintly connected to the surroundings.

Recently, this has been happening in Sahasrara as well.

Until now, Sahasrara hasn't been functioning properly, and it seems that it has been blocked before reaching Sahasrara, and that the feeling of retaining the aura in Sahasrara hasn't been established.

Because of this, I feel like I'm in a "middle" state of consciousness, where the five senses and the state of stillness are combined. Although it may seem small, it seems like a surprisingly large change.

From an outside perspective, both states might seem very similar.

However, in my own experience, these are different states. When I am in a state of tamas, feeling dull and sluggish, all my thoughts and senses become muted and hazy.

On the other hand, in the "middle" state, my vision is not fully active, so my field of vision seems blurry.

This is because the state where I feel my body's movements in slow motion is a state where my vision is dominant. However, in this case, it was not that all the senses were dominant, but specifically my sense of sight.

In yoga, the eyes are said to be governed by the manipura (solar plexus) chakra, which is associated with love and compassion. When the manipura is activated, the sense of sight becomes more active, and things may appear in slow motion.

However, there are other sensations as well. For example, the muladhara is associated with the sense of smell, the swadhisthana with the sense of taste, the anahata with the sense of touch, and the vishuddha with the sense of hearing. So, the fact that my sense of sight is particularly active suggests that the manipura is active.

The mind governs all the senses, but when the sense of sight becomes dominant, the other senses become less prominent. Therefore, a state where only the sense of sight is active is not necessarily the best state. It is something that can be used intentionally; if there is a conscious intention to activate the sense of sight, then the sense of sight will be activated.

As my state of consciousness approaches samadhi, my senses gradually become more active, starting with whichever sense is dominant. In my case, in the past, it was often the sense of taste or smell, but recently, it seems that the sense of sight has become more dominant.

When these senses are balanced, it is said to be the "middle" state. This is not just a balance of the senses, but also the underlying function of samadhi, which is sometimes referred to as "rikpa."

This state has emerged as a result of meditation in the past, but the underlying function of samadhi, which extends to everyday life and continues in that state, is still relatively weak.

Because it is weak, I have sometimes consciously maintained the state of samadhi by actively using my sense of sight, which activates the underlying rikpa. However, as this "effort" becomes unnecessary, the senses gradually become less distinct. Specifically, I become able to maintain samadhi without having to actively use my sense of sight to create a slow-motion effect.

Then, I gradually become able to maintain samadhi even when I am living a normal life without actively using my senses. This is sometimes referred to metaphorically as the "middle" state.

In this state, my vision may be blurry because I am not actively using it. However, this is not the same as the dull sensation of tamas; it is simply because I am not using my sense of sight very much.

On the other hand, each of my senses is functioning to some extent. In everyday life, this means that I am constantly aware of internal sensations, as well as sensations from my skin.

In this state, everyday meditation becomes easier, and a relatively normal life can become meditation itself.

This "everyday meditation" is something that is often talked about, but it is not something that is consciously done. Rather, it is a process where meditation gradually spreads to everyday life, and eventually, it becomes a natural part of life. While consciousness is necessary for the meditative state, it is not something that is consciously attempted. Instead, as meditation deepens, everyday life naturally transforms into meditation itself. Although it may sound similar when described in words, there is a significant difference between consciously trying to meditate and having everyday life naturally transform into meditation.

Originally, when Kundalini first started moving, my body felt warm.

Initially, my whole body felt warm, and then, as Manipura became dominant, especially the lower body felt warm. In terms of warmth, the first Kundalini experience was the warmest, and even when Manipura was dominant, it was warm, but not as much as the first time.

Next, when Anahata became dominant, my chest felt warm, but it wasn't as warm as the first time or when Manipura was dominant. When Ajna became dominant, the feeling of warmth was similar.

Then, when the public consciousness of creation, destruction, and preservation appeared in the depths of my chest, it was warm to some extent, but the feeling of presence was stronger than the feeling of heat. It felt like a combination of the heat of heat and the heat of presence.

And recently, when the aura has been filling up to Sahasrara and I feel like the aura is spreading thinly from Sahasrara to the surroundings, the feeling of heat in my body suddenly decreased.

The feeling of warmth and pressure throughout my body decreased, and I even started to feel a chill that I hadn't felt in a while.

For a while, since Kundalini started moving, my body has basically been warm and resistant to cold, but suddenly I started to feel cold.

At first glance, this might give the impression that Kundalini has disappeared and the state has returned, but that's not the case. I think that the feeling of heat itself was actually an experience that occurs at a relatively low level.

I interpret this as finally passing that stage.

I have been feeling heat for a long time, and it is a pleasant feeling, but compared to the recent normal state of Sahasrara, its appeal has faded. In the past, that state was a good state full of energy, but I think that the current state might be "the center."

When I read the books by Honzan Hyōsensei, a yoga practitioner, it says that the power of Kundalini itself does not have heat, but it descends into the astral and energy dimensions and appears as heat, but that is because the vessel has not yet been purified and is manifesting as heat, so if you are saying that it is hot, you are still in the early stages. I think that might be the case.

That being said, of course, there is a feeling of heat as body temperature, and if it were truly cold, it would mean that I have died, so this is a subjective feeling.

In spirituality, the concept of "oneness" is often mentioned, but there are cases where it refers to the sameness of auras and cases where it refers to the sameness of the fundamental essence, which are quite different, but often confused.

The sameness of auras means "becoming the same," and it refers to the unification of everything, including the way of thinking, habits, and atmosphere.

On the other hand, when talking about the sameness of the fundamental essence, it means that even if the appearance, way of thinking, habits, and even the aura are different, the fundamental essence is the same, and this is also called "oneness."

Therefore, these two concepts are inherently incompatible.

However, in spirituality, these two concepts are often discussed in parallel, with the idea that there is a fundamental oneness beyond the qualitative sameness of auras.

This seems to be based on a system where a teacher (guru) and disciples exist, where it is easier for someone to reach the fundamental essence if they first become qualitatively the same as the teacher or a religious organization. In that case, the individual's growth depends on the organization, and the progress is such that everyone in the organization grows together.

However, these two concepts are inherently different.

The sameness between a teacher and a disciple, or the sameness between disciples who are learning from each other, is a common occurrence, and it is not necessarily something to be denied. It is a relationship of mutual dependence, and the atmosphere and aura in that relationship tend to become very similar. There is a path to seek the true oneness with the fundamental essence, but the concept of oneness based on the sameness of auras and the concept of oneness with the fundamental essence are essentially different.

Especially, even if the auras are not the same, everything in this world has the same fundamental essence, and oneness has already been achieved. Therefore, the oneness based on the sameness of auras is essentially unnecessary for that fundamental oneness. However, in spirituality, these are often described as if they are steps. This is simply a matter of having a group of people who are growing together, and that is a matter of aura-based oneness, which is different from the concept of oneness with the fundamental essence.

This is not to deny the sameness of auras, as such groups and close-knit communities are normal and exist. What I want to say is that, fundamentally, these are different things.

When looking at yoga scriptures, the Sahasrara is often depicted as a semi-circular shape, like a knitted hat or net, on the top of the head.

This description feels correct in terms of sensation, but at the same time, the Sahasrara is also often described as a single point chakra at the crown of the head.

This difference in perspective varies depending on the lineage, and some lineages do not recognize the Sahasrara as a chakra, while others do. Currently, it seems that more lineages consider it a chakra.

In yoga, the route to the Sahasrara is generally described as extending directly from the spine. Alternatively, in some yoga systems, the route goes from Ajna to Sahasrara, passing through the back of the head before ascending again. In this case, the route is from Vishuddha to Ajna, then to the back of the head, and then to the Sahasrara.

Some spiritual lineages also describe the route as going from Ajna, through the back of the head, to the Sahasrara.

These descriptions exist, and while they seem to be related, they are also somewhat confusing and don't quite resonate.

However, it seems that these can be interpreted as follows:

First, there is a membrane-like structure surrounding the Sahasrara. It exists slightly inside, along the skull, and forms a shape like a knitted hat or net.

This structure serves as an antenna, but also functions as a guard to prevent unwanted entities from entering, especially from the top of the head.

Some lineages advocate for breaking or creating a hole in this "hat" to connect with the heavens, but I personally don't think that's a good idea.

When accessing the Sahasrara from Ajna, it is through this "hat."

When passing through the "hat," it feels like a guard, so it's accessed by bypassing it from somewhere. This is why the back of the head is often easier.

Structurally, it is a semi-circular shape, so it can be bypassed from anywhere. For example, it can go through the area around the left ear to reach the Sahasrara, or from the right ear, or from slightly in front of the eyebrows to reach the crown. It can be accessed from anywhere.

When considering this, things become relatively simple. The difference lies in whether you consider the Sahasrara as the "hat" itself, or as a chakra above the "hat," or whether you call the point above the "hat" the Sahasrara. Regardless, the energy can flow through almost anywhere to access it.

Energy flows through the easiest path, so sometimes energy flows from a single point, and sometimes it flows relatively evenly, and sometimes there is a bias. However, in either case, the energy connects with the upper realm by passing around the "hat."

In Sanskrit, the scriptures say that all of space in this world is filled with "jnana" (knowledge). Even empty space and the vastness of the universe are filled with "jnana," which is not bound by time and space.

This is a statement from the scriptures, and in other words, it is the totality of Brahman, and the individual Atman also possesses that quality.

Until recently, I understood this "jnana" as a statement from the scriptures. However, recently, as this world seems like a movie, I gradually began to feel that space extends far beyond what I can see. Although I don't know specifically what exists far away, I have a feeling that something continues, and that space is distorted.

The perspectives in my field of vision are distorted, and it seems that these distortions are not constant.

The perception that space extends far beyond what I can see is not related to whether I can actually see far away. Even in ordinary, familiar scenery, I feel that there is something that extends far beyond, beyond the visible, into the depths of space.

When I have this feeling, I intuitively understand that everything in this world is filled with something.

I can only describe what it is as "that," but if I try to relate that feeling to the words in the scriptures, I feel that it fits best to call it "jnana."

Something that fills all of space creates a feeling that generates something like knowledge within my perception. If something exists, and what exists is different, and that difference is perceived, then perhaps it can be called "knowledge (jnana)."

I have known from the scriptures that all of space is filled with something, but the actual perception that I experience when these subtle feelings develop is completely different from the words in the scriptures.

Understanding the words in the scriptures is just an intellectual understanding. Some schools of thought deny extrasensory experiences and insist that the truth should be sought through a thorough intellectual understanding. However, I personally do not think so. I think that if one cannot actually feel it through subtle sensations, even if it's not a full-blown extrasensory experience, the meaning of studying is reduced by half. Although studying itself is not useless, I would like to know it directly.

In my case, I meditate, first achieving a state of visual insight, which improves my dynamic vision. Then, I begin to feel that space is distorted, and then I experience the realization that "space is filled with knowledge."

Now, I think that the words in the scriptures were not lies.

For quite some time, I've occasionally felt this way, but recently, especially since I've felt that everything in this world is filled with knowledge, I've become able to clearly hear the thoughts that other people have about someone.

However, I don't hear everything, because if I did, it would be too noisy. Fortunately, it's only sometimes that I hear things clearly.

Generally, it's said that people constantly repeat thoughts and have tens of thousands of thoughts every day, but I don't hear all of those. Instead, it feels like what someone is thinking about a person who is nearby (not about that person) is being said to me (in my mind).

In reality, there may not be that many clear, intentional thoughts, and there are often times when I'm simply listening to someone else's thoughts. It seems that among the clear, intentional thoughts that people have, the thoughts about others are the ones that I can hear. However, it's not everything, and there seem to be conditions. I suspect that it's the voices of people with similar vibrations that I can hear, but further verification is needed.

These "calls" of thought feel like they are being spoken to me (in my mind), but at first, I was often in a situation where I wondered, "Could this possibly be related to me?"

For example, I once heard a voice saying, "It's been a while?" and I initially thought, "Is there someone I haven't seen in a while? Who could it be?" Then, I realized that two other people were old acquaintances who were meeting up for the first time in a long time.

I've had similar experiences occasionally. Every time, I wonder, "Could this possibly be related to me?" but it turns out to be about other people, but it feels like it's being said to me (in my mind), so I initially think, "Could this be something related to me? What is it?"

However, it's just the thoughts of one person about another, so it's not really related to me.

I've had similar experiences occasionally in the past, but recently, the frequency has increased. Also, the voices have become much clearer.

Everyone's inner thoughts are surprisingly loud. They reach all the way to me.

This is completely different from the method of "fusing auras to read other people's thoughts." This is simply about reading thoughts. They are different things.

If I intentionally think, "I don't want to hear it," I don't hear it, and if I open my senses, it's easier to hear. So, I haven't had any problems with hearing too much. Besides, I'm not that interested in other people's inner conversations; it's just that I happen to hear them.

I have a feeling that many women are born with telepathic abilities. What do you think?

The fact that this telepathic ability emerged when I started to notice that the space is filled suggests that the space is always connected. So far, I've only been receiving, and I haven't tried transmitting much. I haven't had many opportunities to do so.

I meditated, and I realized that everything in this world is filled with knowledge, and that the space appeared distorted, and at the same time, I understood that it was made of bubbles.

When there are bubbles in the space, the area around the bubbles is slightly black, the inside of the bubbles is white, and the space between the bubbles is black. Although it is called black, it is closer to gray than pitch black, but it is closer to black than the gray between white and black, so it is black in color. Some people might say it is gray, but to me, it looked more like black.

In that way, I understood that the space was filled with bubbles, but not the entire field of vision, only a part of it. I sensed that other parts were probably the same.

Originally, the distorted appearance of the space was also a part of my field of vision, and the feeling that everything in this world is filled with knowledge was also a part of my field of vision. Both appeared in the slightly upper part of my field of vision, initially slightly to the upper right, but basically in front and slightly to the right, where the space appeared distorted. Later, I felt that more than half of my field of vision was filled with knowledge, and then, I realized that the space in the slightly left side of my field of vision was filled with bubbles. It appeared vaguely and faintly.

It was not a clear visual image like a substance, but I felt that the space was filled with something like bubbles.

I thought, "I've heard this somewhere before..." and then I remembered that it might be similar to Professor Yukawa's elementary particle theory, which won the Nobel Prize, although I'm not familiar with it. What do you think?

This morning, during meditation, I focused on my forehead, and an aura began to gather around the ajna chakra. After a while, it seemed to dissipate into the sahasrara chakra, and simultaneously, the tension in my body eased slightly. Then, the aura would gather again in the ajna chakra, dissipate slightly into the sahasrara, and the tension in my body would ease again, and this cycle repeated several times.

While this was happening, the Gayatri mantra suddenly came to mind, and I tried chanting it mentally, which I hadn't done in a while. I felt an effect as a kind of nucleus formed in the ajna chakra, deep within my forehead.

This wasn't the end of it. I continued chanting it several times, and then, from the ajna chakra, with the direction facing forward as the axis, my body rotated several times in my imagination while remaining in a seated position.

The left rotation was like this: starting from a normal seated position, the lower body moved to the right while the head remained facing forward, then continued rotating so that the lower body moved upwards while still facing forward, and then continued rotating so that the lower body moved to the left, and then returned to the lower position. I think it rotated about 3 times.

Of course, this was only in my imagination, and my physical body did not rotate.

Previously, I had experienced something similar when kundalini energy rose, causing my body to rotate around the spine, or when the balance shifted from manipura to anahata, causing my body to rotate around the spine. In both cases, the spine was the axis of rotation.

This time, the body rotated around an axis extending from the ajna chakra towards the front, so the axis was different.

In the previous experiences, I felt a sense of "twisting" being released, and energy flowing, but this time, while I felt some energy flow, it wasn't as dramatic as before.

The rotation felt natural for the first two rotations, but it slowed down around the third rotation, so it may not have been a complete rotation. I'm not sure about that.

However, I experienced an interesting effect this time by chanting the Gayatri mantra, which I hadn't done in a while.

In spiritual practices and fortune-telling, various methods for fulfilling desires are discussed.
While there are many different techniques, the basic principle involves reading one's luck and then strengthening and acting upon it.

This means there are two patterns:
- Strengthening a template in the astral realm of thoughts to manifest it into reality.
- Mimicking a reality that already exists in a parallel world.

Parallel worlds are often misunderstood, but here, the idea is that parallel worlds are essentially based on the past. While some parallel worlds, from our current perspective, may seem like the future, they may have been revisited and redone across time, so they appear to be the future. However, parallel worlds have a sequence, so they are essentially like the past. This is an application of that concept: there are parallel worlds that are chronologically in the past, but appear to be the future when viewed in a conventional timeline, and by replicating the reality that exists in that timeline, we can reproduce it in this timeline.

Sometimes, we trace a past timeline to create a similar future in this timeline, while other times, there is only an astral template, and the reality is manifested for the first time in this timeline.

In the first case, when it comes to fulfilling desires in spirituality, the power of thought is used to strengthen that template, it is concretely visualized and first materialized in the mind, and then actual action is necessary to make it a reality.
On the other hand, if it has already been realized in a parallel world, it is like having experienced it, so it should not be difficult to replicate it.
Furthermore, based on the experience and reflections from when it was realized in a parallel world, if one thinks, "That was a failure. I want to make it better," a new future can be created.

In spirituality and fortune-telling, these concepts are often mixed up, and the methods for fulfilling desires can either create a future that does not yet exist or predict the future, and either case is possible.
However, in either case, action is necessary.

However, the purpose of most spiritual practices and methods for fulfilling desires is often to fulfill desires, which ultimately means satisfying desires in the current world, so it is not a big deal.
From a broader perspective, whether or not those desires are fulfilled, life goes on, and there is little difference.
Fortune-telling and spirituality for fulfilling desires are, in a sense, like a hobby.

In reality, there is another path in spirituality: "overcoming desires." In this case, fulfilling desires becomes unnecessary. It is a path to escape the loop of desires that generate further desires.
When it comes to escaping the rat race, the story of "Rich Dad Poor Dad" is famous, and it may seem like a story about making money, but here, it has nothing to do with money; it is about becoming free from the loop of constantly pursuing desires. While money is necessary for living, it is unrelated to what is being discussed here.
There is no need to deny spiritual practices for fulfilling desires, as they are a technique for living in reality and are like a hobby. It is also an option to live a life using those skills, escaping the loop of desires, and living freely.
This world is like an amusement park, so it is also a hobby to be interested in and try the loop of "What is poverty?" or "Why are everyone so diligently working and suffering for such trivial desires?"
On the other hand, it is also a way of life to not be interested and not even notice the existence of the loop of desires.
Even when it is called spirituality, there are various levels of difference.

It can also be said that energy is overflowing, or that the aura is overflowing, or that light is overflowing. It's the same thing. It can also be called the voice of the heart, or the voice of the higher self, or, for some people, it may sound like the voice of God. But it's a faint, tiny voice that comes from far away, but it's heard clearly.

There are various ways to put it, such as "listening to the voice of the heart," "listening to the voice of the higher self," or "listening to the voice of God." However, this voice doesn't feel like someone is talking to you. It comes from a relatively close distance, either from inside or slightly above and to the side of the body. Although it feels close in distance, the way it sounds is like hearing an "echo" in the mountains. The sound is distant and quiet, but the voice itself is clear and sudden.

There are also stories about hearing the voice of a guardian spirit, but in that case, the voice is much clearer and more distinct. When a guardian spirit or a spirit of a friend or acquaintance speaks, it is heard very clearly. In fact, most people can hear it normally without any special training, but it is mixed with their own thoughts and distractions, so they are not aware of it, or they mistake it for their own thoughts. In reality, many ideas are given by a guardian spirit or a spirit of a friend or acquaintance, so there is no need to insist that it is your own idea if you know the truth. However, in modern society, people are not aware of this, and they talk about protecting their ideas with copyrights and patents. In reality, however, there are many ideas in the spiritual world. Moreover, spirits can transcend time and space if they evolve even a little, so they can easily bring ideas from the future and act like idea generators. Is that interesting? I think it's boring.

In contrast to the clear voice that comes from a guardian spirit or a spirit of a friend or acquaintance, the voice that sounds like an "echo" is said to be the "voice of God" or the "voice of the higher self" in some schools of thought, or in spirituality. Some schools may call it the "voice of heaven."

Even if you haven't done much training, you can actually hear this voice from the beginning. However, when the Sahasrara chakra is not filled with light, it is like having clouds in the sky, making it difficult to distinguish it. When an idea suddenly comes to mind, it is often the "clear" voice of a guardian spirit or a spirit of a friend or acquaintance. This clear inspiration can also be called "intuition." However, there is a separate "echo-like" voice that comes from far away, in addition to the clear intuition that a guardian spirit or a friend gives you.

This "echo-like" voice is also something that you can hear from the beginning, but most people have it buried in their distractions, so they can't pick it up very well. It is common for people to say later, "I had a feeling like that," but it is important to be able to recognize that "echo-like" voice immediately at that moment, rather than realizing it later.

It is when you become sensitive to the subtle voice in the depths of your being, which is often referred to as the "voice of the heart" or, in some cases, the "higher self," especially in English-speaking countries, and you can quickly recognize it, react to it, and act accordingly that you have reached a stage where the Sahasrara chakra is filled with energy.

Even before that, you can hear it to some extent, and it becomes easier to hear as you progress. However, whether or not the Sahasrara chakra is filled with energy is a kind of boundary that determines whether you can clearly recognize that voice and give feedback to it, and change your behavior accordingly.

Even if you can hear the voice, it is a different stage when you can react to it properly.

This is often misunderstood as channeling, but in channeling, there are cases where it is like this, especially in higher-level channeling. However, in many cases, you will be talking to a guardian spirit, a spirit of a friend or acquaintance, or an alien. In that case, the voice is much easier to hear, and it's not like an "echo," but like someone talking on a speaker. Especially aliens seem to use some kind of technical device for telepathy, and they amplify it and convey it in easy-to-understand words. Therefore, when you channel with aliens, you don't need any training, so it's better not to misunderstand. Aliens channel with humans for various reasons, such as curiosity, investigation, or enlightenment, as if an ordinary Japanese person were to go to an undeveloped jungle in the Amazon and try to contact the indigenous people. Therefore, there is no need for humans to feel particularly special. Well, it might be interesting sometimes, but you shouldn't think that you are "chosen" just because you have such an experience. It is often the case that they just happened to notice you and are talking to you out of curiosity. People who have a mission know it from the moment they are born, so ordinary people should not misunderstand that they are "chosen" or have a mission.

Unlike such clear telepathic channeling, there is a story about listening to the voice of one's own inner heart, like an "echo."

Currently, I am in a transitional period where the energy in my Sahasrara chakra is filling and emptying repeatedly. However, this transitional period is not a stagnation, but simply a stage where I am. It is interesting that such a transitional period has a clearly distinguishable state before and after. This time, the story is interesting because it identifies the difference in how much the voice of the heart differs and sounds clouded, depending on whether the energy in the Sahasrara chakra is full or not.

It becomes clear through consistent meditation that the mind and samadhi are distinct, although it's important to understand this beforehand.

The key difference is that the mind involves concentration, while samadhi does not.

Some meditation schools deny the importance of concentration, but this often stems from a misunderstanding of samadhi. They may be focusing on a specific aspect of samadhi, but ultimately, they seem to equate the mind and samadhi, which is incorrect.

The mind's function is to focus and direct attention towards a goal. This is essentially concentration.

Even schools that emphasize the importance of concentration often describe it as "observing without concentrating," which can be confusing. It seems that either they don't fully understand the difference between the mind and samadhi, or they are simplifying the explanation for teaching purposes. Regardless, beginners often don't receive a clear explanation of this distinction.

Various techniques exist, such as observing the breath or bodily sensations, but the difference between the mind and samadhi is rarely explained. Some definitions even equate samadhi with mere concentration, which can be misleading, especially when taken literally from scriptures.

Some schools use the term "vipassana" instead of "samadhi," but regardless of the terminology, there's a process involved in reaching that state. It's beneficial to understand the difference between the mind and samadhi (or vipassana) beforehand.

Otherwise, misunderstandings about meditation can arise.

For example, if someone is told that "samadhi involves no concentration," they might mistakenly believe that they shouldn't concentrate during meditation. This can be incredibly confusing. If a teacher provides such an explanation without fully understanding the concept, it indicates a lack of expertise. Conversely, if they do understand but present it poorly, it's still a disservice to the students. Such explanations should be approached with caution.

In reality, as mentioned earlier, the mind involves concentration, while samadhi does not. Therefore, during meditation, the mind should be focused on something, while simultaneously, the state of samadhi, characterized by non-concentrative observation, can emerge.

Since the mind and samadhi are distinct, the state of samadhi can persist regardless of whether the mind is focused or not. However, those who have meditated consistently have strengthened their minds, making it less likely for them to wander. Therefore, while it's possible to "not concentrate" with a sufficiently trained mind, those who haven't developed that level of mental strength need to maintain a firm focus.

Some schools insist on "observation only," even for those who are not adequately prepared. This can lead to a lack of focus and mental wandering, making individuals susceptible to negative thoughts and reactive impulses.

While individual explanations may seem correct, some schools have a flawed overall understanding. Even if the logic appears sound, the understanding of many within those groups may be incorrect.

It's almost comical how widespread these misunderstandings are, to the point where it can be difficult to discern what is correct.

Unfortunately, these misunderstandings can have real-world consequences. People who meditate within these schools, particularly those who are told to "not concentrate," often experience mental confusion and distress.

The fundamental principle of meditation is concentration, which means maintaining focus. The mind, in its untrained state, is often described as being like a monkey, flitting from one thought to another. Therefore, it's necessary to train the mind before attempting to achieve samadhi.

In theory, it's possible to cultivate samadhi without training the mind, as the mind and samadhi are distinct. Some schools directly focus on cultivating samadhi. However, someone who achieves samadhi without mental training might be considered like a child who has attained enlightenment. While it's their choice, I believe it's better to train the mind as well, as we are born into this world. Ultimately, it's a matter of personal preference and the freedom of each individual.

If you reach samadhi and lose concentration, it might be because you misunderstand that the mind and samadhi are not separate things but the same thing, leading to a misunderstanding that concentration disappears with the mind. However, the mind is the mind, and samadhi is samadhi. Even if samadhi exists, mental concentration exists, and it is possible for concentration without samadhi to exist simultaneously.

Therefore, while it is not wrong to say "some degree of concentration is necessary" to describe such a state, if you do not properly understand that the mind and samadhi are separate things, you may misunderstand that mental concentration is not necessary.

Some schools of thought particularly dislike concentration meditation. When you ask "Why is concentration meditation bad?" in such schools, you may be instantly angered and shouted at. The fact that they get angry indicates that their meditation is not very advanced, and they are simply suppressing unpleasant emotions. In schools that deny concentration meditation, meditation may be taught incorrectly, and they may be trying to create a "samadhi-like" observational state by suppressing the mind and artificially creating a similar state with the mind. This may be difficult to understand, but if you aim for samadhi without properly understanding that the mind and samadhi are separate things, you will inevitably have to observe with the mind. This is because the state of samadhi is initially not present in oneself, but even if it is not present, if you simply listen to the explanation and try to imitate samadhi, you may end up suppressing the mind and artificially creating a "samadhi-like" observational state with the mind. This is like a pseudo-samadhi, not true samadhi, but simply an imitation. Such a strange state can be achieved through meditation. This may be a comedy that occurs because the understanding that the mind and samadhi are separate things has not permeated.

When talking about the mind and samadhi, the mind is "activity," and samadhi is "state," so some people may feel that I am juxtaposing different things. In this regard, the explanation in the Tibetan style may be clearer, and it may be better to use the terms "mind" and "rikpa."

The mind is the ordinary thinking mind, while rikpa is the essence of the mind. Rikpa is initially covered by a thick cloud and is not active in many people, but it exists in everyone from the beginning, and by advancing the purification of the mind, it will manifest. Rikpa brings about the state of samadhi.

The mind has concentration, while rikpa has only observation, without concentration.

In reality, rikpa also has a certain degree of concentration, and you can direct your awareness, but it is not as clear as the mind, so I think it is okay to explain it in this way.

There are schools of thought that mix the story of the mind and the story of rikpa (or samadhi), but on the other hand, it is important to be aware of the difference and meditate accordingly.

In reality, meditation is not just concentration, but even so, especially in the beginning, simple concentration is sufficient. Therefore, it is not wrong to say that meditation is concentration, and traditionally, it is explained in that way. However, concentration is not all of meditation, and true meditation is achieved by activating rikpa and entering an observational state.

Therefore, while there is a purification aspect to meditation, it is also important to engage in activities for purification in parallel with meditation.

The basic concept of meditation is based on the idea that there are two minds: the ordinary mind and the nature of mind (rigpa). Rigpa is initially hidden from many people, so it is described as something that needs to be uncovered (purified).

However, in reality, there is only one mind, and it has a wide range of layers, like a gradient.

Even so, it is easier to explain by dividing it into the ordinary mind, which thinks, and the subtle mind (rigpa). Also, for many people, the ordinary mind is too strong, so it needs to be suppressed, even temporarily, through trance or meditation concentration, in order for rigpa to emerge.

Therefore, even though it is originally a continuous entity, rigpa does not easily appear without the process of suppressing the ordinary mind.

However, over time, the ordinary mind and rigpa begin to function as a continuous entity without the need to suppress the ordinary mind.

There are stages where suppressing the ordinary mind is necessary, and stages where it is not necessary.

In the West, suppressing the ordinary mind to reveal rigpa is sometimes called a trance, and there are various methods for achieving this. There seem to be methods involving drugs with side effects, but I have not tried them and do not know much about them. Another method is using music. People seeking spirituality in the West often prefer loud music, which may be because, at that stage, a method is needed to suppress the ordinary mind, and by listening to loud music, they are trying to keep the ordinary mind busy and bring out the rigpa hidden beneath it. I do not use such methods, and I simply think it is just noisy music. However, such methods seem to be commonly used in the West. Even so, the fact that it is necessary to suppress the ordinary mind to enter a trance state indicates that the meditation is not very advanced, and I believe that one should not rely on it forever. However, some people who only know that method may rely on trance for the rest of their lives.

If you meditate normally, you will gradually move from the stage of relying on such a trance and become less reliant on it. And that is healthy.

Ultimately, the ordinary mind and rigpa become a continuous entity, and rigpa functions regardless of whether the ordinary mind is working or not. At that point, it becomes unnecessary to enter a trance and suppress the ordinary mind.

A common misconception is that being "compliant" (in the sense of obedience), being docile, or readily accepting everything is spiritual. While there may be some truth to this, the core issue is that whether or not someone exhibits these behaviors is not necessarily related to their spirituality.

This applies to both how we evaluate others and how we determine our own behavior. There are people who mistakenly use "accepting everything" as a criterion for judging someone's spirituality.

Furthermore, these misconceptions can be divided into two categories: those who are simply mistaken, and those who are being manipulated.

There are those who mistakenly believe that being compliant is spiritual, and those who mistakenly judge others' spirituality based on their compliance. There are also those who are being manipulated into believing that compliance is spiritual, and those who are being manipulated by others who claim to be spiritual.

This is a subtle distinction, but it's often said that manipulation and dependence are detrimental to spiritual growth. However, people may not consciously recognize this and may even deny it when pointed out. The underlying issue is that the criterion of "compliance" is ultimately based on dependence and manipulation, even if it's disguised.

Therefore, intentionally manipulating others is obviously wrong. However, to avoid falling into this trap, it's important to stop blindly accepting everything and to avoid judging others as less spiritual simply because they refuse something. The refusal may be a sign of healthy boundaries. Conversely, even if someone appears to be accepting, a truly spiritual person may not be accepting them in the same way. They may be recognizing the differences between themselves and the other person and allowing them to exist as they are, which is not necessarily the same as accepting them. They may be respecting the other person's way of life, while also respecting their own. Therefore, even if someone appears to be readily accepting, they may simply be acknowledging the other person's reality without merging with them.

There's a misconception that spirituality involves giving everything to others, believing that there is no difference between oneself and the other person, and unconditionally offering energy, love, or possessions. However, spirituality is not about that.

It's often mistakenly believed that compliant and obedient people are spiritual and wonderful. However, this is often a trap, and it can lead people to be manipulated by those who are trying to extract energy or results from them. How many people can recognize this trap? Are people who live a compliant and obedient life, dreaming of a future reward of "happiness and wealth," like a poor Cinderella, mistakenly believing that this is spirituality?

However, it's also not about becoming arrogant or making the middle choice, which is another common misconception about spirituality. It's important not to confuse this with the Buddhist concept of the "Middle Way." If one believes that the Middle Way is about choosing the middle ground, they may be trapped in a situation where they are presented with two extreme choices and forced to choose the middle option.

Spirituality is about staying centered and not being swayed by external influences. Therefore, one is not affected by what others think or how they behave, and one does not necessarily reject others. This may appear to others as "acceptance," but it can also be seen as being strong and independent. However, it's not about being inflexible. One can be flexible when necessary, but they are not easily swayed by others. One can consciously change themselves in any way they choose, and they are free to either incorporate others' opinions or simply understand them as different individuals.

However, the term "spiritual" has become associated with a stereotype of being overly submissive, accepting everything from others, and doing whatever they want. This stereotype leads to people judging others as having a "low" level of spirituality if they don't conform to this ideal.

It can be explained as a form of inner strength, but it's not about the strength to fight, but rather the degree to which one is connected to their core. It's not about masculine strength.

Some people call this "love," accepting everything and trusting their own inner self, which is unwavering. If we call that love, then it can be considered as such. True love is inherently unconditional. It's about a deep trust in oneself, regardless of what others think. It's not just about loving someone; it's about the way one operates from their core. If that operates at a level where others perceive it as being full of love, it's not necessarily about unconditionally accepting others, but rather about being connected to one's core and being unwavering. In that sense, it's not entirely wrong to say that one is understanding and accepting others as they are, but that expression can be misleading. While it's true that one is recognizing things as they are and not denying them, it's different from the kind of love where someone will do anything for you.

True love can also be called "self-love." It's about being connected to one's core, which is different from selfish love. When you love yourself, you become able to accept others as they are. In other words, accepting someone as they are means recognizing them as they are, just as you would see their visual appearance. It means recognizing their expressions, voice, atmosphere, and even their scent.

This might feel cold, and it's true that it might lack the warmth of passion. Passion is a fiery love based on emotions, and there is such a love in the world. However, the self-love I'm talking about is more of a self-love that is felt deep within the heart chakra.

At the stage of passion, people often completely accept each other or want to be completely accepted by each other, which is a human emotion, and that's fine. Even with the love of the heart chakra, one can experience such emotions, but when passion is felt in isolation without the love of the heart chakra, it can lead to obsessive or blind love. However, when the love of the heart chakra is included, it's based on self-love, which allows one to love others as they are without being overly obsessive.

When one has the love of the heart chakra, there are many cases where others might think, "They're cold," or "They've lost their love" if they don't understand it. This is where the discernment of the observer becomes important.

The word "sincere" has two meanings: being open to accepting things as they are is the love of the heart chakra, while being submissive is a misunderstood form of sincerity. It seems that this misunderstood form of sincerity has become a criterion for judging whether someone is spiritual. The idea that someone who silently accepts what you say is spiritual is true in the sense of accepting things as they are, but if someone is simply being submissive and following along, that's not the same as being spiritual. However, there's a misunderstanding that if you're not submissive, then you're not spiritual. If you follow this criterion, you might end up forcing others to be submissive or trying to be submissive yourself.

Being sincere in the sense of being natural is important in spirituality. Being open and treating others with kindness is generally respected, just as it is in mainstream society. However, in a distorted spirituality, the meaning of "sincere" is often misunderstood as "submissive," and this is then imposed on others. This is a form of oppression, and it can lead to a situation where someone who appears to be sincere might suddenly lash out due to stress.

Ultimately, since we cannot become something greater than ourselves, the first step is to accept ourselves. However, there are some spiritual beliefs that try to become something different from themselves by suppressing their emotions or mistaking self-love for obedience, believing that if they are obedient to something like a god, things will work out. But such people often have a faint aura and are not well-grounded. To become natural and genuine, it is necessary to first accept everything about oneself. Rather than intentionally trying to change, one naturally returns to their true self when they let go of the thoughts of others that they have been clinging to. In that state, one becomes genuine but also has a strong core, and they become free from being controlled by others, and at the same time, they no longer feel the need to control others.

As a supplement, emotions themselves are important as one step in the process, and there are people who are even before emotions, so in such cases, it is necessary to first acquire emotions. However, the next step after emotions is the love of the heart chakra, Anahata.

When I feel uneasy and have difficulty entering a meditative state, I think there's a possibility that I'm being influenced by something, so I need to remove negative energy or evil spirits.

Alternatively, there's a possibility that an aura cable is connected and energy is being drawn out, so I check all around my body to see if anything is connected.

In my case, perhaps other people may feel the same, but I...右肩I am weak, and I am easily possessed by negative energy or spirits through my right shoulder.

When I feel a sense of unease, I check my right shoulder and, with the intention of using my aura, I try to "pull out" something from my right shoulder towards the right. Suddenly, the tension disappears, and the feeling of unease also vanishes.

This has two main possibilities: one is that a spirit-like entity is attached and absorbing energy. The other is that an aura-like cable is piercing me and absorbing energy.

The aura cable can be connected to anywhere in the body, and sometimes it connects to the lower body, such as the manipura chakra. So, if you suddenly feel unwell in your stomach, someone might be connecting through the manipura chakra.

For aura cables, I create a protective membrane or perform a gesture of cutting the cable. Even if it's persistent, it often disconnects quickly.

Spirits will continue to absorb energy until they are satisfied, or they will not leave unless we pull them out. So, if you feel unwell, immediately check your right shoulder and pull out any spirits.

It is better to do this check regularly, even if you don't feel anything, as it significantly improves your physical condition with just a little awareness.

This world is scary, and there are many people who unknowingly live their lives while having their energy drained and being used as an energy source. Since even something as simple as this can be improved, you should do it right away.

And, such aura stability is also important for meditation.

If you are having your energy drained or your aura is unstable, it takes a very long time to deepen your meditation.

First, it is important to stabilize your own aura, and to do that, it is necessary to prepare by removing spirits or cutting aura cables.

In short, you can also say that it is "removing negative energy," but the actions are the same.

Also, some people might say the same thing as "opening yourself." What do you think?

You don't need to talk about complex things like mindfulness, samadhi, or vipassana; simply meditating can make everyday life easier. I think that's a benefit of meditation in itself.

Heavy, sinking feelings, unpleasant emotions, and repeatedly surfacing hatred and unpleasant feelings gradually disappear through meditation, and eventually, everyday life becomes lively and pleasant.

You don't need to talk about complex things like work performance, mental agility, or transcendental consciousness; even that is a benefit of meditation.

At the beginning of meditation, you will face repeated unpleasant feelings, emotions, and doubts, which can be difficult, but eventually, they will disappear and turn into a lively and comfortable feeling.

If sitting meditation itself is difficult, you can focus on your work. That is also a preparation for meditation, and extreme concentration is a form of meditation. Craftsmen become close to a meditative state when they are absorbed in their work, and computer engineers feel deep joy when they concentrate on programming. There is something similar to what athletes call the "zone."

That "zone" state is a form of meditation, but true meditation is more gentle and filled with tranquility and quiet, deep joy. By living in that state, you can live a life with a calm and peaceful mind.

In the morning, you can simply feel the beauty of the sunrise.
Flowers are blooming beautifully.
Clouds are hanging fantastically over the mountains.
The sky is very blue.

That simple thing is a meditative state.

It is a state of feeling the world as it is, which may seem "obvious" when heard, but it is a state that is not "obvious." Hearing something as "obvious" and actually living in that state are different.

Hearing something as "obvious" is a matter of thought, but actually feeling it is a matter of feeling something deeper than thought. Whether or not you are feeling something is what determines whether or not it is meditation, not whether or not you understand it intellectually. Of course, thought is useful as a preparation, but it becomes a matter of whether or not you are feeling it in a meditative state.

So, being able to feel simple, obvious things as obvious is a meditative state, and if you can do that, you can live without being swayed by unpleasant emotions. Of course, this is a matter of degree, but compared to when you are not meditating, you will experience a dramatic decrease in being bothered by others.

Before starting meditation, there are many people who, when told something by others and feeling unpleasant, have that thought lingering in their minds for days, and when they see that person again, they think about getting revenge. This is a world where troublesome relationships with relatives, friends, and classmates are repeated endlessly. Meditation is a means of escaping from that troublesome loop, and many people can live comfortably by meditating and breaking that loop.

There are secondary effects of meditation, such as improved mental agility and improved athletic performance, but I think these subtle changes in everyday life are more important.