|
|
|
Author |
Topic |
|
solo
USA
167 Posts |
Posted - Jul 24 2009 : 10:21:07 AM
|
A seasoned yogi hopefully eventaully reaches a state of samadhi in meditation. A shaman will enter an altered state or a trance state.
Are these the same thing? Similar? |
|
CarsonZi
Canada
3189 Posts |
Posted - Jul 24 2009 : 10:40:27 AM
|
Hey solo.....
Good question.....when I read this I had an instinctual response....but in writing it down I don't know if I still agree with it....going to inquire about this for a bit....thanks for the awesome question.
Love, Carson |
|
|
Konchok Ösel Dorje
USA
545 Posts |
Posted - Jul 24 2009 : 12:57:10 PM
|
I bow the the Ultimate Guru. There are many different samadhis. All the things you describe are similar at different levels. The samadhi is a level higher than another to the extent the yogi or shaman has no attachment to self and to external appearances. To the degree the yogi holds an object or subtle feeling to be real, the samadhi is lower than the samadhi where projections and self are not held to have substance. |
|
|
Kirtanman
USA
1651 Posts |
Posted - Jul 24 2009 : 2:04:23 PM
|
Hi Solo,
I would say they can be similar ... but without more info, that may be as "close" as anyone can get to giving an answer.
Trance is not necessarily samadhi; samadhi is the experiencing of all experiencing *as* consciousness, and of all objects as being *equally* consciousness.
In Savikalpa Samadhi, objects (self-thoughts, thoughts-of-experiencing, this-object-thoughts) are part of the experiencing.
In Nirvikalpa Samadhi, no objects exist .... only primal awareness itself. Initially, in meditation, this usually involves the experience of "ultra-trance" - there is the pure field of awareness only, subjectively -- and the "person" experiencing it usually appears to be as *gone* (in a trance-like condition) as a person can be .... which may or may not be the case for the experiencer ... but it will probably *appear* that way to any "other" observers (who will see a still, non-responsive body, possibly wearing a samadhi-specific This-Eating* grin.)
*Hey ... I like that!
In Sahaja Samadhi ... this indeterminate awareness-being is where life is living *from* .... and there is no trance; awareness of self as awareness, including all that is appearing in awareness now, has integrated; there is no trance --- yet Sahaja Samadhi is the "truest", most-real samadhi of all (<- this is why we call it *real*ization. )
Savikalpa and Nirvikalpa are (apparently) stations along the way ... because the thought-me we thought we were, literally can't imagine life without some sort of form (even if it's just "my thoughts", "my emotions", "my sensations", "my opinions", "my memories" .... "me") ... and so the experiencing of unity seems special/unique at first//for a while.
It's beautiful ... but it's not special; nothing is less special, literally: samadhi, ultimately, is purely experiencing this moment as it is ... not as we think it to be.
And from awareness of self as awareness ... it is realized that "I am who I think I am" is actually the deepest trance-state of all ... infinite awareness has conditionally identified with the indications of language and concept (i.e. *think* about it ... and/or notice: everything you "know" yourself to be {prior to living la vida samadhi } .... is based on a *memory* - whether genetic-biological, cultural, familial, social, emotional, conceptual, etc.)
We "are who we think we are" -- who we conceive that we remember ourselves to be (we think).
ALL of this has one source only:
Language - and the meanings we were conditioned to believe that language describes, specifically: who we are, and what is important.
This is the veil of Maya; illusion; this is true trance.
Samadhi is the gateway to liberation *from* trance .... that's why one of the terms for the process and its completion is Awakening.
And so, when a given shaman is in a trance-state ... is he or she having some object-containing visions? Or experiencing absorption with objects-in-vision? Or experiencing freedom-from-objects? Or knowing-self-as-awareness-and/as-objects? Or just having one heck of a rollickin' high, per some altered-state inducing botanical?
Who knows?
And so ... that's why I say that trance-states *can* be samadhi under another name ... or "like samadhi" ... but one can't really say for sure, without knowing more about the details/purpose, etc.
I do know that all accurate spiritual maps (paths, religions, etc.) have equivalents to samadhi/realization under various names; mystical-yogic Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhist, Pagans, Taoists, Yogis, "Spiritual But Not Religious" practitioners, etc. ... and any number of other names/paths ... all have their equivalents of yogic samadhi states, under different names (saints and sages, mystics and yogis, from every path, all over the world, all throughout history, have been writing, talking, singing and teaching about it .... calling it God, Realization, Enlightenment, Salvation, Nirvana, Valhalla, and a whole host of other things.)
The maps work great, until a limited me-thought, who has never experienced a map-reading course tries to explain something they have no experiencing of, and no ability to understand or experience, based on the inherent restriction of that me-thought.
The whole game is relaxing *past* that restriction.
And that, my friends, is what yoga in general, and AYP in particular, is for.
And, once again, by the way:
AYP works.
All the way home.
Intending The Knowing of the Truth Making Us Free -- as Self -- for All,
Kirtanman |
Edited by - Kirtanman on Jul 24 2009 2:09:28 PM |
|
|
gumpi
United Kingdom
546 Posts |
Posted - Jul 25 2009 : 09:03:35 AM
|
Look for some work by Joy Manne. She has written about similarities between buddhism and shamanism and her work is mainly about breathwork.
"trance" is somewhat of a misleading word. I think it can mean many different things, including some samadhis. Shamans go on vision quests which are basically out of body experiences. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
AYP Public Forum |
© Contributing Authors (opinions and advice belong to the respective authors) |
|
|
|
|