Wisdom Notes on Spirituality

The Jhanas and Relativity

The links in the table on the left take you to sub-headings on this page.

a). First he experienced the state of total peace and utter silence.
This was the Advaitic experience of impersonality. The Buddhist term for this is Nirvana. In this state both the impersonal ego and the world exist but they are empty forms; the impersonal ego has no desires, no motivation, no drives.
In my view, the state of Nirvana is the state of the impersonal or transcendent God: it is a state of complete monism. The absence of all desires and motivations seemed to indicate a state of equanimity.

b). Later he experienced the enlightenment typified by yoga practice.
I call it yoga enlightenment or personal enlightenment. In this state the ego of the yogi is supreme. The world dissolves into unreality: it becomes nothing more than a dream.
In my view, in personal enlightenment the ego has achieved conscious union with its higher self. The higher self is the immanent God. This is enlightenment based on individuality and immanence: God is found within the seeker. It is the state that typifies my idea of a monad, a self-sufficient being. Only for a monad is the world a dream world.

c). Eventually Aurobindo experienced what he called the universal consciousness.
Now the world becomes emphasised. Everything has its own value; nothing is more important than anything else. The ego loses its self-importance. God is seen in everything and everyone. In the seeker, in his consciousness, the universal state is the state of Oneness. In the centre of unconscious matter, the universal state is that of pantheism.
In universal enlightenment, the world is emphasised instead of the ego.

Cosmic Abreaction

Aurobindo thought that these three stages were an orderly progression, so that the universal consciousness was the final and supreme reality. These states of enlightenment can be arranged in a progressive sequence from (1) to (3). 

1). Monism or Transcendence.

2). Monadism or Immanence.

3). Universality or Pantheism.

At that time in the early 2000s, I lacked some important ideas, and disagreed with him about the order of stages. The ideas that I needed came when I began jhana riding nearly 20 years later. Then I could re-arrange the order of these experiences into a different progression, adding my terminology. 

4). Personal, or Monadism, or Immanence.

5). Impersonal, or Monism, or Transcendence.

6). Relative, or Universality, or Pantheism.

In my theory of abreaction, there is first a thesis, then an antithesis, and finally the resolution. Or, first an idea is introduced, then the opposing idea is introduced, and finally we have the resolution of the two ideas. In the sequence from (4) to (6), we first have personal enlightenment, then the opposite enlightenment of impersonality, and finally the resolution of both of them into a relative enlightenment. This is cosmic abreaction.

The deduction from these ideas is that abreaction is a law of reality [¹]. Hence sorrow is always present in a human existence, even if enlightened.

Self or No-Self

In various spiritual literatures there is widespread confusion about the event of enlightenment. First, the seeker experiences positive mysticism, which is spiritual enlightenment accompanied by bliss and ecstasy. God is felt as being personal and immanent to the ego. Positive union is between a personal God and the self of the seeker.

If the second form of enlightenment, that of a negative union with an impersonal and transcendent God, is later experienced, it is claimed that the ego has to be abandoned before the event can happen. Then the enlightenment becomes a union between an impersonal God and a no-self of the seeker. Is this actually what happens?  In my opinion, it does not happen this way. The analysis of negative union is deficient.

I understand negative union to be that of an impersonal God with an impersonal ego. God is felt as being impersonal and transcendent to the ego. What the seeker has to abandon is not its self, but all its various identities. When it abandons its identities, it becomes impersonal. The ego has to return to non-duality so that it becomes impersonal before negative union can occur.

The Relativity of Enlightenment

There seems to be more than one type of enlightenment. Why is this?  The world is a relative world, because everything in it is relative. Relativity means that any objective aspect is always tied to a subjective aspect.[²].

One way of understanding relativity is that there must be two axes to reality, as experienced by humans. Reality has one axis of objectivity, and one axis of subjectivity. The deduction from this is that there are two main ways that God communicates with humans, one way from the subjective axis and another way from the objective axis.

The objective axis of reality is will or will power, and the subjective axis is feeling. Will and feeling make up reality. Each axis gives rise to its own form of enlightenment.

The first enlightenment to reach, that of blissful mysticism, occurs in jhana 2, and is called positive mysticism because it is accompanied by love. 

The second enlightenment, that of the abyss or void or emptiness, is called negative mysticism, because hate is present and love is absent.

Positive mysticism occurs even though the ego remains separate from God. In this situation, will is dominant. Jhana-2 enlightenment is often symbolised by the mystical marriage of the seeker to the personal God.

Negative mysticism signifies the merging of the seeker with the impersonal God. An impersonal God can only have impersonal relationships, so therefore the ego becomes impersonal too. Now feeling is dominant. Advaita Vedanta claims I am That when the seeker merges with God. More accurately, the seeker merges with that aspect of God that mirrors his beliefs.

In positive mysticism, the will is dominant, and so this is the objective factor of the enlightenment. Hence enlightenment is experienced as happiness in the immanent God. Whereas, in negative mysticism, feeling is dominant and so this is the subjective factor of enlightenment. Now enlightenment is experienced as the emptiness of the transcendent God.

Finally the third enlightenment is reached, the relative one. Both the subjectivity and objectivity of reality can be felt. Now the seeker finds that in the relative objective experience he is one with everything, whilst in the relative subjective experience everything is empty. The objective experience is sometimes called the One and Many experience. The seeker lives and moves and has his being inside God. The seeker finds that the world, and everything in it (including the ego), is in God. And as it has been put, the knower, the known, and the act of knowing become one.

I also consider that the relationship between monism and monadism can be succinctly put. An objective enlightenment equates to monadism for the ego, whilst a subjective enlightenment equates to monism for it.

A Quick Summary of the Three Enlightenments

Understanding the positive nature of reality equates to positive mysticism. Enlightenment is explored in jhana-2; this provides validation for the seeker. In this scenario, God is objective and immanent. The love factor ensures that enlightenment is to a personal God. The personal God unites with the personal seeker.

Understanding the negative nature of reality with the impersonal God equates to negative mysticism and the experience of the void. Impersonal enlightenment is explored in jhana-3. Now God is subjective and transcendent. Love is absent from jhana-3, and that is why the seeker experiences the impersonal void or the impersonal abyss. The impersonal ego unites with the impersonal God.

In order to experience the personal God, the ego has to be purified. The person finds that God is within himself/herself. Then in order to experience the impersonal God, the purified ego becomes impersonal too. When there is no personal ego, there is no longer a desire for a personal God. Then finally, the person surrenders his will and experiences the relative God. God is neither personal nor impersonal. God is neither immanent nor transcendent. God is. The person finds that the world, and everything in it (including the ego), is in God.

The jhana-4 experience is sometimes described as the One and Many experience. The seeker finds himself one with everything – this is the objective side of relativity. Otherwise, when using meditation as his spiritual discipline, the person finds that everything is empty – this is the subjective side of relativity. Emptiness just means the absence of rigid beliefs, beliefs that define the ego. Rigid beliefs create psychological structure, and in relativity this structure is no longer present, thereby creating the experience of emptiness. Emptiness is nothing more than the complete absence of any structures of any kind. 

Personal enlightenment focuses on the will. 

Impersonal enlightenment focuses on emotion. 

Relative enlightenment focuses on the mind.

God is both Transcendent and Immanent

It might be wondered why I conceptualise God in two forms: the transcendent and the immanent. I occasionally have brief contacts with my higher self, who is the immanent God. As I understand it, God works in two ways on the human. The immanent God works with the psychological needs of the seeker. The transcendent God works with the spiritual needs of the seeker. Hence enlightenment changes, depending on which form of God I can unite with.

In personal enlightenment, the immanent God addresses my psychological needs.

In impersonal enlightenment, the transcendent God addresses my spiritual needs.

Energy

A popular conception about reality is that everything is really just energy. Energy arose in the beginning, whenever that was, and all material worlds came from it. A nice, easily understandable theory. However, in my view it is mistaken. Reality is relative, and so it consists of a subjective side and an objective side to it. It is not possible to have one side without the other side as well.

The subjective side is Feeling, which transforms into emotion, which transforms into energy. 

The objective side is Will, which transforms into desire, which transforms into materialism. 

The feature that holds will and energy together is Mind, and the result is Consciousness. Mind is the cement that holds Consciousness together. Mind is the home of archetypes, ideas, forms, patterns. Mind produces the One and Many experience for advanced seekers. 

Energy and Materialism have always co-existed, under the control of Mind.

[1]. My theory of abreaction begins with the first article on abreaction. [1]

[2]. I explain my theory of relativity in the article The Meaning of Relativity. [2]

Book

Price, Joan. Sri Aurobindo's Philosophy. Sri Aurobindo Ashram Press, 1977 and 1994.

The articles in this section are :

Copyright © 2026 Ian Heath
All Rights Reserved

The copyright is mine, and the articles are free to use. They can be reproduced
anywhere, so long as the source is acknowledged.

Ian Heath
London, UK

If you want to contact me, use the address at the bottom of the Home page.

Also, since there are numerous articles on this site, please include the title of the article if you want me to clarify or discuss particular issues.

It may be a few days before I can respond to correspondence.