The right concept of happiness

Q - I ask: is there anyone happy in this world? Now? Io I don't know any. There are some moments of happiness but ...

What the main Guides have tried in some way to make people understand this evening is that you have a wrong concept of happiness. You usually, at least in my view, attribute happiness to when your "I" is happywhen your ego and its awareness within the physical plane are happy, but true happiness is something beyond happiness on the physical plane.

Certainly there are moments of happiness that also involve the physical plane, woe if it were not so because, otherwise, no one would get busy on the physical plane if he never found a few moments of happiness, but it is only a partial view of the true happiness that it includes a well-being of "all" the components of the individual, not only that which concerns the physical plane.

How often do I hear you say: “Ah, how unhappy I am; how wretched I am!” because, I don't know, you paid more taxes, or you ate something you didn't like, or you can't buy a designer shirt, and so on. These are things that can also give happiness for a moment, but it is always the I - I repeat - that makes you happy with these things; it is not a lasting, true happiness that – as someone said – you can grasp and then keep within yourself.
Then it slips on you, and you go in search of "different" happiness, of new, more fulfilling happiness because, obviously, those happinesses are not true happiness.

As for the real question you asked, there are no doubt happy people; the problem is that a little bit you fail to see happiness in others, a little bit that - as it was said - even these people don't realize they are happy.

Being happy does not mean being happy, singing, being joyful, always being in a good mood and so on; there may also be this manifestation, of course, but the state of happiness is a state of equilibrium and, therefore, it is difficult for true happiness to be accompanied by great emotional changes, by great external behaviors apparent to everyone.

Many times the people you see and say about, for example: “He doesn't have a big one personality, it does not put itself on display, it makes wallpaper ”and so on, those instead could be signs of an inner happiness such that they do not need to exploit themselves, to show off their ego; it is therefore an inner happiness which is not attached to the material things of the physical plane. I hope I have made myself understood, because you know that I am very unevolved and, bungler, when I speak.

D - If happiness is linked to the capacity of understanding, of awareness, it is logical that even the most advanced complexion will always have something to understand; whereby total happiness is something from another world, that is, being absolutely happy is what has left the wheel of births and deaths.

But certainly, certainly: total and definitive happiness cannot yet be linked to the lower planes. This, without a doubt.

D - Also because, in fact, suffering is nothing other than the opposite of happiness; unhappiness is the measure of our selfishness and we are here to work on exactly what we lack.

More than being the measure of selfishness (because, as you know, selfishness and I are only puppets, fictitious creatures) unhappiness is, in my opinion, a measure of how much misunderstanding there is in the individual.

D - Exactly: not understanding is the work we are doing now, to overcome it.

Ah, there is no rain on this! 

D - We often give the example of ego desire, perhaps talking about designer t-shirts or cars, etc., but in general we seek happiness in a couple relationship, in looking for a partner. Can you tell us something about the reasons why you are looking for it? Because, at times, you can find a very satisfying relationship and, therefore, it almost seems that, thinking about true happiness, this couple relationship is a bit like "debased" ... I don't know, put aside, because you say: "But what do you want, it's a little thing, ... "

Absolutely; the couple relationship is always a way to compensate or search for something that the individual does not have in himself, it is an enlargement, an expansion of his understanding towards others and therefore it is a great important moment, actually.

The problem, in couple relationships, therefore in "love" relationships (in quotation marks), arises when one of the two lovers pretends to be happy on the other's shoulders, pretends to be happy only when the other is "like him he wants it to be ”, so much so that the best relationships are always those in which there is acceptance of how the other is.

If there is no acceptance, it is difficult for there to be a good relationship because undoubtedly, always, conflicts, rancor, spite and so on arise from non-acceptance; all those things that, a little at a time, poison a feeling that then, in reality, was obviously not yet very solid, otherwise he would not have let himself be poisoned by these things.

D - Of course; But is the search for a good relationship also a research that can be done?

What "must" do! Always remember that the Masters say to "start closely" and, therefore, starting close means first of all starting with oneself, trying to improve oneself; then it means trying to establish very close relationships with someone.
Once a relationship has been established with someone, there may be children, and here the relationship widens. It is, therefore, a bit of a shift of awareness from selfish love of oneself to a love that then includes all the others.

D - And it is the beginning towards absolute love, is there this first step?

It is not a start; it is a step that is necessary, because there cannot be a sudden leap from selfish love to absolute love! It is not possible. There must be all the steps, the intermediate gradations, to arrive at true Love.

D - I believe that happiness must be a momentary fact; like a good grade at school, which represents satisfaction with what you have done, and at the same time, a stimulus to go further. And this, I believe, also in the spiritual plane.

Here the discourse is really complicated, because first of all it is necessary to establish a common terminology for when it is said, "spiritual plane". What do you mean by the spiritual plane?

D - The non-physical one.

This is a little too vague.

D - Yours.

This too is too vague. I prefer to help you, to try to reason together. You know that we always say that the individual is actually made up of many different planes of existence: the physical plane, the astral plane, the mental plane, the Akasic, and then let's put them together, as usual, the higher planes. . What are the spiritual planes, then, those beyond the physical?

D - In my opinion the higher ones, those beyond Akasic.

In those beyond the akasic, the conscience of the individual is now formed. If it was formed, it means that total understanding has reached it, right?

D - Yes, as conscience yes; however, in my opinion, we cannot stop there. There will be something that will serve as a stimulus to go further.

Certainly. There is no doubt about this. It is not that theevolution end when you have abandoned the wheel of births and deaths; evolution continues in other ways, with other possibilities of evolution, but it is no longer necessary to reach awareness, consciousness; it is, more than anything else, the union with all the other individualities, with the others "feel". 

The state of happiness is reached when there is this fusion of feeling with all individualities within the Akasic plane; then, when there is this understanding reached, there is a state of happiness which then (I speak from hearsay, because unfortunately I am far from being merged with others!) is a basis on which further evolution is built of individuality.

Therefore it can be said that the evolution of the individual, beyond this phase, is nothing other than a continuous expansion of this state of happiness; something that uses the happiness achieved as a pedestal to then lead individuality - united with all the others - to make an even more enormous journey, until reaching (you know) reunion with God.

So, according to my point of view (I could also be wrong, because I do not have direct experience of this type of situation, of condition), we can no longer speak of the pursuit of happiness after abandoning the ego plans, lower floors, but we are talking about something else, in which the happiness achieved constitutes a common basis on which it is built.

Readings for the interior: every day, a short spiritual reading of the Ifior Circle and of the Florence 77 Circle, on Whatsapp. 
(Read only, cannot comment) To subscribe

Q - So the Akasic plane would be the point of arrival where one should reach the maximum of happiness, understood as the maximum expansion of consciousness?

Yes, yes, I would say that what you have just said is quite well summarized.

D - Returning to what G. said about starting through a couple bond to also discover the way to be with others ... therefore a person who manages to live his whole life in a serene, balanced way, while remaining from alone, is she still further behind - if these terms can be used on an evolutionary scale - than another who manages to live her life with a partner? Is that so?

What a bad habit you have of making some sort of judgments and scales on these things!

Q - I was not clear about this idea of ​​starting from the couple relationship to have family, children, etc.

Yes, I understand what you mean, but you are using a limited view, because it is limited to that "life" of that individual: you don't know what previous lives were like. He may have already had and understood everything about the couple relationship, for example, and therefore no longer need a couple relationship but his love, his happiness, could already be directed towards all other individuals. ; it is not necessary for your loved one to be there, physically. If that were the case, then all, what do I know, sailors' wives would always be unhappy!

D - Not only that, but then this person would not be well alone but would feel the need, the need to look for a partner; so it's a bit of a contradiction. Who is fine alone is because she has overcome that kind of problem.

This too is perhaps excessive because it should be examined, as usual, on a case-by-case basis. Let's say that, as far as the individual with a good evolution is concerned, if he gets to the point of being happy ... here, maybe that's the difference: he must be able both to be alone, and to be with others, and to him it makes no difference.

D - That there is no need to be in a given condition, but that he is fine anyway.

That he is fine anyway. Here, this is an index of inner happiness and therefore of self-understanding, self-fulfillment, self-knowledge and all those beautiful things that can still be said. Georgei

---

Privacy policy of this site to consult before commenting,
or subscribe to feeds.

---