Unconditional existence without any reciprocity is a true state
of happiness. This level of being is not affected by any exter-
nal circumstances or situations. It is a stable and steady condi-
tion, which can be achieved by inner practice and persistence.
It is a pure form of being—totally loving and peaceful.
Harmony and inner confidence are experienced within and
are not, therefore, dependent on the outside world.
Happiness in its purest form is just another expression for
sympathy and empathy in their deepest meaning. This means
that happiness in its fundamental form is not reflected to the
subject itself; it is shared and experienced together with exis-
tence and with other beings.
Something that is conditional to circumstances or specific
to subjects has nothing to do with happiness. It is a desire or
selfish act in disguise. Lasting happiness is omnipotent with-
out an object, a time, or a place. It’s eternal and ubiquitous—
within our reach at every moment.
This is the original text, and an edited version can be found in the Fragments of Reality -book.
I have an issue with the statement:
It is a stable and steady condition, which can be achieved by inner practice and persistence.
The problem is: the EXPECTATION that “I should be able to be ALWAYS happy” is a factor driving people in e.g. America to consume Prozac and other happy pills.
My viewpoint is that the human brain was not created to ALWAYS run in ANY particular emotional state. In fact, the “normal” emotional state is no state at all. Unfortunately some would not think of themselves as “happy” if they were in this normal emotional state of mind, simply because they associate “happiness” with an emotion nearly as strong as “euphoria”.
Rather than feeding people the expectation that they CAN always be happy (if they just try hard enough), people should be directed to examine whether they can feel CONTENT. In other words, can they feel content about their life?
The benefit of contentment is that the word itself does not carry the same emotional weight. The act of evaluating ones own contentment is of a more intellectual nature than evaluating ones own happiness. Nevertheless, a person who accepts themselves as content does not have a need to consume happy-pills, alcohol, or other mind-state altering chemicals.
Content is a good word. The text refers to a steady state that is not dependent on external stimulus or action/effort that is required when one is expecting something outside of oneself (i.e. lacking). So I agree with you. Like the New Oxford American Dictionary defines content: “in a state of peaceful happiness” that’s the meaning in the text.
(Another post about happiness.)