I have a friend who married his wife soon after she had a deep awakening experience. She spontaneously fell into a state where she did not identify with a sense of self, had very little or no discursive thoughts or preferences, and did not have a subjective sense of agency or emotion (including love). It sounded exactly like "Actual Freedom" or what Jeffrey Martin calls "Ongoing Non-Symbolic Experience, Location 4." From the outside, she seemed normal, but less stressed out. The boyfriend was very codependent and in love with her and asked her to marry him that week in order to secure the future of the relationship, reasoning that they were probably going to get married eventually anyway and she would probably eventually integrate this experience and re-connect with a sense of agencty and emotion, but if they don't do something now, she might just drift out of his life and they might both lose this relationship in which they both (her, up until the moment of her awakening) believed they were soulmates. He told her that she should not agree to marry just because he wants her to, and that he only wants to do it if she "wants" to (recognizing that "wanting" might mean something unique for her now). She took a few days to decide, but ended up giving an enthusiastic "yes!" and they eloped a couple days later. 

She fell out of her "enlightenment" after a few weeks and their relationship fell apart and he ended up breaking up with her (against her fierce protests) a few months later. Now she is saying that she did not consent to the marriage because she was in a dissasociated state and did not have a subjective sense of agency at the time. Since he knew about her lack of subjective sense of agency, she claims he basically made the decision for them, and it now feels to her like a consent violation equivalent to rape. She says she did not actually decide to get married.

They both agree that it was a foolish, impulsive decision, that they should not have rushed into marriage, and that it was wrong for him to try to convince her to marry him when she claimed to have no preferences at all. 

How would you help them interpret this situation? What do you think of her claim that her decision wasn't "real" because she didn't have a subjective sense of agency? Is it true that people in that state can't consent to anything? or to big decisions like that? Is it still a decision that she's responsible for?

How do you define responsibility?  Will she burn in hell for it? My sense is no.  

dflkjdflkdjf

"Awakening" is not an experience - there is no "one" present to awaken.


"Awakening" is a permanent insight, not a mind state.

-

In relative truth: Why waste time with he said she said? He doesn't want to be married. She says she never consented. No problem. Silly things happen all the time. Look at today's politics. No harm done. 

In absolute truth: Nothing happened. No-one to happen to. Everything is perfect.

Ultimately there is brahman/tao/dharmakaya. Nothing separate. No parts acting on parts... thus, no victim. Just "this", and just "now".

Now that's a couple who misunderstands the dharma and the legalities of marriage. It's best they breakup and grow up.

No-self is true for everyone regardless of realization. So a person experiencing an agencyless state can consent just as much as a person of equal mental faculties who is not experiencing such a state, I guess.