4201

If I understand properly, whenever I have an idea, I can use the ultimate tester of ideas, feeling, to tell me if I reasonate with that idea or not. This means no over conceptualization is required anymore, I can just feel my way through life. But now, what will this feeling lead me to? If I am a hundred percent of the time following feeling and I end up spending all my time cutting wood, does that mean cutting wood is the meaning of life? It begs the question, who decides what feels good and what feels bad? Either the thing that controls feeling is thoughts or there exist a thing that is not a thought. If it's my belief of "what is good" that defines "what feels good", then isn't this utterly circular? And if so why do following thinking doesn't feel good if it's thinking that defines what feel good?

Don't stop! Maybe someday you'll have a great idea that will end up being very practical.

It's much simpler to work for a research chemical company and sell psychedelics which may be different from DMT but still provide everything you need in a psychedelic. With an actual company you get real money, rather than dirty money, so you don't need to hide it from the government You can actually ship your product to your customer rather than having to bury it somewhere and have someone unbury it You can be liable for your actions, so your customers can trust you more. Not sure if I would trust somebody selling me GPS location of a drug stash You can actually sell the amount that is desired. Imagine having to bury every possible quantity of every drug you want to sell You can do business everywhere in the world by shipping the research chemicals by mail rather than having to do business at one location If you don't know about research chemicals, a good google search may help you. Acquiring psychedelics doesn't have to be illegal and complicated. Of course legality varies with the country, but here in Canada, 1P-LSD, 4-Aco-DMT (shroom analog) and 5-MeO-DMT are legal.

Why do things feel bad when you have a limiting perspective? Because this limitation is a nuisance to survival. All the other examples you give are also divergence form survival. So is survival the purpose of the body? I think so. I think my problem was to turn that into a problem. Maybe it's ok that it's all survival. In the end that's just a perspective. I just can't find something that contradicts that perspective. @Gesundheit This is an interesting perspective you offer on how to look at fear and pain, but all I'm really saying is "why?". Is body "just a thought" if feeling is alignment with how the body feels? Perhaps my question can be simplified as "What is feeling?". I do realize I'll have to search on my own. Opening this thread expecting to get from others what I can look at is a bit silly.

Are you saying that you don't love yourself because in the past, you tried to prove yourself that you are worthless? Isn't that you creating meaning out of the fact you did something? But you yourself recognize that doing that thing felt bad. It's like I start cutting wood, I hate it, it feels like hell. Then I call myself a lumberjack. Why? Because I cut wood this morning, despite it feeling very bad. So you want a reason to love yourself that "sounds good". You want to feel good about your reason to love yourself. Isn't that ironic? You just said many times you don't care about how you feel but at the same time you are looking for a "reason to love yourself" that feels good. The reason for all this mess might be that, you dislike the idea of loving yourself as you are, since there's something about yourself you dislike and you would want it to change. You are scared that if you were to stop the judgements and self-shaming then you would lose the ability to be what you want. All of those fears are pure fallacy however, if you can notice that your intentions are pure. You are here trying to solve the problem. You want to fix the cognitive dissonance that is happening. Isn't that a proof of love? If you truly didn't love yourself as you pretend, then why would you even care about helping yourself like you do? But hey, you wanted a "rational" reason to love yourself, so let me give you one. In any system, what is the best way to obtain any desired outcome? To directly create that outcome. What is an irrational/unconstructive way to try and get to a desired outcome? To put all your energy on hating and complaining about any current situation that is different from the desired outcome, in hope that somehow "it will change itself" once the system went through enough hate and dislike. You might say "well I don't know what's the desired outcome, all outcomes are meaningless!". It might be true that there's no "absolute" outcome, but you certainly desire something. Otherwise there would be no problem.

Ok but then what is the meaning of the body? What does the body makes "feel good"? (Survival and reproduction probably.) If any divergence from "what the body makes feel good" results in feeling bad, isn't the meaning of the body the same as the meaning of life?

Love is the absence of so this is the same as saying life has no meaning. Which honestly "feels right". If Truth is awareness why do "doing stuff" is aligned with truth?

In my experience with working through emotional blockage is that the emotions that are repressed are not really things on their own, but rather symptoms or something that is thought or believed. Don't expect to just cry because "there was repressed sadness" and it be the end of it. If there's sadness there is a story that makes you feel sad. It will take radical honesty to see that story for what it is and to truly question the reality of it. If you want a methodical approach, Ralston's contemplation guide included in his "Book of not knowing" is very good. It lets you contemplate on any part of your behavior and understand what's the real deal about it. At least personally I would recommend this book.

"Ask a random person to think of blue for a few seconds. Then when they are done ask them which shape their blue was." Some people may come up with some ideas. But if somebody says "shape?? you asked me to think about a color!" then that person didn't think of a shape did they?

What I'm saying is that anyone introduced to the idea of "a color without a shape" is contaminated with the idea that they can't think of a color without a shape. If you think it's true then it becomes true for you. If you introduce the idea you are trying to prove beforehand, it's confirmation bias. The idea that "you" are "unable" to conceptualize about a color without conceptualizing about a shape is a limitation. Where do this limitation stem from? You won't find out by looking for a specific "shapeless" color.

You are not random though, you also are a believer of the no color without a shape cult of this thread Some people may be more creative though. Ask a boring logical person I guess

You are introducing the question with an arbitrary limitation you just created and confirming this idea by imagining no color without a shape. Ask a random person to think of blue for a few seconds. Then when they are done ask them which shape their blue was.

Time to start practicing your chidoris then

Do you own carpet?

Does God actually do that or is it your interpretation? Have you considered that if you believe god is hiding something from you, then you may act in accordance to this belief and thus effectively hide the truth from yourself? A self-fulfilling fallacy. Or maybe not. Maybe you are right. Who knows? Someone needs to go and verify.

Doesn't that imply a "me" that wants to be doing it? I don't see the difference. Isn't it something wanted by the self I created? Yes I agree, if it's escapism it's escapism there's no need to figure out why I chose a specific activity as my escape. But perhaps there is value to figure out why I was escaping? Don't I need to catch the perspective that lead me to escape in the first place? Let's say I start escaping out of shame for having failed something, then I want to see that perspective and stop holding it as true. Won't it come back if I don't notice and eliminate it? Not only made new but it always feels "out of the box" and not obvious. But yes the box is the perspective I'm creating. Yes, but isn't there an implicit self hidden in the fallacies that leads one to follow thoughts rather than feeling? At least there is an implicit self in the idea that "I'm unable to do what I want". But that is just a perspective. Would any perspective be problematic if they didn't include a self?

Are you saying that when I procrastinate, I'm doing what the self wants? Basically I'm identifying as a self who wants that. So when I'm doing the "wrong" thing (or anything) I can question myself why I want to do this rather than state how much I don't want to do this. This points directly to the perspective, which is the reason of my doing. I feel like I'm just scratching the surface with perspective. I saw with meditation how much those perspectives slide under the carpet. A thought will come up, I tend to notice the thought itself but not the self-jugement I have for having my thought. For instance I will use the occurrence of a thought as a reason to reinforce the perspective that I don't have any focus or I'm really not woke lately. It is very tricky to see those perspectives, I really buy into them easily. (But that's just a perspective). I know I can take a psychedelic anytime and free myself from all perspectives, but this tends to be temporary for me. (Also a perspective) Sometimes I feel bad, so I know I'm fooling myself (buying into a perspective) so I sit down and meditate for 30 min and not find it. Not get anything out of it. At those times I feel very desperate. I'm out of options. But yes, this idea of accepting that if I do X, it's because self wants to do X and then asking, "why do I want to do X?" seems like a better alternative than bruteforce meditation. With "mindless" meditation I just reinforce the perspective of "me not getting it". So thanks for this insight. Those perspectives are everywhere though. Waiting for me to buy into them at every corner. I feel like I'll get caught up again into another perspective. But that's just a perspective.

@Nahm Thank you. It took me a while to digest this answer. I won't respond to every bit to cut it short, but every bit was helpful. The perspective I struggle to let go is of having "wasted my day" after procrastinating for 10-12 hours. I struggle to let it go because I do believe that is true, in the context of achieving something, doing something unrelated for that long is not helping. I also struggle to let it go because when that happen I don't want to "let it slide". I don't want to become complacent and tolerate that. But of course that is just fear, forcing myself to feel bad about something, counter intuitively, doesn't lead me to do less of that thing. Instead I just escape as a way to try and avoid this feeling. I do struggle with this "bypassing". I struggle to reject a perspective that hasn't been proved wrong, just because it makes me feel bad. This idea creates the image of a delusional person denying a fact that is difficult for them to accept. But of course such a person would feel their own delusion, so the concern is bogus. Furthermore, this idea that a perspective have to be proved wrong is very prone to circular logic. So yeah, I don't have any real reason to cling unto my perspective. My objection to the deconstruction of the concept of time is not a matter of "not believing you" or anything of the kind. I just don't feel like "time" is the problem. It's like a boulder fall onto my car overnight, and this is not covered by insurance. I'm mad! And you are like "car is a thought". Sure car is a thought but the problem is the entitlement to it, not the concept of "car". But maybe I'm wrong, maybe "time" is to be deconstructed. I don't see it though. And no I don't consider you "a whacko". There's no way I can express the amount of respect I have for you. You understand everything, you are always helpful. I am extremely grateful for all the help you gave me, thank you.

I wish I could stop caring about being awake but whenever I'm not awake I'm also not productive. And if I keep not being productive my current plan for making a source of income from something that passionates me will fall flat, and I will need to fall back to working a job I might not like. I do plan to chase passive income, precisely for the sake of being able not to care anymore. But for now that's not a priviledge I have. Perhaps I can still get myself to stop caring about it. Since it seems that caring about it reduces the chances of it from happening. But in this case I am stopping to care about X for the sake of X and not for itself. @DianaFr Really nothing special. Sometimes I think I will find something at the end of the road but there is nothing to find there. I just binge all day until my back hurts and I'm completely disgusted. If only I could procrastinate for a normal amount of time like a normal person. @Michal__ Thanks for the tip, that STOP method do seem valuable.

You are the one who claims to be awake, which means realizing there's no you in the first place. Perhaps it means more to you, because you went deeper but no-self is still an important component of being awake. You cannot both be awake and behave like somebody that is not at the same time. That doesn't mean you absolutely need to be awake, 5-MeO-DMT-everyday-for-a-month style. If you happen to backslide from time to time nobody will bitch about it if you admit it, we realize you are a human being. But if you keep claiming you are awake but not living to the standard of being awake, you feel like a fraud. I do see how tricky it can be if "being awake" is part of your identity and your brand. But if it's not true it's not worth anything. Personally I don't expect anything. I don't see you like a fraud for claiming you are awake and not being it, because I see how thinking you are awake is probably a big part of not being awake. But we cannot expect others to realize it as well.

@Leo Gura Why do you actively try to avoid being an ideal to people? Is this "I'm corrupt, don't follow me" idea really the best way to make people follow their own path instead of yours? At some point, they will be doomed to eventually question whether they are truly questioning or just following you anyway. It's not like denigrating your image to them will really help. Perhaps yes, by being judgemental you'll force people to not like you and follow their own path. But much worse are the people who delude themselves into thinking it's ok to keep judging because "enlightened people" like Leo are judging all the time. And likewise, you justify your judgements using other people's behavior. Sure, you have the "I'm doing this purposefully for you" excuse, but people who are influenced by you do not. This whole idea of enlightened people doing X is ridiculous to start with. There are no enlightened people. It's not the person that is enlightened, obviously. At the end, that's not my business but yours. You do whatever you want, but if you behave like this then the frustration presented in this thread is to be expected.

Bullet points are scary but do you have any case studies of supposedly enlightened people going to psy wards? Also what a perfect thumbnail hahaha

Yes you can jokingly call something a ball-sack and then it will jokingly be called a ball-sack or you can firmly believe something and it will be firmly believed.

I also get headaches on 4-AcO-DMT (shroom analog) about every time I take it. Never had any with LSD despite LSD preventing me from sleeping after long days (which I would think is much more demanding). They used to be worse though, last time was pretty mild despite the high dosage and didn't affect my life too negatively. For me it lasts about 24 hours and starts when the effects of the drug begin to wear off.

What's the point? I trip for up to 16 hours on LSD. Too long is not great honest. 6-7 hours is probably the best amount of time (shrooms basically). I don't appreciate the trip wrecking my entire sleep schedule. But up to you. What's the problem with the more traditional psychedelics?