Osaid

I know haha. Sometimes the dreams get VERY creative. They really stretch the boundaries of what you assume they are capable of, as you can see. As for the other lucid dream I was talking about at the beginning but didn't bother to elaborate on: I had a dream once, where I fell asleep in the dream, and then started lucid dreaming while inside of this dream, but this lucid dream I was experiencing was STILL nested inside the context of the "previous" dream, where I was NOT lucid. Then, I woke up again, but I was still inside of the "previous" dream that I fell asleep in, and this made me stop lucid dreaming, but I was STILL inside of a dream. It basically tricked me into thinking that I actually woke up and WASN'T dreaming, but in actuality I only woke up back into the previous dream. And then, inevitably, I woke up AGAIN to actual reality, and then I realized, "ohhh, that was a dream as well." So, to reiterate, I fell asleep in the dream, and then started lucid dreaming while in the new dream which was inside that dream. Then, when I woke up inside the dream, I stopped lucid dreaming. And then, I woke up again to actual reality. So, I "woke up" twice, one was into the initial non-lucid dream, and another was into the waking state. Basically, in this dream, my lucidity depends entirely on this idea of "I fell asleep", but this idea is connected to the events of the "previous" dream where I am NOT lucid. So, the dream is capable of achieving lucidity by imagining itself to fall asleep, and it is capable of removing that lucidity by imagining that wakes up. But, all of this happens in one dream. My lucid dream depended on this idea that "I am having this lucid dream because I fell asleep", BUT, this thought is referring to me falling asleep inside of the non-lucid dream, so now this lucid dream is connected to the non-lucid dream. I will also clarify, I had no recollection of the "previous" non-lucid dream DURING the lucid dream, it only appeared when I "woke up" again into the initial non-lucid dream. So yes, experientially, it was a 100% legit lucid dream. So it was like, a lucid dream but also not a lucid dream at the same time. Hope that made a little bit of sense hahaha

Just experiencing or being conscious of something. Not just humans. Doesn't have to be a human phenomenon. Furthermore, there are many humans who actually constrict their understanding, and their love for what they understand. (their identity is based on a lack of understanding) For example, a pizza chef only focuses mainly on understanding pizzas, because they are a pizza chef Or, a religious person who is scared to watch a video which goes against their religion, because they are religious. There is also a survival incentive. You cannot survive without understanding. Understanding shapes survival. Why do we want to do a colonoscopy? I will answer this with another question: What else is there to do? What is the alternative? Trying to become conscious of something you are not conscious of.

Not gonna watch the video, but... You can judge anything without trying it. Judging has never had anything to do with direct experience, inherently. It's not just a martial arts thing, I mean, it's the structure of the act of judging itself. Judging is never factual, it's a subjective interpretation or conclusion. I have not directly experienced the video myself, though.

It's just an idea, so don't worry. There isn't a thing which can lack consciousness. This is a contradiction. Furthermore, "nothing", or "nothingness", is very conscious and alive, by necessity. Anything that exists or is experienced is enmeshed in a conscious experience. Everything is as conscious as you are, unless you imagine it isn't. This is a human bias to interpret "nothingness" as some soulless void. Your ego is simply co-opting whatever you experienced and misinterpreting it into some ideology. Consciousness is capable of all sorts of wacky and ephemeral states, but they are not now. You are neurotically clinging to those states. There is nothing special about that state, it is equally as valid as what you experience now. Can consciousness imagine everyone as a robot? Probably. Can consciousness UNIMAGINE all of that and turn everyone into a real person? Yes! Of course! You were doing exactly that before. But, NOW, your ego is stepping in and saying "But...it's not real!! Stop imagining that! You're not allowed to imagine people anymore, remember what you saw?? Stop imagining! Stop connecting with people!! Wahhhh" You can intuitively feel that reality is not dumb enough to limit itself to just some mindless robots, but the intellectual ego in you clings to the ideology, and so resistance is created inside of you. You are just trying to live some intellectual theory you crafted from some experience you had. You have not thoroughly explored all the possibilities. Mental resistance always just comes from ego in the end. That's a big indicator.

I would pick No Boundary. On first glance, the other one seems rather dogmatic, clinging to the Buddhist "nothingness." It looks like someone who had their first awakening wrote it, kind of rudimentary, if that makes sense. You could find many books talking about nothingness, and so it lacks uniqueness as well. Or you could go for both, why not.

Hmm, I like drifting off into sleep through audiobooks or podcasts. Books are nice, but for me, impractical when trying to go to sleep, although still a viable avenue of course A book about God? I heard Conversations with God is good. The Book of Not Knowing I have also heard good things about. You can also look into certain genres yourself, I think finding a book you personally sought after has its own appeal as well. I don't read books that much, so I wish I had some personal recommendations I could list and recommend to you. I should really start reading some as well, though, so thanks for reminding me.

Yeah there might be something more fundamental going on, which is just that people are attracted to highly dramatic and emotionally stimulating and unique characters. Same reason why someone would watch a drama. Such traits come easy to a narcissist. They subvert past your conscious standards with their charisma and passion.

Lol, you guys can't send half-quotes when it comes to arguments about enlightenment ? It's like deciphering hieroglyphs, all the details matter

Only high EQ can pick up on high EQ, maybe

Dogs are actually pretty amazing. Like, really amazing. Some serious EQ here. I will not take dogs for granted again.

misdogthropy

Explanation = conclusion = limitation Reality = infinite = the source of explanations Explanation will always amount to perspective. Not anything "for reality", because by definition it is not reality, just a compartmentalized and limited map of reality, which is never reality itself, just a map. Not to take away from your explanation or invalidate it at all. I do not want minds to get stuck to explanations, is all. So this is just lubrication to prevent your mind from getting stuck, if anyone needs it. The beauty and utility of explanations is found in the fact it is limited. That is what makes it. It becomes a mess if you interpret it as something that is not limited, but all-encompassing.

This is basically Descartes' evil demon, but with the theme of christianity, or so I intuit. Popular philosophical conundrum. There is nothing literal about your interpretation of "666". I could put up "666" on my wall right now and it wouldn't mean I'm a follower of Satan. YOU could put up "666" on your wall, and it would mean nothing. Your local christian pastor could put "666" on his wall and it would mean nothing. But, you fear these numbers because of dogma and fantastical thinking. Actually, the extent of this thinking reminds me of schizophrenia, although I understand it has probably been drilled into you through no fault of your own. Ultimately, you don't know. You're just assuming. And, you can assume anything you want, even things that make you really fearful and paranoid. Such is the nature of mind. Anyways, my advice to you is to just build a really good and solid epistemology by watching Leo's videos. Your epistemology is like a firewall that screens out maladaptive ideologies. You need to be able to accurately discern what is ideological bullshit and what isn't. You need to create a genuine inquiry: What do I know for sure? What do I know that is 100% true? Latch on to that. FOLLOW THROUGH WITH ALL YOUR QUESTIONS: What if Satan is powerful? What if he ISN'T powerful? How do I know Satan even exists? What does it even mean for something to exist? How do I know something doesn't exist? Why am I assuming the worst scenario? <<< Like this

I don't find it that weird or suspicious. He has a history of weird outbursts, and has previously been warned many times for spamming threads with multiple posts in the same fashion.

Ralston is just being very picky about his words, as he always is. He is saying that a relative phenomenon like psychedelics has no direct relation to enlightenment or truth. Ralston tends to be anal about such things. He never levels with you on your relativity. He always speaks very strictly, with this sort of autistically hyper-Absolute perspective, so to speak. He's very careful about saying things like "psychedelics will lead you to enlightenment" or "everything is love" or "enlightenment is full of love and bliss." He doesn't want to lead people on with ideas. He is very careful about this. Admittedly, he does feel a bit standoffish when it comes to talking about psychedelics. He could offer more nuance so that he is not misunderstood as this entire thread misunderstands him. But, I do believe it is a misunderstanding, as he says at the end "it is possible to have direct consciousness while on some drug." Maybe this is just his teaching style and it works well in his workshops. I don't like it either, though.

Unless you unimagine that you ever took DMT*

Narcissists control and gaslight people all the time, and they also like to isolate people into their own "virtual reality" or "bubble." Cults are often started by narcissists. Common cult mind control technique is isolating you from friends and family. Cult dynamics are very similar to the narcissist dynamics on a small scale, it's just on a bigger scale, and so it leads to a cult. I have suspicions that the War Room is a cult, at the higher echelons at least.

Ah ok, thank you. Also, this is the exact opposite of materialism, did anyone read the last sentence? Or any of the sentences? It's very succinct. "And I understand what it is and that no drug, process, or any alteration of the brain or experience can ever produce it. Just not possible. Doesn’t work that way. It may be possible to have a direct consciousness while on some drug, but the drug doesn’t do it. Only you can. Just like it may be possible to have an enlightenment while contemplating, but the method doesn’t do it, you do." Essentially, he is saying that psychedelics are a part of the dream, so to speak. This is the exact same reason why Leo made the "We are not in a simulation" video. He is saying that you should not offload direct experience and enlightenment onto a process called "psychedelics", the same way someone would offload their direct experience onto a process called "simulation" or "virtual reality" or "simulation theory." Essentially, in my own attempt to reiterate his communication as accurately as possible, he is saying that enlightenment is not caused by drugs or psychedelics, but just YOU, directly experiencing yourself. To clarify more, he is saying that the psychedelic high is simply a state which makes it easier to perceive enlightenment, but it is not enlightenment itself. Kind of like a finger that points to the moon and makes it easier to see the moon, but the finger is not the moon itself. The moon is a separate phenomenon from the finger. And so is the same with "psychedelics" and "enlightenment."

You don't ?

What was your initial question? How was it worded? What is he responding to?

Is it like being a child again?

Confidence and dominance is not equal to bullying. There's a false equivalence. You can be confident and dominant without bullying someone. And also, bullying by itself has no relation to confidence. It's not mutually inclusive. You can bully someone without confidence. Bullying is usually enmeshed in an underlying insecurity.

Oh no, although I'd love to take credit, I just had ChatGPT convert the writing style. Good, you should. I worked really hard to channel that message directly from God himself. Aw, thanks.

Alright, I forwarded the questions to God and he sent me the complete list of when you can and can't kill flies. I have copy and pasted it below, hopefully it clears up all the confusion: When It Is and Isn't Morally Appropriate to Kill Flies, As Penned by the Almighty: Section 1: Thou Shalt Not Slay the Minuscule Buzzers When the clock strikes noon on the third Sunday of the seventh month, thou shall not layeth a finger on any fly buzzing around thy abode. If the fly bears a striking resemblance to William Shakespeare, thou shall spare its life, for it may be a literary genius in disguise. In the event that the fly chanteth a melodious tune in the key of G-flat major, thou shall grant it safe passage to the nearest meadow, where it can join a fly choir. Should a fly find itself trapped in thy beverage, thou shall grant it a lifebuoy fashioned from a toothpick and rescue it from its liquidy doom. Unless the fly challenges thee to a game of chess and thou art defeated thrice in a row, thou shall not smite it. Section 2: Of Fly Slaying Circumstances When a fly partaketh in espionage or engage in covert operations against thee, thou shall summon the Fly Counterintelligence Unit and act accordingly. If a fly declareth war upon thee and leadeth an army of its brethren, thou shall be permitted to retaliate with flyswatters and rolled-up newspapers. In times of dire famine, thou shall be allowed to consider flies as a last resort of sustenance. But verily, only if thou art truly desperate. Thou shall not engage in wanton slaughter for the mere sake of acquiring fly wings for use in ill-fated attempts at human flight. Section 3: Flies in Divine Service If a fly hath been appointed as thy spiritual guide by fate or chance, thou shall heed its buzzing advice and embark on a quest of self-discovery. Should a fly display miraculous powers of healing, thou shall establish a Fly Church of Miracle Cures and arrange weekly services in thy garden. In the presence of a sacred fly infestation during sacred ceremonies, thou shall view it as a sign of divine favor and celebrate with joyous abandon. Section 4: Miscellaneous Fly-Related Matters If thou findeth a fly with golden wings, thou shall set it free and wait for three wishes to be granted by a grateful fly fairy. In the event of an interdimensional portal appearing in thy living room, and flies starteth to emerge, thou shall not be alarmed; it merely indicates an odd day in the cosmos. Should thou encounter a time-traveling fly from the future, thou shall exchange philosophical insights but refrain from asking for lottery numbers.

I just spoke with God, he said you're not allowed to kill flies.