OldManCorcoran

Each time the thing happens it happens the same. It's only different afterwards in how you interpret it? In the actual moment thoughts aren't often being processed even, because you're too fucked from the psychedelic. So it's always a hindsight thing. If Leo didn't smoke for years he'd lose all memory of these headspaces as I have now. It took me a year and a half to completely forget. Now it's like I never had that knowledge at all. Now I can't know if I was just delusional from drugs because I just don't remember it at all... Except the logical and rational certainties, you can hold onto those.

The post quality has dramatically increased on this forum since Leo stopped putting out videos for low IQ people to parrot and have """awakenings!!!!""" over.

Why isn't this dude in an institution yet?

A lot of this forum is really ill people and they come to try to become "spiritual" as a cope, because they think they will get to escape their mentally taxing life via enlightenment. If Holykael or Razard86 took serious psychedelic drugs, they would likely be hospitalized. These are seriously ill people who probably shouldn't be using drugs, is there going to be screening for that?

This was when he was still having meaningful trips with a real spiritual substance, as opposed to jerking off in the bath or using weird designer chemicals which are just probably like any other research chem/shrooms/acid.

You're not well, I can't believe nobody tells you to get help?

Well you are unlikely to ever see the EXACT same sight again (because different lighting or weather, etc), but I mean for example there's no difference between you going to see the grand canyon two days in a row, vs you seeing it one day and me the next while you stayed home. It is the same apart from inconsequential oddities (oddities like say one of us is colorblind etc etc.) I just mean that it does not matter which dead matter "living body" happens to be beside a thing. I forgot the ego death event entirely now so I don't remember anymore how I am sure this is the case (though at the time it was a serious thing). But I can explain that paradigm and implications.

Specifically regarding the "unconsciousness" and "I" claims, I think this is probably not be a correct grasping of monism. Deep sleep, coma, death, various other supposed unconscious states don't exist or even happen at all. If you go see the Eiffel tower today you can tell me about it, and say that you saw it. Now if I go see it the day after while you stay home and I'm stood in front of it telling you about the sight, you will think you aren't seeing it because you will say that you are viewing some other sight like maybe your living room wall. If you remove the idea whereby there are experiencers to experiences, then on BOTH days there exists the sight of the Eiffel Tower. And it ends there, the sight exists and that's it. Irrespective of which body is stood in front of it looking at it... Because nobody ever sees anything, there exists sights and sounds etc and they exist all by themselves in absence of anything viewing them. The state of your body is irrelevant to this because the body is dead matter like everything else. Experiences happen and they happen by themselves ALWAYS in your total absence. Basically, that idea is that sights see themselves and sounds hear themselves, and that nobody has ever existed, does not exist right now, and never will. And with that also consciousness stops having anything to do with qualitative experiences. There does not necessarily need to be any qualitative experiences happening, they can stop for millenia then just randomly happen again. There isn't any substantive difference between unconscious objects and conscious phenomena, they can all just come and go. And each time they come they will exist precisely the same... If someone in 10,000 years stands in front of the Eiffel tower in the same exact spot and looks at it, it is identical to when you were stood there looking at it yourself. As mentioned the sight is all that exists, so the sight existed 10,000 years prior when the body with your name stood there, and the sight exists again with this future person's body there. Nobody saw it then and nobody sees it now, rather, the "shape" of paper by which the sight exists simply formed again. That's the style of monism I think is being discussed.

Cannabis is a worthless drug, don't bother taking weed thoughts seriously.

I would be pretty angry because I'm getting into great shape rn.

I think he means that the objects literally ARE what we term as consciousness. It is VERY different from objects being observed by consciousness, to be literally MADE of the thing in the absolute absence of a being which views these images. Unfortunately consciousness as a word implies the act of observing things or some sort of definite link to "subjective experience" which is probably not necessarily the case. Even if people say the object and subject are one, it is a conceptual framework which is not really prompting recognition of unity. As moreso people imagine two things swimming around each other, when actually it is JUST the thing itself. So rather than a seer swirling around within red, it is literally JUST red. JUST that. Like making origami shapes, every shape within the result literally IS paper. You can't actually take apart the shape and paper the shape literally is made of paper. So sights sounds and whatever else, are literally made of consciousness just like that. And when it is experienced by "you" (seemingly, that is, the character I'm speaking to), the shape happens to be the experience of your life... But there's ultimately just paper, just consciousness. No "I" element within the appearances.

Sleep doesn't happen. All ideas regarding what will happen to you at X event (such as death) exists as a result of having an idea that there is a being which knows things. If you take the "I" out of all experience, the state of the physical body you associate yourself with is completely irrelevant. These events don't actually take place at all if there is no idea of an "I"... See the sleep thing, if there WAS an "I", then clearly it is viewing some things then everything goes pitch dark and the character seems to be extinguished temporarily from existence. Naturally then, you will see that as being your fate at death without the waking up on the other side... Without the idea of any "I", all appearances appear by themselves in absence of any such thing. So there isn't any "I" to enter into nonexistence or to come out of it (such as with sleep) or to be alive or to die. There's just a series of different appearances, all of which appear alone by themselves never witnessed.

The inhale 5-MeO-DMT trips would be the important ones. Asshole 5 is just perversion, and I mean, Leo literally does jerk off in the bath to porn videos while doing that. Of course, it's possible to have a handshake trip, strong trip, or "release dose" when freebasing. Of over 100 trips with the DMT family I only attained mystical enlightenment in one of those. One fully I mean, and then a bunch of weird trips, mild uncomfortable "highs", ego changes, and other useless events.

That's based on ideas about there existing a self or soul. Without individual selves or souls you can watch your own funeral, except of course there's no you to watch things, there will exist the appearance of your own funeral. You also die every instance, as appearances are always changing, you died while reading this, but see how nothing has changed... Without selves this is no issue, there could exist one appearance or many, there's no conflict. Rather than a me seeing my computer and you seeing yours, there exists both appearances and both are MADE OF "consciousness" rather than existing observed by a consciousness. More like origami where the paper is consciousness. All of your ideas are stemming from within ego function and you need to book an appointment with the toad.

No conscious being exists including both me and you, there is only consciousness itself as such: There exists the experience of being X person, and then there's not. There's also the experience of seeing this screen and when you turn off the computer there's not. But existence remains. When the experience of being X person stops, existence remains. It is the same as you 10 seconds ago vs now. I can't really give a good answer on what it will subjectively or relatively be like without using concepts of there existing different conscious beings who have experience. The you can only die or go somewhere if the you is something which actually exists. If there is no you and only existence itself appearing as various things, then that simply continues uninterrupted.

You can't just claim it "doesn't make sense", when the reason it doesn't make sense is because that logic is built upon a wrong assumption (that sights are seen by something and sounds are heard by something). Which you maybe won't be able to comprehend until qualia remains when you are completely gone. Which is ego death. Until qualia is present when you are not, it doesn't seem something that is possible. But you do know that the "I am seeing" in "I am seeing red" is a thought added by your brain/mind onto what is actually present, which is the color red. If that entire process of thought is turned off somehow, then things appear without the I entity (the "witness") being existent at all.

Ego death is so rare lmao. Even to a materialist neuroscientist, it is known that the sense of self is produced by the brain. No ego death = no chance of understanding, probably lol.

How advanced are you? It would really help people to address you appropriately, because for example if you were hardcore materialist, which would be a default human viewpoint, then first people would need to talk through that, and then through the next step etc. Have you ever had any level of ego dissolution? Anyway: There are various experiences involved in the typing of this message, many many thoughts and also tactile experiences like the feeling of the keys against my fingers. All of these appearances are different in "shape" yet substantially the same... I said "shape" because I think origami is a perfect metaphor, because regardless of what animal you fold from the paper you can never ever find any portion of the result which is substantially something other than paper, despite there being many different shapes of fold to create an origami swan. And further, the fact that each fold is itself paper. Sort of like how Norquist says, consciousness is not like a disembodied entity which experiences a carrot, it IS the experience of carrot. So like the swan beak shape literally is itself paper. It just all works metaphorically well. The unifying factor you are possibly alluding to when discussing something beyond the limited experiences, is that paperness. This is what people call "consciousness". It is VASTLY different from human-centric or even life-centric ideas of consciousness which is an idea revolving around "experiencing". Often in that ego-centric framework of X individual viewing Y phenomena.

If I knew how experienced you are with ego death and your current understanding of reality, it would be easier. I am writing as if you have had experience with ego death before. If you are coming in like James Randi I would explain in a different manner. I also don't understand "You got to explain how this is typed out with just limited experiences." If you can clarify this I can easily explain as requested.

You don't understand what I'm saying.

^ I am referring to 100% ego dissolution. Ego dissolution happens to various degrees: 1. First is the normal sense of being our body with the world around us. 2. If you have ingested a serious psych like DMT, you might experience this intermediary. Where you start losing feeling of body parts, your sense of I shrinks, so where you feel you are your entire body, as you lose sensation the anchor for the I-ness shrinks until it's pinpointed in your head or some other bodily location. 3. When you lose all sense of your body, the ego function has nowhere to tether it's I-ness to and therefore loses boundary. This causes the I-ness to spread to every appearing phenomena within your field of experience. This is the experience of "being infinite" commonly brought about by a breakthrough dose of n,n-DMT. 4. Your ego function is actually shut off entirely. The "I" sense is absolutely non-existent. There exists only appearances without such a thing as an I... This is very alien to conceive of, and many people trying to intellectualize this, cannot help but mentally wrestle the I into the concept of it like "IT MUST BE THERE!!! IT COULDN'T POSSIBLY NOT BE THERE!!!" But no it is entirely absent, there is no I anymore at all. And all things are perfectly logical via this framework if you do understand what it entails. . There is a person online Steven Norquist who wrote about that sort of ego dissolution in a better way I think you will understand.

Dave you are still positioning yourself as being something existent additionally to the various things which appear. Whereby "I" see 7:05, "I" see 7:06. You are considering yourself to be an entity which views appearances. It seems to you as you describe because of a functioning ego. It's not real to the situation. If you walk past the Eiffel tower right now and I walk past it tomorrow, by your current conception you are imagining there is an I character you possess which sees the tower. Then the next day the I character I possess sees it, not you because you can confirm you are seeing your living room wall or computer screen or whatever you're doing! Without ego, there is the existence of the appearance and nothing more. So not you seeing the tower one day, then me seeing the tower the next, just the existence of the appearance of the tower on both days. It is identical regardless of who sees it. Do you understand this?

Note this is what happens when someone with a psychological need to believe in Jesus forgoes Jesus and projects the same anthropomorphic "God in the sky" properties onto Eastern spiritual conceptions of reality.

Logical error due to belief in separate souls / my and your consciousness etc. This is an ego trick. Imagine if instead of your ego believing itself to be a character viewing 5:41 PM on the clock, you could shift the idea of "you" to the actual sight of the 5:41 PM clockface. If you literally are that clockface and not the person seeing it, does it matter if your body is the one in front of it or if your friend's is? Does your body even need to be alive? If you literally are the sight of that clockface, does it even matter if your body is dead as long as someone else's is there seeing that sight. If you literally ARE the sight then whichever body happens to be seeing the clockface you are present. Because your identity is shifted away from the idea of a character who views things to being the actual viewed thing itself... Then what if you were the clockface and also the color red, and also the sound of music, and the scent of vanilla or w.e. else. And what if you literally were every single existent phenomena. It does not matter which person happens to be experiencing the world, if you are in fact the experienced world itself, and there isn't actually anybody at all who experiences any world... Where neither of us exist at all... When egos do not exist you can comprehend that easily. As easily as you have no issue with the existence of Earth and Mars or two different States or many different countries... So you aren't the character which dies you are the world which remains. There are no conscious beings, things are themselves consciousness. Red ISSSSS consciousness, it isn't over there seen by a consciousness, it IS it. It literally IS it... There is no such thing as "your" experience and "my" experience, that is ego story crafted on the notion of separate selves / souls.

Dude he just gets high all the time and then says whatever... Trying to recapture the actual breakthrough attained when he used a release dose of 5 years ago.