Emerald

You can look around on different articles and videos online. This has been very helpful for me. But if you want to learn a TON about chakras and how the whole system works, I recommend the book "Wheels of Life" by Anodea Judith. Not only will this give you a ton of information about chakras, it will also help you put certain spiritual paths and esoteric understandings in perspective. It has really helped me connect some dots.

Well, from my understanding, you want to make sure that you're grounded in the lower chakras first before attempting anything with the upper chakras. Sort of like, you don't want to start building when you haven't set your foundation. However, if a person has a decent foundation and simply has a blockage in the upper chakras, it is okay to start working on just the area where there is a blockage. But also it's important to be mindful and to do grounding work as necessary, so that a person doesn't experience emotional and mental complications. That's why I mentioned it to NutellaTC afterward, just to be sure. Think about the body as though it were a tree. The deeper the roots grow into the ground the higher the branches can grow, and the more nutrient dense and plenty the fruits come to be.

You're welcome. Also, I wanted to mention that after you unblock your upper chakras you may need to do some grounding, as well. That way, you keep balance between the lower and upper chakras. If you start to feel ungrounded or too disconnected/abstract after you unblock your upper chakras, you can balance out by walking barefoot on the Earth, eating vegetables that grow under the ground (like Carrots, Beets, Turnips, etc.), eating food that is red in color (like Beets, Radishes, etc.), doing body scan meditations, stones (like Black Tourmaline, Tiger Iron, etc.), exercise (Hatha Yoga, etc.), essential oils (Patchouli, Sandalwood, etc.), and focusing toward material/mundane things while taking a break from spiritual/intellectual things.

You can try placing stones like Crystal Quarts (Crown) and Amethyst (Third Eye) close to those chakras or even sleeping with them under your pillow. Also, essential oils like Sage (Crown), Lavender (Third Eye), Peppermint (Throat), and Rosewood (Heart) are good. You can dilute them, and either rub a small amount on your skin near those chakras or you can put them in a diffuser or a glass spray bottle and disperse them into the air. Be sure that the essential oils are high quality and pure though. And only use spring water or minimally chemically filtered water for the mix. You can also try fasting for a short period of time as this is said to help unblock and open the Crown Chakra and the Third Eye Chakra. If you don't want to fast, you may instead try eating fruits with bluish or purple color to them, such as blueberries and blackberries. Water is said to be very helpful as well. Also, the Crown Chakra is associated with the color Violet. Blue is also related to the upper chakras. With all of these things, you want to introduce these things gradually as you don't want to overdo it. There are cases where people have gone overboard with Kundalini meditation and other such practices like Quigong, and ended up experiencing serious psychological and physiological problems. So, I would start perhaps with the stones or essential oils first, and see how it works out for you.

You're welcome and thank you!

I recently made a video about creativity. It's my own creative process, that was inspired by my husband's creative process.

This reminds me of when I was in high school, prior to my awakening experiences which shifted my views on things quite a bit. I had these ideas that I was attached to that I would go to college and make something of myself. I would teach and impact lives, and eventually become a famous artist. So, I had all these desires and attachments and big dreams. And my life revolved around these ideas completely, to the point of obsession... only it was a socially supported obsession that other people tended to smile upon. Then, I would have these fears that I would die before I was able to make my mark on the world. I was afraid that I would die before I could leave a legacy, and that the sands of time would swallow me up without a trace. Just like a baby or child who dies will never have the chance to leave a mark upon the world. And to my mind, at the time, this was a travesty because leaving a mark is what I thought gave live meaning and value and significance. I did not want to blend in with the common people or be forgotten in mediocrity and a life unlived. So, there was this constant existential dread and pressure to become something and to make something of myself. I was not truly valid unto myself, if I did not do this. To my teenage self, my legacy was more important than my life. Then, when I had my experiences of ego-transcendence, I saw clearly the ridiculousness of this type of thought. I saw clearly that nothing I would ever do would make my life any more or less significant than it already was. In fact, significance isn't even real. I was dooming myself to running around in a hamster wheel for a legacy that I would never be able to enjoy. Then, I let go of my need to live and have my idea of myself continue onward. I could have died right then, and felt completely and utterly okay with it. I was unshakably valid because I was an inextricable part of reality. I realized that one day, Emerald Wilkins would die and be forgotten, as would everyone that I have ever cared for. And that was beautiful, because that's exactly what's supposed to happen. I found beauty in my own temporal nature and the fact that I belonged to the beautiful cycle of life and death. Death could not harm me. So, I say, to try to let go of the idea that a life interrupted by death is a negative thing, or that certain things must be done to make your life worth something. Find beauty and acceptance in death, and you never have to fear it. Let go of the need to add to the concept of you. Let go of your self-concept.

I used to suffer from Maladaptive Day Dreaming (self diagnosed) and even joined an online forum for it a few years back. I've found that focusing myself productively toward other things has helped a lot. Also, letting go of beliefs that would spur a lot of day dreaming was also very helpful. I used to be able to just sit in a room by myself for 6 hours day dreaming and pacing around. And before I knew it, my day was gone. It can be very hard to break the addiction to thought and scenario creating. I also found that I was daydreaming to get away from negative feelings and situations, in order that I might feel positively. So, I was running away into daydreams to feel better. So, finding a way to feel better when you're present in your life is also very helpful.

I just did a video about Shadow Work a couple weeks ago, posted above if you're interested. I learned most of what I know about Shadow Work from authors working under the Jungian Psychological framework. I highly recommend the work of Carl Jung directly. But authors like Jean Benedict Raffa, Monika Wikman, John Sanford, Robert Johnson, Jean Shinoda Bolen, June Singer, Maureen Murdoch, and Joseph Campbell have also been very helpful to me.

Having an OBE seems nearly 100% similar to real life. Though mine have been fuzzier in the past few years, which I attribute to co-sleeping with my kids. I never quite have a comfortable night's sleep. They're very consistent though. They always start out with me waking up where I went to sleep, paralyzed. Then I feel vibrations and hear a high pitched buzzing noise. At this point I can try to get up and move around, and it is very consistent with reality. I can go outside and see the same things I would normally expect to see. But then I can also travel to different places. It was interesting talking to Teal. But I tend to be somewhat contrary and weird with people that I admire. So, I was fighting with my ego, half the time. I get to where I want to impress them, by being somewhat competitive. It's a really annoying tendency that I have. I agree on the vaccine thing. I can't see what the issue is, in light of how many problems vaccines have solved. Even if they do cause harm sometimes. My older sister had an allergic reaction to the Pertussis vaccine which caused her petit mal seizures, leaving her permanently developmentally delayed. She has the mentality of a seven year old in many ways, despite being in her 40s. But even this, is much better than there being no vaccines and children dying from Polio and Tetanus. At least, my sister is alive and happy.

No, I didn't ask her to. I met her at the end of her workshop for a few moments and asked her a question. I had spoken to her during an OBE once, and I wanted to know if it was actually her or just a projection of my own mind. She said that she has met me before in astral quite a few times. I've seen her a ton of times since then too. I don't know if any of it's true as I'm not sure if astral projection is actually real or simply a dreamlike state that feels extremely real, but I'm intrigued at the possibility. Then, the next day, I met her at the park with about 20 other people. That's when I thanked her. We also had a conversation about vaccines, which she is very against... as were most everyone else at the small gathering. So, I was honest in saying that I vaccinated my kids, but used this divergence to ask a question. Teal Swan says that she had the ability to sense vibrations in things to see if they're conducive to health. So, if this is true, she presumably has this reason for being anti-vaccine. So, I asked her, as person who isn't clairvoyant, how would I personally be able to tell one way or another whether something like this is something that is wise to avoid or pursue. She gave me the answer, to not be lead by fear.

I hope this is helpful to you. I've dealt with existential crises before, and these are my observations and reflections on the phenomenon.

I've found Teal Swan's work monumentally helpful at certain points in my journey, but not as helpful at others. Her work helped me clear up a lot of false conceptions and mental blocks that I've had in the past. It would be false to say that she hasn't been one of my most helpful teachers. But, as with any spiritual teachers, you have to resonate with them to benefit from their message, and resonance is always fluctuating for those on a spiritual path. So, if you don't resonate with her teachings, then don't force yourself to. But if you do resonate with her, you should allow yourself to. And allow that resonance to change as time goes on, as it certainly will. I found it hard to accept that I resonated so well with Teal Swan's teachings because she is very New Agey and mystical, and I have in the past had a strong identification with rationality and being seen as a practical person. She also has a "bite" to her personality that I find off-putting. Plus, there are many rumors of her being a cult-leader. I have met her personally, and I spoke with her and thanked her for being so helpful. But I can't deny that I'm very uneasy about her. But this likely has a lot more to do with me than with her. That said, take what you find helpful from Teal Swan and leave the rest. Never get too attached to a spiritual teacher.

In terms of depth/space existing or not, I'm not entirely sure. I know that I feel sensations that seem to be floating in space while remaining spatially relative and proportional to one another. But I'm not sure if they actually have depth/space/distance/direction or take up space or even maintain consistent proportional/directional relationships to one another. It could be that the illusion of depth only has an apparent reality (tactually) due to repeated experiences with the visual field as well. So, it's basically like two illusions that require one another to function. But I haven't been able to get a clear, un-thought clouded experience of my physical sensations. My mind loves jumping in with visuals. So, I don't know if I actually experience right/left/up/down in my tactual experiential field, or if size is something that I actually experience, or if my sensations take up any space at all. It's a mysterious medium of reality, that always seems to elude my grip.

It means just that everything you see is basically a flat screen of shapes and colors with no separations or delineations, nothing more. So, separate objects don't exist within the visual field or in any of the other sensory fields. They are only an apparent reality that we interpret (with analytical thought) based on repeated experiences and corresponding other-sensory field experiences. For example, we learn that certain shapes paired with certain colors/shades within the visual field have depth because we're used to feeling that depth in our tactual/sensational field. But the depth doesn't actual exist in the flat plane of our visual field. It is only the illusion of depth due to particular placements of certain shapes and colors that we're used to interpreting that way.

I define Truth as "being aware of and accepting reality exactly as it is beyond all thoughts, concepts, frameworks, and assumptions." It is the ability to see through illusions. An example that I can think of, in my personal experience, that relates to Truth is how I learned how to draw/paint realistically. So, I went into art class in high school not knowing how to draw. I was drawing symbolically from my left brain. So, if I saw a desk, I would draw a desk. Or if I saw a chair, I would draw a chair. These drawings never truly had realism. But then I learned the Truth that the visual field is actually a flat plane of shapes imbued with colors. There are no actual separate objects... it's all one thing. So, then, I just observed the shapes imbued with colors exactly as they were and my drawing/painting skills improved dramatically, almost overnight. Afterward, it was simply a matter of training my eyes to see more and more subtle details and subtle colors that the average person may not pick up on. So, a person who looks at a black piece of construction paper may only see black, but I see many different subtle colors. This is what awareness of the Truth does.

@Leo Gura I've been reading through the comments and I'm glad to see you addressing a concern that I have about how people (especially people of a rational disposition) often respond to non-dual teachings. As opposed to the teachings opening them up to new possibilities of reality beyond the materialist view, it seems to close them off as the "power realms" (as Shinzen Young refers to them) can sometimes be a distraction from enlightenment work. So, the many varieties and layers of reality are disregarded completely. I personally have had some experiences that people would refer to as paranormal via OBE as well as a few other mystical experiences, and (in the moments that they are occurring) they seem just as real as anything else. But in my own closed-mindedness and unwillingness to be socially unacceptable, I often wrote off these very real feeling experiences as simply hallucination and dreams: cut and dried. It's only in the past couple years that I've been letting go of these socially motivated interpretations of the phenomenon, to admit that I truly don't know what's real. I don't know if paranormal experiences of entities that I've encountered are real, I don't know if the places I've visited are real, and I don't know if my typing this here is real. But I do know that it feels real. And I think that's what's important. I think experiences like these can enrich someone's life. I know that life takes on a much more magical and limitless feeling when I open my mind to these possibilities. It's like going from being in a room with no windows or doors to being in a room with windows, doors, and an atrium.

Logic doesn't tump emotion with regard to transcending/dissolving the ego. Emotion is real and tangible and logic is abstract and idea-based. The thoughts are real, but what you're thinking about is not that important, unless it distracts you from actual reality. So, ignoring/repressing emotional awareness is a resistance to reality as it is. Many people who seek enlightenment begin valuing an intellectual understanding of Truth as opposed to their subjective experience of reality (which includes emotions), and this always results in simply spiritual bypassing. There is a great quote from Marion Woodman that describes what happens, "Spirit without matter is a ghost, matter without spirit is a corpse." Both, are dead. I believe what you think I'm doing is advocating matter without spirit/intellect, this is not the case. So, you're leaning more toward spirit without regard to matter, and valuing the intellect/logic more than what's real. That is a mistake to think it will yield you results toward enlightenment. Plus, what would be the point in reaching enlightenment if it didn't have some positive emotional payoff? There is no escaping the fact that emotions are what motivates you. Either you want to feel good about yourself because you reached some special spiritual state. Or you want to feel the clarity, wisdom, and fulfillment that comes from the transcendence/dissolution of ego. Or you want to get away from the suffering that comes from identification with ego. Or you seek simply because it feels good to seek. There is no pursuing anything without an emotional motivator... to gloss over this fact will create so many blindspots. You will fail to understand yourself at every turn, if you don't understand this fact of sentience: emotions motivate. Also, we will never not be animals. So, we must live as an animal. We cannot take the animal out of ourselves. It is not as though, in transcending the ego, we cease to be animals. So, it's important to accept this fact of reality. We have a body and our body makes us an animal. The problem is to balk at and resist our animalistic nature while holding up our higher/spiritual nature as the more desirable part of our reality. This aspect is incredibly important, of course. It's like a tree. The higher nature is where the fruit grows and the higher the branches grow the more fruit that can grow from the tree. But our animal nature is the roots of the tree and all the dirty dirt that surrounds it. If we believe we can somehow uproot the tree to make it grow higher, this is a mistake. The deeper you are aware of your animal (emotional) nature, the more you can expand your higher nature, the more fruits that will grow.

My argument was basically that happiness and fulfillment are the default and unchangeable core value of sentient beings, by our very nature. Every action that we take is essentially to go toward the most positive emotions and away from negative emotions, unless we perceive some greater emotional payoff in the future. So, even when we choose to suffer, it is because we believe it will have positive emotional ends for ourselves even if it is to feel positively that someone else gets to feel positive even in our suffering. Athene's argument is basically that logic should be adopted as the core value, as this aligns a person with reality. And in alignment with reality through logic, we can move toward better evolution of the species which is what we're genetically geared toward and that emotions are simply a byproduct of this. My argument relative to this is that even adopting logic as the core value is motivated by a desire to feel positive emotions. And even the desire to make humanity evolve, is an emotionally motivated desire from the subjective perspective. So, my argument is that it's important to realize that emotions are the primary motivating factor as failure to do so can create great blindspots in awareness of reality and our motivations toward particular actions. Like we can adopt actions and motivations that will not get us what we're actually desiring. I ultimately came to the conclusion that Athene's ideas and my ideas are not mutually exclusive, due to how he defines logic. I define logic as "A framework for understanding reality that makes good sense to the human mind." So, to define logic this way is at odds with my thinking. He defines logic as "being in alignment with reality." This definition is not out of alignment with my thinking. My idea is that "Truth" which I define as "being in alignment with reality" (as he defines logic) will beget the highest levels of emotional fulfillment. So, I have no issue with him saying that logic (as he defines it) should be adopted as the main perspective, as this will help more people achieve their natural desire of having the deepest levels of emotional fulfillment. The Truth is liberating, and reality itself is what's True and real. But he discounts emotional fulfillment as the default core value and desired end to all actions and says this value can be changed to logic for logic's sake. I disagree with this, as it has been my experience that emotions are always underneath all motivations and actions, no matter what those actions happen to be. So, I believe that the desire for the highest levels of human fulfillment possible in any given situation must be recognized as the motivator for action. This clarifies a lot in terms of self-awareness, as we can otherwise lose sight of why we do the things that we decide to do. I don't think his view that 'logic' (as in his idea of logic) is mutually exclusive to this recognition. Within his system of logic (which is basically being in touch with reality), it could also be noticed that all actions are motivated by emotional ends. But he claims that logic comes first and that being in touch with logic means that you're completely detached and indifferent to emotional ends. But this makes no sense to me. I've never had the experience of emotions not being the underlying motivator for all my actions. For example, I can go to a 9 to 5 job that makes me miserable, but maybe I think that it will bring me happiness in the long through the security of having that job. Or I can decide to become a serial killer because it gives me some kind of a thrill to have power over others and to harm others. This is also emotionally motivated. Or I can decide to become a philanthropist because bringing happiness to others makes me feel good. So, emotions as primary motivator (even in adopting logic (as Athene defines it)) is motivated by emotions foremost. I believe that thinking otherwise is a blindspot to logic as Athene conceives of it.

Well, I will argue that logic cannot be the core value even if we want it to be because even the adoption of logic as the supposed core value is motivated by the search for happiness and fulfillment which is the motivator for all action. To go toward positive emotion and away from negative emotion. No matter what a person does, benevolent/malevolent/neutral is always motivated by this emotional end. Emotions are (of course) not very logical in and of themselves. But making logic as your end, you could completely sail off course from your actual intended destination. Many people get stuck in being "the most logical" person, but never question whether or not being the most logical person actually makes them feel happy and fulfilled... when this was why they wanted to be "the most logical" person in the first place. So, logic can only ever be the means to that end, as the default core value of sentient beings is toward happiness. Then, I will argue that logic only produces imperfect results toward achieving the end of happiness and fulfillment. I would argue instead that Truth (as in being in touch with reality exactly as it is beyond all frameworks, attachments, and assumptions) and unconditional love and acceptance of that Truth, is a far more effective vehicle toward happiness and fulfillment than logic is. Often times, logic can get us stuck in blindspots because of its limits. If we think logically about ourselves and existence, it can make us come to the false conclusion that existence is invalid because it does not hold up logically. It makes no sense that anything would exist in the first place. Also, people who take on logic as their only perspective tend to get strongly identified with seeming logical, to the point that they have to lie to themselves about their own experience of reality. I will also debate his assertion that he is the most intelligent person in the world from the basis of logic in science, as this is neither a logical nor scientific claim. It's not scientific because he has no evidence of this claim. Also, we'd all have to decide on what exactly intelligence is, as well as whether or not it's quantifiable in the first place. Also, it's not logical to make this claim because it's implausible that he would be the most intelligent person out of the nearly 8 billion people on the planet.

I'm going to be debating Athene tomorrow. I'm looking forward to it. I don't think he'll concede that I won, no matter what I do. But I think it will be an interesting discussion none-the-less.

Very interesting. When I had my experiences, there was this deep feeling that I already knew everything and always had. It was as though I was directly connected to an infinite river of wisdom, and as I needed it it would always come. But I had no urge to know everything in the moment or to explore that river. I simply wanted to just be and to let whatever was necessary to come, come up as it applied to my life. Is this like the infinity that you experienced? Also, sometimes when I'm about to go to sleep, I'll see images reflecting before my eyes, partially mind and partially reflected onto the darkness of the room. One of the most common forms it takes is fractal-like designs. Also, sometimes when I close my eyes for long enough, I will see from the darkness (not imagine but truly see- seemingly) a very realistic random setting for split-moments at a time. Like, I'll see a street with people walking or an area of the woods, for a flash of a second projected directly onto the darkness of my eyelids. Is this simply mild bedtime hallucinations or is this perhaps a very mild glimpse of infinity as you experienced on 5-MEO?

So, basically infinity wanted to know what being finite is all about. And thus made itself into the infinite amount of finite experiences all at once. Correct? As God must be omnipresent and omnipotent, how else could this be achieved if God wasn't also experiencing the experience of being finite. To be otherwise, would be against its own nature. So, this sort of works like a fractal works. As you zoom further in you start to see the same intelligence translated through "smaller" (so to speak) mediums of consciousness. So, each universe has its own individualized consciousness with an apparent free will, then each creature within that universe with an apparent free will, on down. Is that correct? So, basically, the thing that makes our Natural Laws seem the way that they are and the universe have the qualities that it appears to have, is the particular frequency/vibration it has. And these vibrational patterns create the diversity on down from the cosmos to a grain of sand... perhaps through more subtle vibrations? Just a thought. It makes me think about when I was a kid and the car door would be ajar and I could split the one beeping sound into multiple beeping sounds just by paying attention in a different way and moving subtle muscles in my ears. Also, a thought that I've been pondering... If the nature of God is infinite, that must mean that the finite (and all the possibilities of the finite) must exist within the infinite as well, otherwise it would not be infinite. I've been thinking of all the possibilities of this that would just be ridiculous realities. Like there could be a reality where I have to tear off all my limbs every day. Or a reality that only consists of Bugs Bunny sitting in a room with orange walls. Or a reality where everyone is a serial killer. Or a reality that only consists of a computer screen. So, these thoughts (of course) make no sense to me because I'm stuck in thoughts of what infinity means. Could you give some clarity from your experiences with the infinite relative to this conundrum? Thank you.

Great observations!

There is no such thing as an unselfish action. But there is nothing wrong with this fact of nature. It's just the way it is. Separation is an illusion anyway, so even the welfare of others is the welfare of Self in disguise. All is one and that one thing is all loving and thus self-loving. This also works the other way around... to do harm to others is to do harm to the Self. So, fill up your own cup and fill up the cups of others. It's all the same thing, and it's all for you in the end, as everything is what you are.