Forestluv

I think this thread is triggering the insanity that is already within me. . .

I’m not versed in this area. Would that involve concentrated 5Meo oils similar to THC oil carts?

I’ve insufflated, plugged and vaped. Of the three, I’d say insufflation is the worst and I won’t use that ROA again. For me, plugging and vaping each have their benefits. Plugging has a wavelike essence to it and lasts longer. Vaping is more like a boost of baseline consciousness, yet I’ve gone to some pretty deep areas - probably a combination of being in the right mindset, setting and digging in with the vape. From what you describe of yourself, vaping sounds like it would fit you well. It is like slowly getting into the pool. You can pull back if you want. Plugging would be like diving into the pool. Once you jump and are in the air, there is no undoing it, regardless of how much the mind-body wants to return. Similarly, once the 5-Meo is plugged, that’s it. It’s best to surrender because there is no undoing it. This has the advantage of going deeper because there is no turning back. Like jumping out of a plane to sky dive. . . Vaping is like an intensity dial. This can have an advantage for beginners that like to put their feet in the water slowly. Yet the disadvantage is it’s super easy to back out if things become uncertainly uncomfortable. I’d say it would be difficult for a beginner to breakthrough since they will likely back out at the first signs of a mindfuck.

@Nak Khid Please chill out on the infantile sarcasm. It’s fine to express different views and humor, yet don’t make a mockery of exploring consciousness.

It seems like a deep 5Meo trip revealed an essence of this and there was a returning. Yet the construction and appearances during return did not involve a “me”. That didn’t return until very late in the process. In this sense, there was no “me” to commit to anything - first, because there was nothing to commit to and second because there was no “me” to do a committing. Perhaps at a transcendent level there was a noncommitting and a decision to return. Yet this was transcendent to me. After the self returned, there was no sense I had any options or could have committed to anything, because I wasn’t there. I didn’t exist. Yet perhaps a transcendent “I” existed and decided not to commit. I’m currently within a personal/human imagination and if given the option to commit permanently to that which was revealed, I would choose ‘no’. I would consider this preference to be a bias.

No, this is not what Is being pointed to. It’s not about a personal character called “Serotoninluv” you have created. There is truth within your creation, yet you won’t expand by staying contracted within that creation. I’m not saying you are wrong and I’m not disagreeing with you. You are misunderstanding. Yet you don’t seem open and curious to this, which is fine.

It’s not about other people. It boils down to you. If you don’t want to venture somewhere you perceive as unappealing, that’s fine. Yet don’t let your interpretations of others distract you. A trick of the mind is assumptions. The idea that Leo is more woke than Buddha is obviously absurd, and you can see that absurdity. That is the easy part. Yet the idea that Leo is more woke that Buddha is also fundamentally true, yet you cannot see that because of how you are creating “Leo” and “Buddha”. It is possible to have clear understanding of this, yet there is a price to pay at the personal level. This is the hard part. You don’t seem to be curious about venturing here, which is fine. There is something here you can see and understand. There is also something here you cannot see or understand. I’m not saying you are wrong and need to reject your view. I’m saying that view is partial.

I don’t necessary disagree with that. I was contemplating a particular moment induced by 5Meo. Any explanation I give is not it, because any explanation is a contextualization of the mind.

That’s consistent with my 5Meo experience. Getting into the subtleties of bias. . . .would you consider “empty perception/imagination” to be a bias? For example, right now I am looking at scenery. I would consider the perception itself of that scenery to be a bias.

You are free to create whatever you like. I’m just pointing out that speculating about what 5Meo says ain’t it. If you want to know what 5Meo says, it’s best to listen to what it says directly - not by speculation based on what others say.

Would you consider a 5Meo-induced null void as zero? No senses, no perception and no awareness since there is no thing to be aware of.

You’ve just scratched the surface of psychedelics. Be careful of assuming understanding based on extrapolation of limited understanding. This creates misunderstanding which is a block to deepening and expanding.

This is a misunderstanding. If you want to know what 5Meo says, listen to It directly rather than speculating through what others say.

Vaping is best for beginners. One can take a little peek. A sitter is not necessary. It would be like asking “If I put my toe in the bath water, would I need a lifeguard?”. One would need to be extremely hyper-sensitive with an anxiety disorder to need a sitter/lifeguard in this context. With a single inhale on a vape you would likely be underwhelmed, thinking “What’s supposed to happen? Is this it?”. As you increase the intensity, there may come a time you want a sitter for a breakthrough experience, yet you aren’t there yet. I’d cross that bridge when you get there.

Yep. Yet it gets tricky with the phrase you use of “one can turn”. I prefer the term “create”, “imagine” or “be”.

For me, it has a unique organic mystical vibe. Nice work.

This is just my experience. . . There was a time I was hearing others say things like “everything is a imaginary” or “we create our own reality through imagination”. There was something very intriguing about this. There were times I wanted to flip and thought “I want to dismiss reality. I think I would be better off and I’m curious what that is like. It seems like many spiritual people say everything is imaginary”. Looking back, I would say that desire was a seed that had the potential to grow, yet it was insufficient on it’s own. I’ve found that I just can’t think myself into believing something that I don’t believe. There are deeper levels. However, that desire was a key for me that opened doors. I started getting curious about real and imagined. Yet staying in the safety of my thinking mind was no longer satisfying. I wanted the actual direct experience. So, I started putting myself in environments to explore that through direct experience - sensory deprivation tanks, lucid dreaming, psychedelics etc. I started reading books and watching videos of people that have explored this. I got very curious. . . However, if I had the mindset of “the experiences of lucid dreaming, sensory deprivations tanks and psychedelics are just imagination, they aren’t real”, I’ve already closed the door to the exploration, before I even started. Regarding lucid dreaming. . . I am not an advanced with lucid dreaming. Yet, last summer I got a good taste of it that opened up my world. I rarely remember dreams and had previously tried to lucid dream with little success. Last June, I suddenly started remembering dreams every night. Between 1-4 dreams every night. This surprised me and I saw it as a great opportunity to explore. Plus, I had time off from work, so I could write down all the dreams throughout the night and sleep in if I wanted to. This led to spaces that were “sorta dreamy, sorta not dreamy” in which I couldn’t tell wether it was an “actual dream” or not. This was the first crack in my hard categorization of what counts as “a dream”. Yet importantly, this was through direct experience, not theorizing. . . The boundaries between what is a dream and what isn’t a dream started to break down. One of the big breakthroughs is when a scene in a sleeping dream manifested in waking life. Exactly the same. The sleeping dream manifested right in front of me in waking life. The two worlds came together and there was an energetic shift. This opened new doors. . . In terms of lucid dreaming while awake. . . I’ve reverted back to rarely remembering dreams and unfortunately I no longer lucid dream while sleeping. However, I’m now much better at lucid dreaming while awake. For me, the key is to fully relax the thinking mind that wants to control the narrative. If there are lucid dream appearances and my mind dismisses it, it is a block. For example, if a lucid dream glimpse with an “entry portal” and the mind thinks “that appearance was just my imagination. It wasn’t real. It was probably just the wind” - that portal slams shut. You mentioned that part of you wants to dismiss reality. For me, this is not the key. The key is the mind wanting to dismiss dream appearances. My analytical thinking mind needs to relax - deeply. This can involve lots of letting go and is much harder when the mind is active. Either through theorizing or pre-occupation. If I am busy with my job and have lots of stuff to do, it’s much harder to enter these states of consciousness. . . The opposite side is trying to “make it happen” - trying to stop all thoughts and push things away - this is also a block. It’s more about letting go and allowing what arises. One thing that helps is setting an intention. If I think “OK, I’m gonna try out this lucid dream while awake thing. It’s probably BS or just imagined, yet I suppose I’l try and see.” The mind is closed and I’m setting myself up for a self-fulfilling confirmation bias. Afterwards I may think “See, nothing happened. No other “realms” appeared. Just regular thoughts. I knew it wasn’t real”. . . A much better orientation is a childlike mind of curiosity and anticipation. . . . I couple environments to deeply relax are yin yoga and laying in nature, sometimes for a couple hours - and reaching deeper and deeper levels of letting go. Thoughts like “what’s supposed to happen? Am I doing this right? Was that a dream appearance? I don’t think this is working, I’ve got shit to do” are at a surface level of consciousness. For me, a small dose of a psychedelic or cannabis edible can give me a bit of a lift. I’ve explored it enough that I can now access while sober, yet it usually takes some effort and often isn’t that strong. Yet often can be. There have been conscious waking states while sober that were full-on lucid dream. For me, my mindset and environment are key factors that interact with each other. Extended time in nature and also who I’m with. I’ve met a few people that have a particular resonance that helps bring me there. I know a few people that seem naturally resonating with these other realms - not immature people that are disorganized and all over the place. There are a few people that can ground in the groundless and this can help open doors. A have one friend that I can pretty much “turn it on and off” when I’m with her. . . Yet the mind will often resist, which makes environment so important. In the begging, when I was in a public place and starting losing touch with “real and imagined” it was very unsettling and caused anxiety. Yet now I’m used to it. It doesn’t even make sense for me to call it “real vs dream” anymore, because it’s all a mixture. I no longer think “Hmmm, was that experience in nature real, a lucid dream or a dream?”. It’s all beingness, appearances and explorations. When it’s practical, I can still categorize things to communicate and function, yet it’s no longer my default state of mind. I’m attracted to experiencing different states of consciousness and after seeing enough of them, it becomes pretty obvious that they are all “altered states of consciousness”, including various sober states.

Excellent!! This is reflective of exploration. To explore this area. . . Rather than intellectually categorizing things as either “real” or “imagined”, I found it helpful to relax the thinking and to experience - not through thought figuring - rather through experiencing through feelings, intuition, empathy, observation and beingness. For example, I spent about 4 months engaged in lucid dreaming - not just in dreams, also entering lucid dreams while I was awake. I explored many spaces that could be considered “sorta real and sorta imagined”. As well, sensory deprivation tanks can allow space to enter. . . I noticed you questioned wether psychedelics were just imaginations. This is another great place to explore. When the mind realizes a psychedelic experience is just as real as a “sober” experience and that a “sober” experience is just as imaginary as a psychedelic experience, there is massive mind expansion. However, some people will not want to venture here - especially people that are oriented toward grounded, concrete structure. Exploring the unknown can be very uncomfortable and groundless. For me, my initial explorations into what is real and imagined was associated with a lot of discomfort and anxiety. I started seeing how everything I thought was real is imagined and how everything I thought was imagined was real. This was very destabilizing for me and I went through a lot of confusion, uncertainty and anxiety. Yet, I was also fascinated and curious. Observing how the mind creates reality is one of the most fascinating and curious areas of life for me.

This is creating categories of “real” and “imagined”. There is nothing wrong with that and it can be helpful to functioning in life and for survival. If I’m standing on the edge of the Grand Canyon and tempted to fly like an eagle, it’s good to create categories and distinguish whether I am dreaming or not dreaming. If I’m dreaming, it’s time to fly like an eagle, if I’m not dreaming it’s best to stay standing and imagine what it would be like to fly like an eagle. This as practical value and I’m not saying it’s wrong. The trap a mind gets into is dualistic structures of opposites - that if one thing is true, then the opposite is false. This is major barrier. In this case the mind may think “If everything is a imaginary, that must mean that there is nothing real - that there is no real and imagined. How can that be? There is obviously real and imagined?”. This is a trap, because both are true and if the mind believes it must accept one side and reject another side, then it will not be able to see the truth of both sides. A very simple example, are the two sides of the coin. If the mind is oriented such that only one side is the coin, it will not be able to see how both sides are the coin. If the mind believes the coin is the heads side and someone says look at the tails side - the mind will think “How can the coin be tails? That would mean the coin is not heads and the coin is clearly heads”. To see both sides of the duality, one must be shown the truth of the opposite to see both are true. If someone can only see the truth of the “heads” side, they need to realize the truth of the “tails” side. If one can only see the truth of the “tails” side, they need to realize the truth of the “heads” side. . . Here you can clearly see that there is real and imagined. You can clearly see that there are imaginary and real things. You have that part of the truth down. That is the “heads” side, and you don’t need any more help seeing the truth of that side. What you need to realize is that everything is imaginary (without rejecting that everything is not imaginary). To do this, I have found it helpful to explore inter-connections between the duality so it is not black and white. For example, rather than creating two categories of “real” and “imagined”, we can explored how the categories are inter-related and how there is a spectrum. For example, we could explore things that are “sorta real and sorta imagined”, we could explore experiences in which we cannot tell the difference between real and imagined. We can observe how the mind creates real and imagined. On the flip side would be a person locked into “everything is imagined. Everything is a dream”. This person can see the truth that everything is imagined, yet cannot see the truth that there is a difference between real and imagined. The human mind is generally not programmed for this orientation, yet it can occur. I’ve met one person that was completely immersed within the truth that everything is imagined and could not see the truth that there is real vs. imagined. He had the opposite orientation than you. Due to his immersion into everything is imagined, he didn’t even consider anything real (it’s all imagined). He could even understand the concept of real. He had an extremely difficult time functioning in life and it took him many years to understand a thing the concept of “real vs. imagined”. He still struggles with it at times. . . He could only see “tails” and not “heads”. However, you have the opposite orientation. You can see that there is real and imagined, yet cannot see that there is only imagined. You can see “heads”, yet not “tails”. Yet it can be very difficult to see the other side of truth, since it is perceived as very threatening to a self construct and it’s survival.

If you are most interested in improving speaking skills, iTalki is a great online community. They have certified teachers and uncertified tutors at a reasonable price. As well, native English speakers learning your native language will skype with you for free. Half the conversation is in English, half the conversation is in your native language. I’d also recommend choosing native English speakers. There are many many people that speak English as a second language without full fluency. This is no big deal in casual conversation. Yet when learning a foreign language, I’ve found native speakers that speak clearly and use correct grammar to be most helpful.

@4201 To me you seem to have a particular orientation. What I’m expressing doesn’t resonate with you and you don’t seem to have interest exploring it. I’m not saying you have a wrong orientation. It’s fine as it is and I wish you well.

“I” is a bias. ”not a thing” is a bias. “Awareness of things” is a bias. Of course the self would feel some sense of defeatism. Defeatism is akin to surrender, and that is the price the self must pay to realize the deeper truths. A mind oriented toward personal development, personal empowerment and personal well-being will not resonate with truths outside the parameters of personal development, empowerment and well-being. There’s nothing wrong with that, yet it’s limiting. At the personal level, it’s important to be clear on honest about one’s orientation. If I think “I seek Truth for Truth’s sake” because I like that identity . . .all sorts of distortion, misinterpretations and confusion will arise because I am perceiving through a personal lens. For the deeper levels of clarity to be revealed, all that needs to be surrender - which will feel like defeatism to the person. Yet again, there is nothing wrong with pursuing personal goals, empowerment, well-being etc. It can be a very loving thing to do for the mind and body - it’s just a different orientation. This reflects the two different orientations. And again, I’m not saying one is better than another. . . One orientation is “The truth (relative to my personal development) is that it doesn’t matter. Fussing about an absolute is a distraction from my personal development and becoming a person with less bias”. This can be true at a personal level, although even that would be relative to the type of personality. For example, I know I will never be a old medal Olympic marathon runner. Yet that doesn’t give me a sense of defeatism and de-motivation. I have a passion for marathon running and try to reach my personal potential. As well that orientation is very different from seeking Truth for Truth’s sake, regardless of the personal consequences. For example, what if discovering the truth means that I will actually become more self biased and my well-being will decrease. What if that is the truth? Someone oriented toward personal development will not enter that room to explore. Someone oriented toward discovering Truth for Truth’s sake, regardless of personal consequences, will enter that room to explore. Again, neither orientation is better or worse. Yet being unclear will cause fog, confusion and inner turmoil.

Yes, those insights are legit. In terms of overly conceptualizing you observe the energetics. What was the energetic orientation of the explanation? Was it a direct experience of implicit knowing trying to express itself explicitly? Or was it the mind trying to create concepts to figure out “what it is” and “what it’s like”? Neither is inherently bad, yet self inquiry is more about having the implicit revealed. Yet the mind has a tendency of taking ownership of implicit understanding and conceptualizing it. Again, nothing wrong with that - it’s just down a different route. For example, realization of a detached observer aware of itself and all things is a nice realization. Yet was the realization revealed in direct experience leading to a sense of “OMG!! What just happened? There are no words. I don’t know how to explain it. It was sorta like I was an observer. Yet that’s not quite right, because it wasn’t “me” observing, yet it sorta was me. I just can’t find the words to describe it”. Ime, that’s what it looks like when implicit understanding through ineffable direct experience is trying it’s best to explain itself through language. That is a very different orientation than a mind trying to figure it out like “I watched a Rupert Spira video about some observer. I wonder what that’s like. He said it felt kinda like this. Maybe there is an observer of an observer. Maybe the observers go on into infinity”. That is trying to figure out an unrealized direct experience of implicit knowing through explicit figuring it out. It won’t work very well. . . . I would also be mindful of the mind contextualizing a realization as an “experience” and taking ownership of it. For example, a direct experience of an attached observer. The ego can enter, take ownership and identify as “I am the observer. This is so cool. I’ve elevated several spiritual levels”. This is conflation between the “i am” and the “I AM”. The mind can be super sneaky.

@4201 It was more abstraction than literal. Trying to explicitly and literally describe it loses the essence. . . In a more literal sense, can you name one thing in life that isn’t a bias? To do so, you would need to create an external, objective, universal “thing”. And that itself is a form of bias.