Forestluv

The coronavirus is much much more dangerous than an ordinary flu virus. As well, the numbers you cite are collective for ALL ordinary flu viruses. Those figures include thousands of different viral strains. Working hard on a cure is just one piece of the puzzle. We also must work hard to increasing testing, increase the amount of protective clothing, increase the number of hospital beds, increase disinfectants, increase public education on the virus and voluntary personal behavior changes to help "flatten the curve". @Vxvxen It's amazing to observe the effects of human impact and how aspects of nature thrive better without humans. From the perspective of much of nature, human "shelter in place" is like a wonderful vacation.

That may be true on a micro scale, yet a macro scale is different level. It would be like trying to treat a benign pancreatic tumor with chemotherapy.

The appearance of fear still arises (yet much less frequently and with less intensity). I'm much better at managing fear, anxiety etc because there is meta awareness of the fear. Yet sometimes the patterns are deeply ingrained and I need some help to release patterns and recondition my mind. . . . For example, one night last June a very loud ringing started in my head. I had no idea what it was and I couldn't stop it. I experienced a lot of fear and went into panic zones. Full on "fight or flight". I could think "the ringing in my head is not threatening, I can relax" - yet this rational thinking did little good. I ended up getting EMDR therapy, which helped change my relationship to the ringing. An underlying issue was an ingrained conditioned belief of "I can't make it stop and it will never end". . . The therapist led me via lucid states into earlier times in my life in which "I can't make it stop and this will never end". This was a "trigger" for the mind-body's fight or flight response. With time, I was able to release this subconscious dynamic. . . The ringing hasn't stopped, yet my relationship to it is no longer fear, anxiety and panic,. . . I would say my new relationship with the ringing is "annoyance", which is much better than fear/anxiety/panic. This is just one example of a patterned fear response. There are many others. And I suppose there are many views about how fear is not patterned, it is created and arises in the moment.

From what I've observed, most fear boils down to survival. If something is perceived as a threat to survival (of mind, body or self), fear often arises. I see it mostly as a protective mechanism. A simple example: if I told you right now that someone was stalking me and trying to murder me, would you experience fear?

@Nightwise This would be dependent on one's goal. It would be like asking "should I allow weeds in my garden to run it's course without restraint". That depends on one's goal. If my goal is to allow the garden to die and free up some time in my life, then yes not weeding is a great idea. Yet if the intention is to maintain a garden, then not weeding is a terrible idea. If we want to kill off about 500 million people in the world and cause a global depression for a decade, then letting the coronavirus run it's course without restraint is a great idea. I suppose there might be some "good" in this scenario, depending on perspective.

It depends on how one defines "cold" and "dangerous". The coronavirus is the causative agent of the condition covid-19, which can be described as a disease and the coronavirus could be described as one of the most dangerous diseases humans have confronted for many reasons. The coronavirus R0 (contiguous factor) is extremely high - about 20X as high as a common flu virus. This is for several reasons: A) There is a long median incubation period in which the virus can spread. The median incubation period is 5 days - meaning 50% of infected people will show symptoms by five days. This means that 50% of infected people have no symptoms and spreading the virus up to 5 days and the other 50% of infected people have no symptoms while they spread the virus for up to 12 days. This is a very potent spreading factor that blows away a common virus. B) Nobody has any immunity to coronavirus and 100% of people are vulnerable and defenseless. With a common virus, there are immunities within a population. In a population, some people will be partially immune, others fully immune due to past exposures and flu shots. Yet nobody has any defense to the coronavirus. Zero. C) The coronavirus ranges from mild symptoms to severe symptoms, with a relatively high lethality. Very few viruses can claim mild, severe and lethal symptoms. About 20% of persons effected will have severe symptoms requiring medical attention and the letality frequency is about 3.4%. A common virus is much much lower. For example, the common flu virus has about a 0.1% lethality frequency, which is 34X lower than the coronavirus. D) The coronavirus can survive on nonhuman surfaces for 2+ days. The reasons the numbers don't seem that dramatic is because the world is not treating the coronavirus like a common flu virus. If the world treated the coronavirus like a common flu virus and let it run it's course, conservative estimates is that 70% of people will get infected. That means about 20% of the world's population (1.5 billion) would have severe symptoms needing medical care. And 3.4% (255 million people) would die of coronavirus exposure - and that is based on a 3.4% estimate in which hospitals are not beyond capacity. Once hospitals max out capacity, the lethality rate will climb much higher than 3.4% (as seen in the 9% death rate in Italy). Even a conservative estimate is 4X higher than all the casualties in WW2 (both military and civilian deaths). Four world wars 2s. . . As well, many many people would also die of comorbidity or other illness since medical care is unavailable. We are looking at 500+ million deaths. . . This blows away numbers from a common flu virus. Allowing a full surge would drastically overwhelm health care systems and people needing care for other illnesses and diseases would not have access to care. There would be many indirect coronavirus deaths. As well, this widespread severe illness and death (20% of worlds population) and considerable illness (about 50% of worlds population) would dramatically decrease productivity due to loss of work and a massive hysteria and panic would arise that is much much worse than current measures (lockdowns, social distancing). Comparing the current state of the coronavirus with strong quarantine efforts to a common flu without quarantine efforts is comparing apples to oranges. In the U.S. all common flu viruses together cause about 40 thousand deaths annually. (That is all common flu viruses combined). If we treat the corona virus like a common flu, models predict roughly 10 million people would die in the U.S. And that is only due directly to the corona virus. Many more people would die due to other illness because hospitals are overwhelmed. Based on this, the coronavirus would be considered orders of magnitude more dangerous than a common flu virus. The coronavirus ranks among the most dangerous in history, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/iOMarZz9BXgwquIn0fCryQSJW8Y=/0x0:1941x1941/920x0/filters:focal(0x0:1941x1941):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19816388/flu_covid_comparison_1_high_res.jpg

The relativity of strangeness is intriguing to me. . . . It's like an Icelander asking an Australian to explain the strangeness of kangaroos.

You are asking for actualization of that which is unactualized. If I ask someone to help me understand the direct experience of "fligev", it would be very difficult because I haven't yet realized the direct experience of "fligev". What they describe has been contextualized through a filter and would not be "fligev" itself. It is a contextualized image. As well the person receiving has their own filter of contextualization. If I told you what 100+ trips is like, I would need to create a story what it is like (filter # 1) and then you would interpret this and create your won throught story what it is like (filter #2). This is why direct experience is king - there are no filters. If I were to explain my own experience as a human, it would be that 100+ trips has dramatically altered my perception and relationship with reality. There is an appearance of awareness transcendent to "me". This opens up a whole new world of trans-personal exploration, yet it comes at a price - the death of identification/attachment to self. This is not what the self desires - the self wants to survive and asks "how could 100+ trips help me?". However, this "me" is surrendered. . . It would be like being afraid of a dangerous snake about to bite you and seeking help from the snake. The health care provider points and says "That's not a snake, that is actually a rope". . . And then the patient asks "Yea but how would that help me from the snake?". . . 1-5 trips can give some glimpses of the actuality of the rope, yet it often doesn't "stick" due to prior conditioning and desire for self survival. Ime, after 50+ trips it began to "stick" even during sober states. This open up a whole new world of exploration "meta" to the self construct. From a "trans-personal" perspective, psychedelics are the master exploratory tool, ime. Psychedelics are like an airplane - it is a valuable tool for exploration. Ime, after many trips - the duality between what is "real" and what is "imagined" dissolves. This is a "game-changer" yet the "myself" is no longer the center of The Game. Appearances of "the character" may appear and "trans-character" awareness may indirectly "help" the character - yet the character is no longer in charge or center stage. For example, if "me" is an illusory thought story, how could can anyone harm "me"? If I create an imaginary friend called "GabaLuv" and someone rejects "GabaLuv" by saying "GabaLuv is ugly and stupid" would this harm our imaginary friend "GabaLuv"? . . . This realization can indirectly reduce anxiety within the mind and body. If the mind and body is anxious that "I" will be rejected and it is revealed "I" is illusory, there will likely be a reduction of anxiety in the mind and body - not because "I" is becoming empowered. Rather because the illusory nature of "I" is revealed. . . Similarly, if awareness that a snake is actually is rope, anxiety about the snake will decrease. Not because the snake has been subdued. Rather because the snake is revealed to be a rope. . . Yet this can be extremely difficult to realize due to deep attachment/identification to the snake. It can be extraordinarily difficult to let go of and the vast majority of beings will hold tightly to the snake because that means "I" am still in the game. This is simply my contextualization that will be contextualized by the reader. This is two steps away from the actuality. Other beings will have other contextualizations. There are an infinite number available.

This can be a challenging thing to face, since fear triggers maximum resistance to observing. If I am feeling blissful laying on a beach in Belize, there is very little resistance of being now. Since I'm blissful, I don't want to change my conditions - I like the conditions of Now. So it is much easier to relax the mind and ask "who or what is experiencing bliss?". It would be lovely to lay on the beach feeling blissful and contemplate the nature of bliss. . . .Sign me up! Yet it is a very different scenario if I am chained up in a dungeon and a man enters with knives and a bottle of Hydrochloric Acid. Here the mind and body is flooded with fear. The is an intense desire to change one's conditions. The mind and body will strongly resist observing the fear and contemplating "who or what is experiencing fear?". When the mind and body is not directly experiencing fear, it is much easier to contemplate fear - yet there is a limitation. The tendency is for the mind to create all sorts of thought theories about fear. This can have some practical value, yet it will be at a surface level - unless it is coupled to extra-ordinary imagination - which most beings lack. One can practice to develop this skill or psychedelics can breakthrough this barrier. For example, I recently watched prisoners describe their experience in solitary confinement. At the start of the video, I didn't feel any fear or discomfort. I let my mind and body relax and allow space. What is "real" vs "imagined" began to dissolve. With time, intense fear arose to the point of insanity and panic. . . There were very energetic dynamics at play in which we could roughly describe in two categories. There was identification to the fear and panic. There was a sense that "I" was experiencing fear and panic. There was a strong desire to stop the video and do something else. As well, there was a "meta awareness" observing the fear and panic. To this awareness, it is not something to avoid. Through this observation, deep insights may arise - yet it's challenging to do because it's the last thing the mind and body wants to do. It is much easier to observe bliss when one is blissful because it's the first thing the mind and body wants to do.

By adding in an "IF", an assumption is created which sets the narrative. This is a major block toward deepening and expanding understanding. If we want to deepen/expand your understanding and transcend the question itself, we would need to inquire prior to those assumptions? This would include contemplation of: What does "flawed" mean? What is "accurate" and "what is inaccurate"? What is "reality"? Proper contemplation would be "meta" to theoretical constructs which can cause a feeling of groundlessness, which the mind and body often resists. The tendency for the mind is to make assumptions, which provide a sense of grounding. If the mind can assume meanings for things like "flawed", "accurate" and "reality" it gives a sense of concrete grounding. However, the grounding is not concrete - it is shifting sand. The direction one proceeds is related to their energetic orientation. Is there a desire to create sandcastles, believing they are concrete castles? Or is there desire to realize the actual substance of sandcastles?

If one is aware of unconditional love, how can anyone love unconditionally? That is putting a condition on love. Unconditional Love has no conditions. Unconditional Love is Everything. How can another being not express love if love is unconditional? Anything they do is unconditional love, because they are unconditional love itself. Let's say someone tells me "You are a bastard!!" and punches me in the face. I am being unconditionally loved. For me to interpret it otherwise, I need to add in conditions. I could say "That person doesn't love me unconditionally because he called me a bastard and punched me in the face". Yet in doing so, I've added a condition to what "unconditional love" is. I've stated that unconditional love is not calling someone a bastard and punching them. <= That is a condition.

What is trust and truth? How do you know if you can trust a birdsong? How do you know if the taste of an apple is true? All the models I create are like sandcastles. They have what some call "relative truth", yet ultimately they all wash back into the ocean. A wonderful interplay between form and formless. I would consider Leo's videos to be movies, just a different form of movie. That type of expression can be effective. Perhaps your mode of expression is similar, or you could create your own novel form of expression. You could integrate what you like about Leo's form with other forms of you like. Is not creativity a transformation of previous form into novel form? I'm a sucker for anything integrated. It's how my mind works. If I could only pack four items for a journey, curiosity would be one of them.

Any thought constructs will be circular. I would find it more insightful to contemplate "what is seeking?" and "who is the seeker?". From a human perspective, growth is within infinity. Growth is infinite. It never ends (and never began). In terms of seeking an illusory "it" to make "me" whole, I would say seeking energy is transformed into exploration energy. They are two different energetic orientations. A voyager who seeks to find "x" has a different orientation than a voyager who is simply exploring. If the journey is the destination, there is no "seeking" energy. The seeking energy gets transformed toward Beingness and exploration.

It's not a somewhere you go.

@Prevailer I’m pointing to something else that you don’t seem to be interested in - which is totally fine.

@billiesimon That's cool too. I'd probably use the term "observing' or "being", yet "inquiring" can work too.

If the mind goes into theoretical mode, let it go. For example, we could ask "what is real and imagined?". If the mind starts thinking like "Real would be things that I can touch. Real is physical things. Real is things I can perceive. Stuff there is evidence for". . . Then stop. Why? Because we just introduced about six new self-inquiry questions: "What is a thing?", "What is physical?", "What is perception?", "What is evidence?". Thus, we are moving in the opposite direction. . . I ask the inquiry question and just observe. If nothing arises, fine. If something arises, fine. Sometimes I let the question go and two days later I will be in nature and an insight arises "oh, so that's it". Or a few days later, I may have a dream about it. To me, an inquiry is like planting a seed. I think inquiry is great for allowing space for implicit understanding, as described in Leo's video. When this arises, it can be tempting to explicitly describe it through words and images. Trying to explicitly describe implicit understanding is a very different orientation from explicitly trying to figure out the implicit. As well, there can also be a form of "thought" that arises, yet it's not a regular thought. For example, I may be laying under a tree for hours, observing. A few thoughts may arise, yet there is no "me" thinking or attachment to it. The thoughts are like background sounds and don't have regular "thought power". It's all One. A thought would be the same as a frog croaking, a leaf falling or a feeling. It's all hallucinations. There is no grasping or pushing away of anything. This is a very different relationship with thoughts. It's not really a "thought", yet I don't know what else to call it.

"Remembering" is an interesting phenomena to me. There are an infinite number of interpretation of "what happened" or "what is happening". A memory is one of an infinite number of possible contextualizations. So, "it" never happened.

I like the phrasing of "grounded on an illusion", since it includes the both sides of the paradox. .. . We could also say "groundless on reality". For me, it gets tricky. . . If I tell myself "This is an illusion", it doesn't honor the realness of it. If I tell myself "This is real", it doesn't honor the imaginary-ness of it.

What I'm pointing at has nothing to do with the view. It's more about the "ownership" of the view. There is no "my view" and "your view" there are simply views. If we were standing on a mountain top admiring views, would we say "the view to the west is my view and the view to the east is your view". Of course not, there are simply views that are free to all. There is noone taking ownership of any view. That is part of the pointer. Thinking too deep. We could also rephrase it as getting too immersed in thinking or believing thinking is true. It is more about the attachment/identification to thoughts as "my thoughts, my view etc." that is the contraction. Or getting lulled into believing that thoughts are true. Who/what is this "self"? How can one dismantle an illusion? If I am walking in a desert and see a mirage, how could I dismantle that mirage?

@Prevailer If you are interested, it's possible to dissolve attachment and identification to belief such that beliefs are no longer held. There are simply appearances of thoughts, images, concepts without holding onto it as a "belief". Similar to how bird chirps may appear in the mind without any attachment or identification. . . I've found this very liberating and allows for clearer observation and freedom to explore, without being encumbered by holding onto beliefs. . . This doesn't resonate with everyone, yet it is available to those with interest. (btw, I find appearances of ideas about different states of consciousness to be interesting and fascinating. Yet holding onto those appearances as beliefs is a drag.)

It depends on what you mean by "twice as strong". In terms of weight, 30mg plugged is a breaktrhough experience. I can't imagine trying to vape 15mg. I only vape around 3mg. In terms of intensity, plugging gives an overpowering "wave" effect into "breakthrough". Vaping is more like an intensity dial in which I have more control over intensity. As well, the various vaping temperatures will have different effects and smoking have different effects. It's not a simple as "plugging is twice as strong as vaped".

I’m moving this to the health section because it is more about the use of drugs relative to one’s health, rather than the use of substances for spiritual realizations. As well, the term “drugs use” generally has a negative connotation in society (e.g. heroine, methamphetamine etc.). In a spiritual / personal development context terms such as “substance”, “tool” or “medicine” would be more accurate.

Then rest in the awareness.

Consciousness includes both physical and non-physical. The mind is creating distinctions called “physical” and “non-physical”. The term “1st order” or “prior” is often used because the mind is well-equipped for linear concepts. What would be “prior” to your ideas of physical on non-physical?