Forestluv

Have you tried synthetic mescaline? I’m curious about going a synthetic route.

To me, this seems to be conflating relative happiness and absolute happiness. Phrases like “lasting happiness” and “complete satisfaction with what you have” points toward unconditional happiness, yet when perceived through a relative filter seeking desire and suffering arises. One way to look at relative happiness is that it arises when seeking energy is relieved. Yet this is a temporary relative happiness. There was something I didn’t have that I was seeking, then I got it and now I’m happy. For example, imagine I have been seeking to get a new car. I save my money for years and buy a new car. Part of the happiness I feel is because the seeking energy is gone. There is relief. The same goes for seeking knowledge, sex, a home, a travel destination etc. When one attains the object sought, the seeking vanishes and there is a sense of happiness. This form of happiness is conditional - if I don’t get the thing I am seeking, I am not happy. The seeking of relative happiness is always for a thing that is not Here and Now. Now imagine that what you seek is whatever is Here and Now. That is the ultimate seeking. The seeking relief comes from “finding” Here and Now. This is unconditional happiness - the happiness is free of any conditions. In a relative context, there is no permanent happiness because it is relative to not happy. For one to hold relative happiness they must also hold relative unhappiness for contrast.

I talk about subconscious biases with other races every week, it’s part of my job. At my institution, I work on a committee that includes several races - part of our work includes discussing subconscious biases at both the individual and institutional levels. As well, I interview job candidates of many races regarding diversity. One of the topics we discuss is subconscious biases. I also teach about subconscious biases in my courses and have discussions with students of a wide range of races. I’ve also been in relationships with women of other races and we discussed subconscious biases. And also my friends of other races, and psychologists of other races - the list goes on and on. It’s a topic I am curious about and desire to explore from different perspectives, including perspectives of other races. I’ve spent hundreds of hours looking at my own subconscious racial biases. I’ve taken various tests to identify my subconscious biases. I’ve attended professional workshops. I’ve lived immersed in communities of color in my own country and foreign countries. I’ve been in relationships with women of color and have had many conversations on this topic with a wide range of people, including poc, people living in poverty, people in the prison system, psychologists, neuroscientists and sociologists. I’ve found that there is a mental dynamic of “to be of blame for all of societies problems”. Blame and guilt are mechanisms that keep a person contracted. It prevents a person from going deeper. Blame is an external orientation and guilt is an internal orientation. Both are contractions that prevent space and openness for realizations and growth. This is a common defensive posture laced with sarcasm. This orientation allows a mind to protect and maintain a particular personal perception of their reality. Mindset is essential to allow space and openness for realizations that enlighten, deepen and expand. A mindset of “tell me about my privileges that I don’t have - privileges that you are just making up because you believe you are to blame for all of society’s problems” . . . is not a genuine, humble, open orientation that allows space. If you could transition into a black transgender woman, your personal relationship with reality would be altered. How you navigate through life would be very different. Your experience, perceptions and interpretations toward your wellbeing and survival would be very different. Your current white, straight are not relative through the lens of a white, straight male oriented toward it’s well-being and survival. Those privileges would be revealed if you could transition to being a black transgender woman. Yet white, straight, males don’t have to acknowledge their own privilege or work through it, because they don’t have to bear the burden of not having those privileges. This itself is a privilege.

“Everybody is. . . “, “They do it too” , “Both sides-ism” and “Why should I have to work on this issue if they don’t have to?” are common ways for a white person and people to avoid taking looking at their own subconscious biases and privilege. This also clouds seeing disproportionate biases at the population level. . . . Similar to “Reverse racism” mentality. It’s one of the challenges I face when trying to discuss the issue with white people. One thing to keep in mind is disproportionate impact. Black/brown people are impacted much more by white subconscious biases than white people are impacted by black/brown subconscious biases because white. has more power and leverage. This is just my pov, others have different povs

@RevoCulture It’s not something that can be figured out.

@RevoCulture I’m unable to connect with you. We have different orientations. It happens sometimes.

I can see something you don’t see and don’t want to see. We aren’t on the same frequency. Have a nice night.

As I see it, there is seeking that is fundamentally human. There are many different forms and some can be sneaky and subtle. Seeking happiness and seeking relief from suffering are the two most common dynamics on the forum - to various degrees, imo. There are other seeking orientations, yet less common. Be aware that there is a personal edge to your energetic orientation that can create personal conflicts.

Well said. I work at a University and think a required study abroad is a good idea. I would add an extra component: the study abroad environment must be significantly different than their counterparts conditioned environment. A white student that grew up in an affluent white community in the suburbs of Boston doesn’t get to study abroad in in an affluent white community in the suburbs of London. At institution, all language majors must study abroad one semester and must live in the “International House” on campus for one semester. I’d like to see this expanded to all students, yet it can be challenging with logistics and finances. It could be done, yet would take a coordinated effort by a lot of people. Hopefully, an academic institution does this as their “brand” and it attracts enrollment. Then other schools will follow to stay competitive in the market for students. There is also a business side to academic institutions.

@seeking_brilliance In a sense, I like the idea that bronze age people may have had awakenings and contemporary people are trying to see higher wisdom in ancient scripture. Yet this type of thing is way too indirect for me - there are too many interpretive steps and filters. It’s like driving hours in a storm on icy roads to reach a destination when the destination is across the street.

You are on to something juicy. . .

@Raze I would make distinctions on clarity and identity politics. Those that have embodied Green know Bernie does not believe a woman can't be president. He has had a completely different orientation his entire life. It would be like someone saying that in a private conversation Trump said that Mexicans and middle-eastern Muslims are superior to white Americans. We would all know that this could not be true because it is not consistent with Trump's orientation. Those that are upset are conflating principles and personalities. They are upset with misogyny and sexism. They are upset with the notion that a woman cannot become president. This is the emotional trigger for green. A green person without embodiment may not be able to distinguish between the principle of gender equality and the energetic orientation of Bernie Sanders. This conflation will cloudy their view. Orange have even less understanding. They will not be triggered by the notion that a woman cannot become president, because their higher value is self-centered gains. They have an aversion to Bernie and will gladly use this situation as a way to harm the Green values he embodies. There motivation is Green resistance, not to promote gender equality.

The energy of the movement spreading and getting stronger. People are taking notice and not everyone is happy about it.

Below is a recent political video. It is one of my favorite political ads. It is tripping with healthy substantive Green. The video was not produced by the Sanders campaign. The video was created by people that have been moved and inspired by Bernie. It has a high level of creativity, human connection, egalitarianism, multi-cultural, empathy and love. For me, the video is very moving. I really hope Bernie wins and this essence permeates through the consciousness of humanity.

When you are dreaming, why do you create a dream character that you identify as?

@Sizeable Oof This isn't about a character called "Leo" you are creating. That is a distraction. A slight rephrase of the question: "If *I* am 'literally god' when *I* take 5-meo, why am *I* still limited in power?" A transcendence of the personal *I* is needed here. A personal *I* is a limited construct. Your question cannot be understood at the level of a personal *I*. If we expand a limitation, we have an expanded limitation. As soon as the personal *I* is introduced, a limitation is introduced. It's like asking "If I am a human, why can't I fly like a bird?". Because you just limited yourself as a human. We could ask "If I am the dream character in this dream, why can't I create the dream?". This is a perspective contracted into a dream character. One would actually need to wake up for a transcendent view of the dream and dream character to be revealed. When you wake up, the dream character goes "bye-bye". Likewise, transcendence of the personal *I* is needed to see the limited contraction within the personal *I*. Realizing this will unlock a lot - even at the personal level. You don't understand how limited your construct of "limited" is. You have potential power waaay beyond what you can currently imagine. Most people might think "Yea, yea. I want this extra power". Yet they are still within the construct of a person. I would recommend tapping into potential slowly and allow the mind and body time to acclimate. If an ant suddenly jumped up to the conscious level of a human for an hour and then dropped back down to an ant, it would be overwhelming. That poor little ant would likely go insane. Or it may explode. For the vast majority of humans, suddenly realizing God consciousness would be so overwhelming to the mind and body they would go insane.

These questions involve a lot of relativity. For each question, I could answer "it depends". There is no one expression of "highly developed". Even the term is relative. In a way, have an image to work and move toward can be helpful. Yet also be careful in being too rigid and creating one imagine of what "highly developed" looks like. Your expression of highly developed may be different than mine. I suppose there are some generalities: In general, I would say that "low conscious" relationships are predominately transnational and each person is motivated toward fulfilling self needs and desires. "I did this for you, so you should do this for me", "I've done so much for her and now she treats me like this". "She takes me for granted". "This isn't my fault, if you hadn't done xyz then none of this would have happened", "I need you to respond to all my texts within 12 hrs". "We haven't had sex in two weeks. I need to have sex more often or I may seek it elsewhere" .. . This type of stuff is centered in Tier 1. . . Tier 2 involves the transcendence of self to a degree. There is an energetic shift in which the source of motivation is not dominated by self needs - there is more of a desire to explore, experience and grow. There is a sense of "us". There is a shared unity. We can see each other in each other,. There is a sense of mutual support and a deeper sense of unconditional love. . . This may sound wonderful, yet it comes at a cost most people are not willing to pay. In terms of levels, Tier 2 can see a vertical hierarchy of levels, horizontal hierarchies within a level and singularity without levels. As well, yellow can see multiple lines of development that can be nonlinear. Yellow also sees a mixture of colors in each person. Yellow is able to perceive the word through multiple lenses. When you ask "Are there people in your life that are on your level?", you are using a lens of vertical levels, which is not the only lens. It would be like saying: If someone is wearing yellow-tinted lenses how could they tell the difference between a tomato and an orange? This question assumes there is only one lens. . . . I recently spent a week with my blue-level parents. I could perceive them as being on a "lower level" than me. This lens will portray certain images. For example, if politics come up "my" views are at a "higher" level than there views. This can create disconnection and turmoil. Yet there are other lenses to wear. . . For example, I teach science courses and my 9 year old niece just started learning science. Am I at a "higher" level than she is? Well, I guess so - yet that would be a weird orientation to have. Rather, we just explored science topics together as we explored science topics. . . With that said, some people want to debate and argue. Some are very attached/identified to a position. In these cases, I tend to avoid engagement. For example, my parents are extremely opinionated in their views and they are highly attached/identified. If I offered another perspective to look at things, they would get very emotional and defensive. For example, they strongly believe that US killing the Iranian general was justified and a good thing. If I asked "What would this look like from an Iranian perspective?" - they would have gotten very upset and defensive. They would accuse me of taking the Iranian side, question my patriotism, go on and on about how many US soldiers the Iranian general killed and how much courage our US soldiers have. They might also say that they will not allow disrespect for our soldiers in the household. So I just don't engage in that topic if it comes up. Yet I don't think "I have a higher conscious view and I will not engage with such low conscious people". Rather they are perfect for who they are. . . Just like my 10 year old niece is perfect - even though she doesn't understand University level genetics. In terms of feeling lonely. . . for me there is an aspect of loneliness, yet it isn't like a "poor me, I'm so highly conscious and now I'm all alone". That is a self-centered orientation that begins to dissolve into the Tier 2 transition. A new energy of curiosity and magnificence that is revealed - whether I am alone or with others. I would describe it more in terms of resonance. There aren't many people I have a strong resonance with - yet I don't need many. . . Sometimes there is a sadness that arises, yet I wouldn't call it loneliness. For example, sometimes I walk in the woods and my mind goes into yellow-level contemplation. It can be very joyful, yet there is also a sadness that I can't really share it with another. Yet, when I cross paths with another and we have high resonance, it is very very special.

What comes to mind for me is effort and conditioning. To me, this seems like a form of discipline that requires effort. For example, I will eat vegetarian every day, whether I want to or not. Some days, I want to eat meat, yet I will be disciplined and only eat vegetarian. This seems like an effortless habit. I wouldn't consider this "discipline" since no effort is involved. I have been vegetarian for over 20 years. I don't even think about it. It doesn't even cross my mind to eat meat. There is nothing for me to be "disciplined" about. Sometimes I am out for dinner with a meat-eater and they ask me "How long have you been vegetarian?". When I say "About 20 years" they often reply "Oh my! You are so disciplined!". From their perspective, being vegetarian would require effort and discipline. To me, it's effortless and needs no discipline. I also don't eat car batteries or bird poop. There is no effort or discipline involved. . . I could also ask someone "When was the last time you at liquid baby food?". They may reply "Not since I was about two years old". It would be silly to respond "Wow!! You are so disciplined!" I wouldn't call it a shift in discipline, I would call it a shift against prior conditioning which can cause a sense of disruption. For example, I lived with local families in small villages in Central and South America. Here, "vegetarian" wasn't a thing. There were so few tourists that the locals didn't try to accommodate tourists with vegetarian options. They didn't really get exposed to it. Their culture was very meat-centric. Many families had their own animals they consumed or the animals were in the local neighborhoods. I saw locals killing various animals, such as hogs. . . Meat was part of every dish. At first, I would say that I'm vegetarian and I would politely refrain from eating meat. Yet they didn't "get it" and sometimes they would need to prepare a separate meal. For example, they might be preparing a meat stew and to ask them to prepare a vegetarian option became really awkward. I tried to explain it, yet my Spanish wasn't the best and it was an odd concept to them. They often asked me "why would you eat like that". Speaking about health, ethical or environmental reasons didn't resonate with them. I even tried to say I was allergic to meat, yet that just made things weirder. . . And I noticed this altered the energetics of our meals. There was an odd vibe. . . So I decided when I travel to remote areas in which vegetarianism isn't well-understood and causes tension, I will eat like the locals - which includes meat. This completely changed the collective energy. The weirdness was completely removed when I started eating what was served. . . Yet a new internal weirdness arose. My mind and body had 20 years of vegetarian conditioning. Eating meat with these families "felt" like I was out of flow because it was counter to over 7,000 consecutive days of not eating meat. . . In terms of "prior conditioning flow" it felt out of flow. Yet in terms of "what's happening now flow", there was no disruption. I was aware of both dynamics. . . Yet discipline was a non-factor. It was all about mind-body conditioning.

To me, the topic seems to be: "How can find what will make me happy?". I would say this is one of the most common fundamental human questions. The human may or may not be aware of this. For example, someone may be aware "I am seeking to be happy. How and where can I find this?". Another person may unconsciously seek - for example, by seeking sex, travel, a good job, learning a foreign language etc - yet they may be seeking without realizing they are seeking a relative form of happiness. The trap is that this is a relative form of happiness. To seek happiness means that happiness is not Here and Now. If happiness was Here and Now, there is nothing to seek - it's been found - it's Here and Now. So we need to create a construct that there is thing called happiness that is not present now, If it's not here now, it must be in some other place in the future. Then there is a desire to seek and find that happiness. This is a fundamental energetic orientation of humans. There is nothing wrong with this, yet it causes turmoil when a person conflates absolute happiness and relative happiness. Absolute happiness cannot be found in the timeline of past or future. It can only be found Now. This is an unconditional happiness and the deeper desire. At a deeper level, we want to come back Home, which is eternally Here and Now.

You may want to update your relationship with "understanding" and "contemplation". For example, I used to have an idea that "understanding" was mostly intellectual. Like I understand English, the rules of football and the plot of a movie. So for me, "contemplation" was about trying to figure it out - like how I would try to figure out the rules of Australian Rugby. . . If I contemplated "what is a thought?", my mind would try to figure it out and go into thinking "Well a thought occurs in the brain. There are neurotransmitters in the brain that cause thoughts. Yet this doesn't seem right. Maybe a thought is an energetic appearance like that Yogi said. But if someone has a brain injury, they may lose their ability to think straight, so the brain must be involved." . . To me, this type of figuring it out contemplation doesn't go very deep and it doesn't lead to a deep understanding of what a thought it. . . For me, trying to figure things out through the intellect is very very limited. What helped me was to relax, let go of that and allow space for insights to appear - which are not always thoughts. Then I recontextualized what "understanding" and "contemplation" is. We cannot solve a problem with the same thinking we used when we created them" - Albert Einstein

Just a few observations appearing in my mind. . . For me, context is a factor. For example, are we talking about people/teachers of car mechanics, learning Spanish or the nature of reality? If we are talking about an authority on learning Spanish, I would look at their experience teaching, their online reviews and would speak with the person to see if their teaching style resonates with me. Yet existential questions are different for me. Religious people, scientists, mystics and others all may express different expressions of truth and reality. It's much easier to distinguish a high quality Spanish teacher than it is a high conscious existential teacher. My level of discernment is proportional to my level of development and clarity. There are things have haven't been in tune with because I wasn't at that level of development yet. What you wrote about intuition and rationale is a key, ime. You can develop your intuition to which there is a knowing of itself with no knower. For me, rationale in the form of "figuring it out" is a deterrent. Yet rationale in the form of structural support is helpful. For example, a few years ago I traveled to the mountains of Peru to do an Ayahuasca retreat. One of the tribal members was an amazing musician. Yet there was something about him that was so attractive to me. Not in a sexual way. I didn't know what kind of way. I didn't know anything about intuition, frequencies, dimensions, LOA and that was probably a good thing because I didn't have a bunch of knowledge and filters. During the retreat, I wanted to be near him and I didn't know why. I sat near him at the ceremonies. I would see him sitting outside on a rock and would go and sit next to him. We didn't even speak to each other. I just sat in his presence. I have never met a person like this in my life. There was a resonance and a knowing that this is new and it is true. Yet I couldn't figure it out or make sense of it. I didn't want to. All that was needed was a little bit of rational framework so I didn't blow it off as "woo woo". . . Over the years, that essence kept re-appearing and pieces started coming together. I might be listening to a nonduality talk and something is said that re-activates that experience and there is a knowing of "yes, that's it". I would be sitting with someone and that essence would arise and there would be a "yes, this is it". It might be helpful to start getting in touch with this "knowing" of direct experience. For example, do you know when someone is speaking English? If someone told you, "No, that person is actually speaking Chinese". You would "know" this isn't true. You wouldn't need to seek evidence and proof. You know. . . Another example, think of a time in your life you reached "flow state". Perhaps you were playing a sport or a musical instrument. "You" and "time" dissolved and there was pure presence of the moment just happening - as if the musical instrument was playing itself. . . Now later, imagine someone describing what a "flow state" is and what happened to you. You can tell if he "knows". He may describe one of his flow states and there may be resonance. You might be like "Yes! That's it!". Another person might get into intellectual theory and tell you your "flow state" was not real - it was just a bunch of molecules in your brain. You might think "No, that's not quite it. I don't think this guy has ever experience a flow state". . . Last example: You have an innate knowing that Now is Now. You don't need any evidence that Now is Now. If you were listening to a nondual speaker trying to express the essence of "Nowness" in words, you might resonate and be like "yes". If someone else came to you and said "Actually, this isn't Now. You are not experiencing anything. You are a rock in a forest and you aren't perceiving anything right now". You "know" this isn't true due to a knowing that comes prior. You wouldn't need to seek evidence and proof that you are not a rock and nothing is happening. These are obvious examples, yet ime it's a somewhat similar sense of "knowing" as we evolve and direct experience is key. And the resonance gets stronger and stronger. Recently, someone on the forum posted an essay that Maslow wrote just before his death. He wrote about the essence of "full actualization". One of the things he wrote was that "full actualizers" can recognize other "full actualizers" immediately. It is as if truth recognizes itself and truth. It is direct. Interpretations and filters are extra steps. Ime, as I evolved "higher" into new stuff, there was a degree of groundless and uncertainty. There may have been questions like "Is this what the buddhists were referring to as no mind?" or "was that experience I just had a collective consciousness?". And then there is integration and resonance that goes deeper and broader. I might read articles from scientists, psychologists, shamans, mystics and people on forums about what collective consciousness is. For me, there is an intuitive form of intuition and essence of attraction/yes-ness. It might just be one sentence in a rambling post or it might be some high conscious post that I can "sorta get" yet seems true. In particular, that that person "knows". . . Then the direct experience can deepen, expand and clarify as it reveals itself. This is a collection of both "inside" inputs and "outside" inputs. . . For example, in one of Leo's videos he talked about consciousness being what you identify as. One can walk in the forest and identify as a human being walking through a forest. Or one can identify as a forest. I immediately knew this. There was no thinking "Wait a minute, how do I know this is true? Maybe he is just making this up. Other people say different things". The knowing came prior to all that figuring. It is the knowing of what IS as it IS. That part of Leo's video helped give me clarity and structural support. Now, consciousness can flow from being a human in a forest to consciousness being the forest. How do I know this is "true"? Because it is what it is. Now, new deeper insights are being revealed all around me that deepen and expand this. There may be appearances in my own mind, through a raccoon, a falling leaf, the Heart Sutra, Maslow, dreams etc. . . And eventually, discussions in my mind about "true" vs "false" started to dissolve. Everything I have written here is both "true" and "false" in a relative sense - for my mind to hold an image of "true" there is also an imagine of "not true" to provide contrast. At a meta level, both of these images are Truth. I'm much more interested in existential truth, than surface level truth. Last week I took my car to the mechanic and he told me I needed a new exhaust system. Asking if this is "true" is a very different energetic orientation for me. I don't really care. I don't want to get ripped off, so I might ask him to show me why or I may get a second opinion. Yet this type of "truth" is dry and uninteresting to me. He seems like a trustworthy guy that knew what he was talking about, so I told him to go ahead and repair it. The question of whether it was true or not never appeared again. There are much deeper levels to explore.

Ime, this can be an entry into expanding one's consciousness/reality. It goes much deeper and broader. It's not just a physical object that can appear visually wavy and morph. Beingness, direct experience and ISness can become "wavy" and "morph". Imo, the appearance of morphing, fascination, silence and effortlessness are really good manifestations for exploration. Morphing visuals are just the beginning. Personally, I don't resonate with morphing visuals. I don't resonate with psychedelics that morph objects - like melting walls or wavy patterns. For me, that is a distraction. I'm much more attracted to other forms of morphing reality. However, mesmerization into an object can be a portal for me that leads to space in which "stuff" can appear. I may be staring at a tree, a painting or a flickering candle and my mind becomes mesmerized by it. Yet then it isn't about the distortion of the object. It's more like a new dimension or essence is revealed and the object merely allowed my mind to get relaxed and quiet for it to happen. An ISness in which real vs. imagined dissolves.

I would say there are different energetic orientations of the desire to "master". There is an orientation of wanting to "master" psychedelics for personal development and personal gain. Here psychedelics would be a personal tool to progress along a path toward a destination. It would be like having a magic wand and asking "Can I master this wand to get where I want to in life". Or "Can I master psychedelics to heal my past traumas?". Another orientation is using psychedelics existentially. This is transcendent to the person. Realizations of reality may be revealed that have nothing to do with my personal desires or gains. Or new abilities may be revealed that weren't asked for or desired. With this orientation, one may ask "Can I master psychedelics such that they become a higher order teacher of transformation in ways I cannot imagine?" These orientations are not mutually exclusive, yet ime it's important to the "mastery" process. There are things to keep in mind for someone wanting to use psychedelics for personal growth and skill development toward success. For example, if this person went into "ego death" zones in which trans-personal awakenings are revealed - there may be a lot of anxiety, resistance and inner turmoil. Not just during the trip - also afterwards for days, even months. The person wants to enter another realm to get some goodies for personal gain and they enter an ego death zone showing that "you" doesn't exist. This misalignment of energetic intention and desire can be quite disruptive to a mind and body. The person may contextualize the trip as a "bad trip" that screwed me up. Or that psychedelics don't work for them.

Thank you for your words. It is nice to connect with others. Now I am contemplating about attention, awareness and creating our reality. I like integrating what others categorize. At times I like to drop the categories of "physical vs nonphysical", "science vs metaphysics", "reality vs imagination". This allows for loosely held ideas and fluidity in the mind. This allows exploration. What is attention? What is awareness? What is happening now? What is existence? Is the reality of Now limited to what we can sense, perceive and imagine? From a "physical" perspective, we have a brain that acquires information from our environment, processes that information, interprets the information and creates perception. For example, our eyes absorb environmental information - this is sent to the Thalamus which processes the information and sends it to the visual cortex of the occipital lobe. Consider how much is involved in visual perception. There are colors, motions, depths, shades, textures, sizes etc. There have been cases in which a blind person has their sight restored with stem cells. One might think "Presto! They can see again". Nope. Eyesight is only one component. That blind person never set up the neural circuitry to process visual information. They will need years of therapy to adjust to this new reality. Evidence for this model comes from stroke patients and brain scans. A stroke is caused by a temporary oxygen deficiency to part of the brain. Neurons die only in this part of the brain. Neurologists and psychologists can then examine what part of the brain died and what deficiencies the person has. As well, we can do brain scans on people in real time. When can observe what parts of the brain are active during different activities such as speaking, imagining drawing, fear responses etc. Together, this has given us a map of the structure and function of the brain. Higher resolution technology is allowing higher resolution maps. Let's assume someone's visual system is working properly. Eyes absorb external information. The thalamus and visual cortex are working fine and can process information. Can this person "see" their environment? In a sense, the person can "see", yet there is one more step. . . There is a region of the parietal lobe involved in attention and awareness. If the visual system is "seeing", but we don't pay attention to it (or are unaware of it) are we "seeing"? . . .Right now, your sensory systems are processing lots of visual, auditory and tactile information - yet your parietal lobe is not active and you are not paying attention to it and are unaware of it. . . We may ask "Does it exist if I have no attention or awareness of it?". Also, does the sensory information I don't pay attention to get incorporated in "me" subconsciously? Can I increase my level of attention and awareness? There is a condition called "Hemisegment neglect". These individuals have had a stroke in one side of their parietal lobe. Thus, they lack attention on one side of their sensory reality and lack perception. Their eyes and visual cortex are working fine, so they can "see" in that sense. However, they are unable to pay attention to it. What would the experience be like? In this sense, they are blind and deaf on half their perceptual field (e.g. they cannot see other hear anything on the left side). Their visual and auditory systems work fine, yet they cannot pay attention to it and are deaf and blind in this regard (for half of their perceptual field). If someone had this condition in both sides of their parietal lobes, it is a form of a coma. They would not pay attention to anything in their perceptual environment - which is a form of coma. Yet would this person still have any awareness? Could they be aware that there is existence that they can no longer sense and perceive? Could they create a new imaginary reality while lying in a bed in a coma? (And totally unaware they are lying in a bed). I'm not aware of anyone having this condition and that recovered and remembered it. My guess is that this person would be considered in a vegetative state and would not be considered conscious. Yet it would be extremely unlikely for a person to lose function in both hemispheres. Below is a video of two people with hemisegment neglect. A few things I find particularly interesting: -- There are two forms of hemisegment neglect. In one form, the person is aware they can no longer perceive one side and are missing something. This is easy to relate to in direct experience. Close your left eye. You are no longer perceiving the left side of your visual field and you are aware that there is something there. Now imagine you had a stroke and you permanently loss perception on your right side. You would be aware of this and could compensate to function in life. . . There is another form of hemisegment neglect in which the person has attention neglect and cannot perceive one side, yet they are unaware of this - they are unaware they cannot perceive something. Imagine having a stroke and being unaware that you are missing any perceptual ability. People tell you that you can no longer see to the left, yet this sounds strange to you. You can only perceive 50% of your potential visual field, yet that 50% is all you know. So in a sense, it is 100% of what your are perceiving. The old center point is now your new "left side". If someone said "you are missing seeing something on the left side" it would seem very strange - your subjective experience is that you can see the left side. However, your "left" is relative to you, relative to other people it is the center point. . . To experience this directly, cover your left eye, stretch out an arm and stick up a finger so it is aligned with your nose. Is your finger at the center point or the left point? This depends on awareness. If you are aware there is a left side you cannot see, the experience will be that your finger is the center point. You have been conditioned to perceive this way and even with your left eye shut, it may seem like your finger is the center point. Now imagine you perceive/believe/experience your finger as being the left side. From one perspective this is true. Can you imagine it as such? Now imagine people telling you that you can't see to the "left" and you think "I can see left, what is she talking about?". The two people are using two different meanings of the word "left" and it will cause confusion. In a sense, the normal person can perceive something that the hemisegment neglect person cannot. You might as well tell the person that they cannot perceive something in the "6th dimension" that they are unaware of. This dynamic is not limited to visual perception. It is much broader. To a person that is only aware of 50% of the visual field may be unaware and assume this is 100%. In a sense, that is true (it is 100% of what they can see). In other sense it is false (they can only see on one side). The mind often holds one piece of a greater whole, yet are unaware it is only on piece of a greater whole. If I hold one grain of sand in my hand, only pay attention to that one grain of sand and I'm unaware of the rest of the sandy beach - then that single grain becomes 100% of sand. That will be my experience and reality. Letting go and becoming aware of the greater whole can be extremely challenging for several reasons: 1) Who cares? The person may be more interested in survival needs and desires. They may be paying attention to seeking a girlfriend, to pay the bills and get a good job. Within that existential reality, the questions posed above don't "exist" because they are unaware. Becoming aware can be a huge hurdle to get over. Imo, curiosity is super important to get over this barrier - also having one's basic survival needs met. . . 2) Even if the person is informed of a greater expansion, there can still be a lot of attachment/identification to get over. If I am attached/identified to the grain of sand I hold, it becomes "me". Becoming aware of the sandy beach can seem like "I" am dying. -- In the video below, I also find it interesting that lack of attention in hemisegment neglect has degrees and preferences. As well, a person can improve to expand their perception. This is revealed in two places. 1) During the finger bending exercise, notice how the man can see the finger bending when it is at the "center point". Yet when both "center" and right fingers are bent, he can only perceive the right side finger. We know he can perceive the "center" finger, yet he is giving attention preference to the right side finger. . . How much of our potential do we miss. Things that we have potential to perceive, yet give attention preference to something else? Perhaps we may have an ability to perceive a paranormal essence, yet we give attention preference to logical theories?. . . 2) The man expanded his visual perception. Notice the line exercise. When he first did it, he drew a "center" dot waaay to the right. Look how narrow his perception is. It is a tiny fraction of the whole line. After doing exercises and practices over a long time, he expanded greatly. His "center" point is now much further to the left, indicating his attention / perception field has expanded. . . Now imagine the psychology needed for this improvement. If this many said "I can already see everything. I don't believe in this "left" side or "expanding stuff". How do I know you are right and I am missing something. Show me evidence with the type of evidence I want". This would have kept the man contracted in one side. The man had to admit he was missing something, get curious and willing to expand. He also needed "trust" that there is "something" others can see that he cannot see. To the ego, this can be very difficult to overcome (myself included). Also notice how important his direct experience is. He could read lots of theory about hemisegment neglect - that is one form of understanding. There is also is direct experience of expanding. I'm curious if this man is aware of his expansion. These are realizations. If the man is aware of his perceptual expansion, it will be a realization in direct experience. It would be like "whoa!!! I can see more now! I was unable to see something and now I can see it!". This is very different than the psychologist pointing to the line test and saying "look how much more you can perceive". The man may understand this in a symbolic sense, yet not realize it in a direct experience sense. For those that resonate with this type of model making. . . In terms of SD, I would consider this a yellow level. Some minds are more in tune with this type of thing than others. It can also be developed, yet some minds are naturally oriented this way. If so, I think it's important to realize this - it will greatly improve your quality of life and allow full potential to be actualized. In brains terms, multi-level integrative abstractions involves the most evolved portions of the frontal lobe - which develops up to about 23 years of age. So if you are younger than this, the good news is your brain will get better at doing it. . . Another point about SD development: for minds evolving from a scientific/logical/analytical orientation - one will first resonate with yellow,. They will be attracted to it. For example, years ago I was interested in Leonardo Da Vinci. I just liked the way his mind thought. The next stage for me recognizing it and making distinctions. For example, I could recognize Richard Dawkins and Da Vinci have different orientations. And not just in a analytical way of comparing traits from a list. There is also a "getting it" kinda way because you are embodying it. You can just tell. . . For a while, I resonated with this type of yellow beingness, yet I couldn't do it on my own,. I could see it in others, yet couldn't create it. When I tried to create it, I would default to other yellow level thinkers. I would read their stuff and try to put it together, yet my mind couldn't do it on its own. Over time, these appearances in my mind just started arising naturally. I would start seeing connections and new creations would arise. For someone that resonates with Yellow, this is one of the greatest joys in life. What I wrote above appeared in my mind last night while walking in nature. It's not anyone else's theory (although others have probably come up with pieces of it). These were all appearances that happened while in "zone". One other point: all of this is just one expression of Yellow. It does not define yellow. If you resonate with this and your mind is thinking of new ideas to expand this model - you are resonating with yellow. If your mind is inter-connecting what I wrote above with other points about sensation/perception/metaphysics/awareness - that is yellow. Notice how fluid your mind is with ideas - with the interplay of form and formless. What I wrote is an expression of Yellow, yet Yellow is much more expansive and includes many other expressions. So if this doesn't resonate with you, it does not mean you have no Yellow. Think of yellow like the essence of traveling. What I wrote here would be like describing my travels through Honduras. That is just one expression of travel. Just because you don't resonate with this Honduras expression, doesn't mean you don't have a love of travel - you just have a different form. What might be indicators of Orange resistance? One thing to look out for is rigidity to terms, desire for concrete grounding and defaults to authorities. For example, a mind might think "Wait a minute. He is saying there is a difference between attention and awareness. But Rupert Spira said that attention and awareness are the same. Who is right? I think Rupert is right because people say he is enlightened." Or "This guy thinks a brain actually exists! He is still contracted in the materialist paradigm! This can't be right.". This would be appearances of a rigid mind looking for objective truths in relative contexts - a thing that is right and a thing that is wrong. . . These are blocks to Yellow development,. It is better to hold ideas loosely and in context. I am not attached to defining the terms "attention" and "awareness" as a specific thing that applies to all situations. For example, I may be having a conversation with someone who says "Let's say attention and awareness are the same thing. It doesn't matter where I'd like to explore. I'd like to explore the different dimensions of attention/awareness the mind can enter while lucid dreaming. A fluid mind could go with that flow. If something arose in the conversation that could be referred to as "attention" the mind would be using another term like "recognition". Well, that's a lot for today. Below is the video on hemi-segment neglect.

For me, even calling others "low conscious" can contribute to my problem. And it's not just a mental narrative. There is subconscious meaning in the mind and emotional stamps. Things like the limbic system that don't have a rational component. For me, the most important thing was to change my response to the stimuli. For my most sensitive sound, it no longer drives me into "fight or flight". About 30% of the time I don't even notice it. About 40% of the time, I notice it but it doesn't bother me, there is not emotional response. It's just background noise, similar to the feeling of my pants. I usually don't notice it and it doesn't bother me. About 30% of the time, the sound is annoying yet not extremely annoying. Yet my condition is tinnitus, not misophonia. They might have different treatment approaches.