Forestluv

@Derrida A baby has a form of nondual consciousness. A baby has no concept of subject object. No attachment/identification to “me” or “you”. A baby has no story about being a character living through time. If a baby throws a ball, the ball simply disappears. There was a ball one moment and no ball another moment. The baby doesn’t look around for the ball or think “I want my ball back”. There simply jus is. . . Then we developed cognition to separate subjects-object, a timeline and a story of “me”. I like using babies to point to a “prior” to these creations. There is a form of consciousness present that is “prior” to the thought stories. An exercise for deconstruction I like is to unwind back to when I was a baby, before all the thought stories. Even back to when I was a fetus and prior to fetus. Before any images, language, thoughts etc. I’ve found sensory deprivation floats to be a good environment for this. Also shamanic breathing. Every “pointer” or metaphor is incomplete. It is a partial truth of one facet. So we can always say “But wait a minute, what about xyz?”. This doesn’t invalidate the value of the metaphor, it’s just a part of the whole. It’s like five blind men feeling an elephant. One man says the elephant is a tail. Another man responds “How can the elephant be a hairy tail, when it is a hoof?”. . . In this case we may say “How can a baby be enlightened when it is has no awareness of the ‘I Am’?”. For sure, we could say that an aspect of enlightenment is awareness of Now for which babies are a good example as well as awareness of “I Am-ness by which babies are not a good example. Yes, I would consider embodiment to be deeper than intellectual acknowledgement. Embodiment is a type of “getting it”. For example, someone might read that “the self is like character in movie”. The person might say “yea, yea, I already knew that. Tell me something new”. Yet the person is still deeply immersed in playing that character and is unaware of the deeper truth. The embodiment would be the direct experience realization , integration and transcendence of the character. This is a much more difficult process and can there can be a lot of resistance and discomfort. . . . Another example might be identifying as a character in a dream. The dream character could intellectually acknowledge the existence of dreams, yet still identify as the dream character. This is different than the alarm clock going off, waking up and realizing “So that’s what a dream is”. That direct experience is deeper than a thought story. . . . One challenge is that thought stories are cheap and easy, the direct experience realizations generally take a lot of practice, effort and time. Regarding hallucinations . . . Imagined = Real and Real = Imagined. Saying that “suffering is just a hallucination and isn’t serious” is assuming that hallucinations aren’t real and therefore not serious. Imo, it would be better to say that suffering is both serious and not serious depending on perspective. I’ve volunteered in a psychiatric ward sitting and listening to patients that re suffering. In this context, I tried to be the best listener possible without judgement and I tried to understand and be loving. In this context, I would not be helpful to tell them “your so-called ‘suffering’ is just a hallucination that isn’t serious”. . . . However, an Eckart Tolle retreat is a very different context. Eckart may reflect on his own suffering and his realization that suffering is an hallucination. This may help people in the audience recontextualize their own suffering. “I hope getting the experience won't require that I abandon my scepticism altogether though. Otherwise that would be similiar to Christians telling you: You need to open yourself to God ( = believe in him) in order to experience him so that you can believe in him. Well .. shit.” Part of the process involves surrender, yet it’s not quite like how you are framing it. Rather than surrendingbto something irrational, it is surrendering to something post-rational. Yet prior to the transcendence, the mind will not be able to differentiate the two and will resist both. However, one can get a sense of the difference. For example, religious people and Leo both seemed to talk about irrational “woo woo” stuff at times. Yet I could tell the difference between a religious zealot and Leo. The key for me was that religious zealots were irrational and could not have a reasonable/logical conversation. However “woo woos” like Leo were able to use reason/logic, so I was able to tell that they were at a higher level and I was missing something.

@Nak Khid This gets into authority. We are our own ultimate authority, yet we turn over our authority to others all the time. This can be useful in certain contexts, yet I find it helpful to be aware when I am doing this. I like knowing someone’s background before investing in their theory, yet there is a balance of skepticism. If someone at the mall is peddling “Get enlightened and lose 30lbs in 30 days for only $30”, I would be skeptical. Yet if some seems genuine, has a history of study/experience and their work resonates with me, I’d be curious to take a look. Also, intellectual parroting is nit embodiment. The map is not the territory. There is a deeper understanding that comes through direct experience. Once this direct experience reveals itself, it’s pretty obvious but in others. For example, someone may parrot stuff they read about nonduality. If they haven’t had nondual experience/embodiment, it’s super obvious. Imagine someone memorized a bunch of English sentences yet couldn’t construct their own sentences. It would be quickly obvious that they can’t speak English.

There is a “hide” option for users. Yet we ask that it be used sparingly. If starting and hiding threads becomes common, things don’t flow so smoothly.

@Name Depending on context, you are correct or incorrect. It’s easy to assume we know what existence is. “Duh, my hand exists and a uncorn doesn’t exist!”. Yet there is a deeper existential realm. To gain a deeper understanding, one could inquire “What is existence?”. Or one could contempkate the inter-connectedness between existence and non-existence. Or one could get direct experience. For example, the experience of not being able to distinguish between existence and non-existence, such that there is no difference. Perhaps through lucid dreaming or psychedelics.

Sure, it depends how one uses it. . . . I’ve been stoned watching Rick and Morty and didn’t get much spiritual insight. . . I’ve been stoned while doing yin yoga and deep spiritual insights were revealed.

Why force a decision between language vs. non-language. This just creates limitation and conflict. . . For example, I know someone that worked through her mental issues through horse therapy. She spent a lot of solitary time with her horse. Most of this was no language. She couldn’t speak a language with the horse and she wasn’t trying to figure things out in her head through language. There were non-language aspects. Was language part of it? Sure, I suppose she had to speak with her parents and the rancher. And perhaps she had a human guide. Now she is starting her own center of horse therapy. . . To say that language is sufficient and that’s all we need seems silly to me. Likewise, to say language is unnecessary and should be avoided seems silly to me. It’s all inter-related and integrated. It’s like traveling to a foreign country and saying “all we need is the rental car. No other modes of transportation”. That’s fine, yet there is also bicycling, kayaking, hand gliding, mopeds, boating, zip lining etc. A rental car is great, yet if we restrict ourselves to that, we limit our range of experience and understanding.

I spent a day in the jungles of Belize with a jungle man. We went canoeing in his hand-made canoe. We capsized in the rapids and swam for our lives back to shore. We barley made it to shore before the next rapids ahead. . . . As I sat there, I realized I lost my shoes and cell phone. Then I realized my feet where in a fire ant nest and I was being bitten. As the burning sensation rushed through my body, I jumped up screaming and “dancing” as I frantically tried to get the fire ants off me. . . There was a moment of pause and the jungle man and I started laughing hysterically at the absurdity of it all. . . . It was a beautiful moment of transcendence.

I would say forms of hatha and vinyasa that include a lot of balancing postures.

There are many webs and all webs are interconnected.

@Nivsch There is sooo much more than language. Observe and notice. . . It’s all around us. . . A new relationship with reality is revealed.

That’s beautiful ❤️ ?

@Scholar I see value in creating post-conscious frameworks to transcend pre-consciousness concepts. I also see value in creating post-post-conscious frameworks to transcend post- conscious concept frameworks. And I see value in exploring other realms as well. For me, theorizing can be like painting a painting. I like going deeper and deeper into the painting, I just need to be mindful of becoming mesmerized and captivated by my painting. There are many other realms to explore and directly experience.

@Scholar Creating new constructs that provide grounding to those evolving is a practical contribution. Maps can be fun to create and useful to oneself and others. If you can create improved maps, that is a worthy pursuit. Your maps may resonate well with others. As well, the map is not the territory and it’s helpful to be aware of the tendency to become mesmerized by maps and miss actual territory.

@Scholar

Sounds like the makings of a roof party. . .

From a meta view, there is the question of what IS is. What is red, brings up relativity. On one level, what is red to one mind is green to another mind. For all we know, what you perceive as red I perceive as green - regardless of the underlying neuronal activity. Yet on another level, there is an underlying shared ISness.

Another approach might be to go meta and challenge their assumption of what the structure of science is. If one can’t distinguish between science and non-science how can they believe in the consent of science? . . . . For example, we can discuss how something is both existent and non-existent. We can discuss how existent/nonexistent is both everywhere and nowhere. This sure does sound like woo woo bullshit, yet it’s also called super position in quantum mechanics. Some say it’s pseudo-science led by quacks, others say it is the hard core science with the highest predictive power of all science.. . . . Another example is entanglement - instantaneous communication over distance. Is this New Age ESP bullshit? Even Einstein called it bs - “spooky action at a distance”. Yet the Nobel Prize in science thinks differently. And then there is multiple dimensions - Airy Fairy delusions of charlatans or String Theory science conducted by respected science with million dollar grants?

My mind got too caught up in the underlying structure and I missed the content. Sorry about that. I think the content of that video is great and it gives a good framework for direct experience. I like how it constructs from Nothing to Everything and back full circle to Nothing. Such that Everything = Nothing. Ime, psychedelics can allow for conscious awareness of these different dimensions. I’ve been on trips in which there where multiple dimensions as the movie suggests. For example, one trip was like being within a dimension within a dimension within a dimension. I was unable to determine which was the “true” dimension. . . On another trip, time was so distorted. I was questioning what I should do. Should I meditate? Watch a vide? Listen to music? Write in my journal? Yet this was beyond the 3/4 dimension of doing stuff in a timeline. It had done, was doing and will do all of those activities. My mind-body was so disoriented. Why would I mediate if I just meditated? But how could I have just meditated if I just watched a video. And how can I be journaling if I am meditating? . . . It was like the branching and multiple infinities shown in the video. . .Ime, I’d also say that 5-Meo can help access these dimension and reach the 10th dimension in which Everything and Nothing collapse together. . . Ime, 5-Meo is so pure and clear it doesn’t give the best details of each dimension. It’s like a fast rack to 10. . . For me, other psyches like shrooms or LSD are better for a direct experience of particular facets of each dimension - like the example I gave above. I think it would be extremely difficult to access such dimensions without psychedelics. Our brains have evolved and been conditioned for 3D/4D and it’s hard to resonate with 5D+. Similar to how a donkey is in tune with 3D and it would be hard for a donkey to access 4D.

I also find it odd when a man says “I understand how women work”. Especially since they have zero direct experience of being a woman. This is an exercise I do in one of my classes: I go to the chalkboard and tell the class I will ask them a question and I want them to call out ideas. I then say “First I’ll ask the males in the class ‘Tell me all the actions you take on a daily basis to protect yourself from sexual harassment and sexual assault”. . . Silence. . . The guys look confused. . . They don’t know if this is a trick question. . . Sometimes I tease them and say “C’mon guys, don’t be shy - let it out”. Nothing. . . . Then I ask the woman the same question and they give rapid fire answers. I’m now writing as fast as I can on the board and can’t keep up with them. I’d say about 30% of the males have a realization that they know very little about actually living as a woman. Also that they have privilege - they don’t need to worry about protecting themself and they don’t need to be concerned about it. I think part of the impact comes because the students are blindsided. I teach science classes and they are not expecting a science teacher to do anything like this. I’m also male, and they are taken off-guard that a male is doing this. If it was a female professor, I think most of the males would dismiss her as “yea, yea. . . another woman trying to tell us about sexual harassment and how hard they have it.”

I think misinterpreted the original question and have a better understanding now. The questions may seem straightforward and simple, yet I think at an existential level they go very deep and can be difficult to discuss through images and language. If I understand the context, I would use the term “awakening” or “revealed”. For example “Can someone awaken to the 10th dimension like one can awaken to God?” or “Can the 10th dimension be revealed like God can be revealed? “. In this context, I would yes - there is a similar essence common to awakenings / revelations. Asking whether God is the same as XXXis a different question, imo. In one perspective, God is Everything, so everything is God. Yet God is also used in different contexts, like as a type of entity. I like the idea of realms and dimensions. Yet personally, I don’t like using the term 10th dimension as synonymous with One/Infinity/Nonduality/Universe/Everything etc. I like trying to be as direct as possible and use pointers with the fewest possible steps. Terms like One/Nonduality/Universe/Everything is one step away. It is about as close as we can get. 10th dimension is multiple steps away for me. If there is a 10th dimension, there must be at least 9 other dimensions. What is a dimension? Are there also non-dimensions? Thus I don’t think 10th dimension is a good pointer - it has too many variables which can cause confusion.. . . If I used the term: “The 4th inter-galactic community” as synonymous with nonduality, it would likely cause confusion.

This is a block to expansion. Many women on the forum have tried to communicate to men “That’s not quite how women work” and then explain aspects of woman-ness. Many men respond by correcting the woman with their own idea of how women work. This will keep a man locked in their own paradigm. I’m not saying male perspectives lack value, I’m saying female perspectives have value. If we want to spandex and deepen our understanding of woman-ness, the experiences and perspectives of actual women are important.

@Jahmaine Whether terms are the same, different or similar is nuanced. To me, the way you define “10th dimension” has similarities to the way many people describe god/One/infinite. I am comfortable using terms like10thdimension/reality/infinite/one/universe/God/nothing/consciousness as synonyms. For example God is Everything. I’m also comfortable with drawing distinctions and creating different facets. For example, there is awakening to the facet God and awakening to the facet of Infinity. Leo describes this in his facets of awakening video. Terms are great to create maps and maps can be useful, yet the ,map is not the territory.

@Jahmaine I think you are entering areas that are transcendent to language and logic, so it becomes difficult to communicate. Asking if the 10th dimension is “the same” as God is a relative question. We are asking if two things are “the same” or “different”. We are asking if two things are actually one thing. It’s easy to start conflating absolute and relative. We could be pragmatic and simply say “yes or no”. Yet the underlying substance is much more nuanced. . . Leo made some good videos in this area on “Sameness vs difference” and Relativity.

Access to what? If the 10th dimension is everything, then there is nothing to gain access to. Rather than how to access the 10th dimension, the better question is how to not access the 10th dimension. There would be no escape from the 10th dimension. An everything dimension includes the experience of oneness. It also includes the experience of separateness. With that said, most humans are highly conditioned into a dualistic / separate mindset, so direct nondual experience of oneness is a key to expansion. Yet the tendency is to become attached/identified to a nondual creation. This creates a duality of nondual vs. dual. Or a duality of 10th dimension vs. Not 10th dimension. . . I think images and constructs of dimensions/realms are awesome to explore and can be helpful. I’ve taken many trips with psychedelics and have explored many realms/dimensions. Yet at the end of the day, it’s all within all encompassing Everything. Which deconstructs to Nothing. Everything I write is within the everything realm, as well as the opposite of what I write. It’s not a truth and a lie. As well as every variation and interpretation of what is written. “the 10th dimension in the video above is described as “imagine all the possible branches for all the possible timelines of all the possible universes” I like that imagery. We can deconstruct even further. . . What is a possibility? What is a branch? What is a timeline? What is a Universe? These are all distinctions used for constructing. That’s great. I love constructing as much as I love deconstructing. . . The distinctions used in this construct may seem simple, yet they are highly sophisticated and would take a lot of work and effort to deconstruct. Ime, 5-Meo is the best deconsructor, yet afterwards the mind returns to construction.

It doesn’t seem like you’ve had experience with needy/clingy partners. At first it can seem comforting. It can give a person a sense of worth and importance. It can feel good helping another with their issues and meeting their needs. It can feel good when someone says “I need you. I can’t live without you. Promise me we will always be together”. It can be like a romantic movie. Yet then the movie changes into a horror movie. It becomes suffocating. Everything becomes about their needs and insecurities. You become responsible for meeting their needs and for their feelings. There is intense underlying fear you will leave. “I saw how you looked at her. That means you like her and are want to leave me. I bet you are sleeping with her. You don’t really love me, do you? Show me you love me, I can’t live without you. Something bad might happen if you leave me. . . ..” . . . It’s awful and all you want relief. Yet there is no escape. If a person gets too immersed, they become trapped and it becomes difficult to get out. If needy/clingy is mixed with the desire to control/possess, it can get twisted and scary - a bunny in a pot of boiling water kinda stuff. I’ve been in a relationship like this and it’s awful.