Forestluv

@Truth Addict ? ♥️

My mind isn’t quite oriented like that and I don’t do well in that type of dialog. I’m oriented more toward observation and exploration than output or destination.

This doesn’t seem like a genuine effort to better understand the nature of subjectivity.

Some structure is useful in conversation. If I say “A gibnot is a thing, yet it can be anything” , now let’s discuss the practical value of gibnot in society. It’s too poorly structured to have a conversation. There is too much flexibility. Yet I could go to the other extreme - if there is too much structure it can become too rigid and contracted. If I say “This is how it is. And this is what this is. There is no fluidity or space to expand. In such a structured state, the only option for the other person is to say “No, that is not how it is.”, “That is not what is is”. If I’m in a mindset of this is how it is, I miss out on a lot. A recent example with “enlightenment”. My mind can see enlightenment as “trans-personal” and a person does get or become enlightened, since the person is illusory there is no person to get enlightened? Who would get enlightened? This is a deep realization and can be very useful in certain contexts. . . Yesterday, I noticed Leo writing about qualities of enlightened persons. At first, my mind may think “A person is not enlightened, maybe he doesn’t get it”. Yet I realized this is a different context and I asked about enlightened persons in this context. I learned about qualities of enlightened people and my mind deepened and expanded. Then I watched a Lisa Cairns video about how the “enlightenment story” is a major distraction because it becomes contracted into a personal story within a timeline that doesn’t exist. Within this context, I also learned a lot and depended/expanded my understanding. . . .Personally, I like a balance between structure and flexibility.

The assertions within this construct are consistent with how terms (and assertions themselves) have been defined. A is A, therefore A is A A gramlet is a hoplit and a gramlet is a blinop, therefore a hoplit is a blinop The assertions are consistent with the relative definition of terms and the assertions themselves. Such definitions can be useful in building a construct, yet they can also cause rigidity, limitation and contraction.

I’m not disagreeing with what you are saying, yet a clear distinction can be made here. We can add on a component to survival called suffering in which there is a psychological self that becomes distressed in thought stories regarding perceived threats to it’s own survival. Humans would have this feature and non-humans would not have this feature. Within this context, we can say humans suffer and non-humans don’t suffer. Yet this feature is not necessary for a sense of survival and being bothered by perceived threats to one’s survival. A sense of self vs not-self and a desire for self survival is not dependent on intellectual thoughts. Animals do not have a psychological self that includes thought stories, yet they clearly have a sense of self. They know a difference between self and non-self. In this regard, animals are not selfless and are bothered by perceived threats to their self survival.

@rNOW I’ve experience similar. In terms of the exhaustion, yoga has helped me increase stamina.

@JayFueel All dualities eventually collapse into nothing / infinity. Referring to this as “groundless” can help understanding in terms of human concepts and subjective experience. Yet, it’s not really grounded vs. groundless. In a practical sense, beings like a sense of being grounded. Humans will assume, think and desire that which gives a sense of grounding. Groundless can feel unsettling, uncomfortable and scary. So we construct a reality of perceptions, ideas and beliefs to provide grounding. For example, holding an idea and wanting “to be right” - we could consider this as firmly grounded. Yet upon closer inspection of nuances, any idea is relative and partially right, depending on context and perspective - now the grounding isn’t so firm anymore, it’s like shifting sand. Upon even closer inspection, this expands into infinity - to nothing - one might consider this groundless. From the human perspective, there can be an intellectual understanding of grounding as well as nonverbal feeling and experiential understanding of grounding - which is nonverbal.

That seems like a narrow definition of “bothered”. I saw a squirrel in a trap recently and it certainly was bothered whether it lived or died. A being doesn’t need to have an intellectual story of personal identity to be bothered when in a situation it perceives as life threatening. Animals have a sense of self and survival and are bothered when that sense of self-survival is threatened.

In the context of the linked video and this thread, no I have not. Experience would suggest an experiencer within a timeline. The term “eternity” suggests “unchanging” which also involves a timeline. I think Rupert addresses this well. As Rupert said in the video, words are a crude tool. I like how he spoke about other expressions such as dance and art as being a more refined tool of expression. In another context, yes I have. Yet this is a different context than the video and thread.

Yea, the problem with using the term “Now” is that it inherently includes a “not Now”. If there is no “not Now” , the term “Now” is no longer relevant or needed. The term is useful in a certain context, yet a deterrent in another context.

I like the image of thought as a veil of Now, better than thoughts are never Now. ?

Imagine laying down and thinking about being at a beach. The waves, surfers, looking for sea shells. You are trying to create a dream by thinking and can’t convince yourself you are dreaming. It’s not flowing organically. It’s sorta like that, but not as dramatic. There is a semi fluid, lucid nature to it, yet also a sense I’m just thinking this up and it might count as a dream - yet with some uncertainty about this. When I fully awake, I realize I was actually half asleep and wasn’t fully awake. It’s a weird hybrid state. It’s not very satisfying. Yet it’s helped my daydreaming quite a bit! I’m much better at reaching semi-lucid dream states during the day. I’m not sure what this means. Could you elaborate?

I do the pinching nose and breathing rc throughout the day. Yet I often forget to do it. I’m going to try the one you do.

Oooh, I haven’t heard of that one. How do you do that check during the day? The first time an rc worked deep within a dream, I got so excited I woke up. ?

That’s a good point, I hadn’t thought of it like that. Yet, there is also a sense that is not “deep in dream”. Like I am kinda just thinking it. Thanks for the book tip. I’d like a practical “how to” guide. What supplements help to increase vividness?

@Elham Which reality check are you using? The finger through palm RC has failed each time in my dreams. Yet, the pinching nose and blowing has worked twice.

I think the dream journaling has been super helpful for me to remember more dreams and to be more engaged. For me, the reality check can be helpful once I’m consciously recalling dreams consistently. Yet during most dreams, I don’t realize I’m dreaming until I’m half awake and it feels too late. I can recall the deeper dream, yet it feels like I’m at a more surface level. I’ve only had reality checks appear six times and each time they were deep within the dream. Not while drifting out of the dream toward wake. Within the full dream itself. So I think they might be helpful deeper in the dream. However, only two of the six RC appearances worked, the other four failed.

I’ve found it super helpful. Even if I can only remember fragments, or if it’s hazy.

That’s where I’m mostly at now. The conscious awareness appeared in what seemed like a mixture of sleep and wake. I think it’s easier to go lucid when in a hybrid sleep/wake state. Like I was sorta in a deep daydream, yet not fully out. . . . Yet it’s not fullynsatisfying. Sometimes I’m like “does this even count? It seemed I was too awake”. I think one trick is not to pull myself out of a sleep state by focusing on the awake aspect. I’d like it to be more dreamlike and vivid. I had one lucid dream in deeper sleep last week. Yet it was it was so real that I wasn’t able to fully engage. It was a dangerous situation with an approaching militia and I was afraid to go all super-hero and kick their butts with magic because if I was wrong and it was real, I’d be totally screwed. Are you doing reality checks and dream journaling? I’ve found that helpful.

I don’t know and I’m not too interested in making up a story about it right now. Did you watch the Spira video Gil linked today? Some good stuff in there.

?

Unsure of what teary face means here

@Truth Addict I don’t disagree with what you are saying. I’m getting at something different. I get the sense that below the conscious intellect, there is a belief what is thought here is true (regardless of whether the mind consciously thinks “what I believe is neither true or false”). Yet, I could be wrong. Perhaps it’s stimulating something in me I can introspect. I can say “What I just wrote above is neither true or false”. Yet at a deeper level, do I really believe that? It can be quite subtle and sneaky. To be honest, there is some type of energy that believes what I wrote above is true, even though I intellectually understand it is neither true or false. It’s like peeling the layers of an onion.