Forestluv

@tecladocasio ?? I think what you describe is a high level. Many people study the theory/concepts of others. Perhaps their whole lifetime. It can involve immense study. Yet they don’t build observation skills. Those skills needed to represent their own observations and experience into their own theories/concepts and integrate those theories/concepts into previous theories/concepts of others. This gets into higher levels of mastery ime and imo.

@Nahm I can handle the tea cup. Yet time seems to open up a can of worms for me. Lately I’ve been trying to observe the movement of thoughts through time. I’m amazed by how many thoughts are based in time. It seems nearly the entire self construct is time-based. Take away the construct of time and the whole house of cards comes tumbling down. . .

Hmmm. . . I like your idea. . . is it ok if I add “observation” to experience? The idea appearing in my mind is now: Concept-theory is based on observation and experience. So if a Botanist only learns concepts-theory, he will have a shallow understanding because he is limited to a subset of previous Botanists’ observations and experience. Deep insights from his own observations and experience will not arise. How does that sound to you?

Ime, this is generally true - yet there can also be a dynamic in which one person is authentic and naive - and the other person takes advantage of that. I’ve been in a couple relationships in which I was authentic, yet I was also naive and a sucker. Even today, there are certain areas I have difficulty spotting authenticity because I have a filter that wants to see the best in others. There are other areas in which I was an insincere bullshitter - and later worked through it to become authentic. In these areas, it’s completely obvious when people have inauthentic underlying dynamics. At times the old saying “you can’t bullshit a bullshitter” rings true.

@Nahm I’m curious. . .Is what you’re saying along these lines?. . . let’s say a botanist’s mind is completely immersed in theory, concepts and knowledge about botany. This mind may be “lost” in theory and not observing actual botany right in front of him. He may “miss” a lot. For example, by simply observing botany around him with an empty mind, new insights my arise. . . Is that about right?

I don’t know. We would each need to observe for ourselves.

Without a self thinking "murder is bad", what remains?

Imagine trying to understand the concept of "nothingness" and not really getting it. I might have a glimpse in which it sorta felt like "nothing". I may start trying to give meaning to the experience.: Was there really "nothing"? Was there awareness? If I remember the experience, how can it nothing? I may read up on what "nothing" actually means. What was the essence of this nothingness? Was this nothing the same as emptiness? I may go and ask my teacher about it. I've found teachers can be very helpful. The key is to be in touch with my intuition. When I am trying to make sense of direct experience or a teacher is trying to help me make sense of it - what does that intuition tell me? I never trusted that intuition. There is a deep sense of knowing. Teachers were super helpful because they could often see when I got into egoic traps and started trying to figure things out in my head. Yet I became dependent on teachers and wasn't learning from my own direct experience. There comes a time when direct experience is queen. The most powerful teacher. Yet other people and teachers are still very helpful. I've found retreats and meditation groups to be helpful. Very helpful. One thing to remember is that insights and awakenings always occur here and Now. They never occur in the timeline. Always Now. Whether you are at a retreat, home, traveling, driving etc. the insights that appear, appear Now. There will always be insights. The mind creates this idea that certain insights will happen in the future, yet they can only happen Now. If you have some deep insights at the retreat, they happen Now. . . This was one of the biggest mental blocks for me. You already "got it". You just noticed a psychological dynamic within you that your mind-body desires to find techniques that will allow you to have insights. That is an insight!! You also realized that you are experiencing an psychological dynamic in which you believe you have an internal "lock" and your mind-body desires a key to that lock! That is an insight!! How amazing. . . I also had that same desire. For me, I noticed a voice that said "You aren't listening". That was an insight. I then started getting curious about where that voice came from and what I'm not listening to. Perhaps that is similar to your internal "lock". That is a big realization to become aware of that "lock" and be aware of the desire to discover the key to unlock it. You sound curious and genuine. You mention you secretly think about this key (with guilty pleasure). I sense a genuine, innocent curiosity and a bit of playfulness. Might one say there is a bit of a fantasy about what that retreat may bring? Some anticipation? What are these feelings and experiences like? How do they move around the mind and body. These are all insights and they are all within you. . . This is it, baby!! You can observe this occuring in your own direct experience right now. Nothing is needed. Just curiosity and observation. . . . Perhaps the key to that lock may arise and guess what?. . . New stuff will arise. Perhaps new locks and new keys. It never ends and everything always occurs in the Now. This is it. The journey is the destination

@Recursoinominado For personal development, I've found medium trips work better. And, a couple micro- or mini-dose trip to raise consciousness closer to the stronger trip. Also, increasing my baseline consciousness - for me yin yoga works well. And occasional cannabis use. For transpersonal awakening, I turn the keys over and allow the universe to mold me as it sees fit.

Ime, that is one reason psychedelics are so powerful. Left on my own devices, there is only so much I can surrender. Yet once you swallow a strong dose of psychedelic, there *will* be full ego death - whether you like it or not. There is no turning turning back. You can do it the easy way or the hard way. . . I can't imagine going through a full ego death process without psychedelics. I just can't see how I could clear that last bit of ego.

Thank you.

@Tony 845 ???

I'm a bit confused on terminology. . . Does the absence of bad leave the reciprocal presence of good? Is the term "good" here being used in the colloquial sense of "not bad"? Or is it being used in a more expansive trans-egoic context? For example, how god and God are used differently as well as self and Self. My sense here is that without a self, nothing is self-based bad and nothing is self-based good. Then, an Absolute Good reveals itself. Yet, I'm not sure if this is a correct understanding.

Thread locked as requested by OP within the thread

@kieranperez I think he makes an interesting point about ego deconstruction and construction. And how he relates both to reaching "witness + object" states of awareness. I hadn't thought about how ego construction can be used to reach entry levels of "witness + object". From that space, I can see how a "witness + object" state of consciousness could arise in which it is very difficult to see one's own egoic framework. The subjective experience would be "witness + object", which would seem like an awakened state. I think Rupert Spira describes a similar dynamic which he refers to as "enlightened duality". It describes it as a halfway point. Wilbur also seems to be describing it as an intermediate level. Thanks for sharing the video.

I don't have words to make you feel better. I just want to say that I know what this feels like. I've been in shitty places in which nothing anyone said could make me feel better and it often made me feel worse. The only thing that seemed to provide relief was through various forms of distractions. Yet the distractions are only temporary. The shitty feelings return. It's a really hard dynamic to live with.

@kieranperez Beautiful ♥️ ?

Dang, I just shot ink into my eyes!! Where am I?

@Nahm @now is forever @Serotoninluv Perhaps we are all tentacles on One dancing octopus. . .

I am the Octopus and I see you tentacle!

The self loves to hide in the shadow and point to itself in the light. Look over there, there is the self. Yet it can't resist seeking and finding itself. Then it hides again in another shadow. Each time, getting sneakier, more subtle and clever. This morning I was looking for my keys. I made sure to double-check my pockets, so I wouldn't have one of those "Duh!" moments. Not there. After a few minutes of searching, I realized my teeth were holding on to them the whole time. . .

I hope he opens the door for a lot of scientists. Unfortunately, he has been marginalized and ostracized by most of the mainstream scientific community.

@Pouya I would say yes. Someone like Deepak Chopra shows a trained scientist can transcend the ego. As a scientist, I would say there is certain conditioning within the scientific career path - technically and socially. There is a scientific paradigm which presents it’s own challenges to expand out of. It’s not just the individual conscious level. There is also a strong collective ego in the scientific community. Being immersed in that can be challenging to break out of. There is collective pressure to stay contracted.

Yes indeed. I think relationships and marriage is a good example. At one time, much of society recoiled from inter-racial marriage: "Marriage in between a man and a woman of the same race!!!". Support for inter-racial marriage was very progressive at one time. Then it became mainstream. More recently came same-sex marriage. The conservative mantra was "Marriage is between one man and one woman!!". Support for same-sex marriage was a very progressive position just 30 years ago. Yet, now it is becoming mainstream and in another generation will no longer be a "progressive issue" it will be mainstream. Yet, will today's progressives be tomorrow's conservatives? The young millennial generation is considered more progressive on today's issues - for example most are cool with same-sex marriage. There mantra is "Love is Love!!". Yet when I ask them about human-android marriage, they are taken aback and most recoil. Most of today's progressives say "Marriage is between two humans!!!". Will today's progressives be the conservatives in the future? Will they have marches and political yard signs to protect the "sanctity of marriage" as being between two humans. How will they feel about human-android marriages? Will their mantra still be "Love is Love"?