Forestluv

I’d be aware of opposites here. Opposites are fine, yet the human mind is trained to think in oppsites. Once true and/or false, we are now in the relative domain. The absolute is one everything and includes every thing - including any idea of true or false. The problem occurs when absolure and relative are comflated. Consider the staement “the fish are not the ocean”. Is that true? Not really. Is the opposite statement true? “The fish are the ocean”. Well that isn’t true either. The ocean includes everything: fush, water, salts, algae etc. The above statements are neither fully true or fully false. They are both partial true and partial false at the same time. Grasping to any thing causes suffering. Imagine two people arguing over whether the fish or the algae are ocean. It would be silly. Yet most people in spirituality do this a lot.

Be careful with opposites. Absence of truth does not mean false.

The dream analogy is one of my favorites for awakening. Imagine you are dreaming that you are a character we will name Paul. The character Paul lives in New York City. He studies philosophy at NYU and is practices meditation and yoga. He also likes cycling and playing basketball. Now, how can Paul wake up that he is a dream character? He doesn’t because Paul is within the dream. It’s one dream. He can’t step outside of the dream. He is within the dream. Paul can spend his whole life seeking awakening through mediatation, yoga, self inquiry, contemplation etc. As long as he the Paul character, he will not wake up. Paul doesn’t wake up. The Real You wakes up from the dream. You wake up and there is awareness it was all a dream. What happens to our character Paul? In a sense, he dies. He isn’t real. Yet, in another sense he still exists - just not like how Paul thought he existed. I see people try to do this all the time. There is an idea that they will personally awaken. Yet it’s not the person that awakens because awakening is high order. Each of our personal characters we think we are is within the dream. Everything is within awakening, including my character, your character, trees, birds, onions and everything else.

Oooh, I love that.

Notice how the above question assumes a destination (liberation). There is nothing wrong with that, just be aware it’s a destination. The problem arises when a mind assumes enlightenment is a destination. Enlightenment is nowhere. So the question “what is the best orientation to nowhere?” doesn’t make sense. As soon as there is an orientation, there is a somewhere, a destination. Nowhere is no orientations and all orientations. There is nowhere/everywhere and somewhere. Ime, becoming aware of this is one of the biggest awakenings. The energy to chase a somewhere in nowhere/everywhere dissolved. At this point it’s easy for the mind to take the opposite view and think “Ahhh, orientations are bad. I must attain no orientation”. Yet that now becomes an orientation. It is a somewhere. It’s both. Somewheres arise everyday in my life. That is within the timeline. Yet there is also a nowhere within the Now.

@AlexJ This seems like either / or thinking. I would shift the orientation to degrees. Consider taking a trip to a foreign country. At one extreme, everything is planned. Every minute of the day. There is zero room for any spontaneity or flexibility in plans. At the other extreme is no plans. You don’t know what country you will visit, what airport you will land in or where you will stay. You just appear with zero planning. You could end up in the article wearing a bathing suit. No planning at all. I think most people would avoid either extreme. We want to learn where in the continuum we fall. Some people like more structure, others less so. I am definitely toward the less structure side. I like a basic foundation of structure (e.g. to plan the plane tickets, the first few nights of lodging and transportation fro the airport to lodging). Yet I like a lot of flexibility and spontaneity when we are there. I would estimate I like 25% structure in life in 75% unstructured.

I think this is the wrong orientation as it sets up a good vs bad dynamic and a self seeking wanting. It can be helpful as motivation, yet ime sets up a control vs surrender dynamic. Towards the end, your question is like saying I want to kill all the fish so I can be the ocean without fish. Yet the ocean includes fish. Being the ocean includes the entire ocean. Trying to kill the fish because of some idea that the ocean shouldn’t have fish is a big distraction. As a mind-body awakens, the is often a dissolution of self-seeking dynamics associated with self pleasure and self suffering. Yet I think having that as a goal is a big distraction. It sets up an enlightenment story and expectations.

One of my favorite meditations is near my bird feeders. I close my eyes and observe thoughts and bird chirps dance together in the same space. It’s so beautiful.

For someone interested in dismantling anxiety and depression, I would recommend personal develop. The above question assumes that enlightenment is an end to anxiety and depression. Yet that question is contracted within the personality construct. Does a rock or mouse care if some person becomes less anxious? Of course not. Does enlightenment care if a person becomes less anxious? Of course not. Those issues are on a personal level and enlightenment is trans-personal. However, that question is very important to the person and appropriate for personal development. I do personal development to help calm my mind-bod, reduce anxiety and improve quality of life. Therapy can be highly effective for personal develop and reducing anxiety and depression. Yet don’t confuse personal stuff for enlightenment.

@David Hammond @Amun Consider intention vs impact. If intention is post-egoic, then awareness of impact can arise without internal resistance, deepening one’s understanding of both personal and social psychological dynamics. The mind claiming “good intentions” is one of the ego’s favorite defense mechanisms to fly under the radar and allow itself to conceal it’s own underlying egoic dynamics in play.

You would need to find out for yourself in your own direct experience. I would drop all the old ideas of god and start observing your experience in the present moment.

I know nothing about flowers. One day I was on a nature walk with a professor of botany. I was totally appreciating the beauty of the plants and flowers. I was free and had no restrictions. The botanist smiled at how I was interacting and loving the plants. He looked said to me - "Sometimes I wish I could experience plants like that again". Another time I got into painting. Just acrylic on canvas. I know nothing about painting and have no skills. I just let go and let whatever arose flow through me. I thought the paintings probably sucked and I wish I could actually paint. Yet, those painting were like a diary of my life. One day a highly skilled artist friend came to my apartment. I mentioned the paintings and she wanted to see them. They were hidden away and I was embarrassed to show them to a real painter. Finally, I gave in and took them out. She saw them and paused. She genuinely appreciated them and I didn't know why. She said to me "I can't paint like that anymore." She then told me about all the years of painting classes. About how all the theory she learned and all the training to paint a certain way made it so she could no longer paint like me, someone who knows nothing". I'm sure she wouldn't trade all of her mastery and go back to the beginning. Yet there was defiantly a something there. Something special about being a novice. The same thing happens to me. I watched a Nova documentary about embryonic and fetal development. My friend who knows nothing was in awe. I still appreciated the documentary, yet all these thoughts about how the video wasn't quite right kept coming up. There were a some terms that weren't accurate and they left out some key information about certain stages. As well, it would have been better if the focused more on neural crest cells during a particular stage of development. . . I looked at my friend and started laughing. I remember when I first started studying developmental biology and it was a wonderland. So fascinating. I didn't know anything about the "rules" or the "proper" way to explain it. I smiled and told her I remember when I experienced it like her yet I know longer can. My experience is still amazing and I wouldn't give up all my knowledge - it gives me a different type of appreciation and wonder - it's just different. I can no longer see it like I once did. It's not about the level of knowledge. It's about the appreciation and connection to magnificence - to beauty. It's about the curiosity, intrigue, wonder, passion and love. And this is present at all stages. Anyone who tells you differently has not yet transcended knowledge.

There are a lot of different usages of the term enlightenment and I generally try to avoid that term because people have so many preconceived ideas about it. Regarding spiral dynamics, this would be within Turquoise. As more beings evolve into Turquoise, more distinctions within Turquoise will be drawn. There will be various levels within Turquoise. This could also be considered different levels of awakening. At the trans-personal level, there is impersonal awareness of the personality structure. I'd say generally a person reaches this stage within themself. Then, there is realization that this applies to other beings as well. I'd say this is currently a very high level of consciousness. In the future, it may be an average level of consciousness. The next one higher is even rarer. Imagine there is trans-personal awareness in a mind-body. That awareness may be detached from the personality impulses that arise in the mind. Through that mind-body there may be lots of ideas about what enlightenment is. There is no person to be attached to it or take ownership of it. This can arise at times on the forum. Yet it is still at the human level of consciousness. There is still human attachment and human identification. All those profound ideas are contextualized at the human level. There is a subconscious assumption at the level of the human mind. For any description of enlightenment, go explain it to a frog or a rock and see how it goes. Can a frog or rock be enlightened? That is a question that challenges the human level of consciousness. . . This also illustrates how low of a level the intellect, thoughts and language is. There is no way a human could explain any form of enlightenment to a frog or rock. Yet what about higher modes of being? Let's expand our idea of empathy, intuition and energetic modes. Is there a way that an essence of enlightenment could be expressed between human and frog via some type of empathetic or intuitive channel? Hmmm, here I'm no so sure. Now we are entering trans-human levels. At the trans-personal level the idea "that person is enlightened" no longer applies (since we are one level higher than the person) At the trans-human level the idea "that human mind-body is enlightened" no longer applies (since we are one level higher than the human). I'm not saying implying one level is "right" or "better" than another. It is just different levels. For example, we could look at the level of an individual basketball player, the level of the basketball team, the level of the basketball conference, the level of the national NCAA basketball organization etc. No level is "right" or "better". The problem arises when there is lack of awareness of levels and people start believing things like "that player is basketball". No, that player is within the sport of basketball. The sport of basketball includes that player, yet it also includes basketball teams and conferences. Similarly, I would say enlightenment includes the trans-personal level, yet also the trans-human level as well as higher levels. At this point, there is awareness and beingness at the trans-human level beginning to flow through my mind-body. I don't have any solid direct experience with any higher levels, maybe a glimpse - yet my baseline level is only high enough to integrate entry-level trans-human awareness and I have only scratched the surface at this level.

@Giulio Bevilacqua I think a distinction can be made within your idea. There is transcendence of the personal ego at the individual level. I consider this the trans-personal level. There is also the transcendence of the social ego at the community level. I consider this the trans-human level. I would say this are two different levels and there could theoretically be a society in which all the people are at the trans-personal level or a "society" in which there is transcendence of humanness. For the latter, I put "society" in quotes because the concept of a human society dissolves as we reach the trans-human level. I think you are getting at the first level in which each individual is at the trans-personal level, yet there is still a social consciousness. Be mindful that the term "enlightened people" would be a low level of enlightenment in which only the personality is transcended.

One thing I like to keep in mind. . . There is awareness that the real Me is not the self and the personality impulses that arise in my mind. Similarly, the real Him is not the self or the personality impulses arising in the mind. They are all just personality impulses arising without any assignment of ownership as "mine" or "his". Identifying thoughts as "me" is no different than identifying thoughts as "him". I think this is one of the keys to enter the trans-personal conscious level of awareness. Of course we use pronouns like "me" and "him" for ease of conversations and it can be fun and useful to explore the personal level of consciousness, yet I try to maintain awareness of de-identification of all personalities (not just mine) that occurs at the trans-personal level of consciousness.

@Mikael89 I've been through this storyline myself. You can step outside the story if you want right now. You claim that you don't like the storyline and that you want a new storyline. I think you are attached to your storyline and won't admit it. You can step outside the story right now. Will you do so?. . . I've hit several personal bottoms in my life. On the way down to the bottom it just seemed like it kept getting worse and would never get better. I would try to change things, yet it didn't help. One thing that happens on the way down is that I am stuck in a story and defend my story. "I am xxx because of yyy. I can't do this. . I'll never get what I want. I'm great, why can't people see that? I suck and everyone can see that. . ." On and on and on. This can go on for years and years. To me it looks like you are stuck in a story and all engagement in this story just keeps you in the storyline. "My personality sucks. I'm not good enough" Friend: "You have a good personality" "You think so? I don't think I do. If I did, women would like me" Friend: "What is it about your personality, can you make a list about your personal traits holding you back?" "I've tried that. It doesn't work. It's just how my personality is. Women hate me". Sometimes personal development can be helpful. Yet what I see here is a bunch of mental masturbation allowing you to stay within the personality dynamic. The problem is not the personality, it is the immersion within the personality. There is attachment and identification to the personality. If you argue for that personality it is yours. If you grasp that personality it is yours. You've convinced yourself it's not what you want. Yet obviously it is what you want because you are defending it and grasping it as if it is your only option. When you truly don't want it, you will let go of it. That does not mean it will go away and it doesn't mean it's easy. It means you will have a entirely different relationship with it. You can step outside of it and look at those personality traits from a detached observation. You won't identify it as being "me". Ask yourself this question: "Why do other people on this thread see my personality dynamic different than I do?" You might think "Well, because they aren't me". This is the identification. Notice that statement "Because you aren't me". That is indicative of attachment and identification of the personality dynamic as "me". If you can detach from that, there will be an awareness that does not say "it is me". That awareness will observe the personality as if it is someone else. It will observe it as if you are observing the personality of some guy in Australia. Then, the personality deconstruction begins. Yet that can't begin until you stop defending and maintaining the personality construct. It is as if there is an old abandoned ugly house that disgusts you. You say the house is ugly and women don't like the ugly house. People around you say, "let's get in there and break the house down. Let's see what it's made of. Let's deconstruct it and build a new house. Perhaps there are some good parts we can recycle and use. Perhaps there are some junky parts we need to trash". Yet you stand outside the house saying "No! No! Don't deconstruct the house!! It's my house!! The house sucks and I hate it!! Women hate the house!! But don't don't touch the house!!!". The problem is you think you are the actual house. The house doesn't want to die and is trying to protect itself. Step outside of the house and realize you are not the house. Then you can start growing and developing. Now the cat is out of the bag and you know. At this point you can choose to stay in the house in misery or you can step outside the house and start the work of deconstruction and construction. It's up to you. Just don't con yourself in thinking you want a better personality and a girlfriend and all that. You can end the self-deception con game right now. If you stay in that house, you are choosing to at this point.

@nistake I think charisma is a factor and a high level of social intelligence. Some people have a very high level of social intelligence and can connect in social groups. Not just with each other, but people in the group. I think being aware and observing is really important. I would take emphasis off trying to figure it out intellectually and put more emphasis into increasing emotional and social intelligence. Less intellectual mode of being and more empathetic and intuitive modes of being. Being present and aware and flowing allows this to happen. I've spent a lot of time trying to develop these skills, both personally and professionally. I just taught a class about cellular respiration. I turned it into a story about Uber drivers, airports, crowded elevators and more. I acted out the story as if certain molecules where Uber or Lyft drivers. I gave these molecules personalities. Lactic acid were passengers that turned sour because they missed their flight etc. I acted it out as if I was performing on stage. The students were engaged, laughing and totally get it. A few things I've learned. 1. Drop my self-need motivations and stop seeing myself as separate form the audience. Crappy storytellers have this self-need dynamic. I knew a guy that never stopped talking, people would try to leave politely and he kept going. He needed to hear himself talk. Another guy I knew told stories for attention. Others for validation or approval. Others to feel connected. My dad had this dynamic that he didn't feel part of the group. So he was always trying to interject and tell these long-winded stories that bored people. He was trying to fill a self-need of belonging and acceptance. Become aware of that and drop is all. It is all separation from group dynamics and introduces self-seeking energy that others pick up on - usually subconsciously. I've learned I can't have a personal seeking agenda. 2. Along with #1, drop the self identity and comparisons. Stuff like "What would other people think?", "Why is he so much more popular than me?" are self-identity distractions. 3. The content of the story is important, yet so is how the story is told. Tone of voice, cadence, awareness of group dynamics. The deeper levels involve an empathetic social knowing and intuitive knowing. You can't try to deliver it a certain way. Another professor asked for one of my stories for his class. He tried to tell it like me and he flopped, big time. This type of flop happened to me over and over because I was trying to do something without the underlying empathetic social skills and intuitive skills. Development of these skills required me to go through #1 and #2 above. 4. When the dynamics of #1 and #2 are cleared, I started developing #3. At first, it was just observing other storytellers and getting a sense of the vibe. There is no personal self seeking here. It is pure observation. I started to pick up on energies between the storyteller and the audience. Yet it is not an intellectual analysis. It is more of a "getting it". I got a sense of the group dynamics with a poor speaker. I got a sense of group dynamics with a great speaker. A developed a deep appreciation for great storytellers. They were like wizards moving a magic wand. 5. I started developing these skills as a storyteller. In particular in my classes. It wasn't about me anymore. It was about letting go and becoming part of the social consciousness. At first, I would just try a little bit with a keen awareness of the group energy. If things felt odd, the tendency is to double-down and force it and that makes it worse. I did not have the skills to steer the ship back on track. So just a little bit and observe, get a feel for it. For the social dynamics. Nonintellectual modes are super important. If I'm not in tune it and the group is not feeling it - I will not try to make it happen. 6. I just starts happening. Imagine storytelling is like a basketball game. When a player is in the flow, he is not thinking "If I don't make this three pointer, we will lose the game" or "That defensive player just shifted, so I should now pass the ball into the low post". No, the player in the flow is in a nonintellectual zone. He is in sync with his teammates. He has a high intuition for the game. Through practice and awareness he is empathetically connected and is intuitive system is highly operative. The highest skilled players intuitively know when to pass, dribble right, take a shot etc. 7. When these dynamics start to become integrated, there is a genuine spontaneity that arises. It's not about me or you. It naturally arises. In this case enjoyment within the social group arises. That may arise through my mind-body, it may arise through Jack's mind-body. You may shoot a three-point story and miss or score. You may pass the ball to Jack and he may shoot a three-pointer and score. The social dynamic is one team. 8. Improvisation is a big key imo. Becoming comfortable with being genuine. No personal needs or self seeking. No me vs. them. No I want this or that. No I have a story I'm gonna tell for attention. I have some theory. Today I walked into class with nothing. No notes, pen, paper. I didn't go in trying to be the "cool professor" or the "essentric professor". I wasn't looking to get validation or to get good student evaluations. I went in for the joy of a group experiencing groupness. I only had a vague idea of the story. I had trust in what will arise will arise. To just show up, improvise and go with the flow takes a very high level of mastery. Imagine an highly skilled jazz guitar musician. There is the basic structure of the jazz songs, yet he is in the flow with his other teammates and the audience. He can intuit and improvise. He is merged with the social consciousness. He is not trying to force his own guitar solos. So I just walked into class and said "I have no idea what story will arise today. A story will arise, yet who knows what the story will be?". And then a giggle and grin emerged from my mind-body. This got the attention of the whole class. The key is it was 100% authentic. I did not plan ahead thinking "What can I do to get the attention of my students? Ah yes, I have this opening line and then I have to giggle a certain way for 1 second and then hold a grin for 2 seconds". It just happened authentically and spontaneously. And then I just stood there. Blank. I literally had no idea what would come out of my mind-body next. This used to terrify me. Now it's a state of being. After a couple seconds the next thing was: "Right now I feel like I am a tour guide and we will go on a tour. Let's all hop on the bus and have some fun". Again, 100% authentic - I did not plan that. Once all the self need dynamics are removed there is a connection to the present moment. The energy and frequencies present. At that moment, that was the essence of that moment. My mind-body was in tune with it. Not because I so great, but because the "I" was removed. There was then a sense of togetherness like everyone did get on the bus. So I started the engine and off we went. . .

This is an analogy is based on my experience with two days of 200ug of Modafinil taken about a week apart. I think a placebo effect is low because I didn't know what to expect. I just knew it was a nootropic that was considered relatively safe that mildly enhances cognition. The first day I took it and got active at work. I was not on the lookout thinking stuff like "Is it working?", "Am I feeling anything?". Rather, I got caught up in work and totally forgot I had taken it. During the day, there was a moment I was doing solo work and thought "Wow, I'm engaged in the flow today. Some insightful ideas are arising". Then I thought "Oh, I took Modafinil this morning - maybe it does work". I would estimate I enter these flow zones about 10% of the time. It was not a new experience. It's just a correlation. The day I took Modafinil, I entered a flow state that occurs somewhat rarely and most importantly, I had forgotten I took the Modafinil. This led me to believe that Modafinil is one variable in my body and environment that can help promote such a flow state. The second day on Modafinil was similar. I am now being aware of what other variable can synergize with the Modafinil. So far, I have noticed that interactions with others decreases the effects - so it seems this will be a tool for more solo type activities. I plan to test Modafinil in different solo activities in different environments. For example, next time I may spend time alone in nature, or meditate, or contemplate. In regards to my statement it "allows an environment for growth", my experience at meditation retreats is applicable. On the first day of the retreat, I have a busy mind thinking about work and different relationships. Yet the mediation retreat center allows an environment to relax and go inward. The second day, worries dissolve about work and stuff - yet I start thinking about meditation stuff like "what is the ego? ". What is the best theory of reality? I may engage in conversations with others. By the third day, I go more introspective and inward. Interacting with other people becomes a distraction. I want to engage with the present moment of what I am doing in the moment. This allows insights to arise. The meditation center did not put me in that place, it allowed an environment in which I could gently transition to that place. There is a similar sense with Modafinil - I don't feel like it is forcing me to do anything. it allows me to gently transition into the present and contemplate or be creative. It's like skipping the first two days of a retreat and going straight to day 3. Yet, I still have to put in some effort. If I'm texting throughout the first two days of the retreat and engaging with lots of distractions, I won't enter the presence and contemplation of day three.

I’d put the over / under at 5 dates.

@kieranperez I have experience with Adderall and know what you are asking. To me, Adderall is like forced attention and energy. I kinda feel like a robot on it. The effects are only apparent while the drug is in the system and there are dependecy and withdrawl effects. Modafanil has a very different effect for me. It’s like being “in the zone”. It’s like my consciousness is raised half a level. The question of whether this persists is an interesting one. I can definitely feel a drop the next day, yet there is another way to look at it. I think it helps create a mental environment that allows for lasting growth, yet it won’t do the growth for a person. If someone uses their modafanil zone flow to play video games and watch porn all day, then no I don’t think there will be a sustained rise in consciousness. Yet if someone uses their modafinil zone flow for contemplation, journaling, meditation, yoga, self inquiry etc, then yes I think there can be.

I’ve found that once the ego death zone is crossed there isn’t more barriers to cross and it can be counter-productive. For example many minds will black-out. What’s the point in blacking out? Also, they can be extemely intense on energetic systems, increase risks if negative side effects and a long time and o recover That’s just my experience. Others have different experience and get a lot out of heroic doses.

Not always ime. For most people, I would recommend being cautious with that idea.

With shrooms on top??!!

@Wisebaxter Go for it. Yet, use it wisely. Tripping every weekend is not sustainable. The tolerance reset is 12 days, so a strong trip once over two weeks is max. More than that, the tolerance will build up. Also the "magic" will fade if you trip to much. And. . . the insights start to pile up and don't get integrated. After a couple months of frequent use, similar insights occurred and I was even scolded by the psychedelic. It essentially said "Why are you back here? I just told you this last week!!". I went dialed it down to once every two weeks and then to once a month. However, I think sprinkling in micro-dosing and mini-dosing to be helpful. As time went on, the contrast between sober and psychedelic realities started to fade. The two worlds started moving closer together. The dosage I need to reached nondual experience decreased. You mentioned 200ug - that would be a monstrous dose for me. A couple weeks ago, 75ug sent me into a nondual deeply insightful space. As well, my baseline conscious level has increased and I can now access realms sober that used to be inaccessible to me a year ago.

@Highest What will you do for your next date tomorrow?