Forestluv

It’s evolution

Whoops, that was a typo. I meant to write 15-20mg of 4-aco-dmt - which is equivalent to about 100ug of LSD.

Below is just my guy's perspective. I think it is only relevant for a large subset of guys "playing the game" and does not apply to all guys. Overall for our species, the female has considerably more selection power than the male. The vast majority of females could “get laid” any night they wanted to. Males often go weeks or months trying to get laid. There are countless guides for males to improve your “game”. And in this game, the female chooses “yes” or “no”. The “default zone” is the same as the “friendzone”. It’s the zone of the guy not get laid. The "friendzone" is when a guy has an interest in dating/romance with a gal that he is courting. The guy is interpreting her behavior as "good" or "bad" regarding his chances for romance. . . Is she responding to my texts? She didn't respond for five hours, what does that mean? Does the tone of the text seem like she is interested? Is that guy in her Facebook photo a date? . . . All questions trying to determine whether he is in the "friendzone". Getting put into the "friendzone" means you have essentially lost on romance. You blew it. . . Then questions arise such as: "What can I do differently the next time to improve my chances?". Guys don't have a "friendzone" with women. How could a guy put himself into his own "friendzone"? It's the gal who has the "friendzone" we are worried about getting put into. If a guy is interested in dating a gal, a friendzone appears around her to be avoided. If a guy is not interested in dating a gal, there is no "friendzone". It's just irrelevant. I've heard guys talk about getting put into the friendzone many times. I have never heard a guy talking about putting a gal into the friendzone. It just doesn't exist.

Before my first ceremony, I asked one of the guides what the experience would be like. She told me that everyone has unique physiology and life experience and will be shown what they need to know in that moment. Each of my three ceremonies was unique and I talked with several participants and they too had unique experiences. My first ceremony was mentally easily and physically hard. There was a blissful energy that swept me away and there was no struggle to hold on my ego or control. It was like "So, just let go of the ego to experience this bliss? Cya ego!". There weren't really "lessons". It was like a semi-lucid state with semi-awareness. There was a sense of being on a foreign planet and oneness within the temple. There were visuals of people I had encountered in Peru and there was a different sense about them. I was connected and enamored with this energy or vibe they had. I felt such appreciation and love for them. Afterword, I felt love for everyone there. It was just being and experiencing. It wasn't like there was knowledge or wisdom. . . Like have you ever had a moment when time stops momentarily and you are present for a beautiful moment? Maybe something like a person playing with their dog on the ground and the dog spontaneously jumps on the owner licking their face - they smile and laugh and roll together. You witness it yet also momentarily lose yourself for a moment and experience that beautiful energy and connection - and feel it. Kinda like that but 100X as intense for four straight hours of various beauties. It wasn't like knowledge. Heading into the second ceremony I felt good. Too good. I actually gave some first-timers advice about letting go and surrendering. Little did I know. . . My intention was to be aware and be shown my blocks to my deeper self. Early on, I tried to steer the experience back to blissville and lost control. I struggled and experience fear, insecurities and panic at times. This time was the most clear-headed, aware experience I've ever had. It's awkward to call it "lessons" or "knowledge" because it wasn't about thoughts. There was no analysis, good/bad, "I get it". Yet, there was this essence/truth/awareness regarding fears, insecurities and beliefs. There was a sense of some kind of being, yet not a source I can pinpoint. There was no "I" or thinking there - so all this I write now is not the actual experience - I'm just trying to put it into words (which were not part of the experience). . . There was a phase at the insanity threshold that nearly went into a full-on panic. I had brought a benzo in case of an emergency - the idea to take it came up - followed by an absolutely clear sense of DO NOT TAKE IT. The prospect of taking the benzo was much more frightening than just experiencing the experience. It was like my ego wanted to regain control with a secret weapon from "my" world. There was an extremely strong sense of "don't fuck with this" and I caught a glimpse of the energy changing to something really dark if I took the benzo. I think my ego surrendered a bit more at that point. After the ceremony, I asked one of the experienced participants if this experience and "lessons" need to be processed or have they just become part of me. I didn't fully understand his response - but it included both.

Psychedelics brought me there. I did an Ayahuasca retreat in Peru last June. The second ceremony was the most terrifying and illuminating experience of my life.

@phoenix666 IKR. If that's how it is, why fight? Why not just "be" and go with the flow?

@phoenix666 I'm in a similar place. Feeling anxiety when the reality that "I" has no free will appears. I.e. what would happen if "I" am not in control? What if this mysterious entity acted on harmful impulses? . . . As I let go, trust is slowly building. If the ego and thoughts are part of everything, part of the whole being - it feels weird that my being is trying to convince itself through the ego that its OK to surrender itself to itself.

@cetus56 Exactly. "I" wants enlightenment. And when "I" approached the door to enlightenment and told it could not enter - that "I" threw a fit. For me, it was all fun and games until that "I" faced the truth that it is nothing and irrelevant. . . All my thinking to make sense of reality is my ego trying to have a seat at the table and be relevant.

@cetus56 Yep and "I" did not like it one bit. . .

@cetus56 For many years, my experience with meditation was that of an "observer". I.e. observing thoughts without judgement. It seemed to be beyond the ego and I would often say things like "My ego is saying/wanting XXX" as if it was a separate entity. Yet, I hadn't realized my ego was still had an illusionary sense of control. The was an unconscious sense that "I" could return anytime it wanted. "I" could get up and stretch if needed. "I" could conceptualize if "I" wanted. "I" could get up and leave if "I" needed to change the scenery. It wasn't until my first 4-aco trip that that "I" was removed. "I" couldn't do anything even if "I" wanted to. It was a place 25 yrs of meditation didn't bring me. "I" struggled against surrender and it was frightening and insightful. Afterwards, there was a sense of "whoa, wtf just happened?". There was no *knowing* anything. Then "I" started to re-create itself with memories and beliefs. To me, a strong trip is like skydiving. The "I" is powerless and not in control of the flight down. As much as "I" may want to stop the experience "I" cannot. Yet during meditation, I've never felt the impetus for the same level of surrender. There is always a background sense of comfort/control that "I" can stop or change the experience if "I" wanted to.

I'm unsure which is more effective: less frequent high dose trips or more frequent low dose trips. The high dose trips seemed impactful, yet often filled with anxiety, confusion and the bizarre. The last four months, I've just done relatively low dosages of lysergics or tryptamines every two weeks (usually 15-20mg of a 4-aco-dmt:4-aco-met mix). I usually just walk or sit solo in nature. The ego seems to diffuse and there is a sense of presence, of being, of oneness. Interactions with plants, insects, animals and people seem to flow naturally. There is fascination and awe. There is a different perspective of the ego, It becomes clear how some of my recent behaviors were motivated by insecurities or fear. . . The short notes to "myself" have a similar theme: "Pay attention and be aware, the world is fascinating. Let go of rules and beliefs, surrender and just be.". Later that week, I often feel more connected and empathetic with others and life flows better. When I return to the Nature Center, sometimes thoughts settle down and I sort-of return to that trip space - and have even thought "Am I tripping? Is this some type of flashback?". . . The thing is. . . I *really* like this tripping space. It feels so natural and effortless. It doesn't feel like an escape, it feels like "me". Yet, I have this belief that introspection is hard work and needs effort and discipline, like sitting meditation. Is this type of low dose trip slowly peeling an onion layer? . . . Is it effective to stay with a substance and dose that appears to be effective? Or, would be more effective to mix up substances and dosages for varied trips?

@PetarKa I was conceptualizing this just last week and with a nudge from Leo realized everything is territory, including maps.

@Leo Gura How does one learn how to surrender to the insanity threshold? Does it just come with experience or is there a tecnique?

@Scholar I remember watching one of Leo's videos where he talks about self discipline. I think it was the Free Will one. My impression is that the message was that when one realizes and surrenders to the fact that they have no free will and they are a machine - things start to flow. Resistance dissipates and one "just does". He gave the example of a Buddhist monk that appears to be so disciplined. For you and me, it would take herculean discipline to live like that. Yet for the monk that has surrendered ego, resistance has dissipated and he "just does what he does".

@Aidan Being is part of existence. My self image and thoughts are part of that existence. They can be illusionary, yet still a projection. Like I'm not the character in a movie, yet there is still a projector and movie screen with an image of a character. The "juicy" side of the ego for my ego is the sense of security that it is in control. The "juicy" side of thoughts for my mind is conceptualization.

@MM1988 I have soooo many background thoughts. Some are random and absurd that I allow to float by. I can't imagine expressing every thought that crosses my mind. Imagine being in a theatre watching a nature scene and expressing your thought "I wonder what it's like to have sex as a baboon". I mean some thoughts should just float right on by. Now, "speaking my truth" is very different. For example, a year ago I began using psychedelics as a tool for personal development. There have been some amazing experiences and insights. Overall, I would say using psychedelics in moderation feels healthy and is part of my "truth" as a seeker. It is part of who I am. Unfortunately, there is a stigma with psychedelics and I didn't feel comfortable telling anyone in my life - including friends or people I dated. One day it felt like I wasn't expressing my truth, that I was hiding this part of me. Did I call up my boss and parents to let them know? No. Did I tell a gal on the first date "before we even start this date, I have to tell you that I use psychedelics". No. It just didn't feel relevant. Yet, when I was discussing an experience with a close friend, did I tell her a psychedelic was involved? Yes. After going on a few dates and a gal asked me with curiosity "what do you do for introspective work"? - Did I include psychedelics on the list? Yes. What has happened is that connections were revealed and strengthened and lack of connections were revealed. One friend asked if she could try a psychedelic with me in October. One gal I dated initially thought it was dangerous and weird. Yet, when I spoke of it nonchalantly like a form of meditation, she got curious and started asking questions. We have spent hours discussing the experience. And there have been gals I never heard back from. And that's good to know. I dated a gal for a year before I realized she did not support or connect with this part of my Truth.

@spicy_pickles I've gone through similar events. In general, not being able to say "No" and taking responsibility for other people's responsibilities and feelings (and often becoming resentful later). For me, the first step was to acknowledge my behavior is a result of my physiology, past experience and current stimuli. There is no "me" or "self" making decisions. As long as I am under the delusion that my illusionary self is making decisions, I will struggle with confusion, frustration, remorse etc. in this area. Then, there was the realization that many of the beliefs/thoughts motivating my behavior were programmed. There was a realization that those thoughts/beliefs about "what I *should* do" could all be bullshit and untrue. Then there was sort of an opening or blankness. For me, the behaviours of others is part of external input - similar to bright sunshine, hot weather or loud music. I feel uncomfortable sensations in hot, humid weather. *Should* I be outside in hot humid weather because I want to reinforce my self image of being "adventurous" and "outdoorsy"? Just imagine talking with the guys at work about what we did during the weekend. They all went running, kayaking, and hiking - and I went to an air-conditioned movie theatre. Imagine texting gals I met on Tinder about my "adventurous" movie outing. Now imagine me feeling like a loser and wishing I had done something outside. . . It seems like a silly example, yet the unconscious authors of my thoughts and beliefs determine my behavior. My being tends to prefer experiencing "good" emotions and my mind prefers being engaged with interesting thought concepts. If I lose the ego, I trust that is where my being will be attracted to. If I am at a loud concert and feeling uncomfortable, I can leave. I do not have to participate in that environment. Likewise, if someone in my life is acting unhealthy - I can leave. I do not have to participate in that activity. Yet, it is not always so simple. Imagine I was outside and uncomfortable in hot humid weather. Just go inside, right? Well, what if I am sitting at my brother's wedding? That wouldn't be too cool to leave just because I'm uncomfortable. Afterwards, I may feel a bit physically ill and need to rehydrate. Yet, I wouldn't feel resentful at the weather for being hot and humid or resentful at my brother for choosing this wedding date. I wouldn't ask myself "why does this always happen to me?" or "why did I act that way?". All that human input is just external input. My being can participate in it or not. Just today, a colleague asked me to write a letter of reference for her by this Friday. My first thoughts were "wtf, why did she wait four days before the due date to ask me?", "I've got enough to do this week, without picking up her responsibilities", "yea, but what if I say "no"? I may need something from her in the future". . . Round and round the resistance went and when it settled down there was a sense that I like the project she is working on and it would be cool to be part of it". I agreed to do it and I don't feel any frustration or resentment about it. I've also said "No" at times for stuff I'm just not interested in participating in.

Yesterday I was in a café with a friend. We had just visited an art museum. I was fascinated by many of the art pieces. In the museum, I was aware and in awe of the works. Yet an hour later in the cafe, I'm back in my head as I talk to my friend about the value of art: stories about how art is underappreciated and an expression of being. Then, stories about how science and art overlap. (I did most of the talking. . . .). After an hour of being absorbed in my head and telling stories, my friend is now nearly pleading that we really really need to leave now. And here comes "the moment": as we are leaving we walk by a table where two of the employees are chatting. I sense something special about them: their appearance is cool: their hairstyles, clothing, jewelry, ethnicities. They have a cool energy and vibe. Their communication is flowing like music - open and free. I feel an attraction, a pull to interact with them. Yet, this is overrided by the thoughts "no, that would be awkward" and "you need to go to the next event". This resistance prevented me from being and participating in the moment. What if. . . as we passed I smiled and said something like "Hey, are you two a couple? Because you go so well together.". That would have been with the "flow". I don't think it would have been awkward or creepy sounding. I was feeling their energy and would have said it in the context of their energy. I bet they would have smiled/laughed and given a short reply as I wished them well and continued on. How many moments do I miss everyday due to lack of awareness or a resistance to engage? . . . The story behind a beautiful piece of jewelry someone is wearing. . . petting and connecting with a dog I encounter along a hiking trail. . . overhearing someone say they just returned from the Cliffs of Moher and joining to share our experiences there. . . noticing someone using a scope on a tripod out in nature and asking how it works. . . Perhaps I should be mindful of personal space and not go around interrupting people and hijacking conversations. Yet, I have found that when I am really curious and fascinated 99% of the time there is a connection and positive interaction. And here's the thing. . . At times, I have engaged in these moments and have had wonderful "spontaneous" moments of intrigue, joy etc. I've met some amazing people. . . I have considered these moments as both special and rare. Yet I am realizing they are not. These moments are all around me everyday. They seem rare because I am rarely aware. And when I do notice, thoughts of resistance tell me how I *should* act block engagement. How much richer would life be if I was aware, trusted intuition and went with the flow?

Part of my research involves cancerous cells and I too find it's development fascinating.

Thanks Tom, that's right along my stage of development. The existential context of your last paragraph particularly resonated with me. Yet, it seems that how you describe "you" here is not how 99.999% of people would use the term. I am unclear why people on the actualized path continue to use terms like "I", "me", "you" out of their classical context. Those terms are so ingrained in our culture to refer to the ego, the self. What those on the actualized path are saying is "no, that classic "you" image is just an illusion. The 'real "you" is something else". So why try to redefine terms like "me" and "you" that are so ingrained? It seems to cause confusion. Why not just come up with new words? Imagine telling someone that when we have a conversation the words "for", "it", and "that" will sometimes by used as their classical meaning. But other times, they will used to mean an existential truth that is abstract and can't be fully explained and it could mean a dozens of different things depending on who you talk to. Imagine how awkward that conversation would be. For example: "Wait a second, when you just said "for" what meaning are you giving *it*?". The second person: "I'm not sure how to answer *that* because I don't know how you were using the term "it". First person: "Well, the answer to *that* would be dependent on how you just used the term "that"? Second person: "Well, you also used the term "that" in your question, did you use *it* in the classical sense to refer to my original question? Or did you use the term "that" as it's existential, hard to describe meaning?". First person: "Please tell me what you mean by "it". This is actually a simple example, because all the terms are used in their classical meaning. It gets much more complicated when there is a mixture of classical and existential usages. I can comprehend "standard" conversations with 99.99% of the people because they are only using terms like "me" and "you" in their classical sense. Yet when I have conversations with Buddhists and people on the actualization path, I am often unclear because they alternate in their usage between classical and existential meanings (and their existential usage is often undefined). I find myself trying to figure out how they are using terms like "I" and "you". I find it makes conversations unclear and I wish we would just create new words. If the classical concept of "me" and "you" (the self) is an illusion and doesn't exist, why the heck are we still using the terms to describe something else? I'm a professor and if I wanted to create misunderstanding, confusion and frustration in communication - that's how I would do it.

I recently watched an interview with the quantum physicist Sean Carroll. The interviewer kept asking "why" and "how" questions in an effort to understand the underlying phenomena. At one point Sean said something to the effect of: When I dig deep enough, there comes a point where I can't explain it in the English language, not even to myself. Yet, I understand the math and it works. . . I found it interesting how Sean couldn't conceptualize and explain the phenomena in the traditional sense, yet was still able to just "get it". Importantly, he seemed comfortable with this. He wasn't struggling to fully explain it. He just gave simple analogies that pointed in the right direction. I thought about how my mind is not satisfied with just "getting it". My mind expends lots of energy trying to conceptualize and explain insights into words and images. I also thought about how different Sean's awareness and perspective of reality is from mine and how I would need to study math and physics for 15+ years to fully gain that perspective. And this is just one aspect of perception and understanding. I only perceive a tiny fraction of what is available.

Yesterday, I went to a soccer game. Afterwards on the drive home, there was a thought about a play in the game that occurred 30 minutes ago. This was followed by a thought about a similar play I made in a soccer game 30 years ago. Both thoughts occurred "now" and were about "not now". There was no time difference between when the two events occurred. They were both "not now". . . Kinda freaky.

Ahhh, so everything here and now is the territory (including any thoughts and feelings that may arise). Higher states of consciousness are higher states of awareness of territory. The question that arises in my mind now is: "Is certain territory *better* than other territory?". This seems to bring me to the "judging" category. Based on this thread and the "Understanding Awareness" video, these judging thoughts are themselves territory, yet generally bring me to a lower state of consciousness (self awareness is reduced as the mind is consumed thinking about which aspects of territory are *better*). . . On the right track?

@Leo Gura Thank you. Do I need maps to find my territory?

Along these lines, one of the "reality checks" I do to promote lucid dreaming is to get into a mindset in which I am really curious if I am awake or dreaming. . . I'm just conscious of all sensation as I wonder if I am dreaming. If I was in a dream, it would be amazing - look at all the detail, sounds and colors. So clear and vivid. Then, you do a "reality check" (such as checking your watch). This exercise can take me out of the "monkey-mind" mindset into one where I'm more conscious. Yet, I'm not sure it it's a silly type of trickery.