Carl-Richard

It can be that, but it can also be the desire to connect with your surroundings.

If you had read past that first little sentence, you would know that I'm really only talking about a traditional type of spirituality that is generally associated with the world religions (Hinduism, Buddhism, Christianity, Islam, etc.). What I'm not talking about is for example a belief in supernatural phenomena (ghosts, crystals, auras, etc.), or being interested in personal development, or shamanism, or psychedelics. I'm talking about the place that all these non-dual teachers I've mentioned in some way draw their inspiration from or resonate with. The crucial characteristics of that place, along with "the search for the sacred", is a deeply embedded notion of progress/growth/transformation. I happened to go for a stroll on Wikipedia, and they put it like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spirituality Notice how strongly it alludes to the concept of transformation. This is also tied to the historical origin of the "mythological worldview", which in a very fundamental way created the distinction between "who you are now" and "who you could be", and which arose in tandem with the world religions. John Vervaeke explains this very well here: 10:35 Leo hasn't managed to change his default experience into abiding non-dual awareness, and he has said he is more interested in experiencing deeper and deeper psychedelic states. This specific choice, is what I'm saying falls outside this traditional conception of spirituality.

@Thought Art Sorry for losing patience. I have repeated myself so many times, even after you re-read the topic. I interpreted your engagement as contrarian and nitpicking. I don't feel that you actually don't understand the point I'm making.

Main. Shtick. It's about degrees. It's a bigger-than sign for a reason. Please don't let me repeat myself any more times.

They all agree that growth > states. Leo doesn't. That is the basis for the two categories.

Correct.

If you're having such a hard time understanding what I wrote, here is my point: When Leo says "I'm the only person in the world who is awake", and that "no other spiritual guru is awake because they haven't taken enough trips of 5-Meo", this is because Leo's idea of awakening is categorically distinct from these gurus' ideas of awakening. When these gurus talk about their idea of awakening, and when Leo calls those gurus "not awake", it's misleading and ambiguous: does he mean that they're not awake according to their own definition, or does he mean that they're not awake according to his definition? You can't know that based on what Leo says in that sentence, let alone that there are multiple definitions of awakening. If you're a newbie, you have to spend hours, days and maybe weeks being confused about it until you finally realize "ah, he is using a different definition", and by then, you've stirred up so much confusion and unnecessary animosity across communities, that you certainly have no right to claim yourself as spiritual. I want to correct that mistake.

Why am I even responding to you?

You're getting stuck on the very first sentence where I present an extremely general definition in order to establish a consistent use of terms, and then you're missing the rest of topic where I'm building up to a very specific point. I never said spirituality and psychonautics don't overlap, and I never said psychedelic experiences are not experiences of the sacred.

You keep making the same mistake

I'll clarify again that I was talking about a difference in intention (seeking states vs. growth), not about a difference in outcome of engaging in either modality (using psychedelics vs. meditation). Sure, you can have the discussion about how much meditation vs. psychedelics is beneficial for whatever goal you have in mind, which is of course closely tied to what I was talking about, but also notice how many people fall into the same trap of misunderstanding the point I'm making, despite how it's a deliberate attempt to clear up a misunderstanding. Imagine then how confusing this problem that I'm addressing really is for a newbie who just arrived here.

We evolved spoken language to increase our capacity to think and process information, cooperate with each other, create culture and survive across different environments and niches. We then invented writing as a technology to increase our capacity to edit our thinking, and then not long after that, we invented alphabetic writing to make that process even more effective. We then experienced the Axial revolution: the birth place of Western thought; ancient Greek philosophy and the new world religions. From there, we got various insights: the necessity of law and order (politics), of personal discipline, of a social duty to the larger society (ethics), of a transcendent purpose outside mere power and conquest (morality, aesthetics, spirituality; the Good, the Beautiful, the Sacred), etc. All this laid the groundwork for how our society functions today. Now, do we even have to ask why that was important? Do we even have to ask why it's still important? We're not the least bit over the challenges that God is throwing at us.

John Vervaeke, from either EP. 1 or 2 of Awakening From The Meaning Crisis: "the things that make you intelligent are also the things that make you prone to self-deception" (btw he is not using the Leonian "definition" of intelligence).

Is Chris Langan a genius? Then hell the fuck no to both of those

It's likely you're trying so hard to go meta, you accidentally hit delete on all the content that you're trying to go meta on.

Uh... so this thing just dropped? It's kinda semi- off-topic, but it's the big hands guy I mentioned earlier doing a very unlikely collab with one of the young and hip progressive bands "Polyphia". The sound is pretty... "New-Age" (the title too). I think the New-agey sound and especially the Asian guy is triggering me. It's like they're a particular manifestation of my shadow (some musical and artistic parts of myself that I used to have but that I've repressed): highly polished and neat, stylistically clean and hygenic, unapologetically creative and untraditional ?

Man, I wrote this topic late at night while having a bad cold, so I apologize for those who read it early on before I fixed the maybe 20 mistakes that were in there EDIT: Fixed the complete lack of flow as well

Nobody is doing that.

This is like conflating physical strength with physical health.

After my first awakening, I stabilized in a habit of 45 min - 1.5 hrs seated meditation (all in one sitting) every day for 3 years, amounting to around 1000 hours, until I had to quit because I started having fully spontaneous awakenings which scared the shit out of me. I've had spontaneous awakenings many times before that (for example while sitting on the bus, or while walking), but by fully spontaneous, I mean that I would be actively doing something which involves the mind (like engaging in an university lecture) and my mind would tell me that I'm dying. At that point, it feels like there is no escape, and it felt like that for 2 years even after quitting meditation. I know what psychedelics can offer. I was hammering home the point that psychedelics have a very different metabolic signature than your brain at rest. If your default state has truly integrated the psychedelic state, you should expect to experience things like visuals.

A microdose is still a very different metabolic signature than your brain at rest. I've had countless spontaneous awakenings which were like meditation awakenings but only eyes open and moving, but I've never even seen slight psychedelic visuals when sober. My sober awakening experiences blew my LSD experiences out of the water. You're assuming things here.

Well, as I've said, they are definitely a source of growth. If you want to be very precise, that is not really what I'm pointing at. I'm talking about a difference in intention: should you aim towards higher and higher states, or should you aim towards a deeper and more grounded integration of those states?

If you can't see the difference between mainly aiming at changing your default state vs. mainly aiming at experiencing the highest states possible, I can't help you.

Again, almost like nobody reads anything I wrote. Thank you! Any distinction is welcome. I know calling them mere "trips" or "experiences" desacralizes them in a way, so I understand that the psychonautic terminology is a bit unfair (I'm not denying that these are experiences of the divine).

It's almost like you haven't read anything I've written here.