Role Of Psychedelics And Their Effects After Self-Realization: Artem Boytsov x Frank

[Bufo Alvarius]

On 8.6.2024 at 6:54 PM, Water by the River said:

29:46 Role Of Psychedelics And Their Effects After Self-Realization

Summary effect after Self-Realization: Ahem. Um. Hmmmm.  

So...

iconoclast (plural iconoclasts)

1. (historical, Christianity) One who destroys religious images or icons, especially an opponent of the Orthodox Church in the 8th and 9th centuries, or a Puritan during the European Reformation. 
2. One who opposes orthodoxy and religion; one who adheres to the doctrine of iconoclasm. 
3. (by extension) One who attacks cherished beliefs; a maverick. 

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/iconoclast

And hey: The guy lives in SF, seems rather friendly and nice, and he offered for anybody who wants to see this to come & smoke the pipe of peace with ingridients of interest! So why not someone more or less local go there and proove the gig and/or fraud? Wouldn't that be interesting?

Selling Bilderstürmer by the River

 

And in case yours truly caused an increased blood-pressure with the link above:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ode_to_Joy

"Joy, thou shining spark of God,
Daughter of Elysium,
With fiery rapture, goddess,
We approach thy shrine!
Your magic reunites those
Whom stern custom has parted;*
All men will become brothers*
Under your protective wing.

...

Be embraced, all ye millions!
With a kiss for all the world!
Brothers, beyond the stars
Surely dwells a loving Father.
Do you kneel before Him, oh millions?
Do you feel the Creator's presence?
Seek Him beyond the stars!
He must dwell beyond the stars"

 

@Water by the River It's interesting that you bring up Artem. I'll post below one of his main thesis on levels of enlightenment. Can you elaborate where your and his views are the same and where they differ? It's especially confusing that Artem claims that even consciousness/infinity are still levels of dreaming and not the final enlightenment, while you point to 'empty pure impersonal infinite consciousness' as the final abode in the process of enlightenment.

From Artem's Quora post: https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-levels-of-enlightenment/answer/Artem-Boytsov

"There are no levels of enlightenment, but there are levels of dreaming, and every level has its own layer of bondage, which you progressively shed as you move towards the center:

On the outer level of dreaming, you are a person in the body, looking outside of the body into the physical world and relating to other persons. You are a slave of society.

On a deeper level of dreaming, you are a soul occupying the body and you relate to other souls on an energetic level. You are a slave of your emotional energy.

On a deeper still level of dreaming, you are consciousness/God, a being of pure compassion and unconditional love, you are everything and everyone, the deepest form of love. You are a slave of love.

On the deepest level of dreaming, you are Brahman, the totality of all existence, infinity beyond manifest, you are truly nothing, eternity, the deepest form of peace. You are a slave of death.

When all dreaming ceases, you are just a hairless monkey walking on a ball of rock, eating, pooping, living and not imagining things that are not there. You are now free.

Each level of the dream has its own amount of fun and beauty, and very few people go all the way, because each level is covered by its own layer of suffering. Embodiment of unconditional love is extremely fun and very rewarding. Being mentally dead while your body is alive is very peaceful, very restful, very blissful, that’s Buddhahood.

When you’re dreaming on the outer layers, the inner layers are there, too, they’re just in your unconscious. As you go from the outer layers towards the center, the dreaming becomes more and more subtle, you become progressively more free. The last level, the Brahmanic level, is the most subtle. It’s almost no dreaming at all.

Most people who are awake have awakened from one level of dreaming into a deeper level of dreaming. So their dreaming became a little bit more lucid. “It’s all a dream” as they say.

Enlightenment is not awakening into your dream, it is awakening from your dream, entirely. It’s when all dreaming ceases and the mind doesn’t dream anymore."

[Breakingthewall]

40 minutes ago, Bufo Alvarius said:

@Water by the River It's interesting that you bring up Artem. I'll post below one of his main thesis on levels of enlightenment. Can you elaborate where your and his views are the same and where they differ? It's especially confusing that Artem claims that even consciousness/infinity are still levels of dreaming and not the final enlightenment, while you point to 'empty pure impersonal infinite consciousness' as the final abode in the process of enlightenment.

From Artem's Quora post: https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-levels-of-enlightenment/answer/Artem-Boytsov

"There are no levels of enlightenment, but there are levels of dreaming, and every level has its own layer of bondage, which you progressively shed as you move towards the center:

On the outer level of dreaming, you are a person in the body, looking outside of the body into the physical world and relating to other persons. You are a slave of society.

On a deeper level of dreaming, you are a soul occupying the body and you relate to other souls on an energetic level. You are a slave of your emotional energy.

On a deeper still level of dreaming, you are consciousness/God, a being of pure compassion and unconditional love, you are everything and everyone, the deepest form of love. You are a slave of love.

On the deepest level of dreaming, you are Brahman, the totality of all existence, infinity beyond manifest, you are truly nothing, eternity, the deepest form of peace. You are a slave of death.

When all dreaming ceases, you are just a hairless monkey walking on a ball of rock, eating, pooping, living and not imagining things that are not there. You are now free.

Each level of the dream has its own amount of fun and beauty, and very few people go all the way, because each level is covered by its own layer of suffering. Embodiment of unconditional love is extremely fun and very rewarding. Being mentally dead while your body is alive is very peaceful, very restful, very blissful, that’s Buddhahood.

When you’re dreaming on the outer layers, the inner layers are there, too, they’re just in your unconscious. As you go from the outer layers towards the center, the dreaming becomes more and more subtle, you become progressively more free. The last level, the Brahmanic level, is the most subtle. It’s almost no dreaming at all.

Most people who are awake have awakened from one level of dreaming into a deeper level of dreaming. So their dreaming became a little bit more lucid. “It’s all a dream” as they say.

Enlightenment is not awakening into your dream, it is awakening from your dream, entirely. It’s when all dreaming ceases and the mind doesn’t dream anymore."

That guy focuses everything on the mind and self-reference, to me it seems wrong and very basic, and perhaps a liar. and that hairless monkey thing makes me think he's a liar, 99%, , he just want to sound special

[emil1234]

@Bufo Alvarius i mean i can confirm this artem guy is straight out wrong. he says during the interview that the universe is not one, that its just a projection of the mind. now this of course comes across as a personal anecdote, but i have experienced a non disputable interaction with my friend through the web of the universal consciousness, so i know for a fact that unity is an ontological truth.

this is also why the yogis abide in the universal consciousness, because miracles happen when you do. read autobiography of a yogi, when you master the universal consciousness you can literally manipulate reality. i dont know if this artem guy is straight out lying, or if hes just wrong. neither way hes not speaking the truth lol

[Scholar]

On 9.6.2024 at 9:52 AM, Leo Gura said:

Nonsense. No amount of meditation equals psychedelic consciousness.

These guys are nowhere as conscious as psychedelics make me. And no amount of talk will ever change that.

If you can walk straight and talk straight that proves you aren't very conscious.

Just because psychedelics stop working on you is not proof of anything profound. And it certainly isn't proof of high consciousness or that you have maxed consciousness out. Thinking that is a prime example of the kind of shallow mindlessness that nondualists are gulity of and why all forms of human spirituality are rat level.

Close-mindedness. I think Yang is superior.

[What Am I]

Anyone know of a good summarizing video to get caught up on the lore for this Frank Yang character?

Maybe I'm coming at it with a naive perspective and judging a book by its cover, but he just seems like the average gym bro lol. Has the guy demonstrated his mastery in any way beyond words in youtube videos? I'd only hold him to that standard because these are some lofty claims.

Edited June 10 by What Am I

[What Am I]

Found this. Well he certainly uses the right lingo. And if his subjective experience lines up with the story he's telling, I guess he'd be one of those who's either made the full journey or is pretty far on it at least. Who am I to say for sure.

 

[Scholar]

25 minutes ago, What Am I said:

Anyone know of a good summarizing video to get caught up on the lore for this Frank Yang character?

Maybe I'm coming at it with a naive perspective and judging a book by its cover, but he just seems like the average gym bro lol. Has the guy demonstrated his mastery in any way beyond words in youtube videos? I'd only hold him to that standard because these are some lofty claims.

I don't have a summary, but this conversation was pretty solid:

 

I'm currently leaning more towards Yang being correct than Gura, or maybe neither.

[Bufo Alvarius]

13 minutes ago, What Am I said:

Anyone know of a good summarizing video to get caught up on the lore for this Frank Yang character?

Maybe I'm coming at it with a naive perspective and judging a book by its cover, but he just seems like the average gym bro lol. Has the guy demonstrated his mastery in any way beyond words in youtube videos? I'd only hold him to that standard because these are some lofty claims.

The map he lays out and his description of the enlightenment process is on par with what waterbytheriver writes and also comparable to the writing of individuals, who fully abide in the Absolute, such as Bernadette Roberts, for example.

The main difference is the language all of them use, so it comes down to stylistic preference, which of those three you resonate most with.

Here's a good summarizing video of his work

 

[lostingenosmaze]

1 hour ago, Scholar said:

Close-mindedness. I think Yang is superior.

Clearly Leo is jealous of Frank Yang's superior genetics. Not that I'm saying that because I just read Leo's latest blogpost today, not really 

Edited June 10 by lostingenosmaze

[Scholar]

9 minutes ago, lostingenosmaze said:

Clearly Leo is jealous of Frank Yang's superior genetics. Not that I'm saying that because I just read Leo's latest blogpost today, really

I think Leo also has a need to be the best and ultimate at something. Wouldn't be very exciting if he couldn't develop the "deepest understanding of reality anyone has ever reached in the history of mankind" etc.

Non-Duality is too simple, and there is a clear end point, and it was discovered for thousands of years. Can't really out-ego that.

[What Am I]

Nice, thanks guys.

27 minutes ago, Scholar said:

I'm currently leaning more towards Yang being correct than Gura, or maybe neither.

Who could say when we're dealing with such incomprehensible stuff? It's likely there's valuable info from both that could push everyone forward. When it comes to many of the big points, they seem mostly aligned.

Edited June 10 by What Am I

[What Am I]

39 minutes ago, Scholar said:

I don't have a summary, but this conversation was pretty solid:

 

Leo's thoughts on the UFO situation are a lot better than this answer, so he gets the point there in my book at least.

[Oppositionless]

Frank Yang is a meditation noob. That's not hyperbole, he's quite literally too young to be anything but a meditation noob.

If you're set on the traditional path, I can only recommend crotchety old tImers. 
 

 

Edited June 11 by Oppositionless

[emil1234]

i couldnt resist and i watched some content with this artem guy. he seems very dreadful

[Breakingthewall]

3 hours ago, emil1234 said:

i couldnt resist and i watched some content with this artem guy. he seems very dreadful

It's curious that people like Frank Yang or Waterriver don't realize how fake Artem is. He is a wannabe sect leader narcissistic and very liar. I would bet a lot that it is like that. On the other hand, yang seems authentic, and river of course is, 100% without a doubt.

[Leo Gura]

Nonduality is too simple because it is ultimately wrong.

Nonduality is not God-Realization.

Nonduality does not explain God.

I have experienced God so deeply that you cannot fathom it. And what spiritual people talk about is not it.

Edited June 12 by Leo Gura

[yetineti]

@Leo Gura

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

I have experienced God so deeply that you cannot fathom it. And what spiritual people talk about is not it.

(Good or Bad)

What does mean to you now? How has it changed you, what has it brought you, etc.?

Obviously, you don’t just say it. And I am curious if there any examples or routine thoughts or habits that’ve evolved recently in consequence.

Maybe it won’t make sense to me. Still, I want your thoughts as they were your own.

 

Edited June 13 by yetineti

[Leo Gura]

What it means is that all human spirituality is childish nonsense.

Humans keep trying to convince you that they understand God, or even transcended God. And they ain't.

Edited June 13 by Leo Gura

[emil1234]

 

9 hours ago, Breakingthewall said:

It's curious that people like Frank Yang or Waterriver don't realize how fake Artem is. He is a wannabe sect leader narcissistic and very liar. I would bet a lot that it is like that. On the other hand, yang seems authentic, and river of course is, 100% without a doubt.

yea i like frank yang however i think hes metaphysics are pretty off. but this artem guy man. narcissistic is the perfectly fitting label to be honest

[Water by the River]

On 10.6.2024 at 9:34 PM, Bufo Alvarius said:

@Water by the River It's interesting that you bring up Artem. I'll post below one of his main thesis on levels of enlightenment. Can you elaborate where your and his views are the same and where they differ? It's especially confusing that Artem claims that even consciousness/infinity are still levels of dreaming and not the final enlightenment, while you point to 'empty pure impersonal infinite consciousness' as the final abode in the process of enlightenment.

From Artem's Quora post: https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-levels-of-enlightenment/answer/Artem-Boytsov

"There are no levels of enlightenment, but there are levels of dreaming, and every level has its own layer of bondage, which you progressively shed as you move towards the center:

On the outer level of dreaming, you are a person in the body, looking outside of the body into the physical world and relating to other persons. You are a slave of society.

On a deeper level of dreaming, you are a soul occupying the body and you relate to other souls on an energetic level. You are a slave of your emotional energy.

On a deeper still level of dreaming, you are consciousness/God, a being of pure compassion and unconditional love, you are everything and everyone, the deepest form of love. You are a slave of love.

On the deepest level of dreaming, you are Brahman, the totality of all existence, infinity beyond manifest, you are truly nothing, eternity, the deepest form of peace. You are a slave of death.

When all dreaming ceases, you are just a hairless monkey walking on a ball of rock, eating, pooping, living and not imagining things that are not there. You are now free.

Each level of the dream has its own amount of fun and beauty, and very few people go all the way, because each level is covered by its own layer of suffering. Embodiment of unconditional love is extremely fun and very rewarding. Being mentally dead while your body is alive is very peaceful, very restful, very blissful, that’s Buddhahood.

When you’re dreaming on the outer layers, the inner layers are there, too, they’re just in your unconscious. As you go from the outer layers towards the center, the dreaming becomes more and more subtle, you become progressively more free. The last level, the Brahmanic level, is the most subtle. It’s almost no dreaming at all.

Most people who are awake have awakened from one level of dreaming into a deeper level of dreaming. So their dreaming became a little bit more lucid. “It’s all a dream” as they say.

Enlightenment is not awakening into your dream, it is awakening from your dream, entirely. It’s when all dreaming ceases and the mind doesn’t dream anymore."

"It's especially confusing that Artem claims that even consciousness/infinity are still levels of dreaming and not the final enlightenment, while you point to 'empty pure impersonal infinite consciousness' as the final abode in the process of enlightenment."

The magic word is impersonal. Meaning no subtle "lense of perception" and any subtle experiencer left, or in other words subtle dualities/lenses arising and making the infinite field not fully syncing up in its true nondual nature.

When there is still an experiencer OF consciousness/infinity, like in

11 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

I have experienced God so deeply that you cannot fathom it

there is still a (often extremly subtle and impossible to spot before fulling crossing over) experiencer too much. A subtle duality preventing the full realization of ones True Identity, but doing a deep dive in its manifestation. The whole Totality/Reality experiencing itself without an experiencer is the "true state of things", and "It" doesn't need any fireworks to understand its essence. The problem is, that the meaning of that only becomes clear when it has happened, and it can not be fully anticipated or understood in any way before that happens.

 

On 29.2.2024 at 6:37 PM, Water by the River said:

And yes, (self-)consciousness implies often a separation. With perceptions perceiving themselves I want to express that there are states where there is no I-thought and I-feeling. Then it is literally the universe perceiving itself, Being perceiving itself. That is also what  I mean when writing "impersonal". Although this report of Steven Norquist is a bit "pushing" the empty/scary character , which can be the initial reaction if this realization goes very fast, in truth its the most wonderful state imaginable.

http://www.hauntedpress.net/What_is_Enlightenment.html

It is Awareness in and by itself, not the "personal" consciousness. There never is and was a personal consciousness, it is only non-personal Infinite Being/Awareness. "Impersonal" can sound bad, but isn't: Its all ones True Being, and that is aware, and eternal. Containing the whole world, and also a human and its thoughts/feelings. It is a much larger Being than the previous illusion-human. And much more blissful. 

This Awareness in and by itself (of Infinite Being) "lends" or appears as personal consciousness (which isn't conscious at all, because True Infinite Being is the Awareness/consciousness cosplaying limited personal consciousness). So nothing is really lost besides the illusion of being just a small separate human. True Being can not be lost, ever. Immortal. Eternal. Unborn.

 

This last shift is impossible to understand or anticipate in any way before it happens. Even Norquist descriptions are just a preview.

And Artem description of the hairless monkey is not the style I would use. But it is a valid desciption in how it emphasizes the point of the experiencer vanishing in the infinite totality of Reality itself, no longer having special importance (like a realizer of infinite consciousness) compared to the Totality that one truly is, becoming a total normie living ones life (which then lives itself without contraction, fear and suffering. Wonderful.). I prefer "empty pure impersonal infinite consciousness/Being/Reality", because hairless monkey can be misunderstood easily.

And off-topic, one can be enlightened and still totally wrong on the relative level. Zen at War, Brian Daizen Victoria. Not to even talk about personality, which can have quite a "hang-over".

Selling Water by the River