I am enlightened. Sincere seekers: ask me anything

[graded24]

1 minute ago, winterknight said:

Yes, with a caveat. Sometimes a mind can seem quiet when it is actually dull -- lacking energy and focus. That apathy is also not-quietness.

And of course doing things according to your desire definitely quiets the mind... that's why I have such an emphasis on being honest about what you want. So that you can do it!

Well, you brought up another thing I have previously gone over with The Mind Illuminated (I am starting to see parallels).. dullness vs awake quietness. Not being able to distinguish the two reliable is definitely one of the key practical problems I am facing in my practice. For long I did meditations with eyes open and it was less of a problem then. But with eyes closed you can slip into dull mind and mistake it for a peaceful one. It is further complicated by the fact that 'I-I' is also supposed to feel peaceful and clear. 

Can you please talk about how one can distinguish the two in the moment? What is the the difference between a clear,quiet but awake mind and a dull mind.  And how to move from dullness to awake quietness when it comes during a sitting practice? 

[winterknight]

6 minutes ago, graded24 said:

Well, you brought up another thing I have previously gone over with The Mind Illuminated (I am starting to see parallels).. dullness vs awake quietness. Not being able to distinguish the two reliable is definitely one of the key practical problems I am facing in my practice. For long I did meditations with eyes open and it was less of a problem then. But with eyes closed you can slip into dull mind and mistake it for a peaceful one. It is further complicated by the fact that 'I-I' is also supposed to feel peaceful and clear. 

Can you please talk about how one can distinguish the two in the moment? What is the the difference between a clear,quiet but awake mind and a dull mind.  And how to move from dullness to awake quietness when it comes during a sitting practice? 

Yes, that's why eyes-open is recommended, and then your practice has to go into daily life, constantly. If you can feel peace while doing your other activities, that is not dullness.

[graded24]

29 minutes ago, winterknight said:

Yes, that's why eyes-open is recommended, and then your practice has to go into daily life, constantly. If you can feel peace while doing your other activities, that is not dullness.

Got it!

Thank you for your patience and answers man. I really appreciate it! 

[Forestluv]

@graded24 There are a wide variety of mystical experiences. I think the mind gets into a problem when a self takes ownership of the experience and/or becomes attached / identified with the experience. I’d say it took me over 30 trips until the trips just “is what it is” without involvement of a self. And then the chains come off - things go deep when the self leaves the picture. 

I wouldn’t be surprised if those sages’ advice was sound for the majority of trippers. I’ve met many trippers that are lost. They may use it carelessly and recreationally. In Peru, I met lots of voyagers doing Ayahuasca ceremonies multiple times per week. These were generally younger people traveling around the world, seeking and searching for themselves, for something meaningful. And they were completely delusional. They would ramble on about time is an illusion and different dimensions. . . They were in there own little bubble of ideology, group think and delusion. So yes, psychedelics carry both risk and reward. It takes discipline and skill to use this tool well. Many, perhaps most, do not.

I had over 20yrs. of meditation and introspective work before my first trip. I did what you’re doing now for over 20yrs. I had a strong foundation before my first trip. I had the experience, discipline, conceptual knowledge and grounding to integrate a lot of lessons from a variety of different consciousness spaces. Some were extremely difficult lessons and very uncomfortable and scary to process. I’ve wanted to back out many times. 

Overall, the work has greatly expanded the mind’s conscious level and capacity. Yet, this is dependent on one’s baseline level of consciousness. Someone with a high baseline level of consciousness can utilize psychedelics as an extraordinary spiritual tool. 

So I would tend to agree with sages regarding low conscious minds and psychedelics. 

Regarding high conscious use is a different story. Here I would like to speak to those sages that had over 20yrs of meditation / introspective work and then used a variety of psychedelics over 100 times. And worked hard to integrate those teachings into their strong foundation. Yes, I’d be very interested in what those sages have to say. 

In general, would you chose one conscious state or 100+ integrated conscious states?

You are giving far too much credit to human teachers and too little credit to your own higher teacher. The teacher beyond human minds. 

[Forestluv]

55 minutes ago, Preetom said:

@Serotoninluv

Recently Leo talked about the distinction between States(a phychedelic/meditative high) and Stages(permanent transformation that actually sticks).

Would you say that your dmt breakthrough took you to the next stage? Or are you still trying to make sense of and integrate those states?

In terms of stages, I like the Ox analogy. Because of psychedelics, I haven’t had a linear progression through the stages. I’ve jumped ahead many times and back. Integrating it, without contracting it or distorting it, takes a lot of experience and skill, imo

[winterknight]

25 minutes ago, graded24 said:

Got it!

Thank you for your patience and answers man. I really appreciate it! 

You're very welcome.

[graded24]

27 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

@graded24 There are a wide variety of mystical experiences. I think the mind gets into a problem when a self takes ownership of the experience and/or becomes attached / identified with the experience. I’d say it took me over 30 trips until the trips just “is what it is” without involvement of a self. And then the chains come off - things go deep when the self leaves the picture. 

I wouldn’t be surprised if those sages’ advice was sound for the majority of trippers. I’ve met many trippers that are lost. They may use it carelessly and recreationally. In Peru, I met lots of voyagers doing Ayahuasca ceremonies multiple times per week. These were generally younger people traveling around the world, seeking and searching for themselves, for something meaningful. And they were completely delusional. They would ramble on about time is an illusion and different dimensions. . . They were in there own little bubble of ideology, group think and delusion. So yes, psychedelics carry both risk and reward. It takes discipline and skill to use this tool well. Many, perhaps most, do not.

I had over 20yrs. of meditation and introspective work before my first trip. I did what you’re doing now for over 20yrs. I had a strong foundation before my first trip. I had the experience, discipline, conceptual knowledge and grounding to integrate a lot of lessons from a variety of different consciousness spaces. Some were extremely difficult lessons. This has greatly expanded the mind’s conscious level and capacity. Yet, this is dependent on the person’s baseline level of consciousness. Someone with a high baseline level of consciousness can utilize psychedelics as an extraordinary spiritual tool. 

So I would tend to agree with sages regarding low conscious minds and psychedelics. 

Regarding high conscious use is a different story. Here I would like to speak to those sages that had over 20yrs of meditation / introspective work and then used a variety of psychedelics over 100 times. And worked hard to integrate those teachings into their strong foundation. Yes, I’d be very interested in what those sages have to say. 

You are giving far too much credit to human teachers and too little credit to your own higher teacher. The teacher beyond human minds. 

hmm I see what you're saying. 

 I do plan to do ayahuasca trips at some point in the future. At the point it is well beyond my means and resources. 

[Bauer1977]

On 12/5/2018 at 6:18 AM, winterknight said:

Yes this is progress. Good for you.

Your work has only just begun with this understanding.

So now, next step, hold to that "sense." Meaning keep it in attention at all times, waking and night. Sense that sense constantly.

Hey Winterknight... I just had this interesting experience. I have had trouble sleeping since our last communication. So I googled a technique that instructed me to find the source of "I" as before, or lack thereof. And to breathe darkness into my Self to begin meditation before trying to go to sleep. So I started to breathe in darkness and began to black out every cell in the body until it was completely gone, then I blacked out the mind, then ultimately the entire field of awareness. After a while, "I" was left in a black void of darkness. And the realizations of what I experienced, and then repeated as the process developed went as follows:

- Just be, there is no time and no form (repeated from the start, maybe 100 times total)

- I am perfect nothingness (realized a bit later, repeated maybe 80 times)

- I am a presence, aware of myself (realized a bit later again, repeated maybe 50 times)

- I am God (realized a fair bit later, repeated only 5 - 10 times)

This left me somewhat in shock. This exercise took me somewhere I did not expect to go. Is there anything to this? Could this be God Consciousness?  I wish I could tell you more, but I didn't experience much in the moment. I just repeated it all a few more times to see if some profound experience would develop from there. But it didn't. Then I figured I needed to let you know to get your thoughts.

[winterknight]

43 minutes ago, Bauer1977 said:

Hey Winterknight... I just had this interesting experience. I have had trouble sleeping since our last communication. So I googled a technique that instructed me to find the source of "I" as before, or lack thereof. And to breathe darkness into my Self to begin meditation before trying to go to sleep. So I started to breathe in darkness and began to black out every cell in the body until it was completely gone, then I blacked out the mind, then ultimately the entire field of awareness. After a while, "I" was left in a black void of darkness. And the realizations of what I experienced, and then repeated as the process developed went as follows:

- Just be, there is no time and no form (repeated from the start, maybe 100 times total)

- I am perfect nothingness (realized a bit later, repeated maybe 80 times)

- I am a presence, aware of myself (realized a bit later again, repeated maybe 50 times)

- I am God (realized a fair bit later, repeated only 5 - 10 times)

This left me somewhat in shock. This exercise took me somewhere I did not expect to go. Is there anything to this? Could this be God Consciousness?  I wish I could tell you more, but I didn't experience much in the moment. I just repeated it all a few more times to see if some profound experience would develop from there. But it didn't. Then I figured I needed to let you know to get your thoughts.

Well, it sounds like a glimpse or glimpses of the Truth, for sure. But there is still a lot of "I am" in them, and there's still a lot of concept. The Truth is simpler than that. It is quiet and beyond concept. So keep going. What's the unchanging constant beneath these realizations?

If those states give you peace, try going there again and staying there, but while you are awake and doing other things...

Edited December 11, 2018 by winterknight

[Forestluv]

Once the self dissolves, is the mind-body more open/free for trans-personal / trans-human “experiences” - such as channeling?

[winterknight]

5 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

Once the self dissolves, is the mind-body more open/free for trans-personal / trans-human “experiences” - such as channeling?

Not particularly. Those are all siddhis. Enlightenment has little to do with them. Perhaps the quieter mind might very slightly help, but it's at best a very indirect connection. And frankly enlightenment is likely if anything to lead to a disinterest in such things. 

As Ramana Maharshi says in Guru Vachaka Kovai: "One who longs for siddhis after arriving in the world of Atma-Siddhas, the unlimited Space of Self-Consciousness, is just like the one who wants sour and stale gruel after reaching Heaven, which provides divine elixir, the food of immortality." 

[Sven]

Let's celebrate! It's been 100 pages and 2000 posts

[winterknight]

1 minute ago, Sven said:

Let's celebrate! It's been 100 pages and 2000 posts

Thanks!  Technically this very post is the 2000th in the series, counting the post that started it as the first... 

[Forestluv]

13 minutes ago, winterknight said:

Not particularly. Those are all siddhis. Enlightenment has little to do with them. Perhaps the quieter mind might very slightly help, but it's at best a very indirect connection. And frankly enlightenment is likely if anything to lead to a disinterest in such things. 

As Ramana Maharshi says in Guru Vachaka Kovai: "One who longs for siddhis after arriving in the world of Atma-Siddhas, the unlimited Space of Self-Consciousness, is just like the one who wants sour and stale gruel after reaching Heaven, which provides divine elixir, the food of immortality." 

Gotcha. Wouldn’t that be self-based desires? I.e. to achieve enlightenment with the self-based hope / intention of siddhis. 

It seems like the egoic state of mind is dominated by self-referential thinking and self seeking / avoidance. Trapped in loops of the “story” of past and future. If these truley dissolve, it seems there would be much more clarity, openness and stillness. 

In “my experience”, it seems like when the majority of the self/ego dissolved, there was clearer, open “space” for “things” to arise. When 5hrs a day of self-based worrying and figuring dissolves, it’s like a new freedom arises. Some of this new stuff might be these siddhis. It’s not something the fragments of self desire. The lower self often finds it uncomfortable and doesn’t like it.

[Forestluv]

12 minutes ago, winterknight said:

Thanks!  Technically this very post is the 2000th in the series, counting the post that started it as the first... 

Nice work winterknight!  ?  ? ? 

[winterknight]

4 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

Gotcha. Wouldn’t that be self-based desires? I.e. to achieve enlightenment with the self-based hope / intention of siddhis. 

It seems like the egoic state of mind is dominated by self-referential thinking and self seeking / avoidance. Trapped in loops of the “story” of past and future. If these truley dissolve, it seems there would be much more clarity, openness and stillness. 

In “my experience”, it seems like when the majority of the self/ego dissolved, there was clearer, open “space” for “things” to arise. When 5hrs a day of self-based worrying and figuring dissolves, it’s like a new freedom arises. Some of this new stuff might be these siddhis. It’s not something the fragments of self desire. The lower self often finds it uncomfortable and doesn’t like it.

Certainly a freedom arises, but siddhis are somewhat different. Vedanta at least is quite firm that enlightenment has no necessary connection with siddhis. 

Siddhis are really just like any other power in the world. Learning is a siddhi. Wealth is a siddhi. And so on. They're all acquired by effort in a certain direction. Where they happen, it's because the effort has been put in -- if not in this life, then in a past one.

So it would be like asking -- couldn't enlightenment make me better as an entrepreneur, a better doctor, a more creative writer, etc.? Well, yes, potentially the quieter mind could be channeled that way, but there's certainly no guarantee.

It really depends on the channels carved "pre"-enlightenment by one's prior effort.

The water will flow down those channels even as they are slowly dissolved, as the tendencies and karma accumulated is burned away (if we are talking of karma... of course really there is no such thing).

[FoxFoxFox]

@winterknight This question is difficult to phrase properly, nevertheless I shall try. When speaking of Maya, what exactly are the texts referring to? Is it the experiences provided by the senses, the conceptual framework which the mind overlays on this experience or both? If both, does that mean that absolute reality is always unmanifest? 

[winterknight]

1 minute ago, FoxFoxFox said:

@winterknight This question is difficult to phrase properly, nevertheless I shall try. When speaking of Maya, what exactly are the texts referring to? Is it the experiences provided by the senses, the conceptual framework which the mind overlays on this experience or both? If both, does that mean that absolute reality is always unmanifest? 

Yes, well, that's the million-dollar unanswerable question.

Maya means a distortion in thought. What is that distortion? It is the illusion that "I" exist, and with the I the conceptual framework. 

But if the I and the conceptual framework are kicked out, one has no words... so one can no longer say that "there is an experience." 

Nor can one say "there is not an experience."

So it is not the case that the Absolute is "unmanifest" or "manifest." It is nameless; it is beyond categories; it is not even that.

One answer: maya means the felt belief that there is such a thing as maya.

[FoxFoxFox]

@winterknight That does actually sufficiently answer the question. Thank you. Ramana's beautiful analogy that the Self is like a screen upon which all this plays out becomes more and more profound. 

[winterknight]

3 minutes ago, FoxFoxFox said:

@winterknight That does actually sufficiently answer the question. Thank you. Ramana's beautiful analogy that the Self is like a screen upon which all this plays out becomes more and more profound. 

Yes. And in fact in the end there is no screen, and no "all this" and no "playing out." All those are concepts, all connected to some notion of "I" which is itself a concept...