Is life a dream?

[The observer]

1 hour ago, Someone here said:

I seriously have no idea how to answer these questions and I wish to have a fruitful conversation. 

It's way more fruitful to ask the questions and try to answer them for yourself. All answers are already inside of you.

And sorry, was trying to lighten the mood a little bit since we've had multiple discussions I thought you're my friend and you'd take it lightly.

[The observer]

1 minute ago, Someone here said:

what do we specifically mean when use the term "dream" when describing reality? . 

Imaginary. Boundless. Infinite. Creative. Mysterious.

All of that shares one same insight; that you don't exist as a someone behind the eyes.

[SamueLSD]

@Someone here        As I said, it is in the sense that a dream is indifferent to waking reality. Dreams and 'real life' are part of the same dream. 

 

The real answer is, you are dreaming everything and nothing at the simultaneously. Infinite potential / mind. Consciousness. I was refraining from saying that though, because giving you the answer straight up isn't gonna make any sense until you have the foundations. 

[Someone here]

6 minutes ago, The observer said:

It's way more fruitful to ask the questions and try to answer them for yourself. All answers are already inside of you.

And sorry, was trying to lighten the mood a little bit since we've had multiple discussions I thought you're my friend and you'd take it lightly.

It's ok man. 

[Someone here]

4 minutes ago, SamueLSD said:

@Someone here        As I said, it is in the sense that a dream is indifferent to waking reality. Dreams and 'real life' are part of the same dream. 

 

The real answer is, you are dreaming everything and nothing at the simultaneously. Infinite potential / mind. Consciousness. I was refraining from saying that though, because giving you the answer straight up isn't gonna make any sense until you have the foundations. 

Does this mean solipsism?  I am dreaming all of you?  Or we both dreaming each other. I think to say reality is an imaginary  dream must imply solipsism. It necessarily has to deny objectivism. 

[zeroISinfinity]

10 minutes ago, The observer said:

Imaginary. Boundless. Infinite. Creative. Mysterious.

All of that shares one same insight; that you don't exist as a someone behind the eyes.

Again Suicidal depression. God damn. 

 

 

 

 

44 minutes ago, Someone here said:

❤️ You all. 

 

Edited May 14, 2020 by zeroISinfinity

[Forestluv]

41 minutes ago, Someone here said:

What do you mean by "orientation"?  My intentions? . 

This is something for you to observe. Introspect your desires. What is the source of the desire? In which direction is the desire pulling you? Is it pulling you toward contraction or greater expansion?

Concepts can have value as structural support as well as practical value in life. Yet, they are very limited. Imagine we are in a hostel in Tasmania. It is our first day, we are having breakfast and you are intellectualizing about the essence of Tasmania. You haven’t even seen Tasmania and are telling Tasmanians what it’s like to live in Tasmania! Everyone leaves for the day to actually explore Tasmania, you stay in the hostel thinking about what Tasmania is. Some people explore the forests, others walk around villages, others engage in ceremonies with local Shamans. They all return to the hostel that night to share there realizations and actual experience of the essence of Tasmania. They connect with locals and say “Yes! Yes! That ps what it was like. Yet, it’s so hard to put in words”. . . Yet, you then start demanding “evidence” for these claims and start correcting everyone about how wrong they are. . . . Don’t you see the problem here?  You will not gain broad, deep understanding of Tasmania by sitting in the hostel the whole time intellectualizing and maintaining pre-conceived ideas. You would actually need to set down the pre-conceived ideas, step outside the hostel, explore, learn and discover.

Rather than arguing from a position, a much better approach would be to actually ask locals “where is the best places to explore the essence of Tasmania?”. After they answer, we don’t say “That’s not evidence. That’s not Tasmania“. Rather, we ask for directions, prepare our backpack with supplies, leave the hostel and actually venture out. 

You have shown a similar orientation here. On this forum, there are experienced “Tasmanians” that have experience and realizations of which you haven’t awakened to. Rather than dismiss it or argue against it, get curious and explore. For example, there are people here that have done psychedelics 100+ times (including myself). There are people here that have spent thousands of hours integrating such insights and have a high level of fluency and expertise. Yet rather than getting curious about this, you dismiss it as “hallucinations”, without ever experiencing it yourself. You demand evidence, yet you have no idea what counts as evidence because you’ve never tripped! 

[Forestluv]

47 minutes ago, SamueLSD said:

Subjective / assumption 

I’m pointing to something prior to this categorization. This is a contextualization, which is fine it’s it’s own sense, yet it distorts the original point by adding in another filter of contextualization. 

ISness => contextualization as energetic orientation => contextualization of energetic orientation as subjective/assumption.

There is nothing wrong with this type of construction and it can have practical value. Yet each filter distorts what lies ‘prior’ to the filter.

49 minutes ago, SamueLSD said:

Also, you are capable of changing the energy, rather than returning it 

I’ve verified this in my experience, yet I would say it is an advanced skill to be able to transform energetics intentionally. I’ve tried with limited success, yet I’ve notice a small minority of people naturally have skills in n this area.

[Someone here]

10 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

This is something for you to observe. Introspect your desires. What is the source of the desire? In which direction is the desire pulling you? Is it pulling you toward contraction or greater expansion?

Concepts can have value as structural support as well as practical value in life. Yet, they are very limited. Imagine we are in a hostel in Tasmania. It is our first day, we are having breakfast and you are intellectualizing about the essence of Tasmania. You haven’t even seen Tasmania and are telling Tasmanians what it’s like to live in Tasmania! Everyone leaves for the day to actually explore Tasmania, you stay in the hostel thinking about what Tasmania is. Some people explore the forests, others walk around villages, others engage in ceremonies with local Shamans. They all return to the hostel that night to share there realizations and actual experience of the essence of Tasmania. They connect with locals and say “Yes! Yes! That ps what it was like. Yet, it’s so hard to put in words”. . . Yet, you then start demanding “evidence” for these claims and start correcting everyone about how wrong they are. . . . Don’t you see the problem here?  You will not gain broad, deep understanding of Tasmania by sitting in the hostel the whole time intellectualizing and maintaining pre-conceived ideas. You would actually need to set down the pre-conceived ideas, step outside the hostel, explore, learn and discover.

Rather than arguing from a position, a much better approach would be to actually ask locals “where is the best places to explore the essence of Tasmania?”. After they answer, we don’t say “That’s not evidence. That’s not Tasmania“. Rather, we ask for directions, prepare our backpack with supplies, leave the hostel and actually venture out. 

You have shown a similar orientation here. On this forum, there are experienced “Tasmanians” that have experience and realizations of which you haven’t awakened to. Rather than dismiss it or argue against it, get curious and explore. For example, there are people here that have done psychedelics 100+ times (including myself). There are people here that have spent thousands of hours integrating such insights and have a high level of fluency and expertise. Yet rather than getting curious about this, you dismiss it as “hallucinations”, without ever experiencing it yourself. You demand evidence, yet you have no idea what counts as evidence because you’ve never tripped! 

I'm not dismissing psychedelics. I admit I never tried it but I'm not as naive to just dismiss after hearing people's reports. Pretty amazing stuff. My only question why should these experiences from psychedelics (call it hallucinations.. Mystical states.. Whatever) be taken as revealing fundamental information about the nature of reality? They are small portions of reality.   A dream is identical to a psychedelic trip if not more mind blowing. Yet we can't jump into conclusions. Dreams are possible.  Hallucinations are possible. Does that necessarily mean that everything is a dream?  Ofcourse no.  If you could elaborate on that as well as sharing what you have learned from your trips would be appreciated. 

[Forestluv]

30 minutes ago, Someone here said:

My only question why should these experiences from psychedelics (call it hallucinations.. Mystical states.. Whatever) be taken as revealing fundamental information about the nature of reality?

This is a great question. Now observe your orientation. Are you oriented to gain insight from people that have extensive experience with both psychedelics as well as without psychedelics? Is there openness and space for insights to be transmitted to you? Or has your mind already concluded what psychedelics are and attached to that conclusion?. . . We can easily see by what follows. What follows next? Is there a pre-conceived conclusion about what psychedelics are? Or is there openness and space to explore and grow?

30 minutes ago, Someone here said:

They are small portions of reality.   A dream is identical to a psychedelic trip if not more mind blowing. 

This is as clear as clear can be. If you can’t see this orientation, I can’t help you. Notice how you asked a question about something you have no experience or understanding, yet already had your answer. You asked a question and then give the answer to your question!! Without ever trying a psychedelic, you have concluded:

— Psychedelics are a small portion of reality

— A dream is identical to a psychedelic

You have no idea what you are talking about because you lack any direct experience, yet have convinced yourself that you do know what you are talking about. If you tripped 50 times with a variety of psychedelics, a variety of doses and a variety of settings, your understanding would greatly deepen and expand - you would look back and laugh about how little you know now.

30 minutes ago, Someone here said:

 If you could elaborate on that as well as sharing what you have learned from your trips would be appreciated. 

You have already defined what psychedelics are without ever trying psychedelics. What good is my actual experience with psychedelics when you have already defined what psychedelics are? This filter is keeping you contracted within your current paradigm. You have no clue what psychedelics are like, yet believe you do. It’s like walking into Calculus class with no understanding of Calculus and then telling the professors what Calculus is and asking them to prove you wrong. 

These are chains that only you can free yourself of (if you are interested and desire it). I’m unable to penetrate this filter that protects your pre-conceived ideas. Your mind already thinks it knows psychedelics. You must first become aware that you don’t know, let go of pre-conceived ideas, allow space and get curious to explore and discover. 

If you ask “What is the essence of Tasmania?” and then state what the essence of Tasmania is (without ever being there) and then ask for others to provide evidence on your terms that you are wrong. . . .there is a major block to realization, deepening and expanding.

[Someone here]

7 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

This is a great question. Now observe your orientation. Are you oriented to gain insight from people that have extensive experience with both psychedelics as well as without psychedelics? Is there openness and space for insights to be transmitted to you? Or has your mind already concluded what psychedelics are and attached to that conclusion?. . . We can easily see by what follows. What follows next? Is there a pre-conceived conclusion about what psychedelics are? Or is there openness and space to explore and grow?

This is as clear as clear can be. If you can’t see this orientation, I can’t help you. Notice how you asked a question about something you have no experience or understanding, yet already had your answer. You ask a question and then give the answer to your question. You ask about how psychedelics can reveal information about reality and then you state what psychedelics reveal - without ever trying psychedelics!! . . . Without ever trying a psychedelic, you have concluded:

— Psychedelics are a small portion of reality

— A dream is identical to a psychedelic

You have no idea what you are talking about because you lack any direct experience, yet have convinced yourself that you do know what you are talking about. If you tripped 50 times with a variety of psychedelics, a variety of doses and a variety of settings, your understanding would greatly deepen and expand - you would look back and laugh about how little you know now.

You have already defined what psychedelics are without ever trying psychedelics. What good is my actual experience with psychedelics when you have already defined what psychedelics are? This filter is keeping you contracted within your current paradigm. You have no clue what psychedelics are like, yet believe you do. These are chains that only you can free yourself of (if you are interested and desire it).

I have no idea about tripping and the experience of taking a psychedelic.  Not of what a psychedelic is at a minimum level. Are you denying that a psychedelic is a certain limited object that exists in the world which gives you certain states similar to the dream state (hallucinations and visuals) or at least that's what I heard from people's trip reports.  I might be wrong.   If so can you please explain to me as well as answering my previous questions without further analysis of my psychological orientations!

[The observer]

@Someone here Just so you don't limit yourself. It's possible to answer all your questions without psychedelics. It helps to ask questions sometimes outwardly, but the most juice comes out of deep contemplations on your own, drug-free or not.

[Forestluv]

4 hours ago, Someone here said:

I have no idea about tripping and the experience of taking a psychedelic.  

Great. . . 

4 hours ago, Someone here said:

Are you denying that a psychedelic is a certain limited object that exists in the world which gives you certain states similar to the dream state (hallucinations and visuals) or at least that's what I heard from people's trip reports.  I might be wrong.   

You just said you have no idea about tripping and the psychedelic experience. Why would you hold onto your ideas of what tripping and a psychedelic experience is like? 

Notice how you are asking me to either accept or deny your pre-conceived conclusion that “a psychedelic is a certain limited object that exists in the world which gives you certain states similar to the dream state (hallucinations and visuals)’. . . This is like saying “I have no idea about the Chinese language, Chinese culture and I’ve never been to China, yet do you deny that my beliefs about China are wrong and if so, please provide evidence on my terms that I am wrong.”

Don’t give so much weight to trip reports. These are several steps away from the direct experience and not the actuality. . . Direct experience of trip => contextualization of trip by the person => expression of contextualized trip via limited language In a trip report => re-contextualization of trip report by the reader. . . There are two many steps removed from the initial direct experience. For example, if you have a filter that says “a psychedelic is a certain limited object that exists in the world which gives you certain states similar to the dream state (hallucinations and visuals)”, you will interpret the report through that filter.

I am not accepting nor denying that statement. To do so would be a disservice to you as it would re-enforce the dualistic construct you have created. The statement has partial truth in one context and lacks truth in another context. 

If you want to expand, drop the pre-conceived ideas. Drop “accept vs deny” of my pre-conceived idea. Drop “right vs wrong”. . . It’s not about you being “right” or “wrong”. It’s more that you are not aware of that which you have not yet awoken to. . . Let go of beliefs, allow space, get curious, explore and discover. 

Ime, psychedelics usually do not produce visuals or hallucinations and are quite different than dream states. I’ve practiced both for years. 

[Someone here]

3 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

Great start. . . 

You just said you have no idea about tripping and the experience of taking a psychedelic. Why would you hold onto your ideas of what tripping and a psychedelic experience is like? 

Notice how you are asking me to either accept or deny your pre-conceived conclusion that “a psychedelic is a certain limited object that exists in the world which gives you certain states similar to the dream state (hallucinations and visuals)’. Notice how the mind wants to 

I am not accepting nor denying that statement. To do so would be a disservice to you as it would re-enforce the dualistic construct you have created. The statement has partial truth in one context and lacks truth in another context. 

If you want to expand, drop the pre-conceived ideas. Drop “accept vs deny” of my pre-conceived idea. Drop “right vs wrong”. . . Do let go. Do get curious. Do allow space. Do practices and observe. 

I dropped it.  Can you please answer my question and give me the alternative. What is a psychedelic really?  What you learned from your trips?  And how do you know that whatever you learned or experienced from these trips should be applied to the whole of reality and reveal conclusive insights about the nature of reality? 

[cetus]

@Someone here Your a constant distraction and well on your way to being banned with your debates. Just a heads up.

[Someone here]

6 minutes ago, cetus said:

@Someone here Your a constant distraction and well on your way to being banned with your constant debates. Just a heads up.

6 minutes ago, cetus said:

@Someone here.

Can I know why please?  I really am curious about finding answers to that question.  I don't think I'm debating sir.  I'm open to different perspectives and not trying to do any distractive behaviors.  Am I not allowed to ask certain questions? (not trying to be disrespectful but maybe I missed something in the guidelines). 

[Forestluv]

28 minutes ago, Someone here said:

What is a psychedelic really?  What you learned from your trips?  And how do you know that whatever you learned or experienced from these trips should be applied to the whole of reality and reveal conclusive insights about the nature of reality? 

Imo, your mind is seeking grounding and is uncomfortable with groundless. It seeks form and is uncomfortable with formless. . . for example, there is no grounded definition I can give you of what a psychedelic is. No definition can capture it all and any definition is a limited partial truth. It is like asking what a mound of clay is. 

To me, the issue here has to do with dualities. If you have interest here, I would recommend putting some work into nonduality. Leo has made videos on duality and there are lots of great nonduality speakers.

Personally, I resonate very strongly with certain psychedelics under certain settings. My mind has expanded beyond what I could have imagined. My relationship to reality has changed. The self has been largely transcended. New spaces of exploration have opened up. Creativity, Intuition, Energetics, Motion, Presence, ISness. My mind is much more fluid and holds thoughts lightly. The mind is not so attached/immersed/identified to any particular thought story. There is a freedom present. . . Yet it wasn’t just psychedelics. I had a substance-free meditation practice for 25 years before my first psychedelic. I’ve also done yoga for years as well as shamanic breathing, lucid dreaming, solo retreats, cultural immersion and sensory deprivation tanks. As well as a lot of integration work. That is my resonance. Others may not do well with psychedelics. They may resonate with other practices.

Regarding “knowing”, I would say there are various manifestations of this. I’m not as interested in knowing facts, I’m much more interested in implicit knowing. . . For example, how do you ‘know’ that now is now? Do you ask each day for evidence that now is now? Do you get online and ask physicists to prove to you that now is now? Similarly, how to you know that here is here? Do you wake up each morning asking for evidence that here is here and here is not the moon? Of course not, because that knowing comes prior to the form of ‘evidence’ you are seeking. . . In terms of reality, it can be easily verified through inquiry and observation. 

If you want to explore what is real and what is dream, I would start by dropping the duality that it is either real or dream. I would start exploring areas that are sorta dream / sorta real hybrids. This comes prior to the intellectual analysis. . . 

[Forestluv]

@cetus I’m such a sucker for this. . . 

[Karas]

@cetus when John and Peter are debating with Hari which side do you take @Someone here democracy man 

[cetus]

@Serotoninluv Just like last time it's going in circles and getting nowhere.