Someone here

can we explain psychedelics under the materialist paradigm ?

202 posts in this topic

22 minutes ago, Jacobsrw said:

There is no Leo ;)

Leo I think may be open to the idea that awakening can be induced.... Hence his heavy involvement with 5-MEO for awakening. I definitely am not open to it.

Go awaken then tell me if you still maintain a belief that enlightenment can be induced xD The whole “process” of awakening dissolves becoming no more real than a bed time story.

I think Leo should be the first one who wants science to understand psychedelics and be able to induce the psychedelic experience without actually taking them.  

 Regarding awakening.. I agree with fred (the nonduality teacher they talked about in the other thread) that we are already awake. There's nothing to Awaken to. This is reality.. This is as real as it gets..hello, Can you see it? 


my mind is gone to a better place.  I'm elevated ..going out of space . And I'm gone .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't really explain anything using the materialist paradigm. You can make cool toys though.


Intrinsic joy is revealed in the marriage of meaning and being.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

You can't really explain anything using the materialist paradigm. You can make cool toys though.

Says who? Science apparently explained a lot of things.  Might not be able to explain everything. But to say it can't explain anything is just ridiculously false. 


my mind is gone to a better place.  I'm elevated ..going out of space . And I'm gone .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Someone here Science makes models. Models are maps. Maps can get you from A to B, but they can't explain what the terrain is made out of or where it came from.


Intrinsic joy is revealed in the marriage of meaning and being.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Someone here said:

I think Leo should be the first one who wants science to understand psychedelics and be able to induce the psychedelic experience without actually taking them.  

 Regarding awakening.. I agree with fred (the nonduality teacher they talked about in the other thread) that we are already awake. There's nothing to Awaken to. This is reality.. This is as real as it gets..hello, Can you see it? 

Agreed. This does nothing for one who is completely deluded however. One can understand they exist and it’s source but operating from this place is a completely different story.

28 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

You can't really explain anything using the materialist paradigm. You can make cool toys though.

@Someone here Fundamentally, this is true. As I stated earlier. A concept is not the same as the very thing attempts to represent. Actuality is very different that the descriptions used to describe it. A model of reality is not the same as the actuality of reality.

Research Jack Derrida and you will see how his theory of Deconstruction completely decimates materialism and science.

Edited by Jacobsrw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Someone here said:

There's nothing to Awaken to.

This is so wrong.

Stop listening to fools like Fred. He is not awake at all.


You are God. You are Truth. You are Love. You are Infinity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Leo Gura how can I know who's "really" awake? . Different teachers have different concepts about what It means to be Awaken and they all think that's the only "real" awakening. 

Mooji : just realize the "I" thought is an illusion and stay as "isness". 

Rupert Spira : you are the knowing of experience. Be aware of being aware. 

Osho : meditate and stay in a silent mind. 

You : realize that you are God and you created the whole universe. 

How can I know which one is the highest method? 


my mind is gone to a better place.  I'm elevated ..going out of space . And I'm gone .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Someone here said:

@Leo Gura how can I know who's "really" awake? . Different teachers have different concepts about what It means to be Awaken and they all think that's the only "real" awakening. 

Mooji : just realize the "I" thought is an illusion and stay as "isness". 

Rupert Spira : you are the knowing of experience. Be aware of being aware. 

Osho : meditate and stay in a silent mind. 

You : realize that you are God and you created the whole universe. 

How can I know which one is the highest method? 

Go directly to reality itself and find out.

Self-inquiry, psychedelics and contemplation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Someone here said:

@Leo Gura how can I know who's "really" awake? . Different teachers have different concepts about what It means to be Awaken and they all think that's the only "real" awakening. 

Mooji : just realize the "I" thought is an illusion and stay as "isness". 

Rupert Spira : you are the knowing of experience. Be aware of being aware. 

Osho : meditate and stay in a silent mind. 

You : realize that you are God and you created the whole universe. 

How can I know which one is the highest method? 

Mine is the highest, of course ;) But don't take my word for it.

The only way to know anything is to do it.


You are God. You are Truth. You are Love. You are Infinity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Someone here said:

@Leo Gura how can I know who's "really" awake? . Different teachers have different concepts about what It means to be Awaken and they all think that's the only "real" awakening. 

Mooji : just realize the "I" thought is an illusion and stay as "isness". 

Rupert Spira : you are the knowing of experience. Be aware of being aware. 

Osho : meditate and stay in a silent mind. 

You : realize that you are God and you created the whole universe. 

How can I know which one is the highest method? 

Geez, man, just reclaim your authority already and get to work.

Spoiler alert, they're all talking about the same "thing". So was Jesus, the Buddha, Mohammad, Ramana Maharshi and all the sages.

No one is going to give you answers!


Alternative Rock Music and Spirituality on YouTube: The Buddha Visions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Someone here said:

@Leo Gura how can I know who's "really" awake? . Different teachers have different concepts about what It means to be Awaken and they all think that's the only "real" awakening. 

Mooji : just realize the "I" thought is an illusion and stay as "isness". 

Rupert Spira : you are the knowing of experience. Be aware of being aware. 

Osho : meditate and stay in a silent mind. 

You : realize that you are God and you created the whole universe. 

How can I know which one is the highest method? 

Most of them are different ways to tell the same thing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, docs20 said:

Most of them are different ways to tell the same thing

Except that some refer to the isness (stay like a fucking tree because you have no control and you will die anyway), while others point to the very act of Creation.

I could tell that it's a huge difference here.

Edited by Member

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Mine is the highest, of course ;) But don't take my word for it.

The only way to know anything is to do it.

That's true. I'm struggling with obtaining psychedelics tho. But I think I will be able to obtain them sometime in the future. 


my mind is gone to a better place.  I'm elevated ..going out of space . And I'm gone .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Gili Trawangan said:

Geez, man, just reclaim your authority already and get to work.

Spoiler alert, they're all talking about the same "thing". So was Jesus, the Buddha, Mohammad, Ramana Maharshi and all the sages.

No one is going to give you answers!

I can sense that. What confused me Leo says there is levels to awakening. I'm convinced that all of reality is itself awakening. So in that sense you could say there is endless levels to awakening that's true which is the same thing as saying there's zero levels to it and this is it lol. 

Edited by Someone here

my mind is gone to a better place.  I'm elevated ..going out of space . And I'm gone .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Someone here said:

I can sense that. What confused me Leo says there is levels to awakening. I'm convinced that all of reality is itself awakening. So in that sense you could say there is endless levels to awakening that's true which is the same thing as saying there's zero levels to it and this is it lol. 

That's precisely true. You don't need to become a spiritual monk to be awake. You can be an awake scientist, or anything else that you want. Awakening is not exclusive to mysticism. That's a myth created by mystics that want you to become a mystical doppelganger of them.

Follow your heart. It sure knows where it belongs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, The observer said:

That's precisely true. You don't need to become a spiritual monk to be awake. You can be an awake scientist, or anything else that you want. Awakening is not exclusive to mysticism. That's a myth created by mystics that want you to become a mystical doppelganger of them.

Follow your heart. It sure knows where it belongs.

I agree. But I think there is no need to bash mystics. Everything in reality is perfectly inevitable.  That's what awakening reveals to you. So there is no point bashing anyone or anything. 


my mind is gone to a better place.  I'm elevated ..going out of space . And I'm gone .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Someone here Bashing? Lol! I was specifically talking about the ones that want others to become like them. That's what many of them do. And of course, it's not exclusive to mystics. The ego loves to have control over reality. The ones that tell you to copy them do not want you to be free. That's what I meant.

Of course, that's what our modern definition of freedom means. But now that I think about it, even blindly following others can be freedom for some people. So, I guess it's not so simple.

Edited by The observer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Someone here said:

Science apparently explained a lot of things.  Might not be able to explain everything. But to say it can't explain anything is just ridiculously false. 

You are not seeing the relationship between explanation and that which is explained. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, The observer said:

@Someone here Bashing? Lol! I was specifically talking about the ones that want others to become like them. That's what many of them do. And of course, it's not exclusive to mystics. The ego loves to have control over reality. The ones that tell you to copy them do not want you to be free. That's what I meant.

Of course, that's what our modern definition of freedom means. But now that I think about it, even blindly following others can be freedom for some people. So, I guess it's not so simple.

Ofcourse I'm against copying others. That's definitely not my path.  And I assume most people in this forum have enough IQ to not accept everything that  "someone" says on blind faith without questioning it and testing it for themselves. So I hope you refrain from debating with that particular "someone" and trying to prove him wrong because I love ya bro and I want you here :)


my mind is gone to a better place.  I'm elevated ..going out of space . And I'm gone .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Someone here said:

Science apparently explained a lot of things. Might not be able to explain everything. But to say it can't explain anything is just ridiculously false.

Science didn't actually explain anything at all. Literally nothing.

Still, it's definitely capable of creating value out of translating one form of perception into another and interchangeably.

To make this conversation solid, could you provide one example where you think science did explain something, so that we can deconstruct it with you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now