I'm Open to the Idea of God-Realization

[EnRoute]

Hi.

Although I have the tendency to remain an atheist, sometimes I'm flabbergasted by the way things are; the structure of reality and its marvelous design.

When we take psychedelics in the context of having a crystal-clear mind, devoid of trauma, and all sorts of toxic chemicals, how can we know that we're not fooling ourselves with that experience? How can we know for sure that reality is fully imaginary?

Isn't it fair to say that we still don't understand the mystery of reality?

A psychedelic experience seems plausible but it doesn't prove a damn thing; it is only a subjective experience that happens inside the mind. We can not know for sure that consciousness it's the ultimate truth of reality.

I'm not trying to contradict anyone here or to argue against @Leo Gura's ideas. I'm only a skeptic.

[BipolarGrowth]

2 minutes ago, EnRoute said:

Hi.

Although I have the tendency to remain an atheist, sometimes I'm flabbergasted by the way things are; the structure of reality and its marvelous design.

When we take psychedelics in the context of having a crystal-clear mind, devoid of trauma, and all sorts of toxic chemicals, how can we know that we're not fooling ourselves with that experience? How can we know for sure that reality is fully imaginary?

Isn't it fair to say that we still don't understand the mystery of reality?

A psychedelic experience seems plausible but it doesn't prove a damn thing; it is only a subjective experience that happens inside the mind. We can not know for sure that consciousness it's the ultimate truth of reality.

I'm not trying to contradict anyone here or to argue against @Leo Gura's ideas. I'm only a skeptic.

Hey, do you care to show me something that isn’t a subjective experience that happens inside the mind? 

[Adamq8]

Welcome ?

How can you be sure of anything?

It is only a subjective experience?

There is only subjective experience tbh, it is the ground for anything else to be.

There is no science or a world without conciousness, we can speculate all we want that a world or a universe exists outside of conciousness, but that is a world wide belief held in a subjective experience. 

Is not every experience happening inside mind then?

But why can you observe mind? Mind observing mind?

So science and the things we know about the universe is inside mind to?

Since experience is inside mind then the universe is inside the mind? 

Just some questions for you to contemplate.

Why dont you question your scepticism enough and investigate why psychedelics wouldnt give you the truth? Why would psychedelics be less true than a math equation?

Who or what puts the meaning of science or psychedelics?

Who is more right?

If 1000 people trip and reach the same conclusions is that false or right? And according to who's standard?

 

 

 

[Shin]

How many times did you think your dreams were 100% real and serious until you wake up ?

[Absolute]

You have to question yourself, have I been deluding myself my entire life and am I just conditioned by the external world into believing there can't be an Absolute Truth?

Before you could ever realize God, first you should question if there is a thing such as God. Could there be an Absolute Truth?

BUT before questioning that, first you must realize that believing there isn't a Truth/God (being an Atheist) IS ALSO A BELIEF, and with that realization must come the realization that YOU have been fooling yourself your whole life, so if you've fooled yourself with that, what about all your other thoughts on reality. This way you have the opportunity to start blank.

You have to go step by step and then work yourself further from every realization because realization gives you the openness to question further. I recommend Openness and Willingness, be committed to finding out for yourself, and most of all, doubt your own mind patterns, mechanics, constructs, structures formed by your thoughts. That's all . 

[Leo Gura]

2 hours ago, EnRoute said:

A psychedelic experience seems plausible but it doesn't prove a damn thing; it is only a subjective experience that happens inside the mind. We can not know for sure that consciousness it's the ultimate truth of reality.

Hahahahahahahaha....

[JosephKnecht]

2 hours ago, EnRoute said:

When we take psychedelics in the context of having a crystal-clear mind, devoid of trauma, and all sorts of toxic chemicals, how can we know that we're not fooling ourselves with that experience? How can we know for sure that reality is fully imaginary?

Your "objective" views have been created because of your "objective" experience.

Having direct experience is how you know things.

The rest is just stories. 

2 hours ago, EnRoute said:

Isn't it fair to say that we still don't understand the mystery of reality?

Consider that is fairer to say that You don't understand the mystery of reality.

2 hours ago, EnRoute said:

A psychedelic experience seems plausible but it doesn't prove a damn thing; it is only a subjective experience that happens inside the mind. We can not know for sure that consciousness it's the ultimate truth of reality.

If having direct experience is how we know things it seems that the only way to know a psychedelic experience Is to try a psychedelic.

All the rest is just speculation.  

[WelcometoReality]

7 hours ago, EnRoute said:

When we take psychedelics in the context of having a crystal-clear mind, devoid of trauma, and all sorts of toxic chemicals, how can we know that we're not fooling ourselves with that experience? How can we know for sure that reality is fully imaginary?

It can be 'experienced' without psychadelics as well. It's simply seeing reality in it's natural state.

We can also flip that question around. How do you know your not fooling yourself right now? You do it by examining what you are experiencing with a magnifying glass.

7 hours ago, EnRoute said:

Isn't it fair to say that we still don't understand the mystery of reality?

Very fair. ?

7 hours ago, EnRoute said:

A psychedelic experience seems plausible but it doesn't prove a damn thing; it is only a subjective experience that happens inside the mind. We can not know for sure that consciousness it's the ultimate truth of reality.

Yes it will be a subjective truth. You can try to communicate it with others but it can't be proven or understood unless it's been 'experienced' by the other.

[Chris365]

It WAS a subjective experience, experienced by the Ultimate Subject, God/Reality/Consciousness/Awareness, which is prior to language, logic and reason, so cannot be 'understood' or 'known' using them. It's like the characters in a TV show trying to understand the TV screen they are projected on.

[RendHeaven]

2 hours ago, Dariansmith said:

How do you know it wasn’t your subjective experience?

As others have said, how do you know that ANYTHING isn't just "your subjective experience?"

You seem to be disparaging "subjective experience" on the assumption that there is something, anything MORE than that somehow.

[RMQualtrough]

15 hours ago, EnRoute said:

Hi.

Although I have the tendency to remain an atheist, sometimes I'm flabbergasted by the way things are; the structure of reality and its marvelous design.

When we take psychedelics in the context of having a crystal-clear mind, devoid of trauma, and all sorts of toxic chemicals, how can we know that we're not fooling ourselves with that experience? How can we know for sure that reality is fully imaginary?

Isn't it fair to say that we still don't understand the mystery of reality?

A psychedelic experience seems plausible but it doesn't prove a damn thing; it is only a subjective experience that happens inside the mind. We can not know for sure that consciousness it's the ultimate truth of reality.

I'm not trying to contradict anyone here or to argue against @Leo Gura's ideas. I'm only a skeptic.

You can definitely prove beyond doubt certain elements of the experience as being genuine. You cannot prove that there is NOT an external material world (with awareness being produced by the brain), but you can prove the logic is stronger.

That is as far as it can go. I would like to be able to prove it but you can only make a "best guess".

[RMQualtrough]

1 hour ago, RendHeaven said:

You seem to be disparaging "subjective experience" on the assumption that there is something, anything MORE than that somehow.

You don't know for a fact that there isn't. You are talking about something legitimately unknowable.

Edited June 1, 2021 by RMQualtrough

[RendHeaven]

15 hours ago, RMQualtrough said:

You don't know for a fact that there isn't. You are talking about something legitimately unknowable.

Actually you can become directly conscious of all things that are - 

and in that process, realize that all things imagined to exist independent of perception are only real insofar as they are imagined to exist, and that these imaginations are not "real" in any way beyond imagination (certainly not more real than that which is Here-Now).

I'm basically suggesting that you can literally peak behind the curtain yourself and find nothing, empirically.

And then people who have yet to peak behind the curtain will claim that "it's impossible to know!" but this is simply not the case.

Go peak! To whoever is reading this: nobody else will peak behind the curtain for you! It must be you who does it.

Debating and slinging ideas back and forth won't cut it either. There is an epistemic difference between theorizing about what Japan is like without having ever been there vs literally booking a plane ticket to Japan and actually stepping foot on its soil

[RMQualtrough]

@RendHeaven I can feel myself cease and consciousness bleed out and become all encompassing. That is actually proveably an accurate perception (for consciousness to be sizeless).

It does not prove there is nothing else.

It is as impossible to find qualia in physical space as it is to find external reality from mind. If there is an external reality you can't know it. There's no curtain you can peak behind unless you can legit exit your mind but you can't. Everything is processed in mind.

It does not prove the lack of anything else at all.

[RendHeaven]

8 minutes ago, RMQualtrough said:

There's no curtain you can peak behind unless you can legit exit your mind but you can't.

Good start.

8 minutes ago, RMQualtrough said:

It does not prove there is nothing else.

 

8 minutes ago, RMQualtrough said:

It does not prove the lack of anything else at all.

You seem very attached to this idea of "else."

Investigate what that literally is.

[RMQualtrough]

@RendHeaven Else/other is a concept in your mind. Word games don't prove anything, you can also say existence exists because non-existence doesn't exist.

You can mess with language in a lot of ways.

It could well be the case that you have an idea of other because there IS other and your mind could be created by a material brain to process the very real external world.

Proof of both directions are inaccessible.

It makes less sense that material can create immaterial but that is just a proof of the logic.

Edited June 1, 2021 by RMQualtrough

[Forestluv]

On 5/31/2021 at 5:22 AM, EnRoute said:

Although I have the tendency to remain an atheist, sometimes I'm flabbergasted by the way things are; the structure of reality and its marvelous design.

Awe is on of the most important traits for an explorer. Awe is re-invigorating. Sometimes, I feel tired and bored with the exploration. And then I experience awe and it gets my juices flowing. It is one of the greatest rewards of effort.

On 5/31/2021 at 5:22 AM, EnRoute said:

When we take psychedelics in the context of having a crystal-clear mind, devoid of trauma, and all sorts of toxic chemicals, how can we know that we're not fooling ourselves with that experience? How can we know for sure that reality is fully imaginary?

That reality is fully imaginary and so is the reciprocal reality of a cluttered mind, full of trauma. Those realities are also very real. 

It boils down to what one considers "imaginary" and "real". In practical terms, being grounded in a realness can have benefits. When I'm at work and interacting with other people, it can be helpful to be grounded in a sense of realness. Yet in another context, this can be a major block / limitation to creativity, playfullness, exploration and expansion. 

Consider people that are hyper grounded into realness. What are they like? They are overly serious, unimaginative, hyper analytical and intellectual. 

For example, imagine hiking in a forest. What is the experience like if the mind is hyper-analyzing what is real? It's caught up in intellectualization? How creative and exploratory can the mind and body be? Imagine seeing an odd pattern of tree bark. It almost looks like an ancient symbol. You get a sense of some presence, an essence - yet then the thinking mind immediately jumps in with skepticism and says "That's just tree bark. Those other sensations are just subjective experiences". That is a block / limitation to exploring intuition, empathic abilities, connection and various phenomena. If we let go of the analysis, it goes prior to the analysis of what is real and imaginary. Into a "zone". We might get a sense of why tribal people were so connected to the spirit of trees because we are now being the connection to the spirit of trees. We might get a sense of the energetics that promote the expression of spiritual symbols in paganism, the occult, celtic religions, withcraft etc. - Yet not from an intellectual analysis. Rather, from a sense of beingness, knowingness - a realization of "Ohhhh, so that's what it's like!!". If the mind starts analyzing, it's lost. Analysis opens doors in some contexts, yet closes doors in other contexts. 

Consider your statement "how do we know for sure". . . What does "knowing" mean to you? Is knowing an intellectual thing that can be verified scientifically? Are there other forms of 'knowing'. Imagine you are a guest in someone's house and you are thirsty. They offer you either milk or strawberry soda. You immediately say "Strawberry soda". Wouldn't it be odd if the person asked you "How did you know for sure you want strawberry soda?". This is an odd question because the knowing comes prior to an analysis or verification. You didn't need to do a set of experiments to test whether you know you prefer strawberry soda over milk in that moment. 

Analysis and verification related to knowing has value, yet it can also be a major block to many areas of reality. For me, it can be a major block in terms of entering zone states of creativity, intuition, energetics, essence etc. 

On 5/31/2021 at 5:22 AM, EnRoute said:

A psychedelic experience seems plausible but it doesn't prove a damn thing; it is only a subjective experience that happens inside the mind.

From one perspective this is true. Yet step outside and deconstruct your construct of "proof". In one context, it is of value, yet it another context it contracts the mind into a very limited space. 

[RMQualtrough]

@Forestluv I've heard before that some degree of schizophrenia was evolutionarily beneficial because it made people more creative.

[RendHeaven]

2 hours ago, RMQualtrough said:

@RendHeaven Else/other is a concept in your mind. Word games don't prove anything, you can also say existence exists because non-existence doesn't exist.

You can mess with language in a lot of ways.

It could well be the case that you have an idea of other because there IS other and your mind could be created by a material brain to process the very real external world.

Proof of both directions are inaccessible.

It makes less sense that material can create immaterial but that is just a proof of the logic.

No dude, you literally think that "else" is an actual thing. It's not a word game to you.

The same thing with "proof."

I am suggesting that if you stop giving these things actuality, they literally cease to be (not just on the level of words but on the level of literal existence). This possibility alone, if taken seriously, should alert you to the transient and partial nature of these things you give ultimate reality to.

[RendHeaven]

2 hours ago, RMQualtrough said:

because there IS other and your mind could be created by a material brain to process the very real external world.

Again, it can convincingly seem this way to someone who has yet to "peek behind the curtain."

If you directly and immediately recognize that all othernesses (as well as any notions of proof) are transient, partial fabrications within the greater Oneness of Here-Now, there is Absolutely no room left for philosophic waffling.