How can we trust a psychedelic experience?

[dearleo123]

@Leo Gura  I used to respect you man. RIght now you're using subtle forms of gaslighting to protect your own narcissistic ego and it's quite sad really. Your interpretation of 5meo is all one needs to see NPD in deep development.

Yeah I'll enjoy the ban, I'll see myself out

[wildflower]

Let me try to help, as I went through this same difficulty with how people use language and try to help each other (help seems a reach, it feels like a game of ego to understand the metaphysical concept of Absolute Truth - which is simple and easy, depending on your intellectual disposition and spiritual work).

Anything that exists, is Absolutely True, all duality and relativisms collapse, there is only one context or no context, the context is suchness, isness or just whatever word you want to use to point the manifest of anything (wittgenstein used what is the case or state of affairs'). This is completely unbiased, and doesn't prejudice any form over anything else, as this would be relativism.

This Absolute Truth has no bearing or utility on your relative experience. Because the Absolute doesn't care about what's classed as suffering or non suffering, as it simply doesn't exist, as again it's a relative duality. This is easy to understand, and easy(ish) to experience in high equanimity meditation states (pain/please, aversion/craving collapse)

So psychosis and delusion and 2+2=4 are the exact same level of Truthness from the Absolute. But obviously this doesn't help you in the slightest in your relative, contextual world, with your relative goals and aims. 

The problem Absolute Truth doesn't help you at all in the relative sense, as Absolute Truth is Absolute Nothing. 

Humans are concerned with relative utility, measured usually against suffering and non suffering in the contexts of Buddhas work, also compassion vs ill will etc etc etc.

So defining a meta context for your relative goals is super important

Absolute Truth can act as a marker, or set of principles to guide you. As you converge to Absolute Truth, your individual subject relativisms fade, mainly craving and aversion in all it's forms, and bias's, which reduce suffering etc.. so there is no conflict here.

Essentially you want to converge to the Absolute to the point before you stop surviving, i.e. renunciation i.e. Buddha --- see how it all fits together?

It's really simple, but the language games on here conflate and distort people actually understanding things

Edited August 24, 2021 by wildflower

[wildflower]

The funniest thing about this forum is when people relatively argue about Absolute Truth, there is nothing you can say about Absolute Truth in any way which isn't automatically Absolutely True, you can literally make any linguistic construction about Absolute Truth and it is True. For example Absolute Truth is roses and peanuts, is just as True as Absolute Truth doesn't exist, or Absolute Truth does exist ad infinity lol

But these people don't get the irony in their discourse lol

Edited August 24, 2021 by wildflower

[Inliytened1]

7 hours ago, The0Self said:

I don’t know about the earlier stages, but as for what can eventually happen with psychedelics? Trust? What even would that mean? As if trust would have any additional effect on the timeless absolute realization that, not only is what you really are not finite, but there’s no separation of any kind at all.

Yes...the realization of Absolute Truth is prior to psychedelics or meditation..it is Pure Consciousness...it is Truth itself without the ego co-opting or doubting.  Therefore they cannot be a doubting of Truth because it is itself.

Now on the return of the ego the ego is the one that then denies Truth or tries to convince itself that it was delusion - because if it does not do this then the ego, which in fact is the illusion, cannot exist.  So it will conjure up all kinds of doubt about Truth.  This can be the case after a sober awakening too.   The ego wants no part of it.

Now having visuals and other things on psychedelics is a separate thing..that is not the realization of Truth..and the point about hallucination is that everything is a hallucination...your experience right now is a hallucination.

[taotemu]

1 hour ago, wildflower said:

Anything that exists, is Absolutely True, all duality and relativisms collapse, there is only one context or no context, the context is suchness, isness or just whatever word you want to use to point the manifest of anything (wittgenstein used what is the case or state of affairs'). This is completely unbiased, and doesn't prejudice any form over anything else, as this would be relativism.

Things that exist, exist.  This is a tautology.  Just like saying, "Things that are white are white".  It is a sentence that adds nothing to understanding or meaning.  What is real is real.  Nobody would argue otherwise.  So when someone says, "A psychotics experience is just as real as a normal person", it only confuses things to say this statement is true.  If what you mean is that the psychotics experience is being experienced, that is a true statement.  If, however, you use ordinary language, this is clearly NOT true.  Call it Absolute vs. Relative if you like but it only adds to confusion.  This a HUGE problem and why how we use language is so important when talking about anything that is outside of common experience.  It is a kind of laziness turned into ego games of one-upmanship.  Or it is a sign of someone who has not fully integrated their experience.

So when I asked the original question, everyone understood what I was asking.  How can we trust the psychedelic experience?  And then I get answers using tautology, that is useless.  An honest answer might be, "How can we trust ANY experience?", or "The psychedelic experience is outside the reach of language itself and so it is just something one must experience first hand to understand", or "The only useful measurement of their reality is through their utility."  Those are more useful answers.  But what happened on this thread is BS language games.  To me it shows a lack of real understanding and in the case Leo, a complete lack of integration, which flies in the face of what he actually claims about his own level of consciousness.  Integrated experiences have had time for the person to formulate language around.  Leo is clearly a very intelligent and articulate man.  So, what Leo is doing is more akin to gaslighting.  

I asked the original question because I do not see any application of critical thinking when it comes to psychedelic experiences.  They are just accepted as "real".  Arguing that they are real in the "absolute" sense is undeniable and worse than useless, because it only creates confusion.  Are they accurate representations of "Reality"?  Can we trust "enlightenment" achieved in a drugged state?  These should be important questions, and I don't see anyone asking them.  Just blind acceptance of confirmation bias or perhaps it is a case of Dunning-Kruger effect in the case of Leo.  He is a neophyte playing enlightened sage.  Anyone who has actually done a lot of work in these areas can likely see it.  

Edited August 24, 2021 by taotemu

[Gesundheit2]

Don't trust it. Nobody is forcing you to.

[Breakingthewall]

@taotemu it isn't to trust the psychedelic experience, the point is to use it to dissolve the ego and thus realize the truth. the ego is also the truth, but they are the trees that do not let you see the forest. You have to cut them down or better vaporize them for a while to see / be with total clarity. I perceive many trees deeply rooted in you. I see how your ego plays to don't give up.

Edited August 24, 2021 by Breakingthewall

[taotemu]

33 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

@taotemu We do not trust the psychedelic experience, we use it to dissolve the ego and thus realize the truth. the ego is also the truth, but they are the trees that do not let you see the forest. You have to cut them down or better vaporize them for a while to see / be with total clarity. I perceive many trees deeply rooted in you. I see how your ego plays to don't give up.

I have experienced profound ego death on LSD.  I know very well what you are talking about.  I'm not at all suggesting that psychedelics can't be a powerful tool in spiritual work.  I am however suggesting that having an ego death experience or an opening of consciousness does not make someone enlightened.  I have experienced the difference, and taking more psychedelics won't help.  My problem is in how these experiences get interpreted by the ego after, and then how they get integrated by the sober mind in ordinary life. 

This is nothing new.  Sages and seers have struggled with the integration of these experiences for eons.  This isn't easy stuff, I get that.

[James12345]

7 minutes ago, taotemu said:

I have experienced profound ego death on LSD.  I know very well what you are talking about.  I'm not at all suggesting that psychedelics can't be a powerful tool in spiritual work.  I am however suggesting that having an ego death experience or an opening of consciousness does not make someone enlightened.  I have experienced the difference, and taking more psychedelics won't help.  My problem is in how these experiences get interpreted by the ego after, and then how they get integrated by the sober mind in ordinary life. 

This is nothing new.  Sages and seers have struggled with the integration of these experiences for eons.  This isn't easy stuff, I get that.

Psychedelics  are helpful for spiritual process for regular human being. however, whatever you experience, or becoming infinite, love, infinite love or nothingness, after enlightenment realization happens that they were just all thoughts, there was no experiencer whatsoever, you are always what you are and where you are not even moved nor began. Thats how beyond the enlightenment is. Every psychedelic trip people experiences different stuff vsvs. However Truth can never change, which has nothing to do with words, thoughts, experience or becoming, those are variables. 

[Breakingthewall]

14 minutes ago, taotemu said:

My problem is in how these experiences get interpreted by the ego after, and then how they get integrated by the sober mind in ordinary life. 

Of course, In most cases it will be useless, but not because of false experience, but because of lack of maturity. But if someone has the clear intention of dissolving his ego because he has realized what it is, but he cannot, since it is the ego that wants to dissolve itself, psychedelics are practically the only way. other ways could be to renounce the ego totally to weaken it, such as locking up for years to meditate, fasting, etc. the traditional way. but almost nobody is willing to do that. And why to do that , if there is a short cut that works?

[wildflower]

2 hours ago, taotemu said:

Things that exist, exist.  This is a tautology.  Just like saying, "Things that are white are white".  It is a sentence that adds nothing to understanding or meaning.  What is real is real.  Nobody would argue otherwise.  So when someone says, "A psychotics experience is just as real as a normal person", it only confuses things to say this statement is true.  If what you mean is that the psychotics experience is being experienced, that is a true statement.  If, however, you use ordinary language, this is clearly NOT true.  Call it Absolute vs. Relative if you like but it only adds to confusion.  This a HUGE problem and why how we use language is so important when talking about anything that is outside of common experience.  It is a kind of laziness turned into ego games of one-upmanship.  Or it is a sign of someone who has not fully integrated their experience.

So when I asked the original question, everyone understood what I was asking.  How can we trust the psychedelic experience?  And then I get answers using tautology, that is useless.  An honest answer might be, "How can we trust ANY experience?", or "The psychedelic experience is outside the reach of language itself and so it is just something one must experience first hand to understand", or "The only useful measurement of their reality is through their utility."  Those are more useful answers.  But what happened on this thread is BS language games.  To me it shows a lack of real understanding and in the case Leo, a complete lack of integration, which flies in the face of what he actually claims about his own level of consciousness.  Integrated experiences have had time for the person to formulate language around.  Leo is clearly a very intelligent and articulate man.  So, what Leo is doing is more akin to gaslighting.  

I asked the original question because I do not see any application of critical thinking when it comes to psychedelic experiences.  They are just accepted as "real".  Arguing that they are real in the "absolute" sense is undeniable and worse than useless, because it only creates confusion.  Are they accurate representations of "Reality"?  Can we trust "enlightenment" achieved in a drugged state?  These should be important questions, and I don't see anyone asking them.  Just blind acceptance of confirmation bias or perhaps it is a case of Dunning-Kruger effect in the case of Leo.  He is a neophyte playing enlightened sage.  Anyone who has actually done a lot of work in these areas can likely see it.  

No I agree 100% with what your saying. It is meaningless to say everything is Absolutely True, as wittgenstein said, better to pass in silence.

The question relating to: can we trust the interpretations of psychedelic experiences to give an absolute metaphysics within the relative domain, then no, I don't think we can. There are just interpretations, views and ideas, which should be seen as such

I don't personally believe it's about any x state achieved in and of itself, it's about what principles we can actualize in our everyday life that reduce our subjective and collective suffering, this is the highest paradigm for me personally.

You can smoke 5 meo dmt, and in your everyday life be abrasive, full of envy and ill will, full of craving for sex and alcohol, and be no better off. So really what benefit or utility did the experience bring to you or anyone else?

[ZzzleepingBear]

I'd say that we can trust the psychadelic experience to the extent that it is capable to show us and ground us into a deepers state of love in our sober day to day life.

[Scholar]

On 23.8.2021 at 2:19 AM, taotemu said:

How do we trust that the experiences and feelings under the influence of psychedelics are real?   I know they feel very real.  I know they are powerful and amazing.  I know they can be profoundly loving and positive.  But to me it seems a bit of a leap to build a whole metaphysics around a drugged state of mind.

Here is what you are missing:

Trust is not a function of truth, it is a function of survival. What you trust and believe to be truthful has no influence over what is truthful. Truth will remain Truth, it always has and always will be. The only reason why you seek to know truth, to create certainty in your experience, is because of survival. The entire sense of reality you have itself is nothing but an extention to this.

 

It's all just the monkey mind, the chimp seeking to create a world for itself. That's all we are doing when we are seeking truth. Truth cannot be sought, it cannot be discovered, as it permeates all. It is the substance of all. Any understanding itself has it's own substance, it is made of Truth, as is all the rest of existence.

Trust and confidence are just one form of Truth, one that is helpful for survival, nothing else.

Edited August 24, 2021 by Scholar

[taotemu]

43 minutes ago, wildflower said:

The question relating to: can we trust the interpretations of psychedelic experiences to give an absolute metaphysics within the relative domain, then no, I don't think we can. There are just interpretations, views and ideas, which should be seen as such

I don't personally believe it's about any x state achieved in and of itself, it's about what principles we can actualize in our everyday life that reduce our subjective and collective suffering, this is the highest paradigm for me personally.

You can smoke 5 meo dmt, and in your everyday life be abrasive, full of envy and ill will, full of craving for sex and alcohol, and be no better off. So really what benefit or utility did the experience bring to you or anyone else?

Ah, thank you for this.  I tend to agree.  As Jesus said, you will know it by their fruits.  

31 minutes ago, ZzzleepingBear said:

I'd say that we can trust the psychadelic experience to the extent that it is capable to show us and ground us into a deepers state of love in our sober day to day life.

Yes.  I agree completely with this.  That has been the value of psychedelics in my life for sure.  I tend to feel more grounded, more loving, more compassionate in my day to day life.  I don't take myself as seriously and I feel more available and present to the other people in my life. I don't make any claims about being enlightened or that I will become some kind of superior being... Just chopping wood and carrying water.  Ordinary life lived with mindfulness and intention.  Anything beyond that is just ego I think.  

[Leo Gura]

You are misunderstanding how psychedelics work. The psychedelic itself is imaginary.

But you are too locked into materialism to open your mind to what I am saying.

[taotemu]

16 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

You are misunderstanding how psychedelics work. The psychedelic itself is imaginary.

But you are too locked into materialism to open your mind to what I am saying.

Leo you make no sense.  If the psychedelic is imaginary then why do you say the only way people can understand your teaching is to take them?

You could touch far more people if you could actually integrate your experiences.  It is clear you are ungrounded.  You call it "materialism" as a way of dismissing criticism.  I am NOT a materialist.  But I do get the nuance of the appearance of the material world that we are operating in with this discussion.  You think in black and white.  Huge red flag that you haven't understood what has been revealed to you.  How is your mind open?  You project so much.  Empty your cup my friend.  Thinking you are superior to everyone else just causes separation and makes any further growth impossible, not to mention completely contrary to everything psychedelics and spiritual work has revealed to me.     

Edited August 24, 2021 by taotemu

[Scholar]

6 minutes ago, taotemu said:

It is clear you are ungrounded.

Everything is ungrounded, that's the entire point! The only reason to remain grounded is survival.

Edited August 24, 2021 by Scholar

[Nahm]

@taotemu

Oh they’re imaginary alright. You’re funnier and sneakier than you’ve yet imagined. 

 

[Carl-Richard]

The drugged state of mind is less tainted by survival. What you experience right now and call reality is only that which allows you to survive. If you saw something else, that would threaten your survival. It's a protective veil. The only thing you shouldn't trust psychedelics to do is to accomodate your survival drives and keep the veil in place.

[taotemu]

37 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

The drugged state of mind is less tainted by survival. What you experience right now and call reality is only that which allows you to survive. If you saw something else, that would threaten your survival. It's a protective veil. The only thing you shouldn't trust psychedelics to do is to accomodate your survival drives and keep the veil in place.

This is an interesting perspective.  I suppose with the perfect use of psychedelics this could be the case.  My concern would be those cases where the trip sends people into delusional insanity.  It can happen and it largely is determined by the state of the mind and the ego strength of the user before the drug.  Ego strength is not necessarily a bad thing by the way.  It allows us to navigate consensus reality with some skill.  Make money, be a good person, raise kids, make the world a little bit better.  The problem with the ego is about over identification.

In my own experience with psychedelics the experiences were more akin to dreams.  Something that can be deeply meaningful, insightful and can seem very, very real, but not something to be taken as "true" in a more literal sense.