kbone

'Increasing consciousness' tends to inspire a little giggle, if ya know what I mean. But yeah, I can understand why the psychonauts tend to think drugs 'causes more' of it, or that taking them is required 'to get it'.

tl;dr (sawwy) I typically don't 'take up for someone', as usually what happens in convos is that someone is exploring the boundaries that are appearing in the mind as thoughts/questions. But, rather than simply state the thought-judgment that comes to the mind like you have here, I like to see where a poster is pointing. After all, language is an abstraction used to convey meaning, which does not happen in a vaccum. From what I can tell, @Breakingthewall is very authentic, more than most, anyway. Filtered through this mind, what's noticed is that s/he is attempting to express what is necessarily unexplainable. I suspect that s/he has had a very profound experience of sorts that has completely turned everything that was previously believed on its head, and their mind is now coming to grips with the nuances of it. S/he is very methodically going through the steps of what I call 'cleaning house'. It is absolutely necessary after getting a glimpse of the Truth that has been pointed to for thousands of years. To become grounded in/as Truth is to come to terms with what comes and goes, is simply worldly cause-and-effect, what is impermanent, and so on and so forth versus what is absolutely true. Part of that involves being tired of hearing all the platitudes, one-liners, and repetitive vocabulary that often gets bandied about like it is free candy without penetrating the meaning of THAT to which they refer. That can be especially annoying to a VERY sincere mind when you have the little cliques of guru worship and hierarchies that get started in those little groups of online, anonymous palace warriors that want to be associated with the ordained ruler of some lost huddled mass. What was also interesting was that the only other person who I have kinda snorta 'seen' as a peep in the similar mindset coming to offer her support. When @Princess Arabia chimed in, I simply thought, 'Of course', which is why I mentioned the ZPD dealio in my previous post. As I've mentioned to her, she reminds me a good bit of my self, when it was going through the same period... at least from what I could tell by the words, thoughts shared, and (some) perspectives offered. As such, when Breaking recently shared their story of sailing/motorcycling, I could easily relate to the 'intensity' of the journey. It was easier to inhabit some of the shared emotional upheavals that are often encountered when going through the dark night period. Neither of these two have expressed anything that would necessitate the various rocks that have been caste via this thread, though it's quite easy to see where such judgments come from. Peeps like to throw rocks and crucify for various reasons. Most are not willing or brave enough to go through that dark night. I am always happy to see those that were/are willing. There's even more joy to chance upon the occasional, even rarer individuation that have found it to this precipice, staring out across the infinite, maybe with that telling little grin that might be expressed as a job well done.

Most people will begin by seeking something 'else', because they want some thing, life, circumstance, state, etc that is better than what they think they have now. It's mostly self-help and placing the idealized person on the altar, praying for what they want to be. If that's the case for anyone, so be it; but just be honest with your self and take full responsibility. After all, your supposed best thinking got you to exactly where you are right now. Only a few will open up enough to allow what they are actually seeking to emerge.

When 'actually' communicating, there's always going to be a certain degree of 'negotiation of meaning'. Sometimes people use different words to refer to the same thing. Furthermore, a lot of the pointing used to 'teach' can only be understood within the depths of one's Zone of Proximal Development (Vygotsky). Disclaimer: I haven't watched the vids, but I have a purddy good idea of where a decent chunk of the miscommunication, misunderstandings, and/or preferences show up. It's been going on for, historically, thousands of years. Rehashing the the Sufi tale... ______ A Persian, a Turk, an Arab and a Greek were traveling to a distant land when they began arguing over how to spend the single coin they possessed among themselves. All four craved food, but the Persian wanted to spend the coin on angur; the Turk, on uzum; the Arab, on inab; and the Greek, on stafil. The argument became heated as each man insisted on having what he desired. A linguist passing by overheard their quarrel. “Give the coin to me,” he said. “I undertake to satisfy the desires of all of you.” Taking the coin, the linguist went to a nearby shop and bought four small bunches of grapes. He then returned to the men and gave them each a bunch. “This is my angur!” cried the Persian. “But this is what I call uzum,” replied the Turk. “You have bought me my inab,” the Arab said. “No! This in my language is stafil.” All of a sudden, the men realized that what each of them had desired was in fact the same thing, only they did not know how to express themselves to each other. _______ Here are some key ways grapes and wine are used in Sufi symbolism: (from AI in the Sky) Spiritual Transformation/Purification: The process of turning grapes into wine, through fermentation, symbolizes the spiritual journey and the purification that comes from actively progressing along the Sufi path. Divine Intoxication/Ecstasy: Wine represents the spiritual rapture or divine intoxication experienced in love and connection with God. This ecstatic state is a metaphorical "spiritual" experience. Hidden Truth: The symbolic use of wine can also serve as a way to convey profound spiritual truths in a way that is not always easily understood by those who are not prepared for these experiences, potentially preventing unintended side effects or "divine madness". Unity of Religions: Grapes can also represent the common essence or underlying truth shared by different religions, even if their outward practices differ. In the end, only Truth (call it what you will) will set one free. Of course, by the time it is apprehended and the mind is fully informed and integrated, it will have rolled over and crushed a majority (if not all) of whatever 'truths and/or perceived facts' one hold's dear. But no worries, the clarity of what appears in/as one's life will make it worthwhile. Welp, at least that's how this mind appreciates it. It is what it is.

Yes, logical deduction. Existence is. Beyond that expression is fine, but many tend to veer off into greater and greater abstraction in order to facilitate the mind's limited understanding. I do understand what you are saying about 're-'flection and the ideas of forms that you are alluding to with respect to Platonian thought. I'm sure Rumi would understand, too. Many of the Sufi's were steeped in Greek thought. I dig'em. Any seeker of Truth is transcending the boundaries you speak of. Even when the individuation has apprehended Truth, it still takes time to inform the mind of its limitations. I use the term 'mind' as someone's capacity to think personally, impersonally, transpersonally, existentially. I suppose I might capitalize it as 'Mind' to emphasize the more transpersonal/existential, though I am aware that some peeps hate that kinda device. Whatevs... When I say 'Perfectly so", I mean so in the same way. It is what it is, and the mind's functions have inherent limitations though what's Realizable is unlimited... Perfectly so.

Fair enough if you want to give that kind of answer to a mind that is asking such question. The next how/why will pop up immediately after that. The mind is insatiable. Perhaps I should have stated that any how/why question about Truth is (in essence) misconceived. The way I see it, in order to fully appreciate the answers you gave, one would have to have at least transcended the typical mindset of cause-and-effect. Whether or not one would need to fully realize what has been pointed to for thousands of years as "Unlimited/Infinite/God/Consciousness/This/etc etc etc" before fully appreciating the answer is debatable, I guess, but what would be the point. I understand what you are saying. What you call 'unlimited' (adjective/noun) is your expression for what other people might refer to with other words, and that is perfectly fine. You do a great job of fleshing out your perspective in what I assume is your second language (at least). ¿Eres un Madrileño? You are very emphatic about aspects of your expression, which I think it to do just that, EMPHASIZE, and it does help me understand/respect what you are attempting to convey as a depth,,, as words simply do not do it justice. That is often why I say the "Realization" is beyond/prior to mind, as it seemingly is of a depth that transcends and includes the appearing world... (words, thoughts, the air we breathe, the love and horrors we experience, the majesties of the universe, etc etc etc).

@OBEler Very often what precipitates a search for Truth is a high degree of delusion, and that might give rise to a speerchal crisis that sends the mind off in search of an 'answer' (i.e., Truth). Then, of course, there's often the identity's 'personal' need for validation and being 'right' that tends to extend the search and/or the absurdities that often make speerchuality such a mess (i.e., misty-cism). Not sure what that says about men, hehe. Of course, seeking it, pontificating on it (often prematurely), and drawing strange lower mind-based conclusions (supposedly) based on 'truth' are often quite different than Truth itself. I recently read a post by Emerald that suggested what might actually induce a healthier discussion than the 'men v women' stance.

1- Is that more or less saying that perfection arises as infinite intelligence; whereas, relative synchrony (on a dualistic continuum) is what is reflected/perceived on the cave wall of lower mind? 2- Actuality is based on what appears and what does not. It's the added layer(s) of lower mind (conditioning, assumptions, beliefs, etc) that distort the view, giving rise to falsities that are not actually there... and perhaps some subsequent misconceived how/why questions. The ensuing posts after my initial reply about the jar/ocean seemed to suggest all sorts of assumptions about why it was shared. This mind's assumption, based on the type of question he asked and his signature block, was that it might spur an introspective moment or discussion. Oops.

Existential questions about how and why are basically misconceived.... built on assumptions. Being more consciously present in/as the higher order of mind you are pointing to would likely give rise to fewer how/why questions and/or action that is of a corresponding higher order. 'Answers' to such questions might appeal or sound plausible to the lower mind in varying degrees, but who knows. Existence unfolds in interesting and unexpected ways, to be sure.

Okey dokey, but I wasn't talking about anything mystical or otherworldly. Just something that might be noticed by anyone.

To me that is an answer that 'another' lower mind may/may not understand or ingest as a pointer. It does require some semblance of a belief structure, no? He's even mentioned more recently that he understands "everything is the way it is", but perhaps has not realized its 'Perfection', in which case the question would never arise in/as Infinite Intelligence I do like the pure trans-rational take you allude to, though.

I was simply poking at the appearing question, "What's the point in being so small is my only question." It arose from somewhere, and 'Infinite Intelligence' wouldn't ask such a question, but it would know from where it arose.

Hmmm, OK. Thought it was a good metaphor with respect to "being small". Appears to have hit a nerve.

Is there a problem, or is the question not pertinent?

If a jar is dipped into the ocean and lifted up to take a good look at it, at what point does the water stop Being the ocean? Your questions allude to assumptions. Look there.

🎯 like above 🎯Correspondence is key🎯 so below 🎯

1- Yes, the story/history is always hindsight and/or about 'someone' else. The story of Jesus is, according to him (in the story), available to everyone. An expression might sound like, we are all sisters and brothers (appearances to each other... all the world's a stage... with one ACTOR). Lots of dualish ways to express, no problem. 2- Yes, the path is the story of the transcendence, not the Realization. Most explain them together as cause-effect based on memory, unconscious of all that was 'happening' as the unfolding. 3- I'd be curious to hear your interpretation of this. Is it somewhat like the following (using some Zen ish to express)? 4- Before enlightenment, mountains are mountains and waters are waters. (lots of stuff happens, unconsciously caught up in one's separate volitional self (SVP) drama..... and then something gives way...... maybe spurring the search) After a first glimpse into Truth, mountains are no longer mountains and waters are no longer waters. (At first, minor 'insights/realizations'.... then Something like a 'collapse into a little greasy spot' -as a dear friend used to say... he was so funny. Though the breakdown can be felt/experienced as a negative, it's purddy much necessary... and gloriously wild to the mind, hehe... in hindsight, of course ). After enlightenment, mountains are once again mountains and waters once again waters. (THIS... EVERYTHING.... simples) ***In how I'd express it, it is only after the 'lower' mind has come to terms with Truth (i.e., via a consistent discerning awareness that informs it of its true nature.... aka, heart of hearts), that the clarity of 'Enlightenment' is fully apprehended. Whatcha think? Similar? Preferences or tinkers for expression?

1- My Korean mother-in-law is a devout Baptist Christian. She's not ignorant of the 'kind of person' I am, so she worries about my salvation, but she's also a little perplexed in that I do not exhibit a worry in the world, can fit right in with the various pastors that the family is associated with, will sometimes comment on Biblical literature from left field, and generally lead a well(enough)-intentioned life. A story that sums up our basic divergence of 'opinions' involves a convo with her (my wife had to translate) about her concern for us not being the types of believers she sees as necessary. I explained to her that, for the most part, I understood the things that Jesus said quite well, and we'd likely agree on most everything with a few caveats. But who I didn't really understand and/or relate to were Peter and Paul, to which she said, "But that's what the whole church is based on." I simply smiled and said, "I know." She still looked concerned, but we hugged. She has never brought it up again, and we still involve ourselves when she wants to do a reading/interpretation... and I sometimes add my bits and pieces to the convo. We sometimes laugh about them. 2- Couldn't have said these much bettererer! In fact, I refuse to add or conceptualize further. 3- Perhaps blow off researching it. Come to think of it, just stay open to what such events provide from the depths of Being. They're more important, and can provide the much-needed direct gnosis for transcending. 4- 'Lower' mind is a weird place to work it out, as doubt will always be an aspect of its conclusions. It is what it is. See #3 5- There might be useful insights and bits and pieces of aligned thinking, but it is the direct experience and quality thereof that spills forth 'from within' that is of greater value. And you obviously already understand this, which is why you are clear enough to already question the veracity. As certain depths of insight/realization, quite often another's nonsense to hardly register and/or simply fall away. That's a function of higher mind. I do not know her, so I'm just speaking generally. 6- A lot of what is attributed to Jesus makes sense so, based on what you have shared and the type of person you come across as, listen to the inner voice, 'identify with it' as if speaking to yourself, stabilize at its depths and let it 'spill over' into the daily life. Truth and honesty are aligned. Honesty gives rise to authenticity. You seem to understand that and will question the beliefs in identity and Truth as needed. Together, they bear the Grace that inspires transcendence. 7- I may have misspoke. Interesting what you wrote. 8- Don't get me started telling stories. It rarely makes sense anyway! 9- Well, to be clearerer, it was a number of events that precipitated the contemplation via singing that song. a) I had also liked and played Sympathy for the Devil (Rolling Stones). b) I'm a bit irreverent, so there's that (no apologies, since I work through it in different ways as needed). c) Months before getting the chords (back before internet and barely able to play guitar anyway), I had a cool experience of traveling with some Chishti sect Sufi's who were on a pilgrimage in North India. We talked about a LOT of stuff late into the night, but one thing that stuck out was their interpretations of Iblis (the Devil), which are varied, but a few of them stimulated some cool contemplation.... especially when he was vilified solely because he refused to bow down to Adam. I get the irreverence, hehe, and I was hot on the trail for Truth. d) Then, shortly thereafter, I found a book at a used book vendor in New Delhi by Bertrand Russell called "The Conquest of Happiness". It seemed interesting enough and you couldn't always be choosy back then, so I carried it around for a month during my escapades, reading and contemplating. I don't remember a lot of the contents, but it guided me in some deeper thoughts on persecution mania, envy,narcissism, and ow to become more aware of such forces in life. e) Then I heard a guy play "Friend of the Devil" with a great set of picking skills and a powerful voice. I'ze like, oh yeah. Awesome to hear you're a musician. Hopefully, you and the band have a similar take on life in general and/or inspire each other enough to work through inevitable 'band drama', hehe. Yeah, it does seem that when IT all starts to open up (like it has for you) the attention and devotion kind of well up from within. Due to this mind's conditioned preferences, it tends to not like church songs so much, and is more interested in exploring the themes in songs of any combination of rock-punk-folk-jazz-ish. It's not a right or wrong thang.... just mood, flow, and joy. I'll look into Robert Hunter when I get a chance... sounds like my kinda guy. 10- Likewise, brotha. Keep on keepin' on!

Aah yes, the School of Necessity. How would you describe witnessing and its value? Did you just automagically start witnessing one day, live a life of harmony, joy and witnessing, and suddenly wake up and Realize?

The comic posted above was just for humor, not meant as a judgment. The context is a 'what if' situation in it's plainest and simplest. If there's any judgment, it is on the people doing the crucifying. We still crucify peeps for their beliefs, just not literally. It is more likely that peeps are put off by Christianity because of how they view stereotypical Christians (and sometimes because they may have been around fundamentalist Christians for long enough, group all Christians in that stereotype). The same might be said for New Agers, non-dualists, fringy metaphysical groups, etc. The story of Jesus and/or the Bible as a whole offers context for penetrating the human condition or, if one really wants to get into it, fodder for linguistic forensics. But yes, if just read and believed in its literal sense alone, it quickly devolves into fundamentalism, completely mentally based, brittle, dead, and lacking any insight. I worked intensely with a community of fundamentalist Christians in Uzbekistan after having woke up, and mostly remained non-judgmentally attuned to their sense of faith, beliefs, actions, and existential 'needs' in order to understand the nuances, similarities, and differences of any belief system. One of the closer friends I made was from South Africa. His stories of fighting behind enemy lines in the Angolan Wars and the coming to the faith furthered my understanding of the value of the 'School of Necessity' required to penetrate the more esoteric aspects of any belief system. Typically what happens is that, in the end, there's a common kernel amongst them. The following Sufi story gives the gist. ______ A Persian, a Turk, an Arab and a Greek were traveling to a distant land when they began arguing over how to spend the single coin they possessed among themselves. All four craved food, but the Persian wanted to spend the coin on angur; the Turk, on uzum; the Arab, on inab; and the Greek, on stafil. The argument became heated as each man insisted on having what he desired. A linguist passing by overheard their quarrel. “Give the coin to me,” he said. “I undertake to satisfy the desires of all of you.” Taking the coin, the linguist went to a nearby shop and bought four small bunches of grapes. He then returned to the men and gave them each a bunch. “This is my angur!” cried the Persian. “But this is what I call uzum,” replied the Turk. “You have bought me my inab,” the Arab said. “No! This in my language is stafil.” All of a sudden, the men realized that what each of them had desired was in fact the same thing, only they did not know how to express themselves to each other. _______ The interpretation of the story one comes to depends on one's conscious abilities to shift outside the confines of the literalist mind. To go further into to the forensics of the story, spend time understanding grapes/wine in the Sufi context... it might even shed some light on the blood/wine aspect of the Jesus story. In fact, if one takes the time to see what was happening around the Mediterranean, the Levant, and the extended region at the time the story of Jesus played out, one will see that many of the same discussions and practices talked about here existed then. Even the assumed misunderstanding of the "_____ faith", the "must understand ___ before ___", and the preference for teachers you've mentioned in your post are still playing out, just not verbatim. The expressions typically overlap, weave, conjure insights, and isolate similar core aspects (though with seemingly different names), but the end-all Realization remains the same. It's typically the mind's cause-and-effect stories of HOW/WHY the Realization happened that creates the drama of this faith, that religion, this cause, that effect... forever spinning into more stories/beliefs in the mind. One could say such stories/beliefs are timeless....

@thierry When waking up in the morning, the mind is about as clear and disengaged as it will be for the remainder of the day. That is the best time to consciously attune to/as Presence. It's not an entity or anything one has to search for or find, it already is... just notice it upon awakening. The earlier in the morning you do this, the better. Don't even get out of bed. Just, the second you realize you have awoken, just hang in that state, and start taking deep breaths, feeling Presence as one's entire Being. No mind, no body... just Presence breathing... a sense-feeling. Slowly, the breathing will happen at its own depth and pace. Perfection. If you have a monkey mind and thoughts just keep coming up, no problem. Just take deep breaths of/as Presence that 'swoop up' the thoughts and exhale them into the ether of existence. Do the same for bodily pain; just inhaling the pain in Presence, and release. Always notice Presence that always is and available every morning before engaging mind for as long as one can and/or likes. It's own reward. Typically what happens is that the clarity of/as Presence that engages mind consciously will nurture a quality of thought and subsequent intuition, decisions, or reactions. The more attuned one is to the ever-available Presence throughout the day (it ain't always easy, sure), the more conscious one is of engaging the mind. Have time before-during-after lunch? Sure, settle into it (it won't be as easy later in the day due to the mind's momentum... no problem), but it will be easier as you notice it more and more as ever-Presence. It's own reward. Conscious.

That was a well made video. As a kid, I had a fascination with the Hermetics, and later on dabbled with some smaller writings that made their way to along the path, but I never looked too deeply or made a coherent study of them. This video does a good job on distilling some key points that very much align with my own expression, so I rezzed with it, kinda nodding along. Purddy coolio. Thank you for sharing.

Schrödinger's cat is alive after all!

Good stuff. I rez with the expressions you share. There's a noetic quality to it that is indicative of a 'being Here' sanity. Bueno.

This is why I differentiate between 'experience' and 'realization'. The experience of 'god' comes and goes, and is often marked in memory as an event (but yes, there is a memorable aspect or facet), but Realization is deeper, so to speak, and what was Realized is Known to be right Here, right Now, prior to all and inclusive of movements of mind (some more diluted/deluded than others). There's no 'need' per say to go 'get more', but of course, it's always nice to take a walk in nature, meditate, whatever to drop off the mind's content and/or detach from it to put it into fresh perspective, especially after a hard day or an intense psychological/physical period (like a new job, a death in the family, a health issue, etc). It's a bit of a stretch to say that if one 'has an experience of being God', one will automatically have a nice life. That may be a bit wishful, automagical thinking ...." It's important not to have expectations about how truth should be and what it would be like" (Rogachevski, A., 2025). But, the 'pursuit of Enlightenment' will be debunked by the Realization, as it will be SEEN as always having been Present, available, Truth... beyond/prior to the mind's conception of it. It's a bit of a doozy to the mind, hehe. Such a lil' rascal! PS: I like how the Anne Frank pic shows up at the base of a Nietzsche quote. Both a great stories in humanity. I'd like to hear your interpretation of the quote.