Forestluv

I was running and cycling several times per week. . . However, there is a likely correlation between people working 70+ hours per week and lack of exercise. This lack of exercise can be an indirect contributing factor. Yet it's all integrated. Working 70+ hours per week is related to not having a well-balanced social life and exercise program. In terms of human wellness, I think it's important to look at individual variables, yet it's also important to look holistically at multiple variables and how they inter-relate. . . If someone is stressed-out working 70+ hours per week, gets no exercise, has no social life and drinks alcoholically for stress-reduction - there are multiple inter-related factors involved in the unhealthy lifestyle. I don't think you are considering that working 70+ hours/week can be inherently stressful and unhealthy for the mind and body. It is one variable of many. For example, if someone only slept 5 hours per night, that can take a cumulative toll over several months on ones health. Is it possible that someone can sustain 5 hours sleep per night for years? Sure. Maybe the person just doesn't need much sleep. Maybe they have genetics and prior conditioning that they are a deep sleeper. Maybe a person also does relaxation meditation and doesn't need much sleep,. However, in general, 5 hours sleep/night for months will have a cumulative negative impact on one's wellness. It is one variable of many. Similarly, working 70+ hours per week will tend to have a negative impact on one's mental/physical health. Yet it is just one of many variables and there are exceptions. Another factor is if the person knows it is temporary and there is an ending date. If someone knows that they have to work 70+ hectic hours / week for four months and then get a one month vacation that is much easier to handle psychologically. When the going gets tough the person can think "OK, I'm halfway through. Only two months of this and then I get a long vacation". . . If someone is working 70+ hours / week and there is no ending time in sight, it is much much harder to handle psychologically and physically. The person has no idea if and when it will ever end. This uncertainty itself is a stressor and produces anxiety. . . There have been studies in which people undergo solitary confinement. If the person knows when the solitary confinement will end it is much easier to psychologically handle than if the person is in solitary confinement and has no idea how long they will need to endure it.

If you would like to explore psychedelics, I would get enough to do several trips over the course of a couple months and see how it goes. I would start with a standard psychedelic like LSD, mushrooms or a standard research chemical like 4-aco-dmt. I would start with a low dose and allow time for integration. I would start tripping in a safe and familiar setting, like my apartment and create a good atmosphere. Depending on how things went, I would expand. Perhaps increase the dose or trip in nature or try a new psychedelic. If you are concerned about risks, start with a mini dose. A mini dose of LSD is less risky than drinking coffee - and much healthier.

Psychedelics have their own flavor, yet each psychedelic has a range of flavors. For example, each of my Ayahuasca trips were very very different. This is more prominent at higher doses. If I take a light dose of 50ug of LSD, I pretty much know what to expect. Yet if I took a strong dose of 150ug the trip could go many places and I wouldn’t have an idea what be revealed. Yet there are some general flavors that appear. For example, San Pedro is super gentle. I can “come and go”. Mushrooms are much more possessive. 4-ho-met often brings warmth and amazing CEVs. You can get a rough idea from others, yet the best way to learn is to get in the saddle.

That wasn’t my experience. I had no wife or kids. I was internally motivated and minimized outside responsibilities and distractions. After a few months of 70 hr work weeks, I started to have mental and physical ailments arise. Perhaps other people have better genetics and life conditioning to handle it. Who knows. Yet for me, there was a big price to pay. Yet there was also a big reward for doing it.

That’s where intuition and wisdom comes in. You seem to be creating scenarios in which you must choose between “learning a lesson” vs “enabling a person to step on me”. Quite often, the lesson to be learned is how to lovingly NOT enable someone to step on you. For example, imagine going on a few dates with someone who is hyper-critical of you. She is often mean-spirited.We could create a lesson of “how to accept hyper-critical mean-spirited criticism”. Or we can create a lesson of “how to communicate with someone about an unhealthy dynamic in a way the allows mutual growth”. Lets go with this one. . . We open up and reach out to our date in an effort to resolve the issue and grow. . . She responds that you can take your New Age woo woo nonsense and shove it up your beta male ass. . . At this point the lesson could be “how do I best face my beta maleness and develop into an alpha male to please her?”. . . Or perhaps the lesson is to learn that she has some relationship issues that she is not willing to work on and I don’t need to participate in this in healthy dynamic. I can genuinely wish her the best in life and walk away. Sometimes the lesson may be about how to best engage in an unhealthy scenario. Sometimes the lesson is how to best dis-engage from an unhealthy scenario. We are creating our own lessons as we go. It’s not like a space kangaroo is trying to send us lessons and we need to decode what those lessons are.

Looks like the Love Mission has been accomplished ?? ♥️

Increase awareness and responsible use of psychedelics.

External relative to what? What is internal reality? And how do we determine what is external reality and what is internal reality?

Mu

I didn't quite interpret your ideas correctly. I think I have it now. . . That is one way of looking at infinity. I like that imagery. . . That humans have one lens to perceive infinite IS. Humans, donkey's, shrimp, trees, ants etc. would all perceive what IS differently. The tricky part is imagining that all individual possibilities are occurring simultaneously now. Imo, this is getting into an area that transcends language, logic and theoretical constructs. It gets into an ISness that is transcendent to is-ness. . . That is a super juicy area to explore. Imagine three beings together: a sober person, a person tripping on LSD and a dog. We can imagine this as three different relative realities that are simultaneously occurring, yet each being is perceiving one reality. None of the relative realities is "more real" than another. Each reality IS. . . Each reality is a contextualization of infinite ISness. Prior to that contextualization, there are infinite possible contextualizations because it is prior to any contextualization. - yet there is only one relative contextualization that appears relative to an individual. This is commonly called"reality" or an "experience" - and the vast majority of humans assume it is objective. . . . So. . . what is there prior to the contextualization? . . . There is No contextualization prior to contextualization. And there is Every possible contextualization prior to contextualization. There is Nothing/Everything. There is infinite ISness. . . Rather than "prior" we can also use the term "above". Prior is a time orientation and above is a spatial orientation, both suffice. From another approach, we could imagine a quadrillion different beings - humans, animals, plants etc. There are a quadrillion different realities simultaneously occurring. Theoretically, we could imagine an infinite number of beings such that an infinite number of realities are simultaneously occurring. . . From a collective consciousness, an infinite number of realities are occurring, yet each individual consciousness contextualizes as one reality. A great existential playground. This is the type of stuff I like while walking through nature. . .

Cool. That cranks up the fun meter to 11.

"if there are all infinite possibilities". . . .If I understand correctly, you are creating a construct of "all possibilities" as a collection of all individual possibilities. The tricky part arises with an underlying duality of real vs. imagined and an assumption of choice. If all possibilities are happening right now, that means that Everything is happening right now. It's not even a "possibility" anymore. If everything is happening now, it's no longer a possibility - it is actually happening! If Everything is happening right now, what choice is there to be made? It's all happening. To make a choice, we need to create two things to choose from. We could create a new duality of "actual happenings vs. not-actual happenings". Then we would ask "If everything is happening now, do we have free will to choose actual happenings occurring now?". This is a form of real vs. imagined. . . I think a great self inquiry questions are "what is a happening?", "what is real?" and "what is imagined?" "happening right now at this moment". This is also relative. . . Right now relative to what? In absolute Now, there is no past or future to contrast Now with. Everything is Now and Nothing is Now because there is no not-now to contrast Now with.

Perhaps, perhaps not. Who knows? Is your use of "I am" an objective, universal truth? Is it objectively true for a frog? How could we tell if your sense of "I exist" is objectively true for a frog? From my pov, absolute and objective often get conflated. In this context, I would drop the *I* part and just go with AM-ness. Is AM-ness a universal truth? Is AM-ness true for both a human and frog? . . . You betcha.

I would offer a classic psychonaut. . . Timothy Leary. He was an American psychologist in the 1950s-1960s and a pioneer in revealing therapeutic potential of psychedelics. He was also a leader in the counter-culture movement. He lost his tenured faculty position at a University due to his psychedelic use and related teachings. 50 years later we are waking up and psychedelic therapy is gradually becoming mainstream. Rather than losing their job for studying psychedelics, academic scientists are now being given multi-million dollar grants to study psychedelics. My honorable mention would be Kary Mullis. He was a biochemist psychonaut. During a LSD trip in 1983, it was revealed to Kary how to replicate DNA in a test tube. At the time, he was viewed as an eccentric oddball (During another LSD trip Kary was abducted by aliens). Yet his DNA discover revolutionized science and he was awarded the nobel prize in 1993.

@Mikael89 According to Mikael89 maybe what others say is bs. As stated. . . on and on into infinity. . . Trying to grasp relativity is like trying to grasp the wind. . . @Nahm

@Preety_India Stay strong. I've found no contact to be best. . . . The thing about people with narc/bpd traits. . . when they realize they can't get the ex back, they drop them and put their sites on the next one.

@Preety_India Be strong. . . . Based on what you've written about him, he may try to re-engage.

An oldie, but a goodie

"Does absolute mean every other possibility is Happening right now at the same time?" In absolute, how can there be an *other* possibility? *Other* relative to what? "Does absolute mean every other possibility is Happening right now at the same time?" In absolute, how can there be an *other* time? *Other* relative to when?

There is an underlying assumption here that there is an objective, universal truth. According to the Medium they are communicating with an individual spirit. . . so according to the Medium it is true they are communicating with an individual spirit. According to a nondualist, there is no Medium communicating to a separate individual spirit. . . so according to a nondualist it is true there is no Medium communicating to a separate individual spirit. We could add in: According to a scientist. . . According to a mystic. . . According to a Christian. . . According to a philosopher. . . According to a psychonaut. . . According to a metaphysicist. . . According to some dude I met at a concert. . . And on and on and on into infinity. . .

That is a big jump up in consciousness. The next step is to inquire about the *I* that has "zero control of thoughts". Who/what is this *I* that lacks control of thoughts? If *I* am not the thoughts that pop up, then who/what am *I*?

There have already been a few threads on this

We don’t need to realize. If we were at a magic show, it’s fun to be amazed by the magic. We may think “That’s amazing!! I wonder how the magic trick works!!”. That amazement and wonder is great. We don’t need to realize how the trick works. There is actually a price to pay for this realization. . . My apologies. I misinterpreted your intention ?

One way to look at experience is as a contextualization that is occurring now. In this regard, there are no experiences, just contextualizations we call “experiences” that are occurring now. There are an infinite number of contextualizations. Therefore Nothing/Everything is experience. To me, this seems like conflating representation and theory. But yea, you can create any definition of theory you want. It’s all relative. Transcend theory and find out for yourself. That’s the whole point. You cannot transcend theory by theorizing about transcending theory. You have to actually do it. This is all distraction and irrelevant. Cut out the middle men and realize the source for yourself. Rather than wasting time and effort worrying about others’ concepts of god, realize god for yourself. This is infinitesimal. It’s as if you are in room 227 and think it is the Grand Hotel. Unaware it is a room within the Grand Hotel. There is nothing wrong with theory or trying to make sense of things, it can be beautiful. Just like bird chirps can be beautiful. As well, theory can be very practical and useful. Yet to grasp theory is highly contracted. To be attached to theory is a mind wanting to control the narrative. There is expansion available you are not yet conscious of.

A babbling brook is an enlightened teacher.