Forestluv

@samedm9 You want to stay within the contraction, which is fine. Yet there is nothing I can do. If you want to grow beyond this stage, I would recommend watching Leo’s video on “65 keys to a good life”. Imo, this is his most foundational video. He has done other videos that go deeper on a particular issue, like self bias, yet I think the foundational “65 keys” would be more beneficial here. As well, it’s not just theory. Direct experience of insights is super important. The foundation of which is practice.

This reminds me of how Trump gives nicknames to those he sees as person opponents. Especially the ALL CAPS. Very Trumpian. Lol If you wear a red lens you will perceive in red. I am not saying a red lens is wrong. Red is true for that lens. What I am saying is that a red lens will restrict a person within a contraction. Attachment and identification to that red lens will prevent expansion. Right now, it is most important to become aware of the red lens. Without that awareness, everything will be interpreted through this red lens and the person won’t even be aware of what is happening. This attachment/identification is due to many inputs - Leo has made many videos on this and I would be happy to direct you to those videos. Yet you seem to be more interested in arguing through your lens than expanding beyond your lens. In this situation, there is nothing I can do. Anything I show you will be interpreted through this red lens. I can show you blueberries and you would argue they are red. Which is true when viewed through a red lens. That is the dilemma of this trap. This is what I am referring to as more fundamental. Without this awareness, one will not understand interpretive filters and contextual manipulations to fit a narrative one is attached to. A wise person can perceive through many lens. . .

There is a dynamic going on here you are not seeing. There is a “show me” dynamic that may appear very innocent - yet it is a major block. It portrays a false sense and portrayal of openness. As well, it places the burden of growth on another person. Yet this is still within the contraction. Once a something is shown, the defense/attachment/identification returns. If you want to grow, you need to take responsibility for your growth. At times, you will need to take action, show yourself, look at yourself and grow. If this was your orientation, you would already have found the information online. It is widely accessible and easily found. You would be reading articles.about this law, learning and growing. Yet this is not your orientation. If your desire to expand is greater than your desire to stay contracted, there will be an energetic shift and your orientation will shift.

You are placing more value on the tree than the sapling through personalization. That is a form of hierarchy on a vertical axis. I am saying there is another form along a different axis. There are certain patterns of thinking dynamics that trump defenders have. For example, the arguments you present here are the same as the arguments all trump defenders are contracted within. There is an individual element, yet also a collective element. Part of the contraction element is through personalization/attachment/identification. The revelation of aspects of truth toward a more expansive holism involves letting go of this.

@samedm9 If you are not willing to put in minimal effort, you are not willing to expand. If you want to stay in a contracted state, that’s fine. I am not saying that you are wrong. I understand your narrative and that it is true from your relative perspective. I am saying that you are contracted within this perspective and are missing something. Many somethings. These somethings would allow you to grow and expand, yet you would need to let go of defending a personal contraction, which you don’t seem willing to do. So there is nothing I can do. I can point you to a mirror, yet I can make you look in the mirror. Nor can I make you realize you are looking at yourself in the mirror.

It is not directed at you personally. It is something I’ve been observing for years n Trump defenders. Trump defenders have a psychology I find interesting - especially in the context of SD.. It is an impersonal thing. This is hard to see when there is contraction within a personal dynamic. I don’t think a hierarchy of lower/higher or worse/better is a good frame. Another way to see it is through developmental stages. We would not say a tree is better than a sapling. They are just at different stages of development. It would not be condescending to say that the developmental stage of a sapling is fascinating.

Look at your orientation. If you wan to expand, you will need to put in some effort. If one has an orientation to defend a pre-conceived narrative of reality, there is nothing that can be done for them. From this orientation, everything will look black and white They will defend their position by arguing and will become further contracted. Expansion of one’s consciousness involves open-mindedness, letting go, willingness and effort. I can point you in the right direction, yet it is up to you. In this case, let go of your pre-conceived story that you are attached to and identified with. Get curious and put some effort in. Go look up the law and read some articles from constitutional lawyers. No one can make you grow, only you can.

The psychology of Trump defenders is fascinating. It would make a great PhD dissertation. One could add in SD as well. For example, how is it that Trump defenders can suspend Orange level rational thinking and blue-level values such as rule of law, respect, dignity etc? I would guess that cultural identity is over-riding other values.

In the United States, it is a crime for a president to solicit a foreign country to investigate a political electoral opponent. You may think that the law is stupid or breaking the law was justified, yet that is a separate issue. As well, you are trying to contextualize this with euphemistic terms, such as “suggest”. When the mob boss “suggests” someone do a favor for him, it is not a “suggestion” in the traditional sense. Trump is at a red level and will use terms like “suggest”. Don’t fall for it. As well, you are creating deflection and a false equivalency with the generic unethical (yet legal) behavior of Biden’s son.

@samedm9 You are not making the distinction between a crime and justification for that crime. For example, driving at 200km/hr on the highway is against the law. However, breaking the law may be justified in some cases. Perhaps someone in the car is having a heart attack and the driver is speeding to the hospital in an effort to save their life. Trump broke the law by soliciting foreign aid against a political opponent in an election. That is against the law. It is a crime. The White House knew this was wrong because they hid it on a coded server for the highest classified information that very few people have access to. You might think this law is stupid or that breaking the law was justified in this situation. That is a separate issue. Trump broke the law and committed a crime. Was he justified in committing the crime? I would say no. I consider Biden’s son on the Ukraine’s board to be unethical, yet it is not illegal. It is the type of generic unethical behavior that is commonplace in politics. There are thousands of instances of unethical behavior occurring in U.S. politics that is legal right now (including in his own administration). Trump chose to go after his political opponent, which benefits him personally. Trump’s behavior is at a higher unethical level than Biden’s son AND it is illegal. Biden’s son is at a lower unethical level and was legal. You are creating a false equivalency. That is a crime in the United States. You may think it is a stupid law or that breaking this law was justified - yet that is a separate issue. As well, demands via quid pro quo would be a second crime. Simply “asking” is sufficiently illegal. Yet you are not seeing the context here. It’s not like Trump simply asked for a glass of water. When the mob boss “asks” for a couple favors, it’s more than a simple request. Relative context is important.

@Thewritersunion I also like storytelling. There are so many forms of storytelling and so much to explore and create. I work as a teacher, so I create stories to explain things. I’d like to create stories that change the way people think about life and reality. . . Wish I was good at poetry, it is a great creative expression. Imagine if we could create AI that creates. AI that can create comics, music, stories, games, magic - beyond what we can imagine

30 years At 14 y.o., you have gotten an early start. Nice work

@Commodent Curiosity and creativity can also be motivations for contemplation and conceptualization.

Yea, relative truths. You are expanding faster than the universe my friend. She was. I was so enamored by her beauty. But the cray cray became too much.

From a physical perspective, cells have enzymes called methyl transferases that can add methyl groups to specific regions of DNA in response to environmental conditions. Yet we are still earning about mechanistic details. Scientists haven’t yet considered “existential inputs” yet. We’ve barely scratched the surface. Have you ever heard of Atari from the 1980s? That’s kinda where we are at.

@Scholar This is a great question. It’s the type of integration between existentialism and science I would love to see. The answer is yes, but we don’t have mechanistic details. Science is still centered at high Orange and mostly influenced by materialism and financial incentives. I teach genetics and have done a lot of consciousness work. My mind is naturally integrative and I can “see” inter-relationships between the big holistic mind of reality expressing itself through epigenetics of human minds. Learning the mechanistic details will expand our understanding of evolution, inheritance and collective consciousness. It will relate nonphysical to physical - similar to how Quantum Mechanics has. Epigenetics is starting to show this, yet we are still at an early stage. I went to an epigenetics seminar last night. Afterwards, I had a long discussion with the reasearcher. We talked about the potential of trans-generational epigenetic memory and the potential of epigenetics to predict the future and adapt accordingly. We also discussed potential for epigenetic memory of “past lives” and explored the question of “what is intelligence”? I was pleasantly surprised how open and curious he was about this. Scientists are evolving. . .

I should mention that the story I wrote is just that, a story. From a personal perspective, it happened as those experiences. From trans-personal awareness, they are appearances of what we call “memories” happening Now - rather than experiences that previously happened. @mandyjwThe ringing has persisted. I’m habituating. . . . Going into the woods in the middle of the night sounds awesome. I think your path and perspective to awakening is awesome.

@Beginner Mind I think you are on the interface of a big expansion into nonduality. . . It’s hard to discuss because language is dualistic, so there are all sorts of “pointers” and metaphors we use to communicate. . . Carse seems like a great nonduality teacher. I’m not disagreeing with him. It’s as if he is saying there is one whole elephant - there are no ears, tail etc. It’s all one giant elephant. I do’t disagree with that. I’m saying the ears, tail etc. is also the elephant. Setting up “either / or” opposites is a new form of duality - yet it is inevitable since all language and imagery is dualistic. This boils down to “exist”. We now have a new duality: existence vs. non-existence. We could spend years exploring what is existence , grey areas between existence and non-existence and inter-relationships between the two. Personally, using imagery of opposites doesn’t resonate with me. Rather, I would imagine more like this. . . Imagine a timeline along a horizontal axis. This timeline is the past, present and future that we are all familiar with. It is all of our memories. It is history. It is the life story of “me”, the construct of a self, ego. . . . Next, imagine a vertical axis of Now. What is actual right Now. Presence. Most people are so mesmerized by thought stories of past and future, they don’t awaken to Now. It can seem boring and uncomfortable. Yet this vertical axis of Now is infinite. The horizontal timeline represents personal growth and vertical Now represents awakening. Yet as you wrote, 99.99999% of humanity is contracted within the horizontal timeline. . . Carse is saying there is no horizontal axis - this is helpful to orient on the vertical axis and awaken to infinite Now. . . . If we are Now, what happens to the timeline? It dissolves and there is no past or future, there is only Now. What happens to the story of “me”? Without the timeline of past and future, what happens to all my memories? All my life experiences? . . . It is all occurring Now. All those thoughts about my life experience are appearances happening Now. . .Just like all the other appearances happening Now. From the perspective of Now, the whole ego collapses, because the ego requires a timeline of past and future to be a real thing that is continuing through time. From this perspective, Carse is right on: “there is nobody home”. Home is infinite Now and there is nobody Home. A deep human desire is to return home to Now. The reason it feels right is because it’s true. What do you know to be true more than anything? . . . That what is actually happening Now is happening Now. The ISness of Now. We don’t need any evidence to prove Now is Now. We don’t search around trying to validate that Now is Now. It seems overly simple and obvious, yet it goes deep. Infinitely deep. And all dualities collapse in Nowness.

The WestWorld series for self actualization. The Sense8 series for high level empathy and inter-personal connection.

This kinda stuff can get tricky. . . If one does not know truth and truth is a feeling - it opens the door to relative subjective experience. I'm not saying you are wrong. It's just something I like to explore. . . So, what if my girlfriend and I are in an argument. Let's showed up 15 minutes late to an event and she is very upset and says I disrespected her. I tell her there was traffic on the highway due to a car accident and I couldn't help it. She says I should have left earlier. Then she suggests that since I didn't text her saying I would be late, that I did it intentionally to get even for something else. Now I'm upset. I didn't do this intentionally. So each of us see this very differently. Each of us is feeling upset and speaking our truth (based on our feelings). Yet if the truth is speaking our feelings, which one of us has the truth. Are both of us speaking truth? If so, the term "truth" loses meaning. If we are both truth, then it cancels each other out and we are just speaking our feelings.

Yes. I did the 5-meo retreat last May and stopped the first week in June. I haven't tripped since (except for a couple microdoses below threshold). I become destabalized and needed time to integrate things. It's been a good break. I would say the biggest benefit was that some insights that were out of reach have become embodied. In some ways this is good, yet it's also more challenging to communicate this stuff with people. Facets that were out of my reach a year ago are now part of my normal perception/consciousness. A lot of it no longer feels "novel" or "special", yet it is still "out there" for normies and I need to be careful how I communicate with others.

I had a similar experience a couple years ago. The therapist was very problem oriented. Like we need to have a problem to fix. But I was more into exploring and growing. "Problem" wasn't quite the right fit. I wanted to go deeper into self actualization and also use insights for growth. . . I then searched for "counselors" rather than therapists. I found an elderly counselor who was nearing retirement. She was an old hippy of the 1960s from California. She was very open-minded and curious. I really liked her perspective. I found out that was what I wanted. I didn't want a "fixer of problems". I wanted to explore my existence and reality with someone at an intimate level and have another perspective. . . She was concerned about my psychedelic use, yet not from the perspective that psychedelics are "bad". Rather, she was picking up on seeking energy I had with psychedelics. She knew I wasn't addicted to psychedelics and that they were useful to me - yet she sensed this seeking/chasing certain consciousness that was off-balance. . . For example, I may have spoken about deep levels of direct experience of empathy with psychedelics. She would say "That's great. How can we get that while sober?". I would speak about psychedelics as if they were my super power. As if I gained new abilities and higher level of consciousness. Yet I couldn't do it sober and didn't realize I yearned to be able to do it sober. She was the first real life person I spoke to about my psychedelic use and was the first to suggest to me I could develop those abilities and high consciousness all the time - with or without psychedelics. That was appealing to me. After our first session she looked at me, grinned and said "I haven't had one like you for many years. This is going to be fun.". I knew then that she was the one. She retired about 6 months later and I miss her.

I forgot to mention. . . Be kind to your mind and body. There was an insight at one point that I should stop for the wellness of my mind and body - but I was no longer attached/identified to a mind and body and I didn't listen. I later learned to listen. . . As well, I haven't tripped since that ordeal. I don't know if the identification and immersion into anxiety would return while tripping.

The author gives beautiful descriptions of nonduality. He is not wrong and there is no need for defense. His pointers are great for revealing nonduality. Another way to describe it. . . imagine being conditioned your entire life to see a coin as "heads or tails". This is a duality of heads vs. tails. To point to nonduality, we might say "There is no tails, there is no heads. It is all one coin". A person who has been conditioned their entire life to see heads or tails would have a very difficult time seeing this. Then they may realize "Ahhh, it's all the same coin!!! It's all One!!". This is a major nondual breakthrough and it is true - it is all one coin. Yet the mind operates in opposites and will create a new duality: "The coin is one. It is not heads/tails". Now we have "one coin vs. heads/tails". This too breaks down. It is all one coin and heads/tails. . . The reason we push so hard toward nonduality in the beginning is because the mind is conditioned and grounded in duality. . .

@StephenK It depends on the society. There have been many forms of power dynamics over human history and many forms that occur now.