Forestluv

This is where the duality between dream/illusion vs. reality starts to break down. Those having experience lucid dreaming know that what is dream/illusion and what is real starts to break down. If you go the full distance dream/illusion = reality. From the perspective of your dream characters, how many "dreamers" are there? Just ONE - Joker_Theory. . . Joker_Theory is the dream. if we take it one level higher, Joker_Theory (and all people, animals, things) is God. Joker_Theory is within Everything, similar to how Everything in the dream is You.

I would be cautious with this path - it can lead to a nasty solipsistic trap. Be careful conflating absolute and relative. The big "You" is creating all of this, not the little "you". When you frame the question as "Am I just dreaming up this life? I am the only one right now that has a subjective experience?". The answer is both "yes" and "no" - and if these two get mixed up and can lead to a nasty solipsistic trap. At the level of the little "i", no you are not dreaming up this life and you are not the only one with a subjective experience. At the god-like omniscient level of One "I", yes YOU are dreaming up this life and are the only ONE. Because there is only ONE. Think of having a dream in which your dream character Paul asks the same question. Paul asks "Am I just dreaming all this? Am I the only person right now having a subjective experience?". From the perspective of Paul, then no. From his perspective he and all the other dream characters are real. It would not be fair to say Paul is dreaming it all up, because Paul is within the dream. We need to transcend Paul and level up to Krockerman. From the perspective of Krockerman, he is dreaming it all up. Paul and all the dream characters are ONE dream. NOT Paul's dream. The higher consciousness of Krockerman's consciousness. Similarly, there is transcendence of the Krockerman character. Krockerman is not the one dreaming it all up. Krockerman is within God and God is dreaming it up. Krockerman and all other characters are ONE dream. If Paul realizes he is Krockerman - that becomes a conscious lucid dream. If Krokcerman realizes he is God - that is awakening, the Ultimate lucid dream.

Well. . . "lack of acceptance" includes A LOT. Within "lack of acceptance" there is stigmatization, marginalization, ostracization, violence, abuse, trauma and on and on. At a physiological epigenetic level, this can lead to alterations in gene expression correlated with neuroses. I'm open to considering other factors. What do you have in mind?

Haha. That's a great question. Welcome to this gate. . . We create the distinction between "ego" and "true self". This can have practical value in terms of personal development. For example, someone may see that they have been self-centered and manipulative to others. They may see this as "ego" and work to reduce their self-centerdness and manipulation. As well, someone may go on a retreat and resonate with dharma talks about compassion and helping others. The person may say "my *true nature* is compassion toward others". This can be great for personal develop and forming healthier relationships. . . Yet in terms of awakening, it sets up a "good self vs. bad self" dynamic. If the person digs deep enough, they will come face to face with this. Then there is transcendence of the entire self.

There is a correlation between homosexuality/bisexuality and depression. There is an even stronger correlation between transgender and depression. At a genetic / neurological level, there is not considerable evidence that gender identity or sexual orientation is physiologically linked to depression via genetics. So people that are homosexual/bisexual/transgender are not at a higher risk of depression due to inheritance of gene variants from their parents. (although a small genetic input is possible). It appears the vast majority of the correlation is due to environmental inputs. For example, homosexuals/bisexuals/transgender people may face stigmatization/marginalization/ostracization of being "abnormal", "immoral", "unacceptable" etc. This can come from within family and socially. . . At a physical level, this negative environmental input would alter a person's physiology increasing the risk of anxiety and depression. . . It's not the sexual/gender orientation itself. It is the environmental response to the sexual/gender orientation.

Hi Cameron, I think you ask some really good questions. Not only can these questions reveal insights into relative personal and social constructs, the questions can also reveal insights into nonduality. I think some of the confusion may be due to mixing absolute and relative perspectives - which I will do my best to explain. . . It's easiest to start from a nondual perspective: that is - Everything is One. So there is no distinctions between "me" and "you". No distinctions between "masculine" and "feminine", no distinctions between "male" and "female". If Everything is One, all of those distinctions dissolve. As a metaphor, imagine Everything is Blue. Then there is no "Blue vs. Not Blue". If Everything is Blue there is no Not Blue for comparison. We would need to create a distinction - that one thing is Blue and another thing is Not Blue. As soon as we enter into this relative arena, things get tricky. . . Who decides what counts as blue or not blue? What if scientists say a specific wavelength of light is blue and philosophers say blue is a personal experience of perception? What if one society defines blue one way and another country defines blue another way? And what about "sort of blue-ish" - at what point does it count as "blue" and how decides? . . . So these things can get messy. We can say "Everything is One, there is no reason for all this blue business". Yet at the same time, blue is part of the human experience. Similarly: sex, gender and sexual orientation can all deconstruct down to One - there is no sex, gender or sexual orientation. From there, we can create personal and social constructs. We can create simple constructs or complex constructs. Yet notice how these are relative constructs that all deconstruct back down to absolute nothing. So why even create such constructs? Because it's part of the relative human experience. It also has practical value in navigating through society, yet at a deeper level it is part of who we are and how we interact with others. We are both One and unique individuals. We can contemplate gender from both personal and societal perspectives. These two are integrated, yet can also be in conflict. How you personally consider "masculine" and "feminine" may differ from some societal constructs on what "masculine" and "feminine" is. Or, personal and societal constructs can be aligned. Likewise, how you identify as "masculine" and "feminine" may differ from how fragments of society judges you as being "masculine" and "feminine". This is all due to relativity. There is no one universal objective definition. . . Understanding this will allow new space to explore. As you mentioned, we can define male and female "sex" based on genitalia and genetics. The male sex has XY chromosomes and a penis, while the female sex has XX chromosomes and a vagina. This would be a scientific definition based on physical features. This would also have practical value in society. If a male sex person is having pain in their testicles, they would look for a doctor that specializes in diagnosing male sex issues. Defining the sexes based on genitalia is generally straightforward, yet there will be some exceptions. For example, there are rare inter-sex individuals with genitalia that is hard to distinguish (for example, a tiny penis/clitoris hybrid). As well, there are some individuals that have had surgery to remove a penis. Yet these are relatively rare cases. Are designation that male sex = penis and female sex = vagina still has practical implications - we can deal with the exceptions on a case by case basis. For example, in medical school we may learn male sex anatomy and female sex anatomy and the professor may mentioned that there are some exceptions - such as intersex and briefly cover that situation. If a student wanted to specialize in intersex medicine, they would take entire courses in that area. Gender designation enters a much more relative word. Here, it's not so easy to say "Male gender is A" and "Female gender is B". Now we are getting into personal identity and this introduces phenomena of self-value, self-expression and self-survival. Once we enter this arena - the fight is On Like Donkey Kong. There will be people that want to define male/female gender based on their own self interest and others that want define it differently because they have different self interests. Therefore, there will not be a universal definition that anyone agrees on. So some people say, gender should be based on how a person identifies. Another person may say "No! That would mean there would be 30+ different genders people are identifying with!!". So society is working things out and evolving. The old, conservative construct is that gender is the same as sex. A person with a penis is the male gender and a person with a vagina is the female gender. Yet this is a very simplistic binary construct. There is also "masculinity and femininity". These are additional features. By the old, conservative view - Male sex = Male gender = Masculine and Female sex = Female gender = Feminine. This is an overly simplistic binary construct that was the mainstream consensus for centuries. . . Over the past 40 years, much of society has questioned this binary construct leading to a a higher evolved construct that is more complex. People have asked "What a minute. . . what does masculine and feminine even mean? Aren't males and females mixtures of masculine and feminine? Can a male sex person with a penis have more feminine features than masculine? If so, should we call them the male gender or female gender". This has led to a spectrum in which some cis-gender males are hyper-masculine and other cis-gender men have more feminine energy (perhaps 60% masculine, 40% feminine). Some of the male sex (with penis) have much more feminine energy (perhaps 70% feminine, 30% masculine). These male sex individuals relate more to the female gender side of the spectrum and are trans-gender female. . . More recently, some individuals do not relate stronger with either male or female designations and are nonbinary. These new, more complex constructs are at a higher evolutionary level, yet there will be backlash. There will be traditional men and women that want to maintain the older binary construct of Male sex = Male gender = Masculine and Female sex = Female gender = Feminine. They will feel very threatened by new gender expressions they see outside of their norm. Many of these conservatives will feel so threatened that they will fight to maintain the old constructs.

What about a black/white out in which there is little or no conscious recall? On one hand such a trip wouldn't have much practical value - since there is little to no recall. Yet on the other hand, there could be a direct experience without an "experiencer". This may lack conscious recall, yet perhaps there is still subconscious awareness. After a deep 5-meo trip there may be little conscious recall, yet insights may appear of the next week. Perhaps an insight about Mu may arise. It might seem like a spontaneous insight, yet perhaps that insight seed was planted into the subconsious and was later revealed to the conscious. I've found that some of my most profound high dosage trips are at the interface of recall and no recall. When my human consciousness is returning, it's like the trip is just outside of my recall and comprehension - yet I can kinda hang on and contextualize some fragments. Later during the week, the picture can become more holistic and clear. Almost like trying to consciously retain a dream while waking up - in which the dream is right at the edge of our grasp if we reach. Yet with 5-meo, there is also the ineffable quality, which makes it harder to grasp. This would be a different dynamic than too disturbing. I'm curious if you think there is value in pushing the trip depth to a threshold of recall.

@Raptorsin7 By “nondual state”, I am referring more to a subjective human experience. A “dual state” is nondual as well, yet people like to create and describe experiences with each other. It’s part of the human experience.

@Nicachi Yep. I wish I could intentionally make it happen. Sometimes it just comes on. Other times, I can relax and allow space. A good place to practice is out in nature, like laying under a tree or by a stream. For me, it seems like adding in a little bit of risk helps somehow. When I’m home alone, the chances are low. Yet if I’m at an event - in a cafe or at a concert - it’s more likely. It’s a form of nondual experience and is related to awakening. Some people are more sensitive to it than others.

I hear ya. It’s an empathetic thing. Sometimes I see someone in turmoil and I feel how introspection and growth could help them. I really want for them to see/experience the benefits and for us to grow together. Especially if they have had some type of abuse or trauma in their past. That is one of my soft spots. . . Sometimes it works out, but if they’re not into it, it usually doesn’t go as far/deep as I had hoped.

@Nicachi Yea, thats a good way to describe it. It can be super cool as well. Two nights ago I was at a retirement party for work. Everyone was sitting around in a circle eating and chatting. I started to feel dissolution come on. This used to scare me because It felt like I was losing control and I didn’t know what would happen - would I scream? Would I do something stupid? Yet now I I’m not scared - I’ve learned to flow with it. Here, I dissolved and it was like I became this collective organism of everyone in the room. As if they were all me, like fingers interacting with each other. Yet I was able to stay at the interface between the two states of consciousness. I was the collective organism, yet also still me at the same time - right at the interface. It was a lot more entertaining than the stories they were telling.

I was kayaking one time and flipped over in intense white water rapids. Upside down, it was like a whole nother world opened up. I melted away and became one with everything. I became the kayak, rocks and water flowing along. It was a beautiful space to be. Totally safe, like being in a womb or floating in outer space. There was no time. . . Then I snapped back, and my body took over. I was able to get out of the kayak and swim to shore. It was a life-threatening ordeal and I was concerned. Yet it wasn’t like I “blanked out”. I was aware and present. And the sense of it’s beauty remained. I would consider that a type of nondual experience. I’m somewhat sensitive to them. At first when one would start to appear, I would get really scared because of the uncertainty. Yet I’ve learned to work with it. I can have a pseudo nondual mindstate and the body can still function normally. Yet occasionally it can still be scary. Last summer, I was at the edge of the grand canyon when one set in, which was scary afterwards.

Chemistry is a weird thing. I’ve been a few relationships with turmoil, yet an unmistakable magic as well. Living together in a parents home would put a huge strain on a young relationship. If you had space and distance there may have been a different dynamic - or a less intense dynamic. On the flip side, a long distance relationship has it strains as well. To me, it doesn’t sound likely that the two of you are compatible as long term partners. Yet may be compatible short term and learn/grow from each other.

Indeed. Not many seekers will attend a retreat with the theme “Nothing Matters”. It is a deep realization that few realize. For me, the awareness it has no meaning makes it so meaningful. A great paradox ♥️

@Ibn Sina Thanks for those insights. I’m not familiar with the who incel thing. I’m in an older generation and a bit out of touch with the younger generation. It’s interesting to me how sone men adopt an identity of incel.

@VeganAwake Yes, I agree with you regarding awakening and absolute. I am pointing toward the unification of duality and nonduality. Yet 99.9999% of people are immersed in duality - so what you are pointing to would have greater relevance the vast majority of times. One must first see the distinction between dual and nondual, before they can drop the distinction between dual and nondual.

What would be considered an incel? If a man has high standards for a woman and isn’t getting laid because of those high standards - does that count as incel? For example, what if a man has a standard that he will not have sex with obese women and turns down sex opportunities with obese women. Would he be considered an incel? What if a woman approaches a man for sex and he turns her down because she is married. Is he an incel? This is a male subculture I am not familiar with and I am genuinely curious.

There is absolute Perfection of what is Now. Yet does this extinguish relative perfection? If an alcoholic beats his wife and kids, would his excuse “Your trauma and suffering is Perfection” suffice? In an absolute sense, it is Perfection, in a relative sense it is not. In the vertical axis of Now, all is Perfect and there is nothing to do. In the horizontal axis of time, there is forward motion toward development, evolution and maturation - and lots of stuff to do. Both are the same coin. A flower or tree is Perfect Now and need not strive toward Perfection. Yet that flower and tree also strives toward perfection through time. It is continuously Perfect through the process of perfection. I’m Perfect Now, yet I also work to purify myself toward perfect clarity. My imperfections are Perfect.

I’m sure this varies among women, yet I’m curious in general how high this is one in terms of actual attraction. For example, on a date a woman mentions she has an art hobbiest and shows a couple photos of her work. The guy is genuinely impressed and appreciates her creative ability. She mentions she is participating in an art exhibit and he genuinely wants to go. After the show, he becomes really interested in her, beyond her looks. Before their next date, he buys a couple art utensils he thought she may like. He doesn’t know much about art, yet it is a genuinely kind and sweet gesture. He is not doing all this manipulatively to get laid. I imagine most guys don’t think this type of interest beyond looks is that important to a woman - she just says it is. Much higher on the list is status, wealth and physical attractiveness of the male. Do you think there is some truth to this? Or are men grossly underestimating the importance of interest beyond looks?

There is the absolute perfection of what is and the relative perfection we strive for. A bit of a paradox. I’m Perfect, yet also a work in progress. If I say “I’m Perfect as is, there is nothing to do”’ I miss out on purifying my imperfections and becoming more clear. If I say “I am imperfect and need to work toward perfection”, I miss out on the Perfection of Now.

That is a difficult life situation to be in. It’s hard for me to imagine dealing with a life-long lover and partner in life dying from terminal cancer. The anxiety and powerlessness of it. . . I hope JP recovers well.

I may have misinterpreted what you wrote or taken it out of context. That was not my intention. As you wrote, sometimes not addressing nuances can increase clarity - yet sometimes not addressing nuances can decrease clarity. It can be challenging to balance. It something I go through a lot with my students. I am not trying to argue with you. It’s not “me vs. you” and “right vs wrong” . I posted a link above that supports your claim. . . saying that you are right. . . Rather than arguing as me vs you, right vs wrong - I prefer to explore. For example, in what ways are the arousal mechanisms the same between men and women? In what ways are they different? Together, I bet we could come up with many aspects that are the same and many that are different. That is awesome you are a medical student. I am a professor at a University that teaches med students. It’s a great career and I wish you the best. What area of medicine would you like to specialize in?

By saying there are differences, does not exclude aspects of sameness. Overall, similarities. In terms of science, recent studies of neural imaging found very similar brain responses to sexual imagery between men and women: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.inverse.com/amp/article/57689-meta-analysis-sexual-arousal-brain-differences-men-and-women In this context, it would be fair to say that the responses are very similar (although I would say “the same” is a bit of a stretch). Yet in other contexts, there are clear differences. A woman can become repeatedly sexually aroused dozens of times in a short time period - having 10+ consecutive orgasms and getting re-aroused between each one. Men physiology is very different. Men have a much longer refractory period and are pretty much “one and done”. In this context, men and women are very different. At a highly technical level, we can’t even say two men have the “same” physiology of arousal (or two women).

It’s not a contest of who is smarter. I don’t know of the context of that statement, yet taken on it’s own - it would need very imaginative definitions of the terms “same”, “physiology” and “arousal” to make it true. Men and women have differences within endocrine, neural and muscular systems - which has differential effects on sexual arousal. Of course there will be similarities, yet also differences. It would be fair to say “men and women have some similarities regarding the physiology of arousal”, yet claiming “the same” is absurd. And this only addresses the physical - there are many relative differences as well. Appealing to authorities can create a dynamic in which a person is confined to a contracted view and erroneously tries to extrapolate that to apply to a larger view.