Forestluv

@Pauline Bureau I think there is a tendency for meditators to consider thoughts as bad that they want to get rid of during meditation. Thoughts are appearing Now, just like all other appearances. Yet when my mind is a chatterbox, the thoughts seem front-and-center, loud and intrusive and I can get so immersed in them, I don’t notice much else in the environment. It’s not like I even meditated, more like I sat down for a while thinking. So if my mind is busy, I do put some effort into slowing the thinking mind. The classic grounding techniques are being mindful of the breath and chanting. There are also various other techniques in kriya yoga that settles the mind. Another one I designed myself is to place a candle at a certain distance away such that the candle flame is still, yet moves with my exhales. For some reason, my mind gets centered staring at the candle and observing the interplay between breath and candle movement. I begin to lose sense of Inner me and outer me. When awareness can’t be located and seems sorta outside of my head, it’s a meditative state with good resonance. Here, thoughts feel far away - as if they are a small voice in another room - or a faint bird chirp from outside. They are not intrusive or bothersome and don’t have any power.

I was at an Ayahuasca ceremony and things started to get a bit hairy. Some moaning, yelps and anxiety in the air. It started to intensify and spread within the group. The leaders very rarely speak during the ceremonies. Here, a female leader said gently, yet firmly. . . B R E A T H. . . . It was like we were a collective organism that started breathing. There was definitely an energetic shift at that point and things settled down.

@krockerman I think it’s better starting with a very low dose and working your way than it is starting with a high dose and a trip killer. If you start with a low dose and work your way up, you will be gaining insights and experience and it will likely be a smoother process than starting with high doses and killing trips. . . Another option is to have a trip sitter to help relax anxiety and paranoia if it arises. I think the dynamics of a trip sitter for newbies is better than a trip killer. If this option is available and you go this route, I would choose a sitter with experience of a variety of trips. Not some nervous Nellie that will freak out at the first sign of trouble - that would make things worse. I had Etizolam available on a few of my early trips. Just having it available gave a sense of calmness. Yet to be honest, I always forgot I had it during the trip and worked through things. The only time I remembered was during an Ayahuasca trip that got intense. Yet there was astringent message not to take it and work through things, which I did. That’s just me, others are different.

I don’t quite see it like that. I think parts of your description conflate duality and nonduality. It would be like saying a chicken is a hamster. In a nondual context, it’s technically true, yet a sloppy way to say it and it could be misinterpreted as literally a chicken is a hamster - rather than . This conflates duality and nonduality imo. I think a better way to phrase it would be everything os One, thus a chicken and hamster are both One (as is everything). You are also introducing ideas of object-space. This is an area I’m interested in exploring, yet not the area of my deepest and broadest understanding.

Threads merged. I’ve noticed a lot of “where are you from?” threads popping up. Please keep that discussion here, so we don’t have various threads on the same topic floating around.

Of course thoughts happen. As you say, otherwise what’s all this thinking we are doing? To me, this seems like a valid perspective in 3D/4D realms. What is a happening? It’s not just about thoughts. This has to do with all happenings. How can there be a happening without a Now and Not Now? Most people perceive “Not Now” as the immediate past. Even when they say “Now” they are contrasting that with an immediate past of “Not Now” - consciously or subconsciously. That is how human brains are conditioned. I’m cool saying that “Not Now” is simpler than a time construct and that calling it the immediate past is unnecessary conceptual construction. Yet even more directly, introducing a “Now” also introduces a “Not Now” that contrasts “Now”. Happenings involve a “Now” and “Not Now”. One side of the coin is like a still photo. The 3D aspect is maintained and the 4D aspect is removed. There is no Now and Not Now, so nothing is happening. Yet this is just one side of the coin, because in aliveness there is also Now and Not Now in 4D, which involves happenings. Yet, without the contrast of “now and not now”, there is no happening. We could have a series of still 3D images in 4D time - we would need to contrast the relative nature of two still 3D images to have a happening. 4D includes both 3D non-happenings and 4D happenings. Leveling up to so-called “5D” would include both 3D non-happenings, 4D happenings and a transcendent 5D “happenings” with new expansive potential and meaning for “happening” I would say this is one aspect in transcending the standard 4D timeline into realms of so-called 5D, which go deeper and broader than simple happenings and non-happenings within a linear construct of time. I suppose some of these realms can be accessed within a framework of happenings, yet it would have limitations and I think the tendency would be to contextualize and try to make sense of such happenings within a more grounded 4D framework, most commonly as an experience that happened. If one simply sees happenings occurring now, the tendency is to subconsciously assume things have happened. Most importantly that experience happened. Strictly speaking, I would say that acknowledging now happenings, without acknowledging the non-happening of those happenings, is a very subtle form of experience - “current” experience happening now. I’m not saying the framework of “things are happening now” is false. I’m saying it is a contraction within realms/dimensions of greater depth and expansiveness.

I suppose we could speak of eternity in multiple dimensions. Most people speak of eternity as an infinite horizontal axis of infinite past, present and infinite future. Yet as you’ve suggested, there is also eternity along the vertical axis of Now. Much fewer people seem aware of this and far fewer have direct experience here, because humans are conditioned to perceive and think of reality as past-present-future. Most people’s sense of “now” still has a tiny piece of the horizontal time axis. Without that, there is no longer “now”, because there is no “not now” to contrast “now” with.

My impression was people in this thread are discussing this as two sides. I see three sides: 1. Thoughts within a conventional past-now-future timeline are illusory since thoughts cannot happen in the past or future. People can be mesmerized by thoughts and become immersed into an illusory conceptual thought world of past and future. 2. Thoughts happen now and only now 3. Thoughts never happen now because a happening would need a timeline to happen (albeit an extremely short timeline of one instant to another instant). So, thoughts don’t even happen.

Is there also another side of the coin? The idea that thoughts “happen” now and only now can bring the mind’s attention to the immediacy of now. Yet upon even further inspection, doesn’t the idea that “thoughts happen now” necessitate a timeline? (albeit an extremely short timeline). A happening seems to be an appearance and disappearance within an extremely short time construct. Could this collapse into a Now of nothing, in which nothing is happening since there is no timeline to happen within? I’m not trying to contradict the other two sides of the coin, I can see the truth in those sides.

I understand these are extremely difficult spaces and how much the mind and body wants relief. Notice how you said “If my assumptions are correct” and then how you immediately pivoted and entered a space as if they were correct. Notice your orientation and where you go with these assumptions. As hard as it is, I would try to re-orient and face prior to “if my assumptions are correct” and examine those assumptions. What is the key belief(s) underlying this discomfort? What belief(s) is triggering this fight or flight response in your mind and body? Just one or two short statements. Not thought stories.

@EvilAngel Observe your assumptions and your orientation.

@Truth Addict ? ♥️

My mind isn’t quite oriented like that and I don’t do well in that type of dialog. I’m oriented more toward observation and exploration than output or destination.

This doesn’t seem like a genuine effort to better understand the nature of subjectivity.

Some structure is useful in conversation. If I say “A gibnot is a thing, yet it can be anything” , now let’s discuss the practical value of gibnot in society. It’s too poorly structured to have a conversation. There is too much flexibility. Yet I could go to the other extreme - if there is too much structure it can become too rigid and contracted. If I say “This is how it is. And this is what this is. There is no fluidity or space to expand. In such a structured state, the only option for the other person is to say “No, that is not how it is.”, “That is not what is is”. If I’m in a mindset of this is how it is, I miss out on a lot. A recent example with “enlightenment”. My mind can see enlightenment as “trans-personal” and a person does get or become enlightened, since the person is illusory there is no person to get enlightened? Who would get enlightened? This is a deep realization and can be very useful in certain contexts. . . Yesterday, I noticed Leo writing about qualities of enlightened persons. At first, my mind may think “A person is not enlightened, maybe he doesn’t get it”. Yet I realized this is a different context and I asked about enlightened persons in this context. I learned about qualities of enlightened people and my mind deepened and expanded. Then I watched a Lisa Cairns video about how the “enlightenment story” is a major distraction because it becomes contracted into a personal story within a timeline that doesn’t exist. Within this context, I also learned a lot and depended/expanded my understanding. . . .Personally, I like a balance between structure and flexibility.

The assertions within this construct are consistent with how terms (and assertions themselves) have been defined. A is A, therefore A is A A gramlet is a hoplit and a gramlet is a blinop, therefore a hoplit is a blinop The assertions are consistent with the relative definition of terms and the assertions themselves. Such definitions can be useful in building a construct, yet they can also cause rigidity, limitation and contraction.

I’m not disagreeing with what you are saying, yet a clear distinction can be made here. We can add on a component to survival called suffering in which there is a psychological self that becomes distressed in thought stories regarding perceived threats to it’s own survival. Humans would have this feature and non-humans would not have this feature. Within this context, we can say humans suffer and non-humans don’t suffer. Yet this feature is not necessary for a sense of survival and being bothered by perceived threats to one’s survival. A sense of self vs not-self and a desire for self survival is not dependent on intellectual thoughts. Animals do not have a psychological self that includes thought stories, yet they clearly have a sense of self. They know a difference between self and non-self. In this regard, animals are not selfless and are bothered by perceived threats to their self survival.

@rNOW I’ve experience similar. In terms of the exhaustion, yoga has helped me increase stamina.

@JayFueel All dualities eventually collapse into nothing / infinity. Referring to this as “groundless” can help understanding in terms of human concepts and subjective experience. Yet, it’s not really grounded vs. groundless. In a practical sense, beings like a sense of being grounded. Humans will assume, think and desire that which gives a sense of grounding. Groundless can feel unsettling, uncomfortable and scary. So we construct a reality of perceptions, ideas and beliefs to provide grounding. For example, holding an idea and wanting “to be right” - we could consider this as firmly grounded. Yet upon closer inspection of nuances, any idea is relative and partially right, depending on context and perspective - now the grounding isn’t so firm anymore, it’s like shifting sand. Upon even closer inspection, this expands into infinity - to nothing - one might consider this groundless. From the human perspective, there can be an intellectual understanding of grounding as well as nonverbal feeling and experiential understanding of grounding - which is nonverbal.

That seems like a narrow definition of “bothered”. I saw a squirrel in a trap recently and it certainly was bothered whether it lived or died. A being doesn’t need to have an intellectual story of personal identity to be bothered when in a situation it perceives as life threatening. Animals have a sense of self and survival and are bothered when that sense of self-survival is threatened.

In the context of the linked video and this thread, no I have not. Experience would suggest an experiencer within a timeline. The term “eternity” suggests “unchanging” which also involves a timeline. I think Rupert addresses this well. As Rupert said in the video, words are a crude tool. I like how he spoke about other expressions such as dance and art as being a more refined tool of expression. In another context, yes I have. Yet this is a different context than the video and thread.

Yea, the problem with using the term “Now” is that it inherently includes a “not Now”. If there is no “not Now” , the term “Now” is no longer relevant or needed. The term is useful in a certain context, yet a deterrent in another context.

I like the image of thought as a veil of Now, better than thoughts are never Now. ?

Imagine laying down and thinking about being at a beach. The waves, surfers, looking for sea shells. You are trying to create a dream by thinking and can’t convince yourself you are dreaming. It’s not flowing organically. It’s sorta like that, but not as dramatic. There is a semi fluid, lucid nature to it, yet also a sense I’m just thinking this up and it might count as a dream - yet with some uncertainty about this. When I fully awake, I realize I was actually half asleep and wasn’t fully awake. It’s a weird hybrid state. It’s not very satisfying. Yet it’s helped my daydreaming quite a bit! I’m much better at reaching semi-lucid dream states during the day. I’m not sure what this means. Could you elaborate?