Forestluv

The context of my point here is that there can be structural brain injuries that should be considered when providing help to some patients. This is one of the most well-supported contributions from neuroscience and has value which can be integrated into talk therapy, psychedelic therapy and spirituality. I’m interested in developing the best modalities and I find integrated holistic perspectives of particular value in this area. Different people need different types of treatment and teachings. There is no one size fits all teaching. It’s more complex than that. I think communication between fields will lead to more effective methods. . . That’s just how my mind works, other minds are wired differently.

Good question. My resonance has changed over time.

@mandyjw I think she has a lot of value as well and can see how a lot of people resonate with her.

@mandyjw I can see value in her intention and approach, yet in my view it’s limited and she is not considering certain dynamics. Consider someone wired with a mind of depression or ptsd. There may be years, even decades, of physiological conditioning. The chromosomal structure and gene expression in the brain literally changes long term. Hormones such as cortisol have elevated levels leading to physiological anxiety. I think awareness of desires and seeing new perspectives is helpful, yet I think it’s naive to think one can heal themself so simply. I would say someone like Deepak Chopra has a more mature integrated view as he combines spirituality with physiology. In some contexts to mentally ill people, it is like she is telling someone who is paralyzed to get on a particular vibrational frequency and walk again. Yet rather than a paralysis of the body, some people have a “paralysis of the mind”. I don’t think she understands what that involves and how complex the treatment is. As well, I think this can limit her empathic abilities as she doesn’t understand structural brain injuries some people have.

@mandyjw I see the value of her message, yet I think she is overly simplistic and underestimating mind-body conditioning. I don’t think it’s just a matter of getting aligned on a particular vibrational frequency. Often times, minds need more complex release of blocks and rewiring. To me, it sounds like an over-simplistic version of “patient heal thyself”.

Some non-demonitional churches are green, others not. It depends on their underlying values. In general, non-denomination churches tend to be more inclusive and diverse - which are green values. Psychedelic users may have a baseline conscious level at any stage. Psychedelics are often attractive to those in the Green stage - they tend to be more open-minded and are attracted to what psychedelics can offer them. Such as heightened creativity and nondual senses of oneness, unity, empathy and love. As well, there is ego dissolution. High green is ready for this. The psychedelic experience can vault a person into tier2 temporarily. That is also attractive to many Greens - since they get direct experience with 1-2 conscious levels higher than their baseline conscious level

@Aakash You can do this in moderation and integrate it into all aspects of life. And acting “normal” around normies is one of our skillz . . .

I acknowledged earlier that my original message was a bit awkward and I re-phrased my message to the OP, taking this into consideration. Thank you again for your input, it was helpful. Here, I was trying to bring clarity to a point the two of us were discussing, yet I was unable to do so. Or, perhaps it is just a concept my mind is attached to and I’m delusional. I can see that as well.

@Aakash But you’re getting so good at this. . .

Nice, I hadn’t noticed that.

Nice ?

It was fun connecting with you. Use that Turquoise wand wisely ? ?‍♂️

It’s not a psychedelic thing. I was just using that as an example. Neither of us is right or wrong - we are just on different “wavelengths”.

Of course. When direct experience of actuality is revealed, the self will try to claim some ownership and identify. This is commonly seen with psychedelics in which one jumps up a conscious level or two temporarily. When the minds drops back down a conscious level, the mind may identify and contextualize it. That is a totally normal part of the integration process. To discard the higher level direct experience without integration is absurd, ime. I would have discarded 95% of my expansive insights. There is no problem with a mind-body feeling pleasure - when there is awareness of the psychological movement. And concepts are often useful after a direct experience. Notice how connected aakash and I were regarding the direct experience. Words helped us connect the direct experience. Words can be very useful. And sometimes it’s fun to celebrate a breakthrough and have fun with it. Getting too serious about being spiritually correct can be a hindrance at times.

Different things. What you say has value, yet so do these other “realms”, insights - whatever you you want to call them. Calling it Turquoise makes it a bit easier to communicate in certain contexts. Notice how aakash and I connected here. Regarding your point, it’s not so much learning and knowledge, it is attachment to knowledge that is the bigger issue - especially when that knowledge attachment is within the psychological self.

Haha, yes. But we can say to each other “psst, psst. . . over here. . .” As well, you won’t be able to explain it to someone in their logical terms. Notice how the two of us are using words to connect with each other on a nonverbal direct experience. Notice how that won’t work with beings that don’t have the direct experience.

@Aakash Getting the first good look at a Turquoise room is the toughest. You may start to develop an intuitive sense when one is around. Intuition is a core Turquoise mode of being. This is why observing attachment to thoughts is so important - even subtle attachments. They are distractions from developing other modes of being - like the intuitive mode. Without thought attachments, intuition (and other modes) are free to develop.

@Aakash ??? Yes. Fun stuff, isn’t it? ? Yet it is only one room. There are many other Turquoise rooms. I’m still discovering new ones.

@Aakash You just entered a Turquoise room that you were wondering about last week. Welcome. ?

Very nice observation. Grade A awareness ?

Then why call it the the feeling of “I”. Are you trying to explain the essence of an illusory “I” in general?

I agree with your last post and see a lot of value in it. Yet on this point, that is not what I am speaking of. Yes, it can be seen as a concept and yes it is a concept. Yet it is also a non-concept in the present moment. The pure awareness without concepts is certainly “prior” to concepts, yet what I am pointing to is not quite that. One might think “We’ll that’s just another concept” - and yes it is. Yet if a mind becomes fixated on that conceptual component it will not get the direct experience of the non-conceptual component. The mind may think once again “we’ll thats just another concept” and will not be able to receive the direct experience. The only way I know here to transmit is through words/concepts. So if one dismisses it all as concepts there is no vehicle to transmit. That is why I’m saying the direct experience in the present is so important. In real life, it may be possible to transmit non-verbally and non-conceptually. Yet I haven't developed those skills well and I certainly wouldn’t be able to do it non-conceptually on a textual forum like this. That’s why I avoid pointing to this on the forum. It’s clear that my efforts here will fail. It can lead to confusion and be distracting. In real life, I think the chances are higher to stimulate the direct experience in another, or at least plant a seed. Person to person includes a much wider range of communication modes. Yet the only people I’ve met with understanding in this “facet” are those with prior direct experience, which is extremely rare.

This is a very common question with meditators. Ime, trying to stop thoughts is counter-productive. Notice if you are getting immersed in thoughts. When thinking arises, do you find you self immersed in thinking and “snap out of it”? Or are you an observer, just observing? Imagine you are meditating in silence and then road construction noise started outside. This would be distracting, yet would you find it bothersome? Would you consider the sound impulses in your brain to be “chaos”? How could you sit in peace with this background noise? Perhaps consider thoughts to be background chatter or a storm that arises. Calmly recognize that a storm has arisen in the mind. Your awareness does not need to go outside and engage in the storm. It can go deeper inside. There, it can look outside the window and observe the storm - in peace. As well, it can be aware of things inside your home while the storm is ongoing outside. After a while, you may not even notice the storm, or the storm will die down. As well, you may get curious how the storm arose. Where does this storm of thoughts arise from? Just keep coming back inside to home and observe - whether or not it’s stormy outside.

From a physical perspective there is no boundary that separates your body from your environment. It is just a subjective sense and idea. If you look very closely there is no separation with the body and environment - it is just a practical concept that comes in handy to function in the world. When we look closely, your body is a continuation with the environment. There is no separation. It just feels that way and the mind has been conditioned to believe it. That is a deeper question. The mind may think: “OK, I am not what I have been calling the “body”. Yet I am something. And that something is dependent on what I call the body”. It certainly seems that something will end when the body dies. What ends? It’s a question humans have pondered for thousands of years. The deepest truth is revealed in your own direct experience, not what someone else tells you it should be based on their direct experience. Others have value, yet your direct experience is the deepest.

If you are a collection of neurons, are you also the cells that communicate with those neurons? For example, blood vessels supply oxygen and nutrients to your brain. Are not these blood vessels also your body and you? Don't worry about right and wrong. What does it seem like to you?