Forestluv

What qualifies as “another reality”? As soon as it appears, it becomes reality. For example, years ago a few people had this idea there were tiny beings all around us that we can’t see. They thought these tiny beings could enter our bodies and cause us to get sick and even make us mad. These people were thought to be insane for proposing such a reality. Even after Louis Pasteur proved it experimentally, it was still too radical for people to accept. It took years of work from other scientists to confirm his results and convince the public. Today, it’s ho-hum obvious stuff. Yea, bacteria and viruses exist. Yet, at the time it was a radical idea of reality.

Could you start us off with your own thoughts and experience?

He aint smokin' dandelions

I communicated with the OP and checked out his lab and survey online. His lab looks legit and this seems like a genuine research project examining personality and awe experiences with and without drugs. If you take the survey, please give honest answers.

Great question. I'm currently learning the power of imagination. Turquoise-level imagination is amazing. It feels para-normal at first. I'm developing skills to use it wisely.

@Belay kelemework You are interpreting metaphors literally, which destroys the whole purpose of the metaphor. For example, there is a saying that "The world is your oyster". It doesn't literally mean that the world is an actual oyster and that you actually own the world. It is just a metaphor. Some oyster's contain a hidden pearl, yet one has to search to find an oyster that has a pearl. Similarly, the world has hidden "pearls" (treasures), yet one has to search for them to find them. As well, sayings that there is a hell realm with a satanic devil, doesn't literally mean there is a physical place of hell with an actual being that is a devil that lives in that place. It's just a metaphor. Interpreting it literally destroys it's meaning as a metaphor. Ancient religious scriptures are filled with stories and metaphors that shouldn't be taken literally.

If you face it, you will know. The ego feels embolden until it must surrender all.

@Garuda Have you worked through the mind state of objective external reality? It seems like you are staying within that state of mind.

@martins name I agree that there are generally two steps. Realizing the irrationality of a pre-rational god and then realizing a truer post-rational god. Yet, I don’t think it’s a good idea to cow tow to blue stage. Other spiritual examples include concepts of emptiness and nothing. I think we should teach people more evolved understandings rather than make up a bunch of new terms that would be very esoteric. With that said, I think terms such as “everything”, “One” and “nothing” are more efficient terms to help evolve Orange to post-rational. The term “god” often triggers preconceived notions, baggage and defenses. It’s iften counter-productive. For these reasons, I rarely use the term “god” when trying to help others evolve. Yet, I still wouldn’t want to concede the term “god”.

♥️

@martins name A higher truth shouldn’t conceed to a lower falsehood. Recently, it’s been determined that Pluto does not qualify as a planet. We didn’t change the meaning of the term “planet” so pluto would now qualify as a planet. And we didn’t give pluto a new name so people could keep calling pluto a planet. Rather the truth was told: pluto is not a planet. Deal with it. Similarly, God is not some old bearded man in the sky. Deal with it. We update terms to reflect higher understanding and truth. Conceeding language to irrational nonsensense merely perpetuates falsehoods. Updating the term God to point to a higher truth is precisely what is needed for people to face their belief in an irrational idea of god. It’s the most direct approach.

It’s all fun and games until you face it directly. Don’t throw sand at those who have had the courage to face it.

@Preetom The land of storytelling is a warm blanket. If you go to the gate, be prepared to surrender all. You don’t get to decide or control what lies on the other side. Crossing over was by far the most terrifying experience of my life.

@Preetom If you go the distance, you will need to surrender everything, including control of the narrative - such as the story you just told.

@Preetom If awareness arises that a mind-body is playing the character of a villain, why assume the mind-body will stop playing that character?

It doesn't seem like there is a consensus on that. In terms of research, studies showing neurotoxicity in rats and primates were using high doses about 10X the standard human dose, the roa was injection and the frequencey of administration was around 200X the frequency of normal human use. There is debate on how relevant those regimes and results are. But yea, if a human took 10X the normal mdma dose via injection twice a day, everyday, for a month - I wouldn’t be surprised to see neurotoxicity.

If you say so, so it is.

@CreamCat Gotcha. I wouldn’t call it self-sacrifice if the same person is benefiting. For example, if someone quits smoking to improve their health, is that self-sacrifice? I’d say no. Yet if a father worked over-time everyday for 20 years to put his kids through college, I would say that’s self sacrifice. I’m kinda using SD as a framework. Blue and Green are the self sacrifice stages. Red and Orange are the self centered stages.

I've found self-enquiry to be helpful when my mind can relax into a quiet state and insights can arise. If I ask a question like "What is Genuine?" and my mind starts conceptualizing and trying to figure it out - I will halt the enquiry.

@Nagma Everything you mentioned is within One Absolute. I did not make any value judgments between religions or spiritual teachers because they are all within One. How could I make a value judgement when there is no thing to judge? On the human level, we can make value judgments and assign relative meaning as good or bad. As well, one could discuss a variety of relative conscious levels. Yet, that is not the thread topic. The thread topic is about absolute God, absolute Consciousness.

I agree. I'd guess about 10 years and momentum is gaining. Yet, I still shake my head at times. I know several psychologists that specialize in PTSD therapy and were shocked when I told them about the MDMA research. Then within a month, I'll get a text like "Oh my gosh, I was just talking with a colleague who mentioned MDMA therapy for PTSD. I can't believe it!!" I think a big turning point will be when psychedelic research has a prominent presence at scientific meetings. Scientists love hot, new things. The first cell biology paper showing neurotrophic properties of psychedelics in cell culture was recently published in the journal Cell. This is the top journal in cell biology and it carries a lot of weight in the scientific community. Regarding the clinical studies, I just want to reiterate for others reading this thread. The clinical studies were done with patients that had already received a lot of psychotherapy before the trials. The psychedelic therapy was in a relaxed controlled setting with a loved one and their trusted health care provider. After the treatment, patients continued psychotherapy to help integrate the insights. We are not talking about handing out MDMA to PTSD sufferers and having them work through things on their own.

Not even close. That is heterosexual privilege. Homosexuals undergo much much higher levels of stigmatization and marginalization. How many homosexual friends and coworkers do you have? I've never met a homosexual man that was repressing heterosexual desires. They would just be bisexual. Homosexual men are naturally attracted to men. It is their true nature. The scenarios you are imagining are rare. Guys having sex with guys because their parents won't let them have sex with women? Yet sex with other guys would be ok with their parents? C'mon. . . Homosexuality is natural. Trying to make it unnatural requires making up bizarre, absurd stories.

One would think so. Yet, cannabis is still schedule I . . . I would love to do experiments with psychedelics in my lab, yet with current regulations . . . I'd have to secure a large grant, go through a couple years of approval process and be willing to undergo strict "health" regulations and a bunch of paperwork. (Even to just experiment with fruit flies). I'm currently collaborating with a lab that has a schedule I license and let him to the work with psychedelics. Yet, I'm so tempted to use my private stash. Yet, what would I do if I got positive results? I can easily order enough mercury to kill thousands of people, yet I can't order a trace amount of MDMA that wouldn't even make a single fruit fly trip. . . There is a movement in the sciences to relax the restrictions on psychedelic research. Yet we haven't hit the critical mass at the societal level. Everyone knows someone who suffers from depression, addiction, PTSD etc. So as word gets out, social support will gradually increase. Yet we have a ways to go. Currently, social support for psychedelic research is about where cannabis was 20 years ago. . . .

I understand. I am questioning your assumptions. You are viewing things from only one POV that you are assuming is true. Flip the script and look at it from another POV. Homosexuality is stigmatized by a portion of society, so there is a reason for a man to repress his homosexual desires. Heterosexuality is not stigmatized by society, so there is no reason for a man to repress his heterosexual desires. I've never met a man pretending to be homosexual because he was repressing his heterosexual desires. Yet, I have met lots of men pretending to be heterosexual because they were repressing their homosexual desires.