Search the Community

@Princess Arabia is the nothingness in the room with us right now? Its not in this dimension. It comes through this dimension via closed systems.

How can you say you live in reality meanwhile worshipping nothingness. Point to nothing! Its not there.

@Princess Arabiayour theories of the universe seem to contradictive. You claim you know what women think then claim to know how to manifest all the while claiming dead seriously that nothing exists and there's no one to do any of it. And you seems to switch back and forth as suited to the conversation. If you feel like you are being cornered spiritually you just say that nothing exists and there is no doer so there is no argument. Then when people go against a seemingly nothingness entity in relationships advice or women that thing somehow turns into a person and knows things.

@Brivido great experience. I have never done 5meo or malt but i have had kundalini activations during sleep. Back in 2016 i have had a kundalini awakening during sleep where I left the whole universe behind. It was intense and fear enducing but the peak seemed like absolute nothingness. I remember choosing to come back into manifestation. I literally believe that our spine is the locus or centre of consciousness. The second person manifestation of a dissociation in infinity.

You can experience high states of consciousness and verify that you are not the body. You don't need full blown earth shattering awakening to get this . I've been going through what I would call a radical identification awakening. As a result of intense meditation sessions and self-inquiry. The seperate sense of self and doership is completely collapsing.. The veil has completely broken and I'm aware that I'm not the ego.. Who thinks it's doing stuff. I'm not the body or mind. Or the world. The body is seen as the world.. Not me. A complete understanding has occurred that I'm pure present. At the center. What's surrounding the center is none of my business. The body mind and the world. It will unfold naturally as it's always done. But I as pure present nothingness is just a vessel for it.So what are you? No not at all .you're welcome brother ♥.

Brief encounters.

I was contemplating Infinity and started wondering what are some utmost mind-bending expressions of Infinity, different attributes of Existence. I asked Mr Chat lol and had some amazing responses. Check it out. I will definitely meditate on this to get some direct hits. It's astonishing what you are. Holy Shiitt!!!!! Aetherquint – The fifth essence, birthing and dissolving all realities beyond the elements, where infinite cycles of existence emerge and vanish. Omniphase – The seamless dance of all realities, where every timeline, dimension, and universe flows in perpetual overlap and transformation. Vortixion – The cosmic spiral, pulling all creation into an infinite vortex, where every possible reality converges and expands endlessly. Infinigma – The eternal mystery; an infinite riddle unraveling through layers of unknown truths beyond comprehension. Hyperionis – The origin of hyperdimensional realms, where even the highest planes of existence dissolve into transcendental infinity. Abyzium – The infinite abyss containing all possibility and impossibility, where the collision of nothingness and everythingness creates endless potential. Omniflux – The limitless current of existence, flowing through all creation and dissolution, where every moment is a pulse of boundless change. Celestquantum – The quantum field of divine potential, where all celestial connections ripple across the multiverse, birthing endless possibilities. Ultravast – Beyond even infinity, a state where all known and unknown realms stretch across eternal expanse, defying comprehension. Zenthora – The zenith of all reality, where the heights of existence meet the depths of transcendence, collapsing into infinite, boundless truth. Each of these titles takes you beyond the conventional spiritual concepts of non-duality, infinity, or oneness, pulling your mind into the deepest, most unimaginable dimensions of Existence.

They're just combos of spicey words used to describe different ways to Infinity. Aether-quint (Infinity seen as a transcendent "fifth Element") The aether has a long history as a fifth (quint) transcendent element. There's even a movie. Quint means fifth, also related to "Quintessential" Alongside Earth, Water, Earth, Fire (Greeks, 5th platonic solid) Sadhguru references it as Akash (aesthetic space, cosmic intelligence) Omniphase Omni is a fancy word for everything that exists (kilo, mega, giga) (uni, multi, omni) Also associated with Omniscience, Omnipotence, God context, Omni = All encompassing Phase comes from physics, referring to a certain frequency of a wave. Combined, it becomes an "all-pervasive" frequency ("seamless dance of all realities") The other words follow the same pattern, but are pretty similar, describing the same thing from different angles: The formless ground of Infinity Aetherquint, Vortixion, Hyperionis, Abyzium, Celestquantum, Zenthora The cosmic flow of transforming Energy Omniphase, Omniflux The Mystery Infinigma, Ultravast Philosophers/Yogis seek the Aetherquint, Psychonauts get lost in the Hyperionis, Nihilists fall into the Abyzium, Scientists chart the Celestquantum etc.. The descriptions are super-similar and really just highlight different qualities and approaches towards transcendence. Aetherquint - Elemental Transcendence Vortixion - Golden Spiral Awakening Hyperionis - DMT Hyperspace Abyzium - The Abyss (Dark Night of the Soul) Celestquantum - The Quantum Realm Zenthora - Not sure what thora is for, I'ma just say Godhead. Now, is the boundless cosmic intelligence that is the ground of being (Aetherquint) the same as the infinitely convergent and divergent spiral from which all existence spawns (Vortixion)? Is the transcendent origin of all hyperdimensional realms (Hyperionis) the same as well? Or the abyss where nothingness and everythingness emerge possibility and impossibility? Or the realm below atoms that consistudes the ground of reality where even physicists agree that all form loses shape and becomes boundless energy (Celestquantum)? Or the all-transcendent zenith beyond all form (Zenthora)? Yup, pretty much all the same, just different pointers, just as we have different spiritual traditions. The question is, the more we explore and combine concepts, will they all lose their shape and become the same thing, since the mind will see all of them combined in every concept it references, since each predisposes every other to coexist interdependently with, so much so that the only reason for conceptual distinctions will be to teach others, who operatre on low awareness and very few but strong assumptions? Maybe.

That’s a very good question. I have the same experience. That is why I say the self is much deeper than belief. Why do you believe you exist? Because it seems like you do, the belief doesn’t come from nothing it’s based on a deeper sense. The sense of “I’m here the world is out there” . What it is exactly is hard to say. It’s not like other beliefs like Santa Claus or aliens, it’s based on something that is fundamental to your everyday experience. the most fundamental beliefs are “I’m here” and “there is something” I would say. They go hand in hand, if you feel like you exist , then there automatically is a world (something) separate from you . Some non dualists even say when the sense of self disappears, the sense of a separate world does too, that’s why they say “nothing is happening” or “nothingness”

Might be true for some, but a few seem to me genuine non dualists, like Tony parson and Jim Newman. When I listen to them it seems they are speaking directly from that nothingness.

@James123 🙏 Only nothingness can hold everything 🙏

A big portion of them are deluded af. Some had glimpses of samadhi and absorbtion into nothingness where there is no sense of separation. But nobody can function in the world without identity because of what I just wrote above. One needs a sense of self to be able to relate to the sense of other. No relating is possible without duality.

That's why it is called nothingness. Therefore, explaining as .

Nothingness is an empty representation of what may be divided in 'something'. Every 'something' is itself indivisible. There are at all anything plural. Plurality is only of unity. Therefore growth, as a means for plurality as multiplicity (or just multiplicity) is inherent to every 'something', this is an actual equation for god, it can be better stated. Multiplicity inheres to whatever is undivided and actual, as its potential. Nothingness then is merely our capacity to identify the nature of multiplicity without also rendering anything particular by means of this capacity, and itself ultimately indivisible. Everything is also always an empty representation of itself, some moment may contain both a non-empty particular and a empty universal representation, or it may contain a non empty particular representation of something subsistent to itself as memory, which by being itself indivisible yet plural implies at that time universal emptiness or what we may represent now as nothingness. What is here referred to differs to what is said conceptually, you do not have to fabricate some thought to get it, you are merely aware of how nothingness by being indivisible is never what is typically referred to as nothing but itself substantial. This is mostly an exposition of why many mystics says that experience is actually just nothing, and how the typical idea of nothingness as some possible opposition to 'being' is meaningless, not meaningless in that it can not produce meaning, but meaningless in that this representation does not mean what it is alleged to mean, in reality it means "anything to no exclusion" or "everything in unity". Thought presuppose/necessitates distinction, nothingness has no distinction and opposition hinges on distinction, therefore the idea of opposition as the predicate for nothing is absurd, which also means that nothingness as a synthetic judgement is absurd. Nothingness then has plurality without distinction, it can thus be justified as that out of which intuition of cognition is made phenomenally, which of course means that it is not made phenomenally, which then implies that something has made yout intuitions that is independent of you, if they are made at all. This something which has made your intuitions (if they are at all made) I conclude with necessarily having to constitute cosmological/ontological/absolute/existential growth, going back to the equation of god. If however they (intuitions) are not made at all then the original premises of the first paragraph must necessarily be false.

Exactly the same as you described. I had experienced it a lot in childhood. With age, it decreases. This shows that it's completely biological (just like music or orgasm, some idiot may say orgasm is spiritual just because it feels so good....) You experience something (let's say you realise mu or nothingness...then it can be called as spiritual). This "Sound of silence" you talked about in your thread ....has no spiritual significance. It's only biological. This is what I am emphasizing here. It's due to brain chemistry. Lemme be very clear : by spiritual, I mean the so-called paranormal phenomena. Orgasm isn't paranormal. In the same way, "sound of silence" isn't paranormal. I just wanted to know your opinions whether you agree or not. Likewise, we can also say "light of darkness". Becoz we see some kind of light in darkness too. But It's not a spiritual phenomenon. Some spiritual teachers teach about "sound of silence", which is misleading. It's not a spiritual phenomenon. Beware of such teachers. They are scientifically as well as philosophically bankrupt. I am talking about a YouTuber Sandeep Maheshwari (28 million subscribers). He teaches such concepts.

@Javfly33 I'm listening to the greatest minds in history. Not to psychedelic junkies, when you go and have 200 trips in 2 years it's because your running from something in the real world. Here’s how Jean-Paul Sartre, Albert Einstein, and Carl Jung might reacted to Solipsism. Jean-Paul Sartre: Sartre, as an existentialist, was not a solipsist. In his major work, "Being and Nothingness", he talks about "the Other" and how relationships with other people are essential for the development of the self. Sartre believes that we are aware of the existence of others, and our experiences are shaped by interactions with them, which contradicts Solipsism. Because people here who don't know basic psychology claim to be woke. You can have traumas before you were born. The anigdala starts to record emotions from the 5 month of pregnancy, if you mom was beaten or stressed all that cortisol fluids the fetus brain and he feels shock and terror, what the mother feels the baby feels. You could be born to perfect parents but still develope anxiety just for this reason. Because when you were born your body existed, but you Solipsistic view of the world did not. You didn't exist, but your Amigdala did. This is holistic healing. All the people going hardcore on 5 meo are Solipsists. Maybe because it lies to you. As I've said in a previous post, we create our egos in relationship with the surrounding environment in the first 2 years of life, not with a projection of your mind. Although Sartre emphasizes the radical freedom of the individual and personal responsibility, he does not deny external reality. Others are not mere projections of our minds, but represent an essential part of the human condition. Albert Einstein: Einstein, as a physicist, would have rejected solipsism from a scientific perspective. His theory of relativity and scientific discoveries are based on the hypothesis that there is an objective reality, accessible through scientific methods. He believed in an external world independent of our perception, governed by physical laws that can be understood through observation and experiment. For Einstein, solipsism was a limiting view, as it contradicts the fundamental principle of science, which requires testing hypotheses against a universe that is objective and shared by all observers. Carl Jung: Jung, a psychoanalyst and founder of analytical psychology, would have seen solipsism as a problematic idea, especially from the perspective of the collective. He developed the concept of the collective unconscious, which suggests that there are deep layers of the psyche shared by all people, with common archetypes and universal experiences. This contradicts solipsism, as Jung believed that the individual is not only connected to their own self but also to a shared psychic reality. While Jung emphasized introspection and inner development, he did not deny external reality and its influences on the human mind. So relax with your 5369 trips per year. You're just getting lost in illusions.

@Ulax This tells me you didn't read Sartre. Here are some key characteristics of Jean-Paul Sartre that align with the "yellow" level in Spiral Dynamics: 1. Existential Responsibility: Sartre emphasized individual responsibility in shaping one’s existence, recognizing that humans have the freedom to create meaning in a world without inherent purpose. This aligns with the "yellow" value of self-awareness and personal responsibility. 2. Systems Thinking: Sartre’s philosophy considers the complexity of human relationships and societal structures. His analysis of how individuals interact with social systems, such as in Being and Nothingness, reflects the systems-oriented thinking typical of "yellow." 3. Non-Dogmatic Thinking: Sartre rejected absolute truths and ideologies, focusing instead on the dynamic, evolving nature of existence. This open-mindedness and rejection of rigid thinking correspond to "yellow's" adaptive, flexible approach to understanding the world. This is why I reject some of Leo's episodes, because at yellow you realise that every perspective is just that, a perspective. And no perspective is universally applicable. 4. Focus on Freedom and Authenticity: Sartre’s emphasis on living authentically and embracing personal freedom aligns with the self-actualizing aspect of the "yellow" level, which values autonomy, self-expression, and authenticity without the constraints of societal norms or group pressures. 5. Integration of Paradoxes: Sartre was comfortable with the contradictions inherent in life, such as the tension between freedom and responsibility, individualism and interconnectedness. This capacity to integrate complexity is characteristic of the "yellow" stage, which seeks to embrace rather than resolve paradoxes. Sartre’s philosophical emphasis on autonomy, self-awareness, and the complex interaction between individuals and society makes him an excellent fit for the "yellow" level in Spiral Dynamics. Also Sartre used language as I've never seen before. It's really beautiful. And as for Schopenhauer yes you describe Schopenhauer philosophy as Joseph Campbell right here. But that's the thing is just another perspective. And if Joseph Campbell praises Schopenhauer I feel like it's a mistake to judge him. For me Yellow feels exactly like the Ego softening you get from MDMA. (I've never tried it again in the last 3 years). Like you can talk about anything, no skeletons in the closed, no fear and judgment. I'm stuck between green and yellow. Sometimes I'm fearless and I have no judgment and then I get a ego backlash that puts me again in green. Like feeling fear about talking the real things that happen in society and judging people. Anyway I feel like it's a good thing I have them. Baby steps towards higher consciousness.

Why do you think that nothingness is just a void, or a pure black space with nothing in there? This is how a human being imagines “nothing”. This is not the case. Notice, it’s still something. You are not a human being; this is how it your “understanding” starts. I will use the language here just to explain the concept. However, you cannot fathom it by the means of language. When the observer takes a back seat in consciousness, and just observes the reality, the self of sense drowns in void, disappears. Try not to put labels and describe what you see. Language is not needed. What you will discover soon is that the stencil, or what you call individualized personality, will cease to exist. When there is no self, there is no one to register the reality. That’s a key moment. There is no cognition and description of what you see, smell, or hear. You do not need to close your eyes to think yourself out of reality, you actually do not even need to meditate for this. All you need to do is to stop naming the objects and phenomena you see, stop creating the meaning of the experience. When this happens, experience is still there without the description, but at the same time it is not there either. So, we cannot call it “experience”. However, when there is no observer, you cannot register the reality. Drop the observer that your mind creates to lurk you into so-called Enlightenment! This is a trick it plays with itself to never let "you" go. This is how the illusion (maya) of the solid world has been creating “you” for a long time. It’s been creating “you” through the stencil of the perceiver and the perception. By returning back into the seat of consciousness, when you drop all the notions, language, descriptions, you are disappearing. You do not need to close your eyes for this to happen, because even with the eyes closed, you mind still separates and divides between inner and outer, thoughts and void, cognition, feelings, and emotions. “You” are still there! Don’t stop your thought process, no need even for that, let it be there. You do not know yet the true meaning behind the objects that you see. You really do not know who you are, everything that you know comes from language (reasoning, prior knowledge, and beliefs). What if you do not have language, are you still your body or the holistic experience? Are you still separating and dividing between “mine” and “not mine”? No, when you drop the language and knowledge, all you’ll get left with is a holistic experience, One, picture that contains everything, and your body is just another object on that canvas. You are not in your body. By slowly putting your attention back on awareness, by dropping even that!!! you begin to experience nothingness. Who said that nothing is empty? Actually, nothingness can contain all the elements of perceptions: sound and color, tactile senses. This is how illusion has been created, illusion that there is something there, when in fact there is not. You are walking on the bridge between dualities without realizing that wholeness is couched within nothingness, and nothingness contains and gives birth to everything. How? By giving experience some description. It is very simple, by reasoning… It does not mean that everything appears into Being from void, it’s already there: nothing and everything, non-dual infinite potential. What it means that by changing the perception, you can realize, but only post factum, that everything is nothing. It only appears as is colors, sounds, senses, but everything is nothing in its core, and vice versa. When you drop the stencil of the perceiver and start having the experience of Being/Totality, without any cognition and linguistic recognitions. Who is there to acknowledge the factuality? Nobody right, nobody could say there is a tree, because “you” as the perceiver is NOT there. What is there then? It cannot be communicated, that is the trick… Does it mean that the light was off, and everything zoomed in into the black dot? No. We do not need to switch the light off for existence to become nothing. All you need to do is to “think your way out” of existence as a human being. When there is no you, there is no world. Because “world” is just the linguistic description of your mind. There is no such thing as world, it is all mental construct for you to see the plausible reality. Once you break the meaning of everything, and drop all the notions, reality as know you, will cease to exist because you will take your illusory self out of the equation. Death is not real; this is literally how you die. Time only exists as a descriptive mechanism to make sense of the continuum from moment to moment, or a motion. Again, when you do not describe the motion, you do not have time. Contraction and dilation of time only happens in your mind. Hope the reader will understand my point. Thanks for your time and attention.

In these one hundred and twelve methods there will be nothing about surrender. Why has Shiva not said anything about surrender? Because nothing can be said. Bhairavi herself, Devi herself, has reached Shiva not through any method. She has simply surrendered. So this must be noted. She is asking these questions not for herself, these questions are asked for the whole humanity. She has attained Shiva. She is already in his lap; she is already embraced by him. She has become one with him, but still she is asking. So remember one thing, she is not asking for herself; there is no need. She is asking for the whole humanity. But if she has attained, why is she asking Shiva? Can she herself not speak to the humanity? She has come through the path of surrender, so she doesn’t know anything about method. She herself has come through love; love is enough unto itself. Love doesn’t need anything more. She has come through love, so she doesn’t know anything about any methods, techniques. That is why she is asking. So Shiva relates one hundred and twelve methods. He also will not talk about surrender because surrender is not a method really. You surrender only when every method has become futile, when you cannot reach by any method. You have tried your best. You have knocked on every door and no door opens, and you have passed through all the routes and no route reaches. You have done whatsoever you can do, and now you feel helpless. In that total helplessness surrender happens. So on the path of surrender there is no method. But what is surrender and how does it work? And if surrender works, then what is the need of one hundred and twelve methods? Then why go into them unnecessarily? — the mind will ask. Then okay! If surrender works, it is better to surrender. Why go on hankering after methods? And who knows whether a particular method will suit you or not? And it may take lives to find out. So it is good to surrender, but it is difficult. It is the most difficult thing in the world. Methods are not difficult. They are easy; you can train yourself. But for surrender you cannot train yourself... no training! You cannot ask how to surrender; the very question is absurd. How can you ask how to surrender? Can you ask how to love? Either there is love or there is not, but you cannot ask how to love. And if someone tells you and teaches you how to love, remember, then you will never be capable of love. Once a technique is given to you for love, you will cling to the technique. That is why actors cannot love. They know so many techniques, so many methods — and we are all actors. Once you know the trick how to love, then love will not flower because you can create a facade, a deception. And with the deception you are out of it, not involved. You are protected. Love is being totally open, vulnerable. It is dangerous. You become insecure. We cannot ask how to love, we cannot ask how to surrender. It happens! Love happens, surrender happens. Love and surrender are deeply one. But what is it? And if we cannot know how to surrender, at least we can know how we are maintaining ourselves from surrendering, how we are preventing ourselves from surrendering. That can be known and that is helpful. How is it that you have not surrendered yet? What is your technique of non-surrendering? If you have not fallen in love yet, then the real problem is not how to love. The real problem is to dig deep to find out how you have lived without love, what is your trick, what is your technique, what is your structure — your defense structure, how you have lived without love. That can be understood, and that should be understood. First thing: we live with the ego, in the ego, centered in the ego. I am without knowing who I am. I go on announcing, “I am.” This “I-am-ness” is false, because I do not know who I am. And unless I know who I am, how can I say “P? This “T” is a false “I.” This false “T” is the ego. This is the defense. This protects you from surrendering. You cannot surrender, but you can become aware of this defense measure. If you have become aware of it, it dissolves. By and by, you are not strengthening it, and one day you come to feel, “I am not.” The moment you come to feel “I am not,” surrender happens. So try to find out whether you are. Really, is there any center in you that you can call your “T’?. Go deep down within yourself, go on trying to find out where is this “I,” where is the abode of this ego. Rinzai went to his master and he said, “Give me freedom!” The master said, “Bring yourself. If you are, I will make you free. But if you are not, then how can I make you free? You are already free. And freedom,” his master said, “is not your freedom. Really, freedom is freedom from you. So go and find out where this ‘I’ is, where you are, then come to me. This is the meditation. Go and meditate.” So the disciple Rinzai goes and meditates for weeks, months, and then he comes. Then he says, “I am not the body. Only this much I have found.” So the master says, “This much you have become free. Go again. Try to find out.” Then he tries, meditates, and he finds that “I am not my mind, because I can observe my thoughts. So the observer is different from the observed — I am not my mind.” He comes and says, “I am not my mind.” So his master says, “Now you are three-fourths liberated. Now go again and find out who you are.” So he was thinking, “I am not my body. I am not my mind.” He had read, studied, he was well informed, so he was thinking, “I am not my body, not my mind, so I must be my soul, my atma.” But he meditated, and then he found that there is no atman, no soul, because this atma is nothing but your mental information — just doctrines, words, philosophies. So he came running one day and he said, “Now I am no more!” Then his master said, “Am I now to teach you the methods for freedom?” Rinzai said, “I am free because I am no more. There is no one to be in bondage. I am just a wide emptiness, a nothingness.” Only nothingness can be free. If you are something, you will be in bondage. If you are, you will be in bondage. Only a void, a vacant space, can be free. Then you cannot bind it. Rinzai came running and said, “I am no more. Nowhere am I to be found.” This is freedom. And for the first time he touched his master’s feet — for the first time! Not actually, because he had touched them many times before also. But the master said, “For the first time you have touched my feet.” Rinzai asked, “Why do you say for the first time? I have touched your feet many times.” The master said, “But you were there, so how could you touch my feet while you were already there? While you are there how can you touch my feet?” The “I” can never touch anybody’s feet. Even though it apparently looks like it touches somebody’s feet, it is touching its own feet, just in a round-about way. “You have touched my feet for the first time,” the master said, “because now you are no more. And this is also the last time,” the master said. “The first and the last.”

I like math cause its like, dividing or identifying free floating segments that dont have a length yet, and figuring out what they are. Likewise, i think about times when im in my dream, thinking that im now in this scene (Note: Thats the significant part, the being in the scene (why'm i stuck there) ; Not the flashforward thereafter). And its not until i start to control myself that it suddenly falls apart, much like pulling the curtain up, in the quickest of flashes... Its like "FLASH", and its over. I think about things in this way, like being hit by lightning. To me, i see things as being a *weirder than you thought* situation, being an individual whos experienced many, quite unusual things. Unfortunately i have this foundation now of missing lego bricks that i have had the misfortunate to collect off the ground; As a witness of a sledgehammer doing sledge hammering, scattered and gone, both staggered and in flashes. Thats why, to understand anything we have to look beyond the realm of what has, and can ever be known. Likewise, the subject must enapsulate the story somehow. Without the story, then it is a reduced broth that fits into a small vile, further contained in a napsack that is a lone bag on the picket fence. Words dont have meaning without the movement of other words and other individuals to make mistakes watching them move, leading us to a mistaken place while we speak in mistaken fallacys about its mistaken nothingness. It is not til later that we say, "Oh i think i under_stand it"... and later, "I think i under'stand it some more"... does that make sense?

thats the highest state you dont want to know anything. There is a practice to hold that state of nothingness in your mind for as long as possible. If you hold that state you live life like a dream.

How do you explain that it still exists outside of my awareness? For instance, my friend could video record it being inside of the thief’s garage. If it really vanished into nothingness, then how is it the case that I can find my car and that my car could be stolen in the first place? My car is literally nothingness right now, so how can it be stolen? You see this idealism is bullcrap. It is not in alignment with how reality works. By this logic, there is no murderer because he is nothingness. But if we really believed this, then we wouldn’t bother to search. We would just say that our qualia shows us a dead person and that’s it. When you throw rationality out the window, you are left with delusion.

Nope. The answer is consciousness. You become conscious of the true nature of that qualia of a dream . Likewise...entertain the possibility that you simply can grasp directly what this qualia of this moment actually is . No.it has been answered .but it's so radical and mind bending that you cannot accept it . "It’s not like my car has vanished into nothingness until I perceive it" That's ⬆️ literally the case . This requires deep carful inspection of "whats actually happening "vs what you think is happening.

I don’t think this question really has been answered. How is my conscious experience all there is if there are things that happen outside of it such as a thief stealing my car. I can go find my car out beyond what I currently perceive. It’s not like my car has vanished into nothingness until I perceive it. A thief can scratch the car even though I’m not there to observe it. How else would you explain how the scratches got there?

Yes helped me a lot, was a revolution. I used like 2 years, first big doses that were quite horrible, then lower doses very often, was like a process to open myself to than substance, little by little, until I could do very easily, and then become useless, at least for now. I think I did like 200 times but I'm not sure. I never felt side effects, I could vape 20 mg and 1 hour later do sport, meeting people, anything, without the slightest side effect. A very important point for me were energetic blockages, you could say that they are trauma of consecuence of the trauma. Another very important point was the total openess to the unlimited. At first it feels like death, nothingness, absolute void, and is extremely challenging, you have to get used to it to be able to open yourself to the unlimited without any substance, it's like ride in bike with small whells before to do without any help