Hi Pharmacognosis,

I think we should rename this the "how to progress" thread as we are racking up loads of great advice. And all of this is really helping me and making me think.

I will say a few things as to parts of what you have said do not seem to be "true" for me, but they may be true for some if they choose, and I apologise for picking out things to argue with rather than endorsing all of its good points which are many, and I hope this is largely me expanding on what you are saying from my understanding rather than any contradiction. I learn by arguing and ultimately being wrong or changing my opinion based on seeing flaws in my arguments.

I guess I do not believe in many absolute truths or answers any more, so these perhaps are less my goal, as I know that each answer opens more questions in an infinite unfolding that I hope never ends. A magicians show is horribly boring when you know how the performer does the tricks.



I do not feel there is a judgement, or that it is indeed possible to go wrong, all you can choose is a direct or scenic route. This also means no one is "better" than another, we choose our battles here. It would be silly for a man driving past in a car to laugh at rock climbers, imagining that he is far superior because he is not faced with the challenge of the rock, or because he chose to go around it. On the scale of getting from A to B he would be judged higher, but on the scale of challenging himself he would be scored lower. Seeing this as the analogy to the lives we face, there are too many scales for you to come top in all.

As for creators doing the judging, depends on your definition of such things. For me it feels like an inner self with a plan which is not consciously available to me. I feel clever if I see a pattern that outlines where it is going, but it would happen if I know it or not. I think it is the same for all. There is perhaps peace and benefit in being aligned with the plan, but it does also make it less of a challenge. But I could also choose my own path and it would be up to that higher self to go with me if it wishes.



I think our "score" (although I would not consider it a competitive score, or one dimensional), determines our positioning right now as well as post death, I do not think death is where the score is tallied, we carry it all the time and it affects us right now - death just changes the game. But who knows, death I cannot recall except by some strong belief brought on by DMT and OOB experiences.



I am not so sure that Lucidity mucks up the agenda, depends whether that agenda is intended to be conscious or not, or if you just spend your lucidity indulging physical desires. In Lucid dreaming you have almost a direct line to deeper inner knowledge and direction as a conscious choice. But I am not going to put down the need to listen and understand your normal dreams, I think lucid dreamers generally do spend more time listening to normal dreams than being lucid, and also probably have cause to give them more credence than your average dreamer.



"Don't concentrate on the finger or you will miss all the heavenly glory". A great quote, especially as it is about "feeling" and emotional content. I have often wanted to say to Christians who suggest that they should be like Jesus - that Jesus is their signpost pointing to where they should be, don't try to be a signpost.

I would balance what you say (which I agree with), with the fact that you cannot see where the signpost points to unless you read it. And sometimes when in a sea of signposts pointing in all directions you sometimes have to immerse yourself in them until you choose a direction.

Hey Jees, thanks for your reply.

Your hope for disagreement has come true, lol. But your point about the handling of differences is quite true.

Let's examine how a few "masters" dealt with disagreement. Did they simmer in it and laugh? Did they cherish it? We don't have evidence for that, but given that they were effective teachers, they must have been at least somewhat kind and good humored with those they disagreed with, as one can't be otherwise and expect to change someone's mind. On the other hand, confrontation has great value when it comes to communication, and the evidence indicates that the "masters" engaged in a lot of confrontation. The evidence we have about them is that they used logic and argument to defeat opposing teachings, though I agree with you that they'd have done this with grace.

For example:

Shankara is widely considered to be the foremost Hindu philosopher. To promote what he believed true, he walked almost the length and breadth of India visiting many of the major teachers of his day. His visits often included publicly debating that teacher, defeating them, and then converting them. It was a major way he taught, by correcting what he saw as untruths being taught by the teachers around him.

Buddha argued aggressively against many teachers of his day. Most of their names and what they were teaching are only known to us today because of accounts in the suttas of Buddha eviscerating their teachings.

Nisargadatta preached very powerfully and eloquently about love, he'd also get in yelling arguments with students, and occasionally throw someone out of satsang.

Jesus argued the Pharisees in the streets. He pissed off a lot of people. They soon killed him.

Socrates debated in the streets as well. He pissed off a lot of people. The Athenians were more sophisticated and tolerant, but eventually they killed him.

If someone thinks they have the truth, they don't typically sit back and cherish the difference between what they consider true and what they see as false. They attempt to eliminate falsehood by teaching what they see as true, and by arguing against falsehood. This behavior is very consistent among "masters."

But why?

Suffering. False teachings and erroneous beliefs directly cause suffering. The truth allows one to alleviate their suffering and then help others to do the same. Relieving suffering is the name of the game.

I've been working very, very, very hard at finding the truth and alleviating my own suffering for decades now and I can confirm that the truth works. I can now see how the falsehood and delusion that I was immersed in when I was younger directly caused suffering. From the point of view of one who's developed enough self-awareness to know all this as reality, the truth is very precious, and we typically abhor falsehood to the point that we're willing to die to get the truth out. I certainly am. In this day and age promoting the truth is unlikely to end in death unless one lives in an Islamic country. For me, it involves a lot of hard work, mostly in the form of study and writing, self-purification, meditation, and also leading others, so a pretty typical life for someone who's self-realized.

Thanks for the reply upwaysidedown, I'll get to it in a separate post...

Thank you for the clear reply Yogi.

Ah, our difference lies mostly in who/when we call a master. Thank you for explaining, those are indeed historically considered 'masters'.

This is just a very personal view of me no more: to consider a master those having no problem quenching their emotions as they recognize themselves constantly in everyone. I realize this doesn't match with what other people consider 'mastery'.

By the way, the point of my post was actually not completely about that.
You said the (known) masters disagree thus there are flaws in their system to reach 'enlightenment?'. If their system was ultimate, then they would agree.

Therefore my response: they don't have to agree to prove something. They could easily disagree and that would be natural, but potentially gain their merit by the way they handle their differences and set the mark there. TBH some known historical masters do not reach that feat, and therefore I'd call them rather teachers, good teachers, whatever teachers. Yet anyone can call them anything.

Thanks for the thoughtful word exchange

Hey Jees, that's a reasonable definition, true mastery has many facets.

But wait, are you saying you know of "teachers", thought to be "masters", who could deal with their emotions and interactions perfectly, yet were still trying to prove something? I can't imagine that's possible outside of someone's who's absurdly skilled at masking(hiding) their true emotions, such as a psychopath.

Any examples of someone like that? If I've even understood you.

There's a related example of Jesus taking a whip into the temple and making his point by cracking it, turning over the money changers' tables, scolding them and driving them out. Did he fail to handle his differences well with those around him? Was he trying to prove something egoically? Or did he simply do what was required to shake people from their stupor of greed? Communication must sometimes be very confrontational to achieve an effect. If Jesus was in truth, it might have been the best thing to do to crack the whip. So, I'm not so sure he wasn't acting perfectly as was called for by the situation. A few excerpts from the Pathwork Lectures on healthy righteous anger: theguidespeaks.org/the-qas/vol-4/healthy-anger/

The Pathwork considers the motivation behind an action to in many cases be more important than the action itself. Does the teacher want to be right in order to elevate themselves above others? To feel superior by putting down others? Or do they only wish to communicate truths that they know to have great value, and which will help others? If it's the latter, then even getting angry and using a whip to convey your point could be the right thing to do, if it was done with love.

And yeah, thanks to you as well Jees, I rarely get to speak with anyone about such matters. This is a good thread...

Right up until I go and wreck it.

Let's see if the thread survives...

Well, upwaysidedown, don't say I didn't warn you. Unfortunately, little of value can be conveyed in short form. Given the path you indicated you're taking at the beginning of the thread, reading this little essay will actually be worth your time. I am quite experienced in what you intend to do. Meditation instructions are in there, and ways you can make decent progress without much seated practice.






What I meant by "masters" is just beings who've become very good at meditating. They're clearly not all in possession of complete knowledge of reality, only by degree.

Ok, here's an example of what I mean by "truth": Free will either exists, sometimes exists, or never exists. If it does exist, it's either limited to some degree, or we are equal with the absolute, and free will is unlimited. The truth of free will is not easy to come by, as anyone at the beginning of the path has only minimal awareness of how they're actually using their will. Still, I don't recommend that anyone believe anything that follows. As with everything, I recommend that reality be discovered for oneself. I can see how hallucinogens could easily result in believing that no truth exists. I also know there are ways to move forward towards reality from such a belief system.

It's either true that free will exists to whatever degree, or it's true that it doesn't.

If any of the following bores you, things do get more exciting below, after where tseuq is quoted.

The following cannot all be true.


Some of the various teachings on free will:

* Nisargadatta: Free will has never existed, it is a delusion. Everything is a spontaneous manifestation of the absolute.

* Adi Shankara and Ramana Maharshi: Free will exists, but only until one's ego is gone. At that point individuality and free will are gone, along with the karmic cycle of birth as a human being, suffering and death. If you look at this carefully it's either illogical, or God is evil. The simple logic which dictates this: If in a perfect state free will and individuality don't exist, then the only way we could have become imperfect with free will, individuality and a cycle of birth, suffering and death is if God created us to be imperfect, suffering individuals, with free will. What kind of God would create massive suffering? Shankara and Ramana were never even tempted to glance in the direction of such logic as they took the Vedas to be scripture. To them, anything in the Vedas is true.

* Buddha: Free will exists, but it is not absolute. If one does something negative there is a mysterious mechanism which keeps track of it, and will eventually visit the negative effect upon one at some future point. This karmic mechanism is unavoidable. So, everything one experiences is generated by one's thoughts, emotions, attitudes and beliefs, in concert with the mechanism governing karma.

* Jesus, A Course in Miracles and the Pathwork Lectures: These three teachings are philosophically identical. That philosophy is that free will is absolute. Everything which one experiences is generated by one's own thoughts, emotions, attitudes and beliefs. The trouble is that we are not fully self-aware, and so we lack awareness of how we're creating our realities. In this philosophy one's being is infinite. So, if we work towards making our awareness infinite, making it penetrate all areas of our being, then we can come to understand how we're creating our lives. Once awareness of how we're mis-creating in a certain area of our lives is had, we can then fix this mis-creation. After this process of healing is complete, we may then create whatever life we wish in whatever dimension we wish. In this philosophy the mechanism which creates bad karma is egoic guilt, essentially bad karma is unnecessary self-punishment. Jesus illustrated this principle in the parable of the Prodigal Son. The son thinks he's in trouble with dad. He comes home to find that not only is he not in trouble, but that his return is considered cause to party. The son squandering his wealth was metaphor for our mis-creation, we've squandered our creative power by creating negative experiences and negative states, thus squandering our potential to have a perfect life. The party is a metaphor for the power to create whatever life you wish. Returning home is a metaphor for becoming self-aware and regaining control over what one is creating, and creating a perfect life. In infinity there are infinite possibilities for positive creation, as well as infinite possibilities for negative creation. There's no need to have any negative creation. In this philosophy it's a matter of choice, but the ability to choose rests upon a very high degree of self-awareness.


At best, only one of these teachings is accurate.


What about karma? Let's compare:

* Nisargadatta: There is no karma. It is ultimately an illusion generated by Brahman. All beautiful, loving and good things, as well as all horrors and all evil, are the natural unfolding of Brahman's infinite being. Individuality and free will are completely illusory, so there can be no karma, only the illusion of it.

* Shankara and Ramana: God keeps track of all deeds. Then God eventually punishes one for bad deeds. Ramana even taught that sometimes God metes out one's punishment through an enlightened being or an avatar. Shankara and Ramana believed in individuality and free will, but they believed that the goal was a perfected state where individuality and free will cease to exist. If one applies logic to this belief system, then one sees that if we'd originally been created perfectly, it would be impossible for us to do wrong, and lacking free will it would be impossible for us to become imperfect on our own. So one wonders, why is God punishing beings he created, for being as he created them to be, for bad karma that he is essentially responsible for the creation of? The topic is of course never addressed.

* Buddha: There's an unseen mechanical force which keeps track of all actions, and then sometime later, by unknown laws, perhaps when it's convenient, metes out karma.

* Jesus, A Course in Miracles, and the Pathwork Lectures: In this philosophy time, space and matter are illusory, completely immaterial. As such, what appears to occur in them can never harm one's true being, as they are nothing more than an appearance produced by that being. So, anything that happens, no matter how unpleasant, is completely harmless. Also, no one can do anything to you which you haven't willed done to you, however subconscious that will is. In other words, if you were a Jew in Nazi Germany and they rounded you up, you created that situation. Why would you do that? Guilt. It's a function of the ego. The ego believes that it has harmed other beings, when the evils it may have been engaged in for eons were actually harmless. The ego even feels guilty for simply creating imperfectly, not just horrors, but anything imperfect. In other words all the Nazi's will probably end up punishing themselves at some point, in some dimension, essentially reenacting the Holocaust all over again if no one teaches them the truth, if they go on believing they harmed someone. Just like what happened to the Jews. They felt guilty for past sins, then they punished themselves. Both parties were insane. Ultimately it comes down to fear of God. That is sustained through the lack of awareness of God's true nature, in other words lack of awareness of our own true nature. Essentially in this philosophy there is no mechanism to keep track of bad karma, and to administer punishment for it, except for the delusional ego. As soon as this is fully understood and accepted by everyone, we can all party. This is why the philosophy of forgiveness is logical. Because no harm has actually ever been done, only a harmless illusion generated though a process of co-creation. What this philosophy is saying is that the Buddhist and Hindu conceptions of karma are actually forms of egotism which create massive levels of unnecessary suffering.


Bhikkhu Bodhi is a good example. He's a Buddhist monk. He's had a chronic pain condition for about forty years. He's been to every sort of doctor, none of them can identify a cause. He believes it's bad karma from past lives, pain he's inflicted on other beings. The condition started about three years after he became a monk. Did it start because he deserves it, or because he developed a powerful belief that he would go through all his bad karma? A belief that he would experience every pain he's ever inflicted. That's what he believes, and it may have come true. Is a mysterious mechanism that kept track of all his past actions, as well as the amount of pain they inflicted, inflicting this pain on him? Or is he experiencing the pain because he believed he would?

One can't really believe such a thing is even possible until one experiences the power of belief firsthand. When one has suspended all belief through meditation, and achieves a no-mind state(the fourth jhana), and then the function of gravity and the laws of motion are altered, and one flies around, this sort of thing begins to seem more reasonable.

I've experienced literal miracles nine times(one was witnessed, not performed). No drugs involved. Many Buddhists have reported them. Check the Iddhipada-vibhanga Sutta. Hiroshi Motoyama reported them. He's ninety now. He's not a kook, the guy has two advanced degrees from a major university, a PhD in Philosophy and Literature, and a more advanced degree, a LittD, a Doctor of Literature, in Psychology. The Nexus' own Avatar of Infinity has reported having experienced miracles. I've met one other guy too. He was a hippy though, no one would believe him. I knew there was something different about the guy right off, and then he was able to keep up in conversation about reality without sounding like he didn't actually get it. That's very odd, so I asked in a roundabout way, sure enough. What all of us have in common is meditation. Even Jesus, what do you think he was doing for forty days in the desert? Fucking about I'm sure.

Why don't more people talk about this, or demonstrate miracles? Because creating them is super fucking hard. Jesus was a freak, guy had mad skills. What would I say? Here, watch me very closely as I meditate all day long for weeks on end, hopefully you'll see a miracle. Can I even produce one if the observer disbelieves? With only eight in eleven years I don't have a good track record, so I would never mention them in public. I've told almost no-one. Avatar of Infinity says his family has witnessed one of his. No one would believe them.






I'm not sure how tseuq is defining "I am experiences", but those which are heterogeneous and impermanent are not real direct experiences of the I AM, the true Self. Perhaps tseuq was referring to life experiences, and how we all choose to create different lives. If the "I am experiences" referred to include things such as experiencing oneself as being male or female, young or old, smart or stupid, and so on, those are egoic delusions.

The actual I AM is one, and infinite, but it's commonly spoken of as having two aspects. Awareness is one of these aspects. The other has been called by various names, but they refer to the same thing: Energy, creation, appearance, illusion, prakriti, vibration. Awareness and energy are not two things, that's a somewhat unfortunate misconception and verbal convention. The I AM is a timeless, spaceless field which vibrates, thus causing an appearance to arise, such as the appearance of matter, a planet called earth, time and space, a universe, etc. The Awareness is what's Vibrating. It is the vibrations, and the awareness of them. They're one thing. Perhaps it's similar to the concept of a quantum field. The metaphor of a field is common in Hinduism, and was used by Jesus as well. Buddhists have different ways of saying the same thing, they call it "The Ground of Being" in Dzogchen, and "Citta-matra", which means "mind only", and "Buddha nature" or "Buddha mind", the last three from Mahayana.

Again, it would be foolish to believe any of this, but, the actual qualities of the field can be experienced directly and profoundly in ways that can - at best - only be hinted at with words. This can be done in a sober state. I'm not sure if it can be done as profoundly on psychedelics, but maybe. It's wise to do what it takes to have these experiences, to see if what the greatest teachers have said is true. Imagine walking down the street, and suddenly all perception of time, space and matter just vanish, and then never really come back. It's unspeakable, no words can describe it. Nisargadatta would insist that time, space and matter were unreal, but try as I might, I could never fully comprehend what he was talking about. Instantly, the first thing I said when it happened was, "Oh fuck! So, that's how it works!"

(Incidentally, when this happened I'd yet to read A Course in Miracles, so I didn't have familiarity with any teaching that would have provided me with a firm grounding from which to think that time, space and matter are unreal. I did have the statements of Nisargadatta, but he's not all that compelling. Regardless, they went away. I'm not sure if this experience would've been entirely convincing had I not already experienced several miracles though. When gravity, or the laws of motion, or those of themodynamics go away during meditation, then one really starts to reassess reality. Here's a thread where Avatar of Infinity and I discuss such matters a bit: https://www.dmt-nexus.me...=759092&#post759092 I'm not the only one to have such experiences. What myself, Avatar of Infinity, and the other guy I met who'd experienced such things have in common is meditation.)

As the I AM is infinity itself, so belief that diversity is anything but illusory is an egoic delusion. We are all infinite, so we are all perfectly equal. Temporary experience means nothing. Appearance means nothing. It is literally - nothing. And yes, I'm suggesting there are multiple infinities. All at one with each other. All having their own free will.

For this next bit "avatar" means either a human body, whether your own or another's, or the appearance an "entity" takes in hyperspace. Infinity means what you are, as you are now, an infinity experiencing an avatar known as your human body against a background of time, space and matter.

"All having their own free will." This phrase implies that if the avatar of another infinity appears in your infinite field, interacting with your avatar, or with your consciousness on a trip, it's only because something in you has created the experience seemingly provided by that other avatar. If you've created good beings coming into your field and someone is kind to you, you're responsible for that. If you've created an evil being in your field, and someone tortures you, then you're responsible for that as well. This is why Jesus said, "Judge not lest ye be judged", because when you judge, you're judging your own creation. If someone hits you, that person couldn't have been in your life and couldn't have hit you unless your will, however unconscious, had created it. It's also one reason it makes sense to turn the other cheek. If another being mistreats you, that being is insane, but it's behavior and presence in your life is only a reflection of your own insanity. For example, notice how some sociopaths horribly mistreat some people they know, but are decent to others, and even nice to some. It's not only the sociopath's will at work, it's co-creation, multiple wills converging.

As Jees just said, " master[s] [are] those [who] have no problem quenching their emotions as they recognize themselves constantly in everyone.", and in every thing for that matter.

And there's the truth. But... you might not know if what's been said is true. I encourage you to find out for yourself. If you don't believe there is any truth, then I assure you, reality is much better than you think, and knowing the truth is worth vastly more than you can imagine, and its worth is vastly more than enough to compensate one for the work needed to know it.

"Creating the best output possible," as tseuq said, is what it's all about.






I've always had an intensely skeptical mindset, and that hasn't changed. It will carry you as far as you can go. Never give up your skepticism, if anything, strengthen it. On the other hand, yeah, you will need accurate teachers. I had a great many teachers. When it came down to it, most of them weren't fully aware of reality, and my intense skepticism was the only thing that saved me from the false aspects of their teachings. I'd distrust them, and just keep pushing forward. If you believe in the power of thought, then make sure you believe that you will find and know the absolute truth. If you don't believe in the power of thought, I'd recommend testing it.

The problem with testing the power of belief is that a subconscious pattern of thought, belief and emotion can prevent you from creating and testing a new one. The Pathwork notes that we can't create effectively if there are opposing currents within us. At best the opposing thoughts, beliefs, emotions, and/or attitudes result in a stalemate. In other words, you can't paper over negativity with positive intention. The negativity will lurk below the surface either fucking up - or preventing the manifestation of - what you're trying to create.

This is where self-awareness comes in. Meditation's necessary for self-awareness, but it can be very helpful to have instructions for how to apply the awareness once it's developed, instructions of how to manage reality. Even though Ramana Maharshi was a pro at meditation, the Pathwork would have helped him. Unfortunately, it didn't exist back then. As such he didn't get a few things, but, he did the best job he could with the degree of truth he had access to with no internet connection.






I agree that not withdrawing from life is the best way to go. You could become fairly good at meditation with minimal seated practice, though you'd have to frequently practice stilling the mind during regular activities where thought isn't required. For example: Driving somewhere you know the route, showering, washing dishes, walking, brushing your teeth, etc. I entered my first satori by meditating super hard while driving a Jeep on a road trip.

The reality you'll discover through meditation is not at all simple to manage. To manage it most effectively you're going to need a map of it. I've studied them all. The Pathwork Lectures are the most complete map available today. I'm intensely skeptical, so I would never say such a thing without having massively verified their accuracy. If you read them, you'll eventually come to the same conclusion. That wouldn't be an easy process, but one well worth it.

A Course in Miracles is an expression of the same truth. It's a simpler exposition of that truth, but presented in more sophisticated language. ACIM does hit harder on the necessary topics of harmlessness, guilt and innocence. It forms the core of the philosophy, while the Pathwork expands that teaching at a very high level of detail into all areas of human life. Fuck around with Buddhism and Hinduism all you want to, but if you were to undertake an in depth study of everything, you'll find they're quite primitive - but more crucially, you'd find many flaws.

It's a question of how fast do you want to perfect your life. That's what all these teachings are about, Hindu and Buddhist included. If you want something else, then go elsewhere. If you want to perfect your life, to dream the best dream you can, then how quickly and thoroughly do you want to accomplish this? How fast do you want to end all of your suffering, and how fast do you want to access all of your creative power, all your psychic power, all your power to live a great life?


If you decide not to give the benefit of the doubt to what I'm saying a few things can happen:

* You could get sidetracked by an inaccurate and less effective version of the path, and not make nearly as much progress as you could otherwise.

* You could never really figure anything out, and just kind of give up. Perhaps you'd give up for lifetimes, but eventually - perhaps very gradually over many lifetimes - you'll see that suffering is optional. Then you'll have a choice between the suffering you're experiencing, and what you'll have to do to relieve that suffering. You'll eventually be forced to take the path to relieve your suffering. If what the Pathwork says about incarnations becoming progressively more difficult as one progresses spiritually is true, it might be awhile before you're forced down the path by a really unpleasant incarnation, or this might already be happening. The increasing difficultly of incarnations is said to happen because as one matures one becomes able to handle facing more of their negativity during a given lifetime. If this is already happening to you, then going through is the only way out, going through by - and with - awareness.

* You could replicate my study of all the various teachings, compare them against your experience of life, and then eventually reach the same conclusions I have. Going this way, depending on how hard you work, will consume a decade or more of your life, a lot of it spent studying relative nonsense. If you go this way you better be really fucking committed, and really fucking smart, if you hope to succeed.


I advise against believing a single thing I say. There's little value in faith when compared with the value of direct experiential knowledge. Given your goals, the best you could do is to give what I'm saying the benefit of the doubt, and then begin your investigation of reality where I recommended. Once you've learned that philosophy thoroughly, and tested it against reality, just move on to something else if you find it lacking. You won't. I promise. If you don't get really into all this stuff, and rather take it easy, than even if you take my advice it could take decades to make really substantial progress. Regardless of what path you follow, some amount of meditation will be a necessity if you wish to progress at a reasonable rate, even if you choose a path filled with dead ends and nonsense, as so many do.

For a beginner, a more or less continuous stream of thought suppresses awareness of thoughts and feelings which exist at deeper levels of being, held there by repression, by what is ultimately fear of fear, and fear of emotional pain. Unfortunately, these unaware thoughts and feelings have just as much creative power as conscious thoughts and feelings, and often much more, as awareness of them wouldn't have been repressed if they weren't quite strongly negative and unpleasant. These are the thoughts are feelings which create all forms of suffering and imperfection.

When anyone has a bad trip on an entheogen, that trip is caused by material in their subconscious mind, not by set and setting as is commonly believed. Positive set and setting can be used to keep such material repressed, and often are. Think about it. Why would a perfect environment, perhaps even with someone right there to hold your hand, be necessary to not have a bad trip. It's only necessary if there's something negative deep inside you. A completely healthy being could have a good trip on the heaviest dose of ayahuasca or acid anywhere they could have a good day. With meditation it even becomes possible to have a bad trip stone cold sober and in a totally safe everyday environment.

If you read the Pathwork, you'll learn the great value of actively willing such unpleasant experiences, so as to process and transform the negative energies and beliefs deep inside you which are creating everything imperfect about your existence.

So, the truth is that one can become aware of repressed negativity even without drugs, simply by becoming proficient at stilling their mind, and then applying that skill as much as they reasonably can during everyday life. Doing this does not require seclusion, though practicing seated meditation is helpful. In fact, if one goes into relative seclusion to meditate, they would not have nearly as many opportunities to encounter their negative creation. Engagement in the world allows one to face and go through their fears by facing and going through the negative situations their subconscious fears and negative emotions have generated.

Doing so is enormously healing. In psychology it's known as exposure and extinction. Proper meditation makes the exposure and extinction already available in everyday life vastly more effective. I'm certain of this because when I started to meditate I didn't believe in any model of reality that could have instilled a preconception as to what the effects of meditation would be. What happened is that meditation made me vastly more aware of previously repressed negative emotions during everyday life. Sometimes it was extremely unpleasant, everyday interactions would occasionally elicit even feelings of terror and horror, and they often elicited high levels of fear that I'd never encountered before meditating. You can't heal without becoming aware of what's already inside you. Read my sig, I didn't believe it going in, in fact I had no expectations, but yet it happened.

Also, if you meditate entheogens have a more powerful effect. It's a good idea to take a few years off to develop a powerful capacity for meditation before considering going back though. Entheogens aren't required, but they may be useful. I'm still not sure how useful. Meditation is very useful. After I began meditating I would hit the weed pipe if it was being passed among friends who smoked, and very rarely I'd smoke on my own after meditation. If you do so, keep your mind as still as possible. I'm certain weed helped me uncover what was inside me, because whatever I was feeling would often massively intensify. Like I said though, I was able to become aware of even repressed terror and horror without any substances, so they're not necessary.

My guess is that entheogens are completely unnecessary if one's awesome at meditation. But, they may still be useful. My interest in entheogens these days is in using them as a magnifying glass to see if I can get awareness of my remaining negativities - IOW to go through residual psychic pain - faster than would be possible through everyday life, but I'm honestly not sure if I'll have the time for it. I haven't smoked weed regularly in years. My sister visited from CO with gummy bears recently. I felt some anxiety, much less than back in the day, but it was there, hence the renewed interest in entheogens. Before I started to meditate, negative states on weed were minimal to none. Then, after I began meditating, in the right situations negative states became extremely intense as I stilled my mind and became aware of repressed feelings. My best experience on entheogens was of an infinite wall of pain which I encountered over nine years ago on a heavy dose of Azurescens mushrooms. It may have been more healing, and certainly less confusing, if I'd understood reality better back then, and also known that keeping a completely still mind would allow for more healing. Not that I had the capacity for that, but I could've done much better, my mind was still during the wall of pain, but not for the rest of the trip.








These two statements align perfectly with the Pathwork. At least read through the titles of all the lectures to get a feel for them. The old site is best: http://web.archive.org/w...sObtainingUnedited.html Try to ignore the references in a small handful of the titles to God and Jesus. The Pathwork addresses Jesus, but very minimally. I was still so anti-Christian when I first came across them that I disregarded them for many years. I kept coming back to have another peek for whatever reason, and each time they'd slap me with some bit of reality. Eventually this repeated slapping became too uncanny to be denied. They are not Christian in any conventional sense. Of course the average Christian doesn't practice much of what Jesus was teaching, even though he simplified it so much.

What you'll eventually find is that all of life is a dream. The trick is to gain control of it, to dream your whole life lucidly. The Pathwork and ACIM are the best instructions presently available on planet earth to accomplish that, bar none. I promise.

Eventually you'd be wise to get one of the versions of A Course in Miracles that's been edited by Doug Thompson. A very draconian edit was done by someone who'd been told not to, so working from the original copies, Doug restored the text to what it was meant to be.

The form of meditation you'll want to use has gone by a ton of different names: Michael Langford's teaching describes it as Awareness Watching Awareness. The Pathwork describes is as Focused Emptiness. In other words, keep your mind as empty as possible, but very focused, not allowing it to drift at all towards unconsciousness. What is it that's being focused? It's your own present awareness. The awareness which is aware of sight and sound, which is aware of your thoughts and feelings. Don't watch thoughts, don't focus on breathing, don't focus on the body. Just still the mind and let your awareness rest in itself. This form of meditation was described simply in Psalms as "Be still and know God."
Like I said, stilling the mind can be done in daily life while doing anything that doesn't require thought. Don't watch the breath, don't recite a mantra, just still the mind as you go about your business and awareness will do its work. If you practice enough that is.

Want to see an actual miracle, a no shit, totally sober, violation of perhaps multiple physical "laws"? The reality of the dream of life cannot be known without such experiences. This form of meditation is how to get them.

Such experiences are the reason I bothered with all this. Through meditation I learned that everything I'd ever believed was wrong, and I wanted to know the truth.

Hope I didn't waste both our time. Good luck.

yogi,

Wow. I can also invoke Jesus by saying "Jesus! that was a long post". But it was worth reading.

I can say for most of it that you were preaching to the converted, but putting the whole thing there is worth while and thank you for putting so much time into something.

I will definitely check out the pathway lectures, this is something I had not discovered before. Currently I am highly resonating with Jane Roberts/Seth which from what you are saying seems very much in agreement. What I enjoy about that particular model is that it is more practical rather than meditative.

Don't get me wrong I am not against meditation, I have done it from an early age and have more recently questioned its purpose. I regularly exist without sub-vocalising my thoughts, generally only sub-vocalising if I am composing something to say to someone. But sitting, is something I do not find exciting, with eyes open I get too distracted, and with eyes closed I get visions which I chase looking for meaning in them. Its more about time to do it. Perhaps the pathway stuff will get me back into it. There is definitely a current block against direct meditation, whether this is an issue I need to resolve, or a message to me about focusing on something else I do not know.

I have no interest in creating miracles - I have already seen this proof in my life as well as multiple occasions of "knowing", reading thoughts and passing messages. I am fairly successful in controlling my life and attracting all things I need (such as this interaction with you). The limitations only being what I can be willing to get off my arse for; in this sense in working on my beliefs, but I feel a strong sense of myself as the writer of the story, and an actor/player of a game - in both cases continuity of the rules keep asserting themselves, wanting me to not be a cheat the game and have a lack of continuity in the plot. Something just said to me "Breaking the forth wall would be interesting" not sure if I understand where that fits in my analogy, sounds very interesting though.

No, lets say this. If I really want something - then I go get it, or make it come to me. If I know what I want and meditation brings it - then I will be there and meditate and will master it. But right now, I am not sure that is the path - which is why I am not doing that. But I have had satori (or what I imagine is such), I have felt the "I am" or imagine I have, these seem like "ends", I don't want ends - I want the journey. So yes, I am a bit of a spiritually spoiled child, and this moment of boredom and lack of direction is annoying!

References to Jesus don't bother me now - I am emotionally almost over the rebellion against popular Christianity which those of us brought up within its culture either have, ARE Christian or really don't care.

So in summary of a response:

"I'll checkout the pathway lectures! and think more about meditation"

"Breaking the forth wall would be interesting"

That's where time, space and matter go bye bye and you become infinity, you become the field. It's everyone's destiny. Meditation helps a lot.

Jane Roberts and Seth are good.

Eva Pierrakos and the Pathwork Lectures are phenomenal.

As are Helen Schucman and A Course in Miracles. ACIM is not about how to create miracles. It's about how to perfect your life, which involves the type of miracles that have actual value. The type I've discussed so far have no value beyond illustrating the nature of reality. They're parlor tricks. It's good that you have no interest in them. When you eventually buy ACIM you must get a version edited by Doug Thompson.

Nice work on manifesting a good reply.

Distraction by visions is an issue I still have in meditation. The Pathwork (not Pathway, it might be telling that you've misread the word "work" ) will help you figure out just about everything about life that there is to know. As will A Course in Miracles. Neither recommend endless meditation, only a bit here and there.

I'd worry more if you weren't spoiled. It sounds like you have a good base to build on.


There's a Pathwork Lecture open in a tab on my browser that discusses resistance to meditation. I'll find it for you.