^^^^^^^^^ conceptual pwnage.

As far as getting to a point where no looking "out" is possible, that's where looking in begins and continues the infinite loop, as in the fractal posted above, although ultimately there's no delineation beyond your own judgements of "inside" or "outside".

Based on my experience, this may be as you described here. When I was at a given level (understanding the formula), I saw how the fractal came into life. I didn't see the entire fractal, all of the possibilities. I was shown some examples, to understand that I had a chance to discover them all if I wanted. But I also understood that this would be impossible (as the possible cases are infinite in number). But - and this is the gist of it - this was not a problem anymore. What happened in my being at such points was something like this: "OK now I see how these lower worlds are created from this one. Therefore I don't have to spend any more time with them. I could if I wanted to, I could get into the details again (and get lost in them, for the sake of science), but there is a better way: upwards. I can now let myself to let go of these lower worlds because I understood how they were created." And with every such step the burden on me got lighter and lighter.

This is the first argument here which I don't understand. So it may hold the answer.

"As far as getting to a point where no looking "out" is possible, that's where looking in begins"

Clear. This point is quite far up the ladder (this is already in the prequel to the reunion of Creator and Creature).

"and continues the infinite loop"

Where is the infinite loop? I don't see the loop here.

"although ultimately there's no delineation beyond your own judgements of "inside" or "outside"."

Ehm. So at one level I realize that the subject/object dichotomy was also a creation and become (all of it becomes) one being (Adam Kadmon?), who from then on follows a predestined way of steps towards enlightenment. A process of getting-into-the-know-of-everything. Deconstruction on auto-pilot. The delineation between "inside" and "outside" doesn't appear again (it was left behind while ascending).

Here’s what I believe:

Whether you move upwards, downwards, left or right, in or out, or inside out, isn’t the point. The point is that we are on an eternal journey. We have always been on this journey and will always be. And as we journey, we grow. We have always been growing. There is no direction to our journey because there is no destination.

There is no final destination, but there is eternal growth.

Here is the loop (now before you say the starting 'brot is the "highest" level, allow me to say that such a starting point is necessity only in a video, not in reality):


This is also why the mandlebrot set is a better metaphor than the number line as far as infinite reality goes.

This topic has some very interesting points and knowledge, thanks for the good read. Here's a video I haven't come across yet until today, which made my day. Hope you enjoy and I strongly agree with Mckenna's last words.

Nature Loves Courage

If you once peek into this secret then afterwards you see it everywhere: all phenomena is a mirror of this same root idea (self-similarity of the fractal). In this way, yes.

*edit: yeah, I see now what you mean. not just the root idea. the whole process. it repeats itself, ad infinitum, in both time and space.

Oh wow.. This thread is still going!

There have been some interesting points that have been brought up.

There has to be a starting point to all of this.. don't you think?
Something had to have started this process, so logically there has to be an ultimate point.

No, I don’t think there has to be a starting point. As human beings, we can’t truly grasp eternity, but I do believe that “all of this” is eternal.

There are even some theories in physics that suggest there are “membranes” in a multi-dimensional space of some sort that, when they come into contact with each other, create a local “big bang”. The theory implies that these membranes have always existed and that our universe is one of infinitely many.



Look at the monster you've created!

Yea I've loved reading the cyclic 'brane models I've stumbled across so far. They resonate very strongly with some of my trips and provide excellent food for thought.

Some of the things being said in this topic are blowing my mind! lol

I would have to say that people don't like Ball because it seems he is attacking Mckenna. Mckenna does have a fan base, but I'm glad he does because he was spreading information. His lectures and books are spread amazing information about a little know substance. I think that his fame is one of his best aspects because he can get out information about mind expansion. I also find his voice slightly annoying and I'd prefer to hear his lectures without background noises. I respect Mckenna because he spread out many ideas that eventually came to me and told me about DMT.

Ball does have some good ideas but It seems more like the conclusions of an infrequent drugs user. My first few trips on any psychedelic causes me to believe certain things deeply. With repeated attempts I'll see contradictions and changes in the 'message'. He sounds like he tried DMT and moved on to 5meo. Then he did a massive 5meo dose and came out thinking he was all knowing. His ideas seem reminiscent of a cult my friend's mom was in. In a cult, there is no open-mindedness. Like most religions, there is ONE truth that only the top honcho seems to completely grasp.

I have tried 5meo in the form of smoked bufo poison but I didn't find the effects to be any stronger than dmt. DMT can also make you 'see' ultimate truths if you let it. I have seen things on DMT and gotten messages that I took as 100% truth. But, many of these messages are overwritten and changed by future trips. I don't think we can ever bring back even 1% of the dmt space with all of our experinces combined. There are just too many possibilities. I have become very open-minded in the past few years, and because I have no concrete beliefs, I am constantly changing my beliefs and sometimes I'm very confused. But, I'd rather be open to everyone's interpretation of dmt, altered states, and spirituality, then know I have all the answers. Because I may think I know the answer to everything but I'd just be closing my mind to other people's ideas.

http://psypressuk.com/20...-entheological-paradigm/

This article is a sort of responce to Martin Balls origional one.

Also like to add, that what Martin Ball is saying, is NOT new. For him to act like he was the first one to put forth this idea of ego and non ego etc, as if this is what humanity has been waiting for for soooo long is rediculous and arrogant. Just becasue he calls it the "entheological paradigm" does not mean it's new. Leary said all this stuff before this guy was even born.

Maybe he is not that well read in psychedelic literature..I dont know but his ideas are not new..Nick Sand had said nearly the same thing about DMT just without the ego inflation in a essay he wrote years ago, in relation to all these alien experience and whatnot.

"I would have to say that people don't like Ball because it seems he is attacking Mckenna"

Wouldnt it be nice for Martin Ball if it really were that simple?..no it's not ONLY becasue he is attacking mckenna, its becasue what he is saying IMO is half truth, and half a giant cop-out.

Kinda sucks that Mckenna becasme the scapegoat of the entire article..

Imagine aliens landed on the white house lawn today..what then would Martin Ball say?..would he dismiss them?.."oh thats all just ego games!"..LMAO ok..well...

Martin says that he is not "energetically imressed" with alien abductees(apparent ones anyway)..and that THAT is why they are inauthentic..well..how the hell are they sopposed to act?

If YOU were abducted by aliens and went through some of the stuff these people report do you think youd be walking around completely calm, collected, and in youre "centre"?

Compare some "abductees" to rape victims..I doubt all of them would "energetically impress" Martin Ball either..but hey, maybe they were just raped by their own egos?..

Im not saying aliens are or arent real..Im saying the explainations he comes up with are just..weird at best..

I once say a UFO along with a group of well over 100 people at a festival one night..while completely sober. One of the bands that were playing a set even stopped to look at the thing. It was as big as the moon in the sky..it was quite obvious that this was no helicopter or plane, and made maneuvers I cant imagine any known aircraft making. I dunno what the military has these days so I wontspeculate too much..It was just a UFO..and it was definatily NOT my individual ego projecting this.

Im sorry the more I think about this whole article the more I just find it sort of arrogant, filled with over confident assumptions that seem silly.

The sad part is I, and Im sure many others agree with the central theme of his idea, that all is one..Martin Ball is an articulate guy that is certain, but he seems to have gotten a bit carried away with his one sided arguement here, choosing a sort of monotheism, and fogetting that you cant have monotheism without it decending into polytheismt and animism, and vice versa..to argue one is more valid than the other is an ontological cop-out, and seems to miss the whole point.

I always assume my 'brilliant' ideas are not new. People have been thinking and taking entheogens for thousands of years. There are thousands of great philosophers out there and in history. They will never be known because they didn't preach their ideas. Some didn't have the tools and skills to pass down their information.

I think Martin Ball would be much more successful if he kept his arguments tight and on track. Instead he seems to be obsessed and he goes about his article very high and mighty. He should've tried to convert the Mckenna fans instead of rejecting them. More people are going to choose Mckenna over this dude anyday.

Hi fractal

You nailed the issue on your post. However I would just like to stress your remarks:



One great book that puts a context on all these alien issues is "Supernatural" by Graham Hancock. I'm not a big fan of his other writings, but this one is a pretty good read to those interested in aliens and DMT. Hancock goes into the beginnings of it all, from cave-men to Rick Strassman, passing by several Shamanic currents and the use of several substances throughout history. One of the main issues that he tracks from the beginning of times is that those alien experiences are ubiquitous.

Despite being long it is a good read. Hancock is a nice and pleasant writer and knows how to tell a good story.

Here's a good review of the book: http://www.andrewcollins..._Supernatural_review.htm

I just saw this thread and am a bit late to the game, but here's my 2 cents...

I have listened to all of Ball's podcasts and bought his Being Human book. I have also listened to several gigs of McKenna and read True Hallucinations. I like what both people have to say in general.

On Martin's side, for those who haven't listened to all his 'casts, he feels he has the absolute truth because a particular session led him to dowsing with a feather of his. He was able to do this while sober after that session, and could ask specific questions and an energy would move the feather around, lead him to things in his house, etc. This quick explanation may sound hokey, but he gives a very detailed description and I would say if all that happened to me, I may feel like I had a part of the truth as well.

Personally, I think his tone is abrasive and off-putting, and I debate this with my wife occasionally. She agrees with Ball in that you can be blunt/confident about things and not be an egomaniac. David Wilcock is a similar example. I like a lot of what he has to say, but don't like to see him tout his stuff as the 'best, most awesomest' thing ever all the time. It *shouldn't* discount what they have to say, even though I don't like that method.

I like the energy work that Martin talks about and have started having those types of sessions with n,n. I am interested to see if I too have a change in speaking at some point. I do think one of my personal hang-ups is with not voicing myself well, and I wonder if this work will help me express myself more confidently or not. I DO feel a difference in my breathing and singing already after a few vocal-work sessions. So I can see where Martin is coming from in his criticism of the voice, but I think it's incorrect in McKenna's case. If he were reviewing a speech of mine, perhaps he would be correct (I too have a nasally voice).

It's been a while since I read the article, but the general impression I was left with was that Martin hasn't really listened to much of McKenna's stuff, and he cherry-picked a few clips that were readily available on Youtube to critique. He's probably correct on some of it...but way off on some as well. I do think Martin believes what he says and I don't get the impression he's trying to make a name for himself with this article. I don't understand the reason behind writing it, however. What's the point? (Maybe it was stated in the article and I've just forgotten).

As far as Terence's descriptions, at first I didn't see any similarities. He led me to DMT in the first place and I am very grateful for that, but I didn't get anything more than the carrier wave sound that he described. I had worked with Salvia enough previously however to know that every session is different and was never discouraged and disappointed at not seeing his machine elves, etc. However, with experience, I have had some trips which VERY closely match many of his descriptions. The translucent look, with diffused lighting, and many entities (jelly-fish-like in my mind) that seemed to get right in my face and try to show me what they could produce. They felt like kids to me. Everything self-transformed. So in time, I had some experiences that were very spot-on to McKenna's basic description. And now that I've started the vocal work that Martin talks about, it often feels like it's being expelled out of me from my gut the way McKenna describes the glossolalia sounds. And looking back, when he says "the elves say 'DO THIS', 'LOOK AT THIS'", etc., I now see they were not explicitly saying this in an audible sense, but that was the feeling I took away from it (if I focused on one jelly-fish it would transform into all sorts of wonderful colors/shapes... like my 7-year old saying 'look what I can do!'

So I'm confused Clouds as to why you say McKenna was spreading fantasy and all??? And he talked about a wide range of subjects of which DMT was just one...and it was one that apparently not many people in the West had experience with yet during his time.

Clouds, as far as 5meo, I too am interested in trying it due to Martin's and Oroc's descriptions of it. However, they said that maybe only 5% of the people who take it have the conscious-god experience if I remember correctly (and I'm sure that's a guess on their part). Or more likely, one may have the godhead trip 5% of the time. However, Martin also stated that once he was on his learning path, he found he could use any of the medicines and proceed in a linear fashion...so he'd use Salvia...then n,n...then Aya...then shrooms, etc. It didn't really matter so much which one he took.

Blessings to all.

Reading this it sounds like i'd love to try 5-meo-dmt, i don't care for visuals much at all, im all about the inner feeling...

As I mentioned in the other thread, how amazingly arrogant Martin Ball's responses are.

and having tried 5-meo-dmt, I really disagree that it shows "The Truth", thats such a ridiculous claim that its hard even to want to debate it. It can be amazing, yes, like dmt can be amazing or mushrooms can be amazing or other psychs can be amazing, all in their own way. "The Truth"? Oh the hubris...

I just like the idea of it being less visual, when i first started out on psychedelics i was all about the visuals, the mushrooms couldn't get visual enough for me, unless on nitrous i found when i started taking my spiritual search more seriously that i grew disenchanted with the visuals & preferred more of the ineffable feeling of lightness/bliss.

I'm NOT saying that some people are hung up on visions & not going beyond them hence not growing spiritually, at all, the visions of DMT can be so purifying & go very deep... i can't see myself extracting 5meo from toads so im sure ill lose interest in it as fast as i became interested in it...

I feel like Ball's criticism of McKenna and the opinion of those who agree with him on that matter comes from a lack of comprehension of McKenna's method of communicating his vision(s).

Those "fantasies" Cloud was talking about are nothing else than metaphors, poetry...language. They aren't meant to be taken literaly. Anyone who takes McKenna literaly is a fool.

The problem here is that these people don't seem to realize that the words they are using are also metaphors. Mathematics are using abstract concepts like numbers to express movement and shape.



You can't express the absolute with words. If there is an absolute, that is. To communicate, you need to compare two things. "You cannot SAY the Universe." Therefore, trying to communicate such a state of being, such an experience, requires methaphors, imagery. Some people will use mathematics and logic, some will use energy movement and flow, some will use the archetypes, gods and godesses... others will use poetry and fantasy, imagination, humour and magic.

Ball's criticism of McKenna's views is based on his own lack of imagination, humour and magic...

I like to think that the ability to understand and enjoy all the different languages of the soul is essential to clear communication and understanding of others.

‎"Metaphor is one of a group of problem-solving medicines known as figures of speech which are normally used to treat literal thinking and other diseases." - Grant Morrison