Using that same logic the argument could be made that everything (rather than nothing) is you. Atman = Brahman and all that.

Agreed. In fact I think buddhism and vedanta are two sides of the same coin.

IMO What Buddha realized was that people seeking enlightenment in the form of a higher self were in fact using their ego to pursue something eternal and lasting... Really higher self kind of implies a soul (or lasting sperate part of yourself) to me. What Buddha did was to say look the only way to fully experience the truth of oneness is to give up the concept of a self

For me personally... this was what I needed to jar me awake. I was deeply engaged in yoga philosophy for along time (and I still sort of am), but now I can fully grasp what it means to be fully connected. These aren't my thoughts they are just thoughts. This isn't my life, it's just life, etc.

At first this concept is quite scary and it turns off a lot of people. But once it's fully grasped it is beautiful beyond anything I've ever experienced. Humility and Compassion just naturally follow suit because once you realize the trap you are in you by extension realize the trap others are in and you realize you are one and the same thing.

Also I agree with Jamie. Psychedelics and yoga/meditation are seperate paths, but the two paths can be used together, but for me psychedelics only prove the fully interconnectedness of the universe and consciousness. I mean without the plants producing DMT could you experience hyperspace?

apathetic

If we are honest and sincere in our search for the truth then we have to accept this as a possibility.

There might be one underlying principle which explains everything, or reality might be like an onion with an infinite number of layers. On the one hand, the danger is that we may delude ourselves into thinking we have the answer when we don't. On the other hand, assuming that there is no such answer precludes you from ever finding it.

I used to be a solipsist mystic buddhist type thing, but along the psychedelic line I am finding that solipsism is somehow an ego illusion, although I am not yet able to put words to it. I look at religious traditions and I see how legitimate insights are shrouded in dogma, but I can use the good parts for my practice - think Jesus' forgiveness, Siddhartha's loving-kindness, the Christian desert fathers.

I look at myself as a raindrop rushing towards a lake. Once I hit, there is no more raindrop, only water.

epistemological solipsism, or metaphysical solipsism?

I honestly think that most people here understand all that. I still disagree that there is no self. If someone shoots you in the leg, it is going to hurt, and a starving child is still starving. When I hear people use these examples of a connected universe to claim there is no self I cant help but feel like people are being ridiculous. It is such a heady idea. It is not an either or situation. Of course we are not closed systems. I think the problem here simply lies in how we individually define "self".

It is just obvious to me. If someone punches you in the face, I don't feel it. You feel it. Therefore, no matter how much you rationalize it based on ideas, you still exist and have a self. The problem with these ideas for me is that they are not grounded, therefore they are not practical and probably inadequate the way they are being presented..basically they don't stand up in real life. For the claim that there is no self to have any credibility IMO requires it to be able to integrate somehow in life..and it just doesn't. To claim we are all just tiny open system-reference points within a larger cosmic mind or energy is totally compatable with reality to me, but it does not cancel out my own personal reality..obviously.

Existing as a self does not mean(to me) that you are not also a reference point within a larger universal mind.

If you pick one level over the other, you are still a dualist. Both are true on different levels. I think the importance or significance of one level above another is based only on vantage points.

dogmas and doctrines, semantics and stances aside;

This:





-Pilamaya yelo ❤

The deepest I've gone has probably been in dreams. That sounds odd to most people until i tell them what i dream about on any given night But I never would have gotten there if it hadn't been for a number of other things.

For me its never been about holding one approach up over any others as being the most effective...They're complimentary, or synergistic, and best when combined. Some may be better at certain things, but that also depends on many other life factors, and how you can and do utilize certain techniques at any given point.

If i was to just take psychedelics in the way i take them now, but not engage in these other practices such as meditation, yoga, lucid dreaming, writing, healthy food, and so on... or with having not explored mental/ideological frameworks that i can on some level relate with - which help in integrating, pondering, grounding, expanding ideas, and so on (hopefully without clinging to any particular realitytunnel)- then i feel that my life would not be nearly as balanced, deep, and fulfilling as it is right now. (thats not to say i don't have a really long way to go )

When you drop the dogma there is just many many effective techniques, and many ways of viewing things...getting caught up in words, or specific techniques to the point where it overshadows all others, is sort of missing the point i think. I actually just heard ram dass say: you disregard the trap once you have the fish, just as you can disregard the words once you have the meaning they are attempting to convey.

I guess what i'm trying to say is that i'd forget thinking in terms of 'this path' or 'that path' and just combine everything together into one really dank psychedelic bag of tricks

Would you elaborate? What exactly do you mean the deepest you have gone? Generally I'd consider that to mean the deepest into hyperspace, but I'm guessing your dreams don't take you to hyperspace.

Personally, the "deepest I've gone" was one DMT trip out of the dozens I've undertaken, it was actually my first breakthrough. It had pretty much all the traits of an NDE. Merging with a bright white light, because all of existence all at once while being nothing at the same time (yes, I know it is a paradox)

This was a few years ago, but it is by far the most spiritual experience I've ever had in my life, and possibly the only psychedelic trip I'd describe as spiritual in nature.

The reason I mention this is because the day after my trip when I was drifting off to sleep I had this same "whiting out" experience for a split second completely independent of any drugs. It doesn't surprise me that some have deep experiences while dreaming but I'd love to hear a little more detail.

^^
universecannon is also consuming tons of melatonin and harmalas , so going deep is the only way for him ,

I like to consider myself a spiritual non-religous person. I've had many positive experiences and one kinda bad one. Hypocracy and secrecy cloud many not-so-godly organizations and its tough decerning the right "path" to "choose" I find it difficult to argue against many of the scientific views on our origins, however the most genuine and in tune cultures seem to have predated all this science mumbo jumbo. Almost like we forgot (or were denied) the real truth. We slowly trained our brains to operate on a see and feel wavelength and it would appear (until recently) that we were heading further away every generation. It's just sad that exploring the mind and beyond has become taboo, that the mainstream population jokes at visiting a shaman or smudging your home. Modern religon just doesn't seem to cut it for this guy. So many bits and pieces from various followings seem possible with a little faith, but the more I try to learn and explore ideas the more it seems the truth is inward not outward.

I love and respect everybody especially if they are doing their best to improve themselves. I think there can be peaceful coexistance and tolerance for whatever angle people wanna play on spirituality as long as its non-violent. Then we can grow and share ideas together. I'm pretty sure we all come from the same place anyway.

joedirt, I don't understand how you conclude that a self doesn't exist from the fact that everything is connected. The two concepts seem entirely unrelated to me. I think of myself as a separate individual because I have private experiences (like in jamie's example of personal pain), not because I think I'm not connected to the rest of the universe.

I feel that beliefs (regarding spirituality) can be transient for the most part. But one base belief I have that stays constant is the idea of this reality being a small pixel in a whole picture. I see everything as unified, but I also see the self as real in that it is what I am currently conscious of.

I take my spiritual cues from science these days. Science is spiritual in the sense that it proves the idea of 'one source' as fact. (e.g. The idea of all complexity arising from an infinitesimal moment - sparking a big bang, and that the elements that make my body were forged in the furnaces of dying stars)

You can blow your mind even further once you read a little bit on the unified field (or super string) theory. Perhaps all existence is made up of a multitude of layers; each layer a filter of the base field of energy/waves/consciousness. That is why my experience is this experience; because of the filters the source goes through. Complexity arises from layered filters.

Having said all this, I think it's important to try and remain playful and detached from 'concepts' of what existence is/means. Getting too attached to anything - even a concept of existence - can cause suffering. Have fun exploring your spirituality, everybody!

As in, the only thing a single human being can go on is what it aprehends with its senses - meaning there can not really be a deeper connection between them on any level.

A religion from the Brazilian rain forest with a natural panthiest persuasion.

I am a rationalist nonbeliever who believes in moral action. I think that the term "atheist" has a certain connotation nowadays, but I think I could be described as an atheist. Despite the fact that I don't believe in a god or an afterlife, I think that "religion" is an essential part of the human experience. It serves to provide answers to unanswerable questions, which can be good or bad depending on how its executed. I think that most people on this site would acknowledge that religion is built into our neurochemistry. Anything a psychedelic can do, our brains can do on its own. We have these mechanisms in our brain for a reason, and I would say that it is to help fight of the feeling that life is inconsequential and we can't instigate real change.