Surely the character"s experiences were created by the person who wrote the novel. Maybe this character has never visited hyperspace but is a projection of the writer"s direct experiences. Whether they be internal, external, inside out or any number of other things that haven"t even been thought of yet. Which, in turn, get shared by the reader.



If you imagine that there is no reader, do you imagine that there is no writer aswell?

If there was an "i don"t know" button i would probably press that.

This is true, but the question wasn’t about the writer or the reader, the question was about the character.


Sure. Why not?

But if there is no writer, then how can there be a novel, a character and therefore an analogy? I am sorry if i am missing the point but i don"t have the imagination to get by without easy to follow instructions and clearly annotated diagrams.

I'm not sure if this will help or not but I was reading Twilight of the Idols by Nietzsche last night and he presented the argument that our consciousness is not causal. We like to think of our will as the cause of what we do but really it's more like our justifications for how our instincts play out.

In other words, there's no you in the sense most of us seem to think. We're a collection of cells living in a democratic environment that all vote based on our collective knowledge and passions. When it comes to time to explain why we do the things we do we're quick with a socially acceptable response. But that thing, that we call I, it's nothing more than a tool of social navigation, like your feet but for relationships.

Now just imagine that there's no God and that we're just particles, chemistry, moving in space and time, and you've removed the author as well. Like a lightning bolt flashing across the night sky we need no author and no character.

Sorry if I muddled your point gibran2. Just trying to show another way to look at it.

Seeing as how the internal is simply a reflection and an interpretation of the outside. I declare, BOTH!

Interesting poll.

Thankyou for trying to explain edge2054. Someone has got to ask the stupid questions every now and then so it might aswell be me!

I think that the translation of the hyperspace experience for me must be based on my ego"s integration of the events. Which is affected by previous events and environments in my life. I have given up the will to live on occasion in order to enter hyperspace and lost any concept of myself but i have never had the completely ego shattering experiences that some people write about (with this there is a part of me that is a little jealous and another part that thinks "rather you than me" .

It does pain me a little to think that i am a big sack of cellular democracy as i have worked quite hard over the years to get my ego into a healthy condition.

Well that's Nietzsche's perspective and while he was a really smart guy and he has had a big influence on modern life (probably a lot more than most people care to admit) it's still just one person's perspective.

I think what giban2 was really trying to express though and myself as well when I voted neither is that there's no need to limit ourselves with a binary system. (And giban2, I apologize if I misunderstand and please correct me if I'm wrong).

If I was to really stop and think about it, break it down, I would say that DMT unlocks the power of the human imagination and that many of us forget how to play pretend as we get older. It lets us escape our lives for a few moments and enter these fantastic realms. That doesn't mean that we hate our lives. My kids play pretend all the time. They lose themselves in cops and robbers (or monsters and space marines rather) and not only is that okay it's healthy.

DMT has helped me to remember how to forget myself and that it's okay to be someone else for awhile and when I'm pretending to be someone else I don't want to stop and ask where it comes from. The human imagination is literally limitless and if it comes from God, inside ourselves, our external environment, our imaginary friends, or something so far beyond human conception that we can't even put it into words then that's what it is. In other words, it's whatever it needs to be for you because it's your imagination, it's your creativity, and it's literally boundless.

I voted both. Simply because during my experiences, both seems most logical comparing all of my experiences together.
This is my reason why.

All of my internal experiences happen when i close my eyes and lay back, completely surrender to the experience and let it take me. During these experiences i desensitize everything about the world around me with head phones, no lights, room temperature, laying down... a very controlled environment.

All of my external experiences happen when i keep my eyes open throughout the entire experience. Usually stay sat in a meditative pose, however force myself to keep my eyes open. When i do this, there is a crystal like clarity to the world around me. Even in this approach i am still visited by entities, even extra terrestrial phenomenon occurs.

Then i have i have an in between experience, external and internal you can say. when i use a candle and stare at the flame throughout the entire experience. This seems to keep me focused on something here, something i know, while all the crazy visions, and information is received all around me. Keeping me steady throughout and never letting go of my focus and control.


So if anything for me, i have experienced three different varieties. great poll though, i often thought about the differences between these experiences. In my eyes there definitely are different types of experiences. Shooting outward, inward, and both.

I like that and can relate to it.

All of the above. (though I do not think this is possibly

I can relate to gibran2's point of view (big surprise), and I think universecannon said it rather well also.

I went with "both" for the poll, but "neither" would have meant almost the same thing because I don't think the external is external. I mean this more in the sense of the idea that we are minds inhabiting a mind and our boundaries and borders are arbitrary and abstract for the most part. Of course, even Descartes knew that there is no logical proof of the existence of an external material world... hence "Cogito ergo sum" as the sum of what can be known in early epistemology.

Waiting for material proof in this case is a bit like waiting for a dream to prove to you that it is not a dream.

After I answered the poll, though, I recognized that we are all answering the OP in a rather personal manner. (i.e. What is the source of Hyperspace... as WE experience it.)

Naturally our experience of anything is internal to us.

But it is a bit of a cop-out way to answer this to focus on us. The real question being asked is whether Hyperspace and its Entities are independent to our consciousness? Are they sentient and existing outside of us taking DMT?

To this question I answer YES. With the caveat that they are as external to us as Yosemite and it's inhabitants. I can not say for sure that Yosemite exists when I am not there, but I have a lot of evidence to suggest that it does. I have an equal amount of evidence about Hyperspace. Neither place feels remotely to me like I am manifesting it solely by myself... or I should say that whatever part of me could be dreaming up Yosemite & Hyperspace is the dreamer who is dreaming everything that ever was, is or will be here in this field of existence.

I suppose I would take back my poll answer and switch to external... but it makes little difference I suppose.

An interesting poll. I voted Both, for the simple reason that duality is an utter illusion (or impermanent dream sequence, if you will). It's the same old human query abut whether the universe really exists without oneself as it's direct witness. Obviously, the answer is both, "yes and no".

Without the seer, what is ever possibly seen? Without the dreamer, what can be dreamed? Can we ever feasibly divide the source of what is created from the creation itself? I think not. Ergo... mind, molecule and reality dance together, interconnectedly and symbiotically. Cause and effect mirror one another splendidly.

How do we separate any aspect of the totality and delineate it as this nor that, when this whole hologram is superimposed over the very same energy grid? Is not the core, quintessential stuff of this Omniversal phenomenon, an expanding current of an indivisible force, spontaneously expressing itself for reasons that defy any finite quantification?

The Hyper-spacial spin is unique to this realm of exploration but... how can we possibly homogenize the potential experience of individuated conscious-awareness, given the vast diversity in humanoid perception and the uniqueness of intelligence or psychic temperament? And I concur that gibran2 put this idea into a most profound light.

And just who watches the watcher watch himself/herself, forever watching himself/herself watch himself/herself, pondering in sheerest wonderment? In a proverbial nutshell, I'd have to vote that the miraculous inter-dimension of Hyperspace is resultant of Infinite Mind perhaps manifesting said Hyperspace, for the sheer joy of becoming and/or unfolding itself (and endlessly so)... simply because it can!!!

I have to say that from my experiences I think that DMT has virtually nothing to do with the imagination. The imagination itself seems barely accessible during the experience anyway. It really keeps you in the now of whatever happens to be going on. I voted both in the poll, and my essay which will appear in the Nexus e-zine will defend my point when it finally gets published.

I agree, but what is 'imagination' anyways? Our connection with the divine ground of existence/source/etc? Imagination/consciousness/divine ground of being/God (not the personified type)...all the same thing to me.

Yes it dissolves you into the Now, because afterall...that's all there is...right?

<3 tat

To my discernment, which is variable and silly at best:


Our world contains many creatures possessed of tryptamine consciousness, animals and plants and fungi.

DMT consciousness is a particular resonant frequency, a vibration.

Our physical universe is teeming with planets that like-wise contain various forms of tryptamine consciousness, including DMT.

The stars themselves seeded the cosmos with the stuff of life, organic molecules. They then continuously bathe seeded planets with the stuff that life needs to thrive, light.

Every man and every woman is a star. In another dimension it is us, up there, shinning down. Brilliantly and forever and with love. I believe that, sometimes.

Other dimensions exist right here, all the time--or have the potential too, at least. I mean, sometimes they don't Anyway, Aldous Huxley talked about the function of consciousness being a filter that limits awareness. Hyperspace is all around, but in order to keep an eye out for saver-tooth tigers, our reality is muchly limited. See also HP Lovecraft's from beyond.

The universe can be organized into all sorts of models: multiple planes, dimensions, multiverse ect. Being one all-mutable substance, a jimjam, it can take all sorts of shapes. And blow your freaky mind, baby. It's all frequencies, vibrations. Something that exists "out there" turns around and then exists right where you are sitting now, if you can tune in.



Hyperspace is a shared realm, a type of tryptamine consciousness inhabited by a vast ecology of souls, from all over the universe/multiverse/and besides, it's all "right here" anyway.



My answer, drum roll please....is Both. I guess.

Great post. Resonate deeply. What i highlighted..i carry with me every day.

<3 tat

For me i would say my imagination plays a large part in the experience. By that i am not saying that the hyperspace world is imagined but each experience is very dependant upon my mood which subsequently influences my imagination.

Hyperspace influences my imagination and my imagination influences how i process what is going on there and how the experience unfolds for me. I think that they are inextricably linked (for me) .

I think if we completely redefine imagination from the way typically think about it, then it becomes rather misleading to call it the imagination. To me the things you listed are all not the same. Consciousness is awareness and just because I'm conscious or aware, doesn't mean I'm currently exercising my imagination. Perhaps I'm mindlessly watching the television, completely absorbed in the current action. In fact I would possibly argue that if one is exercising the imagination, one probably isn't in the here and now....but somewhere else either timeless or thinking on the past or future. I feel that DMT completely exceeds the imagination's typical abilities, even during immediate recall which should say something. The imagination as most people typically have access to, the mental forming of images and concepts resemble very little to me of what goes on in a DMT experience that offers its unique perceptions that completely supercede the imagination. If you wanna call it the imagination of God or whoever created hyperspace (if there was an intelligence to create it) then I could see that as more believable, even though it's more far-fetched considering you have to allow for God or some other external creator to exist. Since the imagination offers up content that really doesn't resemble DMT (unless you're trying to imagine a DMT experience which is a different can of worms), I feel it's unfair to claim that it's the source of hyperspace. The biggest distinction seems to be that the imagination is based exclusively on past experience - you can only synthesize pretty much from what you've experienced. As you experience DMT, you can then imagine other DMT situations that haven't actually happened more easily because it becomes incorporated as past experience(s) but mind the order here of cause and effect.



I don't necessarily argue with this, but I'll point out that you reversed the cause and effect of imagination in your first paragraph. That's fine too because that's more realistic, and from the way I look at it, that's integrative inspiration.

I agree with your second paragraph to the extent that perhaps what you're referring to as the imagination, I tend to think of as focus or attention, which IME does have a very direct impact on hyperspace. Obviously one can focus attention through the imagination, and so in this sense I agree with you. So if anything, I would tend to think of the imagination as a modifier of hyperspace, but in terms of the actual content from multidimensional geometry to cross-cultural visions, I think the imagination has relatively little to do with that. I don't believe that it's simply the imagination externalized. Just because they may be inextricably linked doesn't mean that the imagination has much to do with being the source. I do understand that I said



and so I admit that I was wrong to word it like that. I was thinking in terms of the source of hyperspace in particular.

yeah this is tricky at best.

lots of semantics on something truly undefinable

"imagination of God" "imagination of ourselves" ...same thing to me, not some paternalistic God or even anything remotely personified. I'll just say "source". hehe

I think everything in the world comes from 'this' place....this place we frequent. Whether this is raw consciousness, ground of all being, implicate order, imagination, mind, hyperspace, or whathaveyou. It's all the same, it all dissolves away into it, like a moth ina flame. Sure we have our separate components in physical reality, like brain, mind/imagination, but I feel imagination is something beyond, not tangible physically. Something that arises and falls like the tide, forever in flux. Everything is imagination, it's boundless, infinite. Imagination of "source", of "us", of "everything in existence".

I hope you see what im trying to get at Global. Not saying to agree or anything, just trying to paint a picture of where im coming from, my ideas on the matter.

<3 tat

My interpretation of this statement: Well, starting off with a bit of an animistic premiss, the primacy of consciousness. All the phenomena of the world is the manifestations of creativity. Imagination is our connection because.....the world is conscious and creative. The source of the world is a conscious/creative impulse. hence, imagination is a connection to that "source".

In hyperspace, things usually seem outside of the grip of my own conscious ability to imagine. However....it may be that my "little imagination" is touching "big imagination".


IDK, just my take on it, currently.




I have to disagree with this statement. Sure, daydreaming and many imaginal acts indeed do take one away from the here and now. So fine, I agree with you and see where you're coming from. But how about an artist--of any sort--creating, plying their trade when they are truly in the zone. An inspired poet, kicking some free styles. yeah, connected to cosmic creativity, tapping into the pulse and just as deeply into the moment as an athlete in the zone, or a lover engaged in passionate coitus. there's nothing more "in the moment" than being "in the zone"--and artist can reach that via the active imaginative act.