Has anybody here experienced telepathy on LSD? Do you even think telepathy exists? Many, many years ago, I sublingually ingested LSD. LSD is the very first entheogen I tried. The trip became too intense, so I sublingually took lorazepam.

For a play on words, during the beginning of the experience I was also toking on marijuana.
Anyways, as the lorazepam started to take effect, I got very relaxed and decided to lay in my bed. As I was laying in my bed, all of the sudden I started to experience a voice. It clearly wasn't being experienced from my ears to my brain, rather directly to my brain. This entity identified as a God and explained I wasn't happy because "you won't let me in".

The entity had a particular, deep, male voice. The closest thing I can compare the voice to is when the divine tree in Naruto communicates with Madara in Japanese. To this day, I still cannot ascertain if I was hallucinating or if I actually came into contact with an entity. Personally, I am gnostic atheist; I know God doesn't exist, so I know everything that supposedly came from this being wasn't true.

Years before this, I remember watching Krystal Cole and her describing her experience with LSD and telepathy. I think that telepathy is a unique facet of LSD, as I've never experienced this on any other classical entheogen. For an example of what the experience was like, I found a video on YouTube of the divine tree communicating to Madara.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lSwDXFvuXmo
Start playing at 1:40

Apparent "telepathy" has been part of my experience on LSD, DMT and mushrooms. With LSD and mushrooms, it's generally with people. With DMT, it's some other kind of mind that injects it's message into my mind.

One love

Personally i do believe telepathy exists. I even believe it is a natural and frequent occurrence especially within a species but also across species boundaries. What's rare is to be sure, or even to think that a thought was not just our own.

Maybe i should clarify what i mean by telepathy - i simply mean having the same thought at the same time. Now this may sometimes 'just' be synchronicity, ie. a correlation with some event (potentially from a different time/place). But other times, the thought one being has, is received and thought by another being as well, and this is what i call telepathy.

I think that this happens a lot, and is kinda one of our senses. We just really rarely realise it. We may think our own brains are producing noise, or we may think it's intuition or empathy. We may not even actually notice the transmitted thought itself. We may just have an emotion. LSD can absolutely bring/increase awareness to that.



How do you know god doesn't exist? I always thought this was impossible to know.
My own stance is that i don't have any non-social reason to believe god exists, and so i don't.

Thinking about it, your god entity might have just been you. I mean the part of you, or full you, or whatever you wanna call it, that you blocked pharmaceutically because it felt too intense.

I understand where you're coming from. There were substances that blurred the line; however, with that being said when I'm thinking it's in my own particular "voice".

As to why I know God doesn't exist, I won't go too in depth, beyond all of the suffering I've experienced in my life, I'll explain to you a scientific and philosophical reason.

1. God is an omnimax being; God is omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient and omnibenevolent.
2. Most animals by virtue cannot exist without oncogenes.
3. Oncogenes are genetics that are encoded to create cancer cells.
4. Most animals are programmed to suffer.
5. Programming a being wherein the only way it can exist is if it has genes that cause cancer is inconsistent with omnipotency, omniscience and omnibenevolence.
6. Therefore, God does not exist.

A supposed "God" creating things wherein existence is by virtue suffering is torture.

There's a lot of unverifiable assumptions here..Herr...

One love

Please excuse me, I should have said "most animals by virtue cannot exist without oncogenes". Beyond that, what do you mean?

Just for the sake of clarity, this is in no way an attack.



Is all that you've experienced in this life suffering? Are you suffering in interacting in this beautiful place with all of us? Do you think all others only suffer? I don't feel that I only suffer, though I concede I feel like I'm having some kind of hard time often.



If this is the most accurate definition or description of God, how can we be satisfied with this definition when it leaves a literal infinite amount to be desired, because in our mortal and limited form, we probably can't wrap our heads around what a being that fits that description is like. We can perhaps imagine what it would be like to have these traits, but that doesn't mean our imagining is an accurate representation of the reality, if it is the reality.

What if this definition is inaccurate? In Yoruba culture, Olodumare, their supreme god, doesn't directly interact with this most spheres of its creation, including this one. There are multiple definitions for "God." Some of this depends on what cultural spiritual paradigm we are interacting with in attempting to define "God."

Your definition seems to be derived from the Judeo-Christian paradigm, in which God gave man free-will. It would seem to be antithetical to giving us freewill if God made itself obvious to us in anyway...



My understanding of oncogenes is that the contribute to the development of cancer, but are not themselves directly causal. Also their occurrence seems to have valid scientific reasoning; mutations of genes from some causal circumstance. Regardless of my skepticism (which questions and suspends absolute judgment about pretty much everything), practically, we operate off of cause and effect. This also shows that they don't have a conscious nefarious nature; they are an occurrence that happens under certain kinds of circumstances. It seems an error to say they are encoded to cause cancer, as if on some sort of mission.

More to the point, would you be able to experience joy if you had never suffered? Would you even try to to strive if there weren't some obstacles and hardships along the way? Hypothetically, your original definition and description is correct, then how could we even fathom understanding God's reasoning? Some of (and maybe a lot of for some and/or many) life is suffering, other parts are other stuff (that aren't suffering).



One love

I never considered it an attack.



Absolutely not, there have been great times, but with that being said there's also been a lot of bullshit. I'm not suffering interacting with any of you. I actually really like interacting with people on forums. Forums can teach you things just as good as higher learning institutions can, but don't have to charge you a premium. In this instance with this forum, all that's being paid is the Internet bill.



I do have have an Abrahamic background, but whether or not that is my background, God is a supreme being. I'm not aware of Yoruba culture, but if you can think of something higher than the God is in this culture, then why call it "God"?



There are other genes that regulate oncogenes to stop the formation of cancer cells. The point is, why are these genes a virtual requirement for existence of a lot of animals in the first place? In an ideal world, the virtuality of humans would involve being able to exist without oncogenes being a virtual requirement. It's not an error to say they are encoded to cause cancer. That's literally the function of oncogenes and why the study of cancer is called "oncology".

Of course, after suffering there is joy. I'm not trying to say I'm one lump of absolute sadness. As you can see, my philosophy on life is close to that of Buddhism; life is by default a state of constant suffering and all of us are trying to reach our "nirvana".

Wasn't saying that it was "higher" just that that was what their absolute "God" was. Just used a more general term. Other cultures have things like "God" that goes by another name. I don't think it's something that one can necessarily compare across cultures, ie, the god of 'x' culture is greater the god of 'y' culture. For some people, "God" is simply the universe we inhabit. So perhaps, it's more "God of the above definition does not exist," or perhaps more accurately, "I do not believe a "God" of the above definition exists." And often when we hear the word "God" used to refer to some entity in a pantheon outside an English speaking culture that is not heavily influenced by Christianity, it's a translation, and as such can be a sort of approximation of what it means in the original culture.



I'm not sure that not having an answer to this question invalidates the potential existence of God (to be clear I'm not a theist, I'm also not an atheist, and agnostic isn't quite accurate either...) It can merely be an instance in which there is something you're not understanding. But why not be upset about all the external potential dangers in the world? Getting malaria from a mosquito? Natural disasters? For you, do these not also show the nonexistence of God?

Change is constant. Some change is preferred or in our favor and some isn't, it's the nature of existing in this form. Regardless of the role of oncogenes, they are mutated genes; a gene that made some kind of change over time. Change is constant. You could also almost look at it as a product of entropy.



Hypothetically, what if that was the kindest system the God was able to devise to suffice us?

Also, if I recollect correctly, in the Dhammapada, the Buddha refers to the Gods on several occasions



One love