When one takes a lot of psychedelic drugs, one is likely to experience things incompatible with the view of the world one previously held. Sometimes these experiences seem to support one another; seem to suggest there are dimensions of truthful, objectively real experience which are open and available to us through drugs (or whatever mechanism) - experiences that hint at things normally hidden from us, but just as "real" as the screen you're reading these words from. This feeling is made all the more compelling by just how saturated with meaning, with emotion and innate, radiant intensity these experiences can be.

And perhaps there is a grain of truth in that kind of thinking.

But perhaps many miss the point, the real lesson of those experiences - not that we can touch and comprehend alien truths hidden from most; but that we have the chance to see the daily "reality" of our perceptions as the continuous fabrication, the elaborate and dazzling sleight of hand that they are. Once the magician has revealed his tricks, playing ordinary poker against him is never quite the same again.

No matter what we do, it's only ever through a thickly warped stained glass window we can hope to glimpse reality at all. Crude, dim, warped, and coloured as this lens may be, it is yet a very rare person who can learn to treat their own perceptions with the appropriate degree of mistrust, no matter what lies they may have seen unravelled.

We are blind to our own blind spots. It's a human failing so universal, and so at the core of our nature, that we will inevitably take it into hyperspace with us. But if you ever come back from hyperspace with complete certainty in the objective truth of - well, just about anything - you might want to take that as a warning sign.

If you haven’t already, you might want to read through this thread:

The Improbability of Hyperspace

Yes, I have read or skimmed most of it, thank you.

My approximate position (in terms you defined) is that:



Is the closest approximation of the truth, but perhaps not in the sense most understand by "illusion". I don't mean that we understand by "reality" is some kind of simulation or dream; I mean that our senses are predicated on illusions, on (if you like) "seratonin hallucinations". They are illusory in the sense that they are deeply fallible, crude approximations that let us quickly apprehend what would otherwise be an incomprehensible torrent of sensory input. We are built to recognise patterns.

In the DMT (etc) state, nothing has changed but a few molecules; sensory data comes in, and it is matched for patterns - just not in the most evolutionarily useful way. Do these different patterns convey information we don't have access to normally? No doubt we can have realisations, make associations we would not have; notice sensory data that would have been swept under the rug by our ordinary brain chemistry. Are we witnessing some other reality with anything approaching the same approximate fidelity (limited though it is) with which we apprehend this one? Those who think so, I'm afraid, are either drug casualties, or were never clear enough thinkers to be taking the drug in the first place ... and when that drug is DMT, i suspect the majority of people are incapable of processing their experiences into a truly rational view of the world.

I suppose this is approximately where someone will feel the need to say that DMT is "beyond rationality" or that "science can't explain" what they've experienced, so I'd best let them get on with that.

cactophage- stupendous post my friend. really thanks or sharing your thoughts. its funny, i was just pondering this field of thought the past couple days and i now see there are 2 current threads discussing the topic. i guess were tapped in.

wow, i have so many things id like to say but im packing for a trip right now and dont have freedom to post. argghhh!
i will say that dmt and strong psychedelic experiences have brought me to what i believe is the only responsible stance a psychonaught should take. an agnostic approach.

its funny that i was pretty new age-y before dmt. i thought i knew how it all worked but now i find that a good clue that i am wrong, short sighted, or mistaken is that i feel 100% right. its a pattern ive seen over and over in my adult life.

no matter what we ingest see or feel its just not possible to be able to comprehend the true nature of reality and beyond. i like your analogy of the stained glass this sumerizes it well. the very first thing that turns me off to any type of spiritual teacher, or speaker is if they speak with the conviction of "knowing" how it all works. right there they show their cards.

if i know anything from my work with dmt and other tools its that the truth is so much stranger and complex than we can possibly grasp. i love Mckenna's words on this matter " the true nature of everything isnt just stranger than we supposed, its stranger than we CAN suppose".
there is one similar charcteristic that all the authors and speaker i admire such as Terrence Mckenna have in common. they know that they dont know. i respect that.

i hope i can chime in more later. like i said i got a lot to add.
cheers

Cactophage I agree. DMT does open doorways of perception we usually aren't that receptive to, like you said, or as you put it allows us to see things that might have been missed.

After kicking up my yoga, and meditative practices over the last few weeks I feel as though I've gotten some insight into the "illusion" you descried in our sober state. Not to say I didn't know of it before, more just experiencing it is entirely different. And through seeing this, it also clarified that the DMT state is not "reality" in the way we directly perceive it.

As for what olympus mon said about being agnostic, I too believe that it is the only option if psychedelia is your only means of spiritual approach. For me however, I do believe in the universal conscious, because I find in my daily life when I tune myself in, in ways of gathering energy, clearing my mind and being receptive to the way things unfold things often seem almost too coincidental in the way they aid me on my path.

I will admit however that there is a "problem" if one is too only consider what I said logically. There is no proof.

This is where faith comes into play. I believe that it is not unreasonable for us to be able to experience in our lives things, that cannot be explained and perceived by ordinary logic, things as you put it that are "beyond rationality." But rationality depends on perspective, and the human one is quite clouded. (Note that I'm talking about the way I experience daily life, and not DMT. I do not believe DMT is the ultimatum in anyway, although some parts of the DMT experience, for now, can't be explained rationally. This doesn't mean eventually the pieces won't come together.)

Now, I'm not saying I have the "answer," or know how life works. As you said, when you are utterly certain about anything, it's time to take a step back and re-examine your position. I don't claim to know exactly how I'm guided by the consciousness at all times. I don't claim to know exactly where my "awakening" for lack of a better word, or continued spiritual growth will lead me. I don't claim to know where humanity is headed if we all "awaken" in the way I believe that I have.

As I posted in another thread earlier... "The Question is the Answer is the Path." Very Buddhist perspective.

But it's not all faith, and it can't all be explained in terms of science.

Too much faith leads to martyrdom and blindness from our lives.
Too much science leads to restlessness and blindness as to the fact there are things deeper then what we currently perceive and can logically explain.

We live at a point in humanity where we are very secular due to breaking away from major religions in centuries before us, and the real investigation of science; and in my opinion it's about time we start combining the two. (But that's not the whole answer either . )

If I had to simply state my beliefs about the reality of hyperspace, I’d say, “Without a doubt, it’s as real as everyday reality”. So the question is, “How ‘real’ is everyday reality?” That’s a good question, and one I can’t answer.

Another good question is, “What does ‘real’ mean?”

We’ve created an abstraction, comprehensible by average human beings, that we call “reality”. We use this abstraction to aid us in creating a plausible model that adequately explains our subjective experiences – that allows us to tell a coherent story concerning subjective experience. But the true nature of things – what Kant called the “numenon”, that which leads to our perceptions or subjective experiences – is likely beyond human comprehension. The adjective “real” may not even apply.

i too feel there is a universal consciousness and many of my day to day thoughts and ideas are in alignment with this feeling but like you said we have zero proof. i wont claim that these beliefs are anything more than personal. that is why i use the term agnostic approach or stance rather than saying i am an agnostic.
i try to keep a buffer between my personal beliefs and the words that come out of my mouth when discussing these subjects.

in the end i think we all are trying to describe the same elephant. (you guys have heard that analogy right?) we just cant speak as if our own truthts are the truth.

good thread.

I'm legitimately curious on what basis you hold this belief, as you seem to have a fairly rational approach, and a healthy awareness of scientific thinking.

Personally, I object to most modes of thought that tend to be labeled "faith" or "belief", especially those make any claim about objective correctness. I've limited experience with DMT, but extensive experience with psychedelics; I've had hallucinations which seem more real than everyday reality, and I've believed in their truth at certain times.

I've certainly experienced many states that could occasion the birth of some kind of belief ... for example, that feeling of utter cosmic connectedness - you know the drill, I'm sure - we're all just different manifestations of one infinite perfect light, our separateness is an illusion caused by time, or life, or something of that nature. I've experienced utter belief in this notion; also, in the notion of a constantly unfurling infinite tree of parallel universes - that every event which introduces quantum randomness causes our timeline to branch into countless daughter worlds with each passing moment.

But ultimately, each of these "truthy" revelations is the result of exchanging one flawed lens for another, and while I may temper the umbrella of my atheism to admit a kind of agnosticism towards some of these points of view, I would view the prosecution of any firm conviction about them as a sign of mental disorder, just as I believe religion is a mental disease.

If there is one common thread joining everyone I'd consider sane or reasonable, this is probably it: they are ruthlessly aware of the shortcomings of their own knowledge, and deeply wary of anyone who claims a guarantee on truth.

As someone who holds onto a "truthy" revelations (ie. my belief in some sort of greater conscious/connectedness), I also follow your definition of "sane." I am constantly redefining my "knowledge" and my belief on what exactly the connectedness is, if it is anything at all. When I say constantly, I mean every single day, and each discovery, I take with a grain of salt because you are correct that it is received through this flawed lens we have.

Ascribing to religion in my opinion, is not a mental disorder, besides a short coming of security and a need for a specific answer to fall back on. I find validity in a lot of aspects of various religions but as soon as someone has it all down on paper, or one message of truth, it becomes as a consequence, untrue. There is a big difference in following a religion, and having a spiritual belief that there is something other than the daily life we perceive(filled with perceived authority, desires, money, possessions and so on) and that there is another goal worth striving for, whatever that may be. That is my definition of spirituality in terms of my life at least.

But of course, I respect your views. I could very well be entirely wrong. And even the large amount of "spritual masters" and others throughout the world who experience similar things that I do it still doesn't prove anything. Just like because most of the world at the current time is happy to play dead and not question, either in the way you do or in spiritual ways like myself, it doesn't mean that I too, shouldn't question.

Just the other day, I drank Ayahuasca and felt blind with my eyes open. It was like I could see everything around me, but that wasn't what there actually was to see at all, it was like an illusion... like all the light hitting my retinas and forming this 3d world was blocking out a greater *something*...

Sounds like you're an agnostic to me. The main thing that sets agnostics apart from atheists IMO is that agnostics can accept and use "belief systems" as a tool. We don't truly believe in them but understand their usefulness. We can change our "belief systems" at will in relation to our current model of reality. Keeping an open mind, reflecting on our beliefs and/or theories and changing them to keep up with our ever changing dynamic spirituality is a trait of a good agnostic. IMO

From a rational perspective, I also conclude 'there is as real as here'. And I agree there is something often overlooked in these experiences. Spice allows one such a complete experience of There, pondering the relative validity of Here is possible in a totally new way. That is a true gift of the molecule. Yes it is often missed that Here and There might be projections of a foggy lens; that even Here is a creation of our senses and CNS; the world might not be what you thought it was; or, maybe, what you think becomes the world.

There is another point that is often missed - a question beyond this question. Investigating and exploring Here and There is fine, but we often fail to ask "what is it that is experiencing this Here and There?" In each, experience is happening, nothing stays the same, yet Here and There are being perceived. In fact, I think we often get stuck in the wonders of Here or There; and in the mental abstractions of which is more real.

But what is It that is looking? Whether Here or There or in a nights dream? What am I? Answers don't come quickly here. We shouldn't touch what the mind offers as an answer. We must actually look and see firsthand - without the foggy lens. Is that possible?

This is the Inquiry offered by many mystics of many religions and ages. Understood rightly, there is no belief being offered to the mind. This would be just another lens. A sage such as Ramana Maharishi only offers instructions which you should discard after used up.

Various Inquiry aids exist. This is how I see Spice as an aid to the instructions of Inquiry:

First
Spice shows you a There as compelling as Here.
Wow! Hello there little elf fellow. What search are you on?
What experiences! We can get caught up here a while ... as its really amazing.

Second
Mental grip on Here is loosened, 'reality' of Here is questioned.
Do I know what I think I know?
Obviously, No. What a relief!

Third, 'reality' of main character is questioned.
Actually look and see who it is that is looking. Can I see that please.
Here, There, what is the same? Who is aware of all of it?
Looking for the one looking becomes habit. Constant effortless ...
Awareness has always been aware of itself. Then out of the blue ...

Fourth,

Fourth, acknowledgement that there is no “main character”.
The realization that there is no “I”.
Looking for the one looking ceases, because there is no one looking!

Just as a particular group of lifeless still photos, when strung together in a particular sequence, appears to be a coherent, dynamic story, so too does a particular group of static “frames of consciousness”, when strung together in a particular sequence, appears to be the living, dynamic subjective experience of an “individual”.

(Just playing with ideas here. )

NUMBER 5

CHOKE THE UNICORN

Why do I believe as I believe? The simple answer is: I believe what I believe because my experiences throughout my life have led me to those beliefs.

The more complicated answer will have to wait until I have more time.

Well, as far as beliefs go it's at least admirably uncontagious.

[edit: insert emoticon(s) to signal humorous and friendly intent]

THERE IS ONLY THAT WHICH IS THE TRUTH

what i am saying is

ITS ALL TRUE , THERE ARE NO ILLUSIONS

yes reality exists , yes hyperspace exists , yes salviaspace exist , yes imagination exists , yes dreams do exist and they are all truths , even you and i exist

fortunately or not our MIGHTY CREATOR only created only the TRUTH

reality is not a cheap trick , hyperspace is not a cheap trick , imagination, memories and dreams are not cheap tricks , cheap tricks are a way of human beings so he expects everything to be a cheap trick or illusion

there are no illusions , there is only that which is the truth
(original bullshit from my idiot brain thank you,thank you,thank you , maybe i am missing the point alltogether )

Yes. Here is just a play of ideas.

I would equate continuing to invest belief in a limited personal self to be ordinary poker. Which is fine. Of course in full belief mode, its a life-and-death game. This is the case Here or There - whether I'm Caucasian, an elf, or a spinning double helix. If I believe I'm that character, I must fear, as I know all things are impermanent.



Sometimes words have connotations that aren't always intended. The Dream, the Illusion all make experience or realities sound somehow 'less'. Usually, this isn't what is intended. After-all, what a Miraculous Creation! How could it be cheap! It's absolutely Everything. Compared to what could it have less value.

Spice and Sally open up such amazing rooms in the mansion. Each is even more fantastic once the particularly limiting aspect of the illusion 'I am this person or elf' is seen as also part of the illusion.

'I am this person' is not an irrefutable fact - which wearing different bodies in different spaces can help elucidate. For I perceive the person, elf or energy just as I perceive the wall, the chrysanthemum, and spinning atoms on an alien landscape.

(And by illusion I mean as real as anything could ever be - just totally nonthreatening - like in a dream. How great!)