joedirt said:
I don't trust Joe Rogan, that's the point.
-
Members of the previous forum can retrieve their temporary password here, (login and check your PM).
Zero proof DMT is made in your head.
- Thread starter Orion
- Start date
I don't trust Joe Rogan, that's the point.
Orion said:
Just like father always told you
endlessness said:
First off thanks for providing the articles. .. Sorry for the last post...you'd already posted before I could edit it...
You are correct there isn't any "proof", but the evidence is pretty big as far as I'm concerned.
The fact that DMT is found to be produced by enzymes in the rodent brain...and the fact that we find it in the human brain is pretty damn strong evidence as far as I'm concerned. Proof No. Strong evidence yeah. We use Rats as human models all the time and yeah there are some serious differences.
Remember it's easy to get permission to kill a live rat and dissect his brain..it's relatively hard to do with a human brain.
IMO we are at the same point we were with serotonin prior to LSD. Back then we knew serotonin was produced in the gut, but had no idea it was produced in the brain until we isolated the brain receptors that LSD bound to...the 5HT class. This caused the scientific community to begin searching for the endogenous brain chemical that hit those receptors...it was serotonin. The exact same thing happened with annandamide...the bodies natural cannabinoid. We learned how THC worked before we found the bodies endogenous ligand.
Just a friendly shit talking bet...nothing more.
Mark my words. There will be proof of DMT produced in the Brain within 3 years. And yes you can rub my noise in it if I'm wrong!
So to the original poster of the thread. I think you have your answer. There is no proof, but quite a few scientists are starting to think it's very likely and the hunt is on.
joedirt said:endlessness said:
First off thanks for providing the articles. .. Sorry for the last post...you'd already posted before I could edit it...
You are correct there isn't any "proof", but the evidence is pretty big as far as I'm concerned.
The fact that DMT is found to be produced by enzymes in the rodent brain...and the fact that we find it in the human brain is pretty damn strong evidence as far as I'm concerned. Proof No. Strong evidence yeah. We use Rats as human models all the time and yeah there are some serious differences.
Remember it's easy to get permission to kill a live rat and dissect his brain..it's relatively hard to do with a human brain.
IMO we are at the same point we were with serotonin prior to LSD. Back then we knew serotonin was produced in the gut, but had no idea it was produced in the brain until we isolated the brain receptors that LSD bound to...the 5HT class. This caused the scientific community to begin searching for the endogenous brain chemical that hit those receptors...it was serotonin. The exact same thing happened with annandamide...the bodies natural cannabinoid. We learned how THC worked before we found the bodies endogenous ligand.
Just a friendly shit talking bet...nothing more.
Mark my words. There will be proof of DMT produced in the Brain within 3 years. And yes you can rub my noise in it if I'm wrong!
So to the original poster of the thread. I think you have your answer. There is no proof, but quite a few scientists are starting to think it's very likely and the hunt is on.
But considering DMT is actively transported across BBB, dont you think the fact that it is present in the brain implies nothing at all because even if produced in other places it could still reach the brain?
And then you would have the big trouble explaining how would dmt be produced with the lack of INMT, which was specifically searched for and not found in the human brain. So to start having any plausibility in the hypothesis, I guess the first step would be to find the necessary enzymes for its production.
Which scientists do you say that hypothesize dmt is made in the brain? AFAIK there's only Rick Strassman. Specially to say its "very likely that dmt is produced in the brain", I would like to see any one of them come up front and debate what is their proposed theory regarding dmt bio-synthesis without INMT or review of literature/explanation why it wasnt found in the brain.
endlessness said:joedirt said:endlessness said:
First off thanks for providing the articles. .. Sorry for the last post...you'd already posted before I could edit it...
You are correct there isn't any "proof", but the evidence is pretty big as far as I'm concerned.
The fact that DMT is found to be produced by enzymes in the rodent brain...and the fact that we find it in the human brain is pretty damn strong evidence as far as I'm concerned. Proof No. Strong evidence yeah. We use Rats as human models all the time and yeah there are some serious differences.
Remember it's easy to get permission to kill a live rat and dissect his brain..it's relatively hard to do with a human brain.
IMO we are at the same point we were with serotonin prior to LSD. Back then we knew serotonin was produced in the gut, but had no idea it was produced in the brain until we isolated the brain receptors that LSD bound to...the 5HT class. This caused the scientific community to begin searching for the endogenous brain chemical that hit those receptors...it was serotonin. The exact same thing happened with annandamide...the bodies natural cannabinoid. We learned how THC worked before we found the bodies endogenous ligand.
Just a friendly shit talking bet...nothing more.
Mark my words. There will be proof of DMT produced in the Brain within 3 years. And yes you can rub my noise in it if I'm wrong!
So to the original poster of the thread. I think you have your answer. There is no proof, but quite a few scientists are starting to think it's very likely and the hunt is on.
But considering DMT is actively transported across BBB, dont you think the fact that it is present in the brain implies nothing at all because even if produced in other places it could still reach the brain?
And then you would have the big trouble explaining how would dmt be produced with the lack of INMT, which was specifically searched for and not found in the human brain. So to start having any plausibility in the hypothesis, I guess the first step would be to find the necessary enzymes for its production.
Which scientists do you say that hypothesize dmt is made in the brain? AFAIK there's only Rick Strassman. Specially to say its "very likely that dmt is produced in the brain", I would like to see any one of them come up front and debate what is their proposed theory regarding dmt bio-synthesis without INMT or review of literature/explanation why it wasnt found in the brain.
1) I already said it's transported across the BBB. But it's also metabolized by MAO VERY fast as well. How much actually makes it to the BBB to get across? How much DMT do you have to eat without an MAOI to get any effects? EDITED>> Bad example. How fast is it metabolized when you smoke it or inject it? How much are you inhaling versus how much is produced externally and brought across the BBB. <<END EDIT
The simplest explanation to me is that if it's found in the brain then it's produced there. Look just because one avenue of study turned up negative certainly doesn't mean that the answer is final. You asked for an alternative theory...well as a first pass guess I would speculate some where in the direction of S-Adenosyl methionine which is a common co-substrate involved in methyl group transfers and it's involved in over 40 metabolic processes that we currently know of. Perhaps you have already explored this direction and I'm off base? Either way just because INMT isn't there doesn't mean that other mechanisms won't be found.... I'm not even going to debate that because science has a history of changing quite often.
2) Rick is certainly the most out spoken scientist about DMT. Plenty of others remain to be unknown at this time. And why would you assume I'd mention names on here to make a point with you? Seriously?
My friendly bet was that there would be proof within a couple of years?
Do we really have to continue this banter?
Good Evening Guys,
My, my, this is a heady discussion! I have a general question regarding the pineal gland and it's functions in the human brain. what does it regulate and why has humanity fixated on this point, as a spiritual center within the mind of human beings? Much has been postulated and as far as I know, nothing proven, correlating the location of the physical pineal gland and the psychic "All seeing eye", existing in the same exact location within our noggins. I would expect there has been considerable research in this area of study, that being the third eye phenomenon? I personally prefer to label this soul-stirring occurrence as, the singular eye, for in terms of spirituality and mystical states of consciousness, it is a perceived as a lens, by which we see realities which are radically different than those generated by rational mind and the functions of the cerebral cortex. It is this lens which opens our minds to the light which is the Omniself or Godhead.
From my windowsill, it doesn't matter if DMT is produced in the pineal gland, the human brain, the lungs or the big toe... as it certainly seems to find the proper channels to open our mind's eye (figuratively speaking). My query is this, has science found any data which provides valid information regarding the interrelationship between the "third eye" and the pineal gland? Now, before a hoard of overly rational personages advance to stomp this idea into tiny bits, please consider the countless thousands of humanoids who have proclaimed the significance of the singular eye. Consider the image of the Buddha as one of many, many examples of our reverence for this spot within our skulls. Please indulge me in this question, albeit a tangent from the debate churning on and on and on...
Isn't is obvious WHY people make such a fuss over this point of revelation, which could be described as a God receptor? By receptor, I don't speak with any technical expertise, so it may be the incorrect and/or inappropriate word? What I mean is that area which generates some kind of field of receptivity to spiritual perceptions. That is, enhanced receptivity to states of consciousness like Samadhi/Satori/Divine Rapture. Granted, these are religious terms but I believe they are intercultural and overall, intrinsic elements of the human psyche. You see, to the layman, where DMT is produced is of far less importance than how it activates certain parts of our brains and what that activation produces in our experience of reality and our understanding of the ascending levels of consciousness, climbing towards the One.
As an addition to this question, what do we know (not intuit, actually know rationally) about the crown region of the human brain? From my own experiences, when this region of my brain/head/mind is stimulated... all subjectivity is shattered and the ensuing transcendental awakening is beyond words. I believe that there is a symbiotic interrelationship between this part of our brain and God consciousness. How is the scientific community addressing the correlation between this area of the brain and the psychic center called, "the thousand petaled lotus"? From my own repeated experiences, it is from this region (when fully activated by a psychedelic substance), perception of The Grid is directly accessed. Time and time again, this happens to me and I am hardly alone in this respect.
I don't mean to irritate the pragmatic thinkers in this family (the Nexus), rather, I am sincere about these issues. Witch doctors and mystics have their own territories and so do the academically inclined researchers involved with proven facts and figures. "East is East and West is West and never the twain shall meet"? I contend the two can conjoin to produce a greater end result. To those of us who regularly experience highly religious (for lack of a better word) states of consciousness, these centers are paramount in our process and despite the scorn heaped upon us by our more logical Nexian family members, we know DIRECTLY what the worlds scriptures have alluded to for thousands of years. Essentially, all I ask is that my curiosity be met with respect and be free of condescension or derision.
BTW, I know from reading multiple threads on this site, that there is great concern that psychedelic experiences be described without intimating a higher and more spiritual significance, as God cannot be proven by any theory or equation. Those who see such indivisible levels of awareness, know a truth that defies explanation. Despite the paradoxical juxtaposition of faith and fact, intuitively knowing and scientifically proving... I maintain that each has it's significant role in our understanding of the human condition; it's role in the universal scheme. From the data available, reports of human beings experiencing a unification of the individual self awareness (ego) and a central, Omnipotent/Divine awareness, is epic in scope. How has science regarded this phenomenon and what has been discovered in recent years? Thanks in advance for your esteemed assistance. Please be kind, as are we not all pioneers reaching out into the vast unknown?
Peace, love & light
My, my, this is a heady discussion! I have a general question regarding the pineal gland and it's functions in the human brain. what does it regulate and why has humanity fixated on this point, as a spiritual center within the mind of human beings? Much has been postulated and as far as I know, nothing proven, correlating the location of the physical pineal gland and the psychic "All seeing eye", existing in the same exact location within our noggins. I would expect there has been considerable research in this area of study, that being the third eye phenomenon? I personally prefer to label this soul-stirring occurrence as, the singular eye, for in terms of spirituality and mystical states of consciousness, it is a perceived as a lens, by which we see realities which are radically different than those generated by rational mind and the functions of the cerebral cortex. It is this lens which opens our minds to the light which is the Omniself or Godhead.
From my windowsill, it doesn't matter if DMT is produced in the pineal gland, the human brain, the lungs or the big toe... as it certainly seems to find the proper channels to open our mind's eye (figuratively speaking). My query is this, has science found any data which provides valid information regarding the interrelationship between the "third eye" and the pineal gland? Now, before a hoard of overly rational personages advance to stomp this idea into tiny bits, please consider the countless thousands of humanoids who have proclaimed the significance of the singular eye. Consider the image of the Buddha as one of many, many examples of our reverence for this spot within our skulls. Please indulge me in this question, albeit a tangent from the debate churning on and on and on...
Isn't is obvious WHY people make such a fuss over this point of revelation, which could be described as a God receptor? By receptor, I don't speak with any technical expertise, so it may be the incorrect and/or inappropriate word? What I mean is that area which generates some kind of field of receptivity to spiritual perceptions. That is, enhanced receptivity to states of consciousness like Samadhi/Satori/Divine Rapture. Granted, these are religious terms but I believe they are intercultural and overall, intrinsic elements of the human psyche. You see, to the layman, where DMT is produced is of far less importance than how it activates certain parts of our brains and what that activation produces in our experience of reality and our understanding of the ascending levels of consciousness, climbing towards the One.
As an addition to this question, what do we know (not intuit, actually know rationally) about the crown region of the human brain? From my own experiences, when this region of my brain/head/mind is stimulated... all subjectivity is shattered and the ensuing transcendental awakening is beyond words. I believe that there is a symbiotic interrelationship between this part of our brain and God consciousness. How is the scientific community addressing the correlation between this area of the brain and the psychic center called, "the thousand petaled lotus"? From my own repeated experiences, it is from this region (when fully activated by a psychedelic substance), perception of The Grid is directly accessed. Time and time again, this happens to me and I am hardly alone in this respect.
I don't mean to irritate the pragmatic thinkers in this family (the Nexus), rather, I am sincere about these issues. Witch doctors and mystics have their own territories and so do the academically inclined researchers involved with proven facts and figures. "East is East and West is West and never the twain shall meet"? I contend the two can conjoin to produce a greater end result. To those of us who regularly experience highly religious (for lack of a better word) states of consciousness, these centers are paramount in our process and despite the scorn heaped upon us by our more logical Nexian family members, we know DIRECTLY what the worlds scriptures have alluded to for thousands of years. Essentially, all I ask is that my curiosity be met with respect and be free of condescension or derision.
BTW, I know from reading multiple threads on this site, that there is great concern that psychedelic experiences be described without intimating a higher and more spiritual significance, as God cannot be proven by any theory or equation. Those who see such indivisible levels of awareness, know a truth that defies explanation. Despite the paradoxical juxtaposition of faith and fact, intuitively knowing and scientifically proving... I maintain that each has it's significant role in our understanding of the human condition; it's role in the universal scheme. From the data available, reports of human beings experiencing a unification of the individual self awareness (ego) and a central, Omnipotent/Divine awareness, is epic in scope. How has science regarded this phenomenon and what has been discovered in recent years? Thanks in advance for your esteemed assistance. Please be kind, as are we not all pioneers reaching out into the vast unknown?
Peace, love & light
joedirt said:
How much makes it to the BBB to get across? Good question, but notice we are talking about nanomolar concentrations here, not active doses. So I dont understand how those other questions are meaningful to what we are discussing, active doses is something completely different than the discussion of origin of trace amounts of endogenous dmt.
joedirt said:
How does your explanation take in account the fact that dmt is found in many other parts of the body as well? That they are all produced in each place they are found and do not move around because they get quickly metabolized?
Regarding SAMe, its a co-substrate, not an enzyme. You still need the enzyme to utilize SAMe for adding a methyl group to a tryptamine or protein etc. Unless Im getting my facts wrong here.
Regarding science, yeah sure science changes and I never said its absolute proof that DMT isnt produced in the brain, but evidence so far seems to point against it. And if evidence points against it, you better have some good reason to claim you disagree, otherwise where is the limit? Are we going to start arguing that the earth doesnt spin around the sun ? Notice im just using this extreme example to question where do we draw the line.
I mean, if I say that "dmt is being made in my ear by some unknown mechanism, would my claim be enough to deserve researching it? If you would be the one giving grants, what would you require for my application ? I guess better argument than that, right? Like some kind of evidence that dmt may indeed be produced there, some proposed biosynthesis path, the presence of necessary enzymes, the explanation why they werent found yet, etc.
Of course maybe ultimately I may be right and dmt be produced in my ear no matter how unlikely it seems, but I think before we start claiming that it is "very likely", that "its real", and adding that "quite a few scientists are thinking it is very likely" and its important that we give some substance to what we say, wouldnt you agree?
Which brings me to:
joedirt said:
Well you guys were the ones saying that scientists defend this hypothesis as an argument in favor of it, so all Im asking is "who?". Im honestly interested if there are published papers which make any hypothesis on this area.
Otherwise better not use the 'appeal to authority' as an argument in the first place, dont you think?.
BTW, Rick said himself that he doesnt know about pineal dmt and that it was speculation based on what he thought at the time:
Erowid DMT Vaults : DMT and the Pineal: Fact or Fiction? by Jon Hanna
'DMT and the Pineal: Fact or Fiction?' by Jon Hanna.
www.erowid.org
Also im not sure if he was ever confronted regarding the lack of INMT presence in the brain. I would suppose he is much more up do date than me on these publications but Ive never read any interview where he mentioned this, would be interesting to ask him.
BTW, notice the end of the article he says there is a new research which could shed light on it, so lets keep our eyes open for this one.
joedirt said:
Why would I bet, I have no personal interest in one way or another, it wouldnt change my life in the least if dmt would be made in the brain or not. I would be interested in research in this area, regardless of the results.
All Im asking here is that when we post in the nexus we try to avoid falling into common misconceptions and speculations and use reliable sources for our claims and good arguments for it. I have nothing against you and I hope you didnt take this as a negative conflict between us, Im glad to have a good dialogue and am ready to learn from your perspective
Btw Rising Spirit, this has never been a discussion about defining the dmt experience in scientific terms or ignoring the spiritual side. This is a thread about common misinformations or baseless speculations regarding dmt, one of them is that its proven dmt is made in your brain/pineal.
If one wants to speculate or discuss philosophy, feel free, there are appropriate places and moments for it (I appreciate some of it myself), lets just please be explicit when doing so and not spread subjective ideas or speculations as Truths.
If one wants to speculate or discuss philosophy, feel free, there are appropriate places and moments for it (I appreciate some of it myself), lets just please be explicit when doing so and not spread subjective ideas or speculations as Truths.
post sources and refs, not anecdotes. unicorns and fairies are not real.
third eye = LOL
The same as serotonin. It's produced all over the body as well. DMT production is likely just an offshot pathway of serotonin synthesis is my best guess.
Yes I believe that is correct, but there are many enzymes left that haven't been characterized yet.
I don't agree with you about the evidence. I think the proof that it's been found in the brain combined with that fact that brain synthesis pathway's have been found in other primates is stronger evidence than a single experiment showing INMT wasn't there. I could very well be wrong and there could be a bunch of experiments in this regard? I've seen biological assay's show completely different results from the same batch of material. We usually never find out why, we just take a bunch of runs and average the results. I should read the data around INMT more I suppose.
I know you are begin intentionally extreme with the ear example, but I'm still going to point out that talking about DMT being produced by the CNS where it has ample receptors that it binds to in addition to the fact there have been pathway's found in other mammals would quite likely be enough for research grant. Of course you'd need to detail exatly how you were going to search for the pathway and approach it. You might actually be able to do it as an offshot of other research. SO yes in this case I think it does deserve research grant funding were as I'd agree that your random speculation that the ear producing it certainly not worthy of study!
I don't believe I ever presented an unreliable source and I don't think anything I've said here is that extreme considering the evidence in my mind points towards a brain synthetic pathway....time will tell. We can disagree about which direction the evidence points and I'm ok with that. I mean as you mentioned there are others working on it. And there are plenty of scientist that have educated opinions regarding it even if they haven't published anything on it yet.
I'm sorry for making the friendly bet....it was an attempt to make light of the discussion.
I do agree with you that we should keep the nexus away from common misconceptions things that could be harmful to others, but I'm not ready to lump DMT being made in the brain as a misconception at this point.
I'm always ready to learn more as well and look forward to our future dialogs. This is a great site and you've provided immense insight, protection, and help to others.
alladinsgrandpa
Rising Star
joedirt said:
thanks! :lol: im one of the lazy ones right now
endlessness said:
Well, I probably should have started a new thread. I'm sorry but sometimes I don't look before I leap. Perhaps my arrogance is uncalled for, if so, please don't think of me consciously rude. Your point is well taken and I forget sometimes that such interjections are inapplicable and therefore, irrelevant. My bad. Yet, I did proceed with this direction and I may have erred in projecting a change in the topic ongoing. Despite my misplace interjection, I do wish to open a dialog about these phenomenon and how the interrelate to the physical brain.
I will beat a hasty retreat and raise this question in another part of the Nexus. I sincerely welcome all of you to participate, for these questions and the implications they present, are worthy of discussion, albeit in another thread.
BTW, I am quite explicit and often in extremes. I may not have the correct language to delineate the interrelationship between specific parts of the human brain and documented spiritual experiences, however, from my windowsill, this is in no way merely speculation. Perhaps you use this word because Indivisibility cannot be proven to a satisfactory degree, to appease the demands scientific academia? I cannot deny your impressions of such conceptions.
Still, I contend that this assessment is itself a subjective projection on your part and as valid as mine. Just don't infer that my offering was unexplicit. The greatest intellectual minds freely admit that science is subjective. What is objective? Gravity? How do we qualify objectivity? Who gets to call which ideas/experiences/conceptions are anything but subjective? As I welcome any and all ideas into any threads I initiate, regardless of how they are re-directed towards alternate discussions, I find it disconcerting that I am told to quiet down and collect my thoughts in a more explicit fashion.
Let's play nice? Have an illuminating discussion folks, I bid you adieu for the passing moment. Feel free to join me in a serious discussion about the issues I may have inappropriately raised in this thread. OK? See you around the next bend in the road, eh?
there's nothing "illuminating" about speaking of so-called drug-induced "enlightenment", and the speculations arising from certain hypotheses proposed over a decade ago. The fact remains that there are no facts on the matter, just proposed ideas with no evidence to support them.
Objectivity pertains to a conceptual model of a phenomena which can be observed by all. That is actually how science operates..answering questions objectively.
Unfortunately, a lot of mysticism is rooted in subjective experiences; therefore, they hold little relevance overall; you may feel differently about this, but that's subjectivity for ya.
Objectivity pertains to a conceptual model of a phenomena which can be observed by all. That is actually how science operates..answering questions objectively.
Unfortunately, a lot of mysticism is rooted in subjective experiences; therefore, they hold little relevance overall; you may feel differently about this, but that's subjectivity for ya.
benzyme said:
Now, now, don't be smug. It reveals volumes about your unwillingness to see through another's vantage point. In light of my intrusive comments, try to be objective and therefore open to the interpretation of another's experience. Why lump legitimate ideas with fantasy and children's books? Who spoke of unicorns and fairies? I raise a valid question and you return it with childish mockery. How can you so dismissively scoff at what you have obviously never experienced? This is clearly not an objective observation you make, it is a subjective projection aimed at fortifying your stance. I gotta be honest here, I believe we are meant to cooperate in our research. This is purely subjective on my part and largely speculative but I implore you to join the thread I am going to start about my previous questions. You don't have to like my terminology but I might suggest you remember that we are all on the same side. The bastards who are intentionally exploiting the environment and proliferating social inequality, the juxtaposition of poverty and extreme wealth, human suffering, warfare and genocide... those are the ones deserving your disdain (IMHO). Let's work together and bridge the gap between the spiritual and the scientific, shall we? 8)
How do you know I never experienced it?
I may have experienced it, and realized it for the illusion it was; like blind faith..too many questions, with no real answers.
the sciences attempt to answer these questions. the KEGG pathway I posted is very well documented, it is not anecdotal. Experiments have been extensively performed and referenced to map out clearly defined metabolic pathways
and alas, the pineal gland does not fit into the equation.
I may have experienced it, and realized it for the illusion it was; like blind faith..too many questions, with no real answers.
the sciences attempt to answer these questions. the KEGG pathway I posted is very well documented, it is not anecdotal. Experiments have been extensively performed and referenced to map out clearly defined metabolic pathways
and alas, the pineal gland does not fit into the equation.
benzyme said:
Hey, I know I said I was splitting but I just read your reply and had to respond. I don't know anything for an absolute certainty. In this way we are all the same. Still, I believe that some truths are truer than others. Hell, if every idea I ever had (or could ever be capable of having) was swiped clean from my mind, I believe I would still have consciousness. I would still have awareness. Why should I make this assertion, this commitment to conjecture? simply because I choose to believe and I have faith. Not blind faith, faith based direct personal and Omni-personal experiences. Faith, in the same way I have faith that I will not float off into space and die as I enter the stratosphere, because I believe I know that gravity will hold me bound to the earth. I hope that reality holds my form in place but this too is conjecture and largely speculative. Belief is based on practical experience, don't you think? Blind faith is based on preferences and wishing things to be as we want or hope them to be. It is ignorance on some levels. I refer to quite another state of mind. It's a knowing or conviction born of voyaging beyond the lines and boundaries of myself, pragmatic experimentation and genuine discoveries which inspire me to continue to merge deeper and yet deeper.
It isn't just a "drug enlightenment". I have had the same perception, growing exponentially, for over 30 years. Both, with the use of psychedelics and without their powerful aid. I might mention here, that I had refrained from tripping for nearly 18 years and have conducted research with "normal" consciousness. I find they are essentially the same experience, just a difference in degree and intensity. During this time I spent thousands of hours in meditation and soberly corroborated much of my earlier LSD, cacti and mushroom-inspired insights and observations about self and God.
It can be argued that this is may believe I know that you have never experienced union with the Omniself, for had you been so immersed, you would need no answers. Don't you get it? Knowledge of God is not wholly conceptual nor is it some kind of answer to all the unanswered and unproven mysteries of the universe. In a nutshell, it is about surrender. This requires abandoning oneself to ego death and a direct experience of the Omniself. Those who see the living presence understand. Those who have not seen this Indivisibility cannot understand. Obviously, I am making this assumption based on your mode of expression. Please forgive me if I err in judgement. That in and of itself, is a subjective projection and you called it right. Guilty as charged but I still respect your intelligence and honor your spirit, benzyme.
aha
now what you just wrote makes good sense. I can observe spirituality from the subjective perspective, and it is a grand thing. Takes a lot of discipline, and I have a certain respect for people who can observe its beauty consistently.
Stanislov Grov's 'Holotropic Breathwork' is a very powerful technique, and I think it just may elicit some endogenous tryptamine production, as well as pinoline. I do not know this for certain, but it seems reasonable.
somewhere along the way, I lost it..pursuit of the divine; a more rigid analytical view of the world took over my consciousness, but I hope to regain some of that dormant right-hemisphere mystique sometime in the near future.
now what you just wrote makes good sense. I can observe spirituality from the subjective perspective, and it is a grand thing. Takes a lot of discipline, and I have a certain respect for people who can observe its beauty consistently.
Stanislov Grov's 'Holotropic Breathwork' is a very powerful technique, and I think it just may elicit some endogenous tryptamine production, as well as pinoline. I do not know this for certain, but it seems reasonable.
somewhere along the way, I lost it..pursuit of the divine; a more rigid analytical view of the world took over my consciousness, but I hope to regain some of that dormant right-hemisphere mystique sometime in the near future.
benzyme said:
Well, it's only natural for people with exceptionally high IQs to have extremely activated left hemispheres of their brain. Yes? If your left brain is more activated than your right brain, that's not a crime, it is a gift. Please understand, it is something I could never, ever honestly condemn you for. Nor would I. It is my hope you don't think I would be projecting a polarized viewpoint, based on total ignorance of your ideologies and impressions. I would like to understand more, so I cross into these kinds of educated discussions to try and unite the opposing hemispheres in my own thinking. I freely admit, I couldn't possibly know your experiences or your realizations. Forgive me for my bradaggio, it's just my damn ego making a big fuss. Pride stinks and without co-operation, we are lost to a potential synergy or synthesis of ideas. :idea:
As far as the enlightenment stuff.... It is probably the as you imply, a right brain tendency. A good deal of what I was rattling on about is born within certain intense surges of right brain activity. Whether a curse or a blessing, I have an abundance of energy in this side of my brain. As a small child, I was diagnosed as "semi-autistic" (circa 1960's). Years later, I was labeled "mildly dyslexic" (circa 1970's). While my most recent IQ test indicates a score of 144, I cannot seem to retain enough cohesive rationality to navigate myself succinctly through proper grammar and correct spelling. Let alone, remember where I left my reading glasses! :lol: It's an odd situation in some contradictory ways but when I am feeling balanced and centered, everything seems to click. I think we are all best suited to have a balance in these realms of mind, as they relate to our brain activity.
Again, I yearn to comprehend some of the physiological aspects of the mystical states of consciousness. I still believe there is much I can learn from a scientific standpoint. Where can I search for contemporary research of this kind?
i'm naturally right-brained as a person (write left-handed).
I'm not a naturally math-oriented person, i had to work at it; more pattern-recognition, structures.
144 was mine too, though at age 13.
check out:
I'm not a naturally math-oriented person, i had to work at it; more pattern-recognition, structures.
144 was mine too, though at age 13.
check out:
