Published on Apr 17, 2017
How to know God – by knowing yourself part 1
Published on Apr 17, 2017
How to know God – by knowing yourself part 1
Published on Apr 13, 2017
A discussion about the stages of understanding and the definitions of Knowing, Awareness and Consciousness.
From the seven day retreat at Mercy Center October 2015.
Published on Apr 12, 2017
Jürgen Ziewe ‘The Ten Minute Moment’ Interview by Iain McNay
Author of ‘The Ten Minute Moment,’ ‘Multi-Dimensional Man,’ and ‘Vistas of Infinity.’ After 40 years of meditation which had gradually taken him to deeper and deeper places Jürgen went on a 7 day personal retreat in as remote cabin in Scotland. He meditated most of the day and experienced a profound awakening….
‘After a meditation I slowly opened my eyes and sized up my surroundings – my body had become part of the furniture. I could still perceive the external world through my eyes but my body had turned into a shell – a cardboard cutout – reality was being stripped away before my eyes. I could no longer be sure of what was happening – it was beyond and outside anything I had come to know. The stillness was too vast in its scope to be grasped. There was no reality as I knew it. The thing is it has always been different but I hadn’t noticed. It was reality stripped of any familiarity. I could almost not bear it. For a moment I wanted to go back. In an instant I recognised that I was just a thought; an imagination without no substance.
This was the death of all deaths. I had arrived at zero point. I was about to be surrendered and reabsorbed into the source. One more step and there would be no return – I was staring into the merciless face of God.’
He also talks us through his life, how he refused to accept that the 5 senses was all there is to reality and how that led to a life long quest to find out who or what this consciousness was conscious of.
World transformation involves replacing old paradigm theories and practices that have held back humanity’s progress since time immemorial. To be an effective replacement, the new paradigm approaches with their innovative theories and practices need first and foremost to offer definitive humanitarian solutions for the co-creation of a world that makes a difference for everyone.
In light of this need for world transformation, here are 7 old-to-new paradigm-shifting humanitarian solutions.
Old paradigm: Parasitical, hierarchical, controlling pyramids, emphasising competitiveness.
New paradigm: Essentially, no hierarchy, decentralized organizations, emphasising co-operation.
In the current old paradigm, the organizational classes whom make up the hierarchical controlling ‘power pyramids’ have a number of common patterns:
The very top of the controlling pyramid is parasitical, while those supporting the system at the bottom are slaves.
Those individuals at the very top, such as those in banks and mega-corporations, may exhibit behavioural patterns related to psychopathy, as the parasitical control system resonates with psychopaths, who are known to do well in business.
Information flows from the top down on a need-to-know basis.
The select few at the top propagating orders, rules, dictates etc, to which the rest of the members in the pyramid must follow, makes this organization a consciousness and soul-destroying set up.
In contrast, as a humanitarian solution to the old, the new paradigm:
Focuses on equality
Works as a team
Thus, eliminates the parasitical predatory pyramid with its psychopaths and power trippers.
Stops orders getting followed blindly. Communication, truth and transparency are keys.
Focuses on natural law as opposed to the potentially destructive man’s law.
Here is a classic example of the above in terms of organizational comparisons between the old and the new paradigm.
Old paradigm: In politics the hierarchical tree is ultimately an exercise in total control. The controlling political establishment has to go to extreme lengths in order to maintain the control: Mass programming, brainwashing, surveillance, harsh law enforcement, media propaganda, etc.
New paradigm: Having no hierarchical pyramid, any organization, such as a government and their obsession with control would be redundant. The government would no longer be looked upon as an organization to be dependent upon: No need for us to have any contract.
Related reading: Our Perception of Leadership Needs to Change If We Are To Change The World
3. Scientific approaches
Old paradigm: The science, theory and application, is stuck on limitations and even delusional beliefs based on materialism: It is chained to the wishes and dictates of corporate/banker sponsors who would rather see profits than real humanitarian progress, with its dogmatic scientists from the ‘church of scientism…’
New paradigm: Goes beyond the limitations related to materialism and corporate/banker profit-based sponsorship. It involves a willingness to embrace and approach a number of subjects rejected by the old paradigm, such as for example, consciousness.
Thus, the new paradigm scientific approaches would solve many unsolved problems caused by the limitations imposed by the old, such as finding cures for disease and making use of free energy which would indeed be humanity-transforming with its innovative pioneers/inventors.
For more information, take a look at Rupert Sheldrake’s ‘10 Untruths made in Science’ with a view to how science could be set free through a turnaround.
Old paradigm: As mentioned in Sheldrake’s ‘10 Untruths made in Science’ the medicine is mechanistic in its approach. It asserts that the body needs medical intervention rather than focussing on the body’s ability to heal naturally. Natural and holistic health based approaches are mainly ignored.
This limited approach to medicine has much to do with the Rockefeller owned and controlled corporate based medical pharmaceutical establishment with its ‘pill for every ill’ mentality. It puts profits over the genuine welfare concerns of people. It has gone to extreme lengths to suppress proven alternative natural health based cures for disease, as these approaches threaten their business.
New paradigm: Goes beyond mechanistic medicine, as it is holistic in approach. It looks at the mind-body-spirit connection that makes up the very fabric of our being. For example, diet nutrition not only focuses on preventative measures, but is also used as curative medicine. Sound, colour and frequency healing modalities would alhave a place.
Unlike the old paradigm’s medical pharmaceutical establishment based medicine which only treats symptoms, guaranteeing repeat business, natural health approaches are capable of curing.
Related reading: Monopoly Medicine: How Big Pharma Stops Its Competitors and Monopolizes the Health Industry
Old paradigm: The quality of the food we eat directly reflects our health: Having the monopoly on production and sales, Big Food mega-corporations demonstrate an abject failure to promote good health through mass producing processed junk foods. Many Americans serve as testimony to this. Through their heavy long-term consumption of these processed junk foods there has been a massive rise in obesity, and much ill health.
‘Mans Law’ supersedes ‘Natural Law’: a biotech company with their genetically modified (GM) foods is a classic example where in the old paradigm ‘Mans Law’ has superseded ‘Natural Law.’ Through tinkering with God-given nature, their manmade GM foods having toxic genes and agrochemicals, threatens the health of consumers, causing diseases and allergies. Then there’s much concern over whether or not the genetic modifications will cause extinction of certain species and how this could affect ecosystems.
New paradigm: As a contrast to the industrial monoculture, our food system is getting redefined. Increasing in numbers, people as individuals and in communities are growing their own food. Some have created their own farms. Based on organic principles, the food produced is of high quality and promotes good health through its consumption.
Old paradigm: The mainstream media owned and controlled by the world’s ruling elite, is a propaganda and mind control tool used to manipulate the masses into a consensus reality. In ‘Orwellian Newspeak’ fashion, the mainstream media wants complete control over the narrative: It claims to be the definitive news source, even though it has been exposed on numerous occasions for reporting blatant lies, cover-ups and deception, to favour hidden agendas. It will not accept the alternative view.
New paradigm: The alternative (independent) media continues to redefine journalism: In recent times, many of us have seen how the ruling elite’s mainstream media have tried to blackout the alternative media with false accusations of ‘fake news.’
Real journalism, unbiased reporting, truths, transparency, and enlightenment are the future: That future is in the alternative media. Viva alternative media!
Related reading: Why Alternative Media is the New Mainstream
7. The paradigm shift
Old paradigm: Heavy bias towards coming from the head, particularly left-brain intellectualism, often devoid of true morality.
New paradigm: Takes the more holistic approach; more involved in thinking, feeling, responding, and acting from the heart, doing what is honest, right, fair and just.
From the heart-based perspective, besides getting active practically, seeing how we could be involved in the creation of the new paradigm, to make a difference, we also need to focus on where we are consciously at with our thoughts, feelings, emotionns and how we perceive our reality, as our inner world reflects the outer world.
In other words, consciousness is the key to world change.
Some may dismiss the idea of world transformation, seeing it as nothing more than a pipe-dream. But world transformation through the new paradigm is not an option for humanity any longer — it is an ultimatum. To be blunt, it’s a do-or-die situation. As more and more people from all over the world are waking up, let’s take the creation of the new paradigm experience one step at a time.
Paul Philips: My blogs, articles and videos and my related alternative news/natural health website NewParadigm.ws are my stand for the possibility of creating a world that makes a difference for everyone. I graduated in biomedical sciences. My website is slanted on health matters and exposes the related deceptions…
However, over the years I have come to the firm conclusion that just about every subject under the sun needs redefining using more truthful, honest and integral approaches in theory and practice, hence the name ‘New Paradigm’. From these new approaches, from the ‘imagination of ourselves,’ from our visions – a ‘new era’ in humanity can result!
Published on Apr 4, 2017
With Julia Mossbridge, Donald Hoffman, Edward Frenkel, Anthony Aguirre, Federico Faggin; facilitated by Deepak Chopra.
Five different scientists with varying views of consciousness or mind. This panel will be a conversation between these different views to understand their contributions, and to see how they understand each other, and how they relate to other theories of consciousness. The point is to have a genuine deep dialogue between scientific theories of consciousness, to find commonalities, and the meaning of the differences. We will explore whether scientific theories have a consensus about anything relating to consciousness, like an operating definition of consciousness. This panel will be facilitated with an eye from the nondual view of consciousness, to ask questions and address issues in the study of consciousness that can help in looking deeper into the assumptions and conclusions of each theory.
The following is an extract from Rupert’s book: ‘The Transparency of Things: Contemplating the Nature of Experience‘…
There is something present which is experiencing the current situation. We do not know what that something is, yet we know for certain that it is present, that it is conscious.
We know that it is not the mind, the body or the world, because the mind, the body and the world are part of the current situation that is being experienced.
The mind, the body and the world appear to this witnessing presence of Consciousness.
If we try to find this Consciousness, if we turn our attention towards it, we are unable to see it or find it, because it does not have any objective qualities.
If it had objective qualities, these qualities would themselves be part of the current situation that is being experienced. They would be experienced by this witnessing presence of Consciousness. They would appear to it, along with all other objects.
At the same time, it is our direct experience that this witnessing presence of Consciousness is undeniably present. It is our most intimate Self.
It is what we know ourselves to be. It is what we call ‘I.’
The current situation is changing all the time. Even if the changes are minute, nevertheless from moment to moment we are presented with a different configuration of mind, body and/or world.
However, this conscious witnessing Presence, this ‘I,’ never changes. It is always simply present, open, available, aware.
Due to the inadvertent and exclusive association of Consciousness with the body and the mind, we tend to think that any change in the body and the mind implies a change in Consciousness.
However, if we look closely at our experience, we see clearly that we have never experienced any change in Consciousness itself.
If we look back over our lives we see that this conscious Presence has always been exactly as it is now. It has never changed, moved, appeared or disappeared.
The very first experience we ever had as a newborn baby was experienced by this witnessing presence of Consciousness. Consciousness was present to witness this first experience, but did we ever experience the appearance of Consciousness?
If the appearance of Consciousness was an experience there would have to have been another Consciousness present to witness this appearance. And if the appearance of Consciousness has never been experienced, what validity is there to the claim that Consciousness appears, that it has a beginning, that it was born?
Likewise have we ever experienced an end to Consciousness? If we experienced the disappearance of Consciousness, there would have to be another Consciousness present to witness this disappearance. And this ‘new’ Consciousness, which witnessed the disappearance of the ‘old’ Consciousness, would have to be present during and after its disappearance, in order to make the claim legitimately that it witnessed its disappearance.
Therefore we cannot claim that we ever have the experience of the disappearance of Consciousness and so what validity is there to our conviction that we, as Consciousness, die?
We experience a beginning and an end to all objects, but we never experience a beginning or an end to Consciousness, to our Self.
We may think that Consciousness disappears when we fall asleep and reappears on waking, but this is in fact not our experience. It is an uninvestigated belief.
However, it is a belief that has taken hold so deeply and become so much a part of the accepted norm, that we actually think that we experience the disappearance of Consciousness when we fall asleep.
As we fall asleep we first experience the withdrawal of sense perceptions or, more accurately, the faculties of perceiving and sensing. With the disappearance of perceiving, the world vanishes from our experience and with the disappearance of sensing, the body vanishes from our experience, leaving only thinking and imagining. This is the dream state.
The thinking and imagining functions are in turn withdrawn and, as a result, the dream state gives way to deep sleep.
In deep sleep Consciousness simply remains as it always is, open and aware, only there are no objects present within it.
Consciousness projects the appearance of the mind, body and world by taking the shape of thinking, sensing and perceiving.
The process of falling asleep is not one of a separate entity transitioning through states. It is simply the withdrawal of this projection.
Due to the fact that we have so closely and exclusively identified Consciousness with the body and the mind, we presume that the absence of the mind and body during the experience of deep sleep implies an absence of Consciousness.
However, that is simply the mind’s interpretation of an experience during which it was not present. It is a presumption based on a presumption.
It is a presumption that Consciousness is in Reality exclusively identified with the body and the mind, and this in turn gives rise to another presumption that Consciousness disappears when the body and mind disappear on falling asleep and, by implication, when the body dies.
This is not our experience in the first case and there is no evidence to suggest that it will be our experience in the second.
There is evidence that sentience disappears on death, but not that Consciousness disappears.
After a period of deep sleep, the Consciousness that was present there takes the shape of thinking and imagining and, as a result, the dream state reappears.
And in turn, after a period of dreaming, Consciousness takes the shape of sensing and perceiving and, as a result, the body and the world are recreated, that is, the waking state reappears.
If we look at deep sleep from the point of view of the waking state, it appears to have lasted a certain length of time, in the same way that the objects that appear in the dream and waking states appear to last for a certain length of time.
Time is the imagined duration between one appearance and another. There are no appearances during deep sleep and therefore time is not present there.
In fact time is not even present in the dreaming and waking states but at least the illusion of time is present in these states. In deep sleep not even the illusion of time is present.
Time, in the waking and dreaming states, is an illusion. In deep sleep, it is a presumption.
The language of the waking state is based on objects and time, and therefore, when we view dreamless sleep from the point of view of the waking state, we think that it must have lasted for a certain duration, because the mind cannot imagine timelessness.
The mind construes that the time it imagines to be real is an actual experience. It imagines that time is present in the absence of mind, in the absence of itself, and therefore imagines that deep sleep has duration. Deep sleep is therefore considered to be a state.
However, divested of duration, deep sleep is in fact the timeless presence of Consciousness that is beyond, behind and within all states and, although it gives birth to the appearance of time, it is not itself in time.
Our experience is that deep sleep is simply the timeless presence of Consciousness that does not appear or disappear.
Does that which is present during deep sleep or rather, that which is present as deep sleep, disappear when the dreaming world appears?
No! The dreaming world simply emerges within deep sleep, that is, within this timeless Consciousness.
Does that which is present as deep sleep disappear when the world of the waking state appears?
No! The waking world simply emerges within deep sleep, within this timeless Consciousness.
The transition from deep sleep to dreaming to waking is seamless. In fact it is not a transition at all. It is presumed to be a transition only from the point of view of the waking state where a separate entity seems to transition from one state to another.
However, from the point of view of Consciousness there is no transition, there is simply a flow of changing appearances, and sometimes no appearances at all, in its own ever-present Reality.
That which is deep sleep, timeless Presence, does not disappear in order for the dreaming and waking worlds to appear. It simply remains as it always is and, at the same time, takes the shape of the dreaming and waking worlds.
At no point in this process does a separate entity fall asleep or transition from one state to another.
Nobody falls asleep and nobody wakes up.
When viewed from the perspective of the waking state, deep sleep is a state. When viewed from its own perspective, it is timeless Presence.
Published on Mar 26, 2017
Sruti is a spiritual teacher who writes about finding God within an experience with an uncommon and painful illness called Interstitial Cystitis. She has been interviewed on the Buddha at the Gas Pump talk show on YouTube about her experience of spiritual awakening in the midst of intense pain
This ongoing and chronic condition challenged her to stay present with daily pain and to look further inward for answers. In an extreme moment of pain, in which consciousness began to fade, Sruti experienced the erasure of all that clouds over the earliest source of vision.
She watched as one by one the layers of the mind, the body and feelings disappeared before her. She asks the question: Who is the One that Can Never Leave You? With whose vision are we seeing when the lights are going out? Has this early vision ever known anything at all?
Sruti’s book, The Hidden Value of Not Knowing, is available as an audiobook and an eBook online at Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01IBZFPIM
Published on Mar 26, 2017
Why do people want to become enlightened? According to spiritual teacher Adyashanti the spiritual impulse inside every human is because of Life’s longing to become fully conscious of itself. Life pushes us and it will do whatever it needs to in order to accomplish this goal: to become fully conscious of itself.
One of the most surprising survivors in our society, long counted out as either moribund or dead, is philosohy “love of truth,” as the Greek term describes, was defeated by science and its love of facts. So it was unexpected when the New York Times ran an op-ed piece titled “If We Are Not Just Animals, What Are We?” (March 6, 2017) by the veteran English philosopher Roger Scruton.
The piece begins by nodding toward the tradition of endowing human beings with a soul, a supernatural spark that sets us apart from the animals, and quite realistically Scruton notes that “Recent advances in genetics, neuroscience, and evolutionary psychology have all but killed off that idea.” Although a popular belief in the soul is very much alive, our official secular culture and its primary source of knowledge, science, totally dismisses it.
What then? Scruton uses a split-the-difference tactic, arguing that although we are undeniably animals who evolved from primitive ancestors, we aren’t just animals. We are special creatures, beginning with our sense of morality. Modern philosophy, therefore, continues to ask the same questions about human specialness as ancient philosophy, searching for the true secret of being human. Scruton looks first to morality as a truth about being human, which most people would sympathize with.
“We believe that people have rights, that they are sovereign over their lives, and that those who live by enslaving or abusing others,” he writes, “are denying their own humanity.” But this appeal seems doomed, I think, because in a secular society truth and facts are the same, and for every nice thing that makes humans special, there are savage behaviors that place us far below the animal kingdom. Genocide, whether we like it or not, is just as human as compassion.
Scruton has more to say, but I think there’s an essential point he misses. Placing science up against philosophy doesn’t hold water, because science is itself a philosophy. The noted senior physicist George Ellis has pointed out quite sharply that when scientists disdain metaphysics, as the vast majority do, they are ignorant of the fact that their view of Nature is also metaphysical. To say that we live in a random universe, for example, is just as metaphysical as saying that the universe was made by God. Arguing than human begins are a mere speck in the cosmos, accidents of evolution that probably got repeated on hundreds or thousands of planets in other galaxies, declares a truth about humanness that is philosophical in its ramifications.
So splitting the difference with science isn’t going to breathe new life into philosophy. Scruton winds up with a fuzzy declaration that is unscientific but also inadequate philosophy: “…as persons we inhabit a life-world that is not reducible to the world of nature.” There’s nothing helpful in this, because things we cherish in our “life-world,” like love and compassion, are still going to be reduced to scientific explanations that for better or worse will rule the argument for a long time, just as they rule the argument now. If science is actually a philosophy, the critical question is this: which philosophy is the best one to live by?
The current crisis in physics doesn’t feature the word philosophy, but the predicaments are absolutely philosophical. Let me sketch in just one critical problem, which might be called the fudge factor. Fudging can imply dishonesty or taking shortcuts, but not in this case. Rather, certain numbers and explanations serve as placeholders while science awaits a new model—or even a new perspective on reality—to fill in the gaps. With the “discovery” of so-called dark matter and dark energy, physics has tried to fill in an enormous gap between theory and reality. Certain phenomena like the speed at which galaxies are rushing away from one another, cannot be explained away with new data. To fill in an enormous discrepancy, particularly in the cosmological constant, one of the most fundamental mathematical calculations in physics, dark matter and energy came along quite conveniently. Neither has ever been observed or directly measured. There is a strong feeling that their structure may be totally alien to the accepted structure of time, space, matter, and energy in the visible (non-dark) universe.
Since fudging the numbers requires such a huge adjustment, it was necessary to rebalance creation so that 96% of it is dark, while the visible universe, including all the matter contained in stars, planets, galaxies, and interstellar dust, amount to only 4% of the total. This means that reality is largely unknown, for even though it’s accepted in many circles that a special particle known as a WIMP (Weakly Interacting Massive Particle) may forge a link with the known universe, no one has ever detected such a particle. Like the multiverse and superstring theory, dark matter and energy may be unknowable. All of these structures are totally mathematical, existing as creations of human consciousness. They provide no data or measurements. Therefore, if you are a radical skeptic, the whole superstructure of modern physics may be just a huge fudge factor.
Even if you aren’t willing to take that spectacular leap, even everyday subatomic particles like electrons are not objective, free-standing things like a loaf of bread or a tree. Being dual in nature, electrons exhibit “thingness” when they are observed but exist the rest of the time as waves of potentiality with no fixed qualities of any kind. This is a bedrock fact of quantum physics going back to its early days over a century ago. To stitch together a marriage of convenience between the everyday world of big objects and the quantum world of very tiny ones (which are dubiously called objects in the first place), it was necessary to erect a wall separating the two domains. This détente isn’t scientifically convincing, but at least it was reassuring. Quantum events could continue to be “spooky action at a distance” while the everyday world chugged along normally.
Only now it appears that the everyday world of big objects is probably quantum in nature, too. Big objects move so slowly, however, that we are fooled by their appearance of solidity. In reality, nothing is fixed, solid, firmly in place, or unchanging. Every piece of creation is caught up in the same process of flow, unpredictability, and spookiness. Without going into details, let’s admit that the fudge factor, which attests to a huge mismatch between theory and reality, upends science’s claim to hard-headed facts. Science is a collection of concepts created in the human mind, just like philosophy. Electrons exist because in our species of consciousness, we gave them a name attached to a concept, and one of the concepts was to call electrons objects or things. In another mode of knowing—perhaps possessed by “dark” thinkers in a domain we can’t conceive of-electrons are totally different, if they exist at all. All of these ideas are explored in great detail in a new book , You Are the Universe I co-wrote with physicist Menas Kafatos.
Over the past century philosophy has capitulated to science, and all of us, whether we realize it or not, live according to the philosophy that science espouses. Because of science’s triumphant discovery of new technologies, we assume that its philosophy must be right. This is like a medieval person who happened to see an airplane fly overhead then rushes to tell his priest that God is real. Technology isn’t the doorkeeper of truth. There is really only one viable way forward. A livable philosophy must be based on a foundation in reality, and for that purpose, the only way we know anything is through consciousness. Reality is an activity in consciousness, whether it’s a matter of falling in love or creating the concept of an electron. Until everyone begins to explore a consciousness-based approach to reality, the pursuit of science and philosophy will both be hobbled.
Deepak Chopra MD, FACP, founder of The Chopra Foundation and co-founder of The Chopra Center for Wellbeing, is a world-renowned pioneer in integrative medicine and personal transformation, and is Board Certified in Internal Medicine, Endocrinology and Metabolism. He is a Fellow of the American College of Physicians, Clinical Professor UCSD Medical School, researcher, Neurology and Psychiatry at Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH), and a member of the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists. The World Post and The Huffington Post global internet survey ranked Chopra #17 influential thinker in the world and #1 in Medicine. Chopra is the author of more than 85 books translated into over 43 languages, including numerous New York Times bestsellers. His latest books are You Are the Universe co-authored with Menas Kafatos, PhD, and Quantum Healing (Revised and Updated): Exploring the Frontiers of Mind/Body Medicine.discoveringyourcosmicself.com
Source: The Huffington Post
Nowadays, psychoactive substances such as Ayahuasca and DMT are widely used with a spiritual intention, as a means of self-exploration and self-expansion. Ayahuasca in particular has a similar status as an ‘elixir of enlightenment’ to LSD in the 1960s.
I don’t think there is any doubt that psychedelics can generate temporary higher states of consciousness (or ‘awakening experiences’, as I prefer to call them). Some writers on mysticism – usually from a religious background – have argued that psychedelic awakening experiences can’t be ‘genuine,’ because they are artificially induced. But this is surely short-sighted and prejudiced. Psychedelic awakening experiences feature many of the same characteristics of other awakening experiences – intensified perception of one’s surroundings, a sense of connection or oneness to the world and revelations about the nature of reality, and so on. I’ve collected many reports of psychedelic-induced awakening experiences which feature these aspects (some of which I quote from in my book Waking From Sleep).
But although psychedelics can bring temporary awakening experiences, I think it’s very unlikely that they can lead to a permanent higher state of consciousness – that is, a state of ‘enlightenment,’ or in my preferred term, ‘wakefulness.’ The reason for this is that psychedelics are basically dissolutive – that is, they achieve their effect by dissolving away our normal mental structures, and putting our normal psychological mechanisms out of action. (I like to use the term ‘self-system’ for these structures and mechanisms.) When the normal self-system dissolves away, our sense of boundary disappears, so that we no longer experience separateness. Our normal concepts of ourselves and of reality fade away too, so that we feel we’re looking at the world and ourselves in a completely new way. The contents of our subconscious mind may open up into our conscious mind, as the boundary between them fades away as well.
This is fine for temporary awakening experiences, but permanent wakefulness can only occur if there is a new self-system to replace the normal one. It’s not enough to dissolve the sense of self – a new self has to replace it.
This is the major difference between prolonged spiritual practice and psychedelics. Prolonged spiritual practice (such as regular meditation or the following of a path such as the eightfold path of Buddhism, or the eight-limbed path of yoga) will gradually form a new self which will slowly supplant your old self – a self-system with much softer boundaries, a much less powerful sense of individuality and separateness, intensified perception, much reduced associational ‘thought-chatter’ and so on. This self-system may be so subtle and integrated within the whole of our being that you might not even notice that it’s there.
In other words, spiritual practice is basically constructive – it gradually changes the structures of consciousness, re-moulding our self-system into a higher functioning form. But psychedelics don’t facilitate the emergence of a new self-system. With the regular use of psychedelics, the danger is that the structures of the normal self-system will completely dissolve way, and without another self-system to supplant it, there will simply be a psychic vacuum, which equates with a state of psychosis. And unfortunately there have been many cases of this. In fact, you could say that this is really the only permanent psychological change which the regular use of psychedelics can bring: not awakening, but psychosis.
Of course, a person may decide to take psychedelics at the same time as following a spiritual practice, or it may be that the use of psychedelics is simply one element of a wider, more general spiritual path. In that case, it’s less likely that they will be disruptive, and more likely that they will have positive effects. The real danger is of using psychedelics independently, and particularly without any supervision.
There’s a further aspect to this though: psychedelics can be transformative in the sense that they can show us an expanded reality, and make us realise that the normal world we perceive is just part of the story. And once we’ve become aware of this expanded reality, it can change our outlook and our values. It can also awaken an impulse to return to the expanded reality in a more reliable, organic way – that is, through following spiritual practices and paths. This is a topic I’ll address in more detail in my next blog.
Steve Taylor is a senior lecturer in psychology at Leeds Beckett University, UK. This article is an excerpt from his book The Leap: The Psychology of Spiritual Awakening. http://www.stevenmtaylor.com
Published on Mar 20, 2017
This clip is an excerpt from a collection of yoga meditations taken from Rupert Spira’s new box set Transparent Body, Luminous World: The Tantric Yoga of Sensation and Perception. The box set includes a set of six mp3 CDs with over 30 hours of guided yoga meditations; and a paperback book of the transcriptions of the spoken meditations.
The 24 yoga meditations explore the experience of the body and world as a continuously changing flow of sensations and perceptions appearing in, known by and made of awareness. These direct and penetrating contemplations discuss and facilitate the gradual alignment of the non-dual understanding with the way the body and world are felt and perceived.
‘Under Rupert Spira’s precise and loving guidance, this esoteric teaching becomes an actual, felt experience… As you follow his pointing-out instructions, body, thoughts, sensations and sounds start to reveal themselves as arising inside a borderless Awareness. In time, you begin to feel your entire experience as saturated with Awareness, made of Awareness, dancing inside Awareness. Connecting to the Presence flowing through Rupert’s words, you literally catch the awakened state. Rupert’s pointing-out instructions can free Consciousness to recognize itself, so that gradually – or suddenly! – your body and the world around you become transparent to the knowing Presence that is experiencing itself as you.’
– Sally Kempton, author of Meditation for the Love of It and Awakening Shakti
‘Rupert speaks from within a field of infinite tenderness, mind and heart joined in awe of the mystery of existence. This is a voice from inside the truth, creating fresh language, a lovingly crafted stream of revelation. This is a voice of infinite gentleness speaking through space and time from the Awareness beyond space and time, reminding us all of our own essence. I am stunned by the beauty and clarity here.’
– Lorin Roche, author of The Radiance Sutras: 112 Gateways to the Yoga of Wonder and Delight and Meditation Secrets for Women
‘Rupert points out that it’s one thing to think the separate self doesn’t exist, quite another to actually feel it. Here, in extraordinary depth and clarity, we are taken through a series of explorative meditations to allow us to feel and experience directly our real nature – unnameable knowing – beyond all boundaries of time and space.’
– Billy Doyle, author of Yoga in the Kashmir Tradition: The Art of Listening and The Mirage of Separation
For more information or to buy go to: http://www.sahajapublications.com/boo…
Published on Mar 17, 2017
http://adyashanti.org – Adyashanti explores what is occurring within the field of our consciousness in every moment. How do you react to situations, no matter whether they are positive or negative experiences of being? Do you find truth and reality within them, or do you simply allow them to be as they are? Instead of being led around by the content of your experience, what would happen if you didn’t automatically ascribe reality to every emotion or thought that arises?
Quotes from this Video:
“We all become completely mesmerized by whatever is occurring within our field of consciousness—whatever we think, whatever we feel, our reactions to what is happening in the world around us, our reactions to our own reactions, and our thoughts about our thinking.”
“There’s nothing in the world that’s going to tell you, ‘You shouldn’t be thinking so much,’ except another thought.”
“Our consciousness is always involved in this relationship with its environment. It’s always eliciting feelings, experiences, and thoughts about those feelings and experiences — and often looking for reality within that matrix.”