Interesting New DMT research

[AshvinP]

We should also remember the depth of 'truth', as Cleric indicated.





Even with regards to the 2nd batch, however, many people are satisfied only with the spiritual seeking we get from ancient wisdom traditions, which in the modern age have been imported into all sorts of new age self-help programs and associated theories. That is a form of truth in its own right, but it is a flattened or, at best, slightly inflated form. The question is whether we are interested in expanding that truth from within by continually asking 'how/why'. It should be a genuine asking of 'how/why', i.e. without expectation that we already have the answer or the answer will look exactly like something we are already familiar with.

How/why did the ancient wisdom traditions arise?
How/why did they evolve?
How/why are they working into our current thought-experience?
How/why am I pursuing them?

Any many similar ones. These sorts of questions all lead us into the depth structure of spiritual reality, i.e. the future of human evolution. They lead us into our real-time activity of Thinking from the Cosmic to the Individual scales of experience, from which all cultural forms of spirituality and their content over the ages have precipitated and continue to precipitate. The difference here really seems to be between those who recognize such questions exist, they are capable of being answered, they haven't yet been answered by us in any comprehensive way, the answers won't look like past forms of thinking we already know, and they are worth pursuing if we desire to become active participants in spiritual evolution, in contrast to those who fail to recognize most of those things. It's not about locking us into any rigid path of seeking the depth structure, which I think should be obvious from the diversity of angles brought to bear on this forum for approaching that structure, but simply recognizing in all seriousness that we are not already conscious of it in our familiar life of concepts (including mystical/psychedelic experiences formatted by those concepts).

In connection with the above, I want to share a passage which also highlights, by way of the New Testament, that the path of modern initiation is one which must necessarily seek ever-new forms through which it can approach the spiritual depth structure, and which I think is a principle nicely embodied on this forum. Many things can be understood in their proper context if we simply get a more living sense for the spiritual evolutionary stream of humanity over the epochs, within which we are tasked with continual adaptation.

The Baptist also baptized in this way in order to bring mankind into a closer union with the Godhead. And this is what all baptism signified in ancient times. It is a radical expression, but one which brings to our consciousness what is meant. Christ Jesus had to baptize with something different. He had to direct men, not to the past, but to the future through the development of a spirituality in their inner being. Through the “holy,” the undimmed and undefiled Spirit, the human spirit could be united with the Godhead. Baptism by water was a baptism of remembrance, that of the Holy Spirit is one of prophecy pointing to the future. That relationship which has been wholly lost, and which baptism by water recalls to mind has also been lost in all that was expressed in the symbol of the wine, of the sacrificial wine. Dionysos was the dismembered God who was drawn into the individual souls, separate parts no longer knowing anything of one another. Humanity was split into many pieces and thrown into matter through what alcohol has brought to the world, alcohol the symbol of Dionysos. In the Marriage at Cana, a great principle was preserved, the instructive principle of evolution. There are, to be sure, absolute truths, but they cannot at all times be revealed to men without preparation. Each age must have its special function, its special truths. Why is it that we can speak today of reincarnation, etc.? Why are we able to sit together in such an assembly as this and foster Spiritual Science? We can do so, because all of the souls which are present within you today have been incarnated upon the earth in so and so many bodies and so and so many times. Very many of the souls which are within you now lived at one time in the Germanic countries where the Druid priests walked among you and brought to your souls Spiritual Wisdom in the form of myth and saga. And because your soul received it in that form at that time, it is now in the position to receive it in another form, the Anthroposophical. At that time it was in the form of pictures — today it is in the form of Anthroposophy. But then it would not have been possible to impart truth in its present form. Do not imagine that the ancient Druid priest would have been able to impart the truth in the form in which it is presented today. Anthroposophy is the form befitting the humanity of the present or of the immediate future. In later incarnations truth will be proclaimed, and men will work for it in quite different forms, and what is now called Anthroposophy will be related as something remembered, just as we now relate the Sagas and Fairy-tales. Anthroposophists should not be foolish enough to say that in ancient times there existed only stupidities and childish ideas, and that we alone have advanced the world so gloriously. Those, for example, who pretend to be monists do this. But we are working in Spiritual Science in preparation for the next epoch. For if our present age were not here, the next would likewise not come.

Ashvin,

I see the need to mediate, and your wish to mitigate any harsh statements. Maybe framing ‘truth’ in these larger terms can resonate with someone with a 'self-care philosophy', but I doubt that. To be the devil's advocate for a second, why should I even start to consider wondering about those how/why questions, if I have adopted a self-care philosophy? When the wisdom traditions are reduced to collections of contemplative objects, the reason why I choose to contemplate them is precisely to avoid inquiring about any depth structure they might end up revealing, because I want the objects to work for me as is, and to serve me and my needs, instead of putting myself at the service of the wisdom, and truth they manifest.

But let’s imagine that someone really is moved by the ‘second batch’ of questions (the first batch has little to do with truth), is eager to search and enquire, and only lacks direction and inspiration. This type should be a quite common encounter on a philosophical forum like this one. Even in this case, I doubt that the how/why questions by themselves are able to elicit deep insights in the true nature of reality. The problem is, they start from an existing faith or tradition, that has already projected the believer ‘up there’, as a standpoint for asking about depth of structure and lawfulness. I would say it’s like parachuting over the ocean and trying to land on a small buoy - it's not going to happen! Is it through the expansion of traditional faith that the believer, the practitioner, will be able to land into the depth structure of reality, with its wealth of ‘administrative’ complexity? Surface answers would inevitably come out from asking these questions from that place, I would think, if there is no background to refer to for what the questions even mean, and what inner attitude is required when approaching the inquiry. I think the depth structure can only be inquired from the bottom up, in a sort of “Path of knowledge”, by those who have an affinity for such an approach.

On the other side, I doubt that the very fervent believer, the one who is driven along a “Path of devotion”, animated by the warmth of faith more than by reasoning and grasping, would feel any need, in connection with the ‘second batch’, that would not already and fully be addressed by the loftiness of their faith. I think those will typically not be the ones who would find themselves pursuing higher cognition, maybe with some rare exceptions, or ‘saints’.

So for me the difference here is between those who have a thirst for knowledge and truth and those who don't, rather than between followers of wisdom traditions who ask those how/why questions, and those who don’t. Am I being too strict and categorical?

Federica,

It wasn't really to mitigate your comment but just express some more context around it. I agree with what you have stated above, especially this part -  "The problem is, they start from an existing faith or tradition, that has already projected the believer ‘up there’, as a standpoint for asking about depth of structure and lawfulness." Let's take a concrete example from the forum. Lou wrote,

I do know users of Santo Daime across a very wide spectrum of philosophical positions, with a range of primary serious spiritual practices and with professional roles of high responsibility who report that usage has enhanced their real-time performance in the here-and-now. It surely has enhanced mine and I count it as a highly significant reason that I'm still alive

Now one level of truth is reflected in the above and we can rest satisfied with the mere fact that it has this effect, or we could go deeper and ask how/why does Santo Daime have this beneficent influence on our psycho-spiritual organism? It's very easy to confuse the latter with a conceptual scientific inquiry into the 'mechanisms' of the substances, such as we find in secular science. Maybe it's imagined we also throw in some language about higher beings and spiritual evolution and telos and what not. Then, based on that erroneous understanding of higher cognitive research, it is felt like that is needless or, at best, strictly optional dabbling in the details for genuine spiritual insight. As usual, our own premature assumptions then become our own greatest enemy in the pursuit of those insights. Eugene does the same thing at an even more extreme level, insofar as he constructs entire rigid theoretical frameworks of 'dualistic realms' because he can't imagine how higher cognitive activity actually unfolds. 

That's why you are absolutely correct that the inner orientation is paramount, or what I called the reverent longing for the currently unknown spheres of activity where the answers to such how/why questions have already been elaborated, and to which we must attune our thinking organism to become receptive to these answers, which will surely arrive in unsuspected, unanticipated, unfamiliar, etc. ways and forms. In that pursuit, we will often find the low-level truths which point towards influences that are seemingly beneficial for our current incarnation, also actively conceal the significant expenses of those influences for our transincarnational development. As we know, the intellect's modern purpose has been to conceal the deeper cognitive currents which lead us into pre-birth and post-death experiences, where our higher-level intents are at work. And, again, because 'higher cognition' is reduced to what we are currently familiar with, it is assumed the mystical/psychedelic experiences also basically lead us into these same cognitive currents. 

That isn't to say we should forsake the intellect altogether, but rather it should be used within its lawful domain, becoming a tool for our higher Be-ing to express its experiences to ourselves and others during normal waking life, helping to do its small but critical part in building the gradient from epoch to epoch of our spiritual evolution. It is only when it projects its current perspective 'up there', as you say, that it oversteps that lawful domain and then rests satisfied that whatever it is currently doing to know the higher worlds is practically the best that can be done, that it has 'communion with the beyond the beyond'. But what is truly beyond lawfully structures the conceptual-perceptual realm of the intellect in unsuspected ways and these intentional lines of force should become increasingly clear to us on the modern path of initiation, which doesn't rely on ancient or modern traditions or conveniences for its gradual ascent. Instead, it seeks to deeply illuminate the cognitive currents underlying those traditions and developments which are still active now.

[Federica]

Federica,

It wasn't really to mitigate your comment but just express some more context around it. I agree with what you have stated above, especially this part -  "The problem is, they start from an existing faith or tradition, that has already projected the believer ‘up there’, as a standpoint for asking about depth of structure and lawfulness." Let's take a concrete example from the forum. Lou wrote,

I do know users of Santo Daime across a very wide spectrum of philosophical positions, with a range of primary serious spiritual practices and with professional roles of high responsibility who report that usage has enhanced their real-time performance in the here-and-now. It surely has enhanced mine and I count it as a highly significant reason that I'm still alive

Now one level of truth is reflected in the above and we can rest satisfied with the mere fact that it has this effect, or we could go deeper and ask how/why does Santo Daime have this beneficent influence on our psycho-spiritual organism? It's very easy to confuse the latter with a conceptual scientific inquiry into the 'mechanisms' of the substances, such as we find in secular science. Maybe it's imagined we also throw in some language about higher beings and spiritual evolution and telos and what not. Then, based on that erroneous understanding of higher cognitive research, it is felt like that is needless or, at best, strictly optional dabbling in the details for genuine spiritual insight. As usual, our own premature assumptions then become our own greatest enemy in the pursuit of those insights. Eugene does the same thing at an even more extreme level, insofar as he constructs entire rigid theoretical frameworks of 'dualistic realms' because he can't imagine how higher cognitive activity actually unfolds. 

That's why you are absolutely correct that the inner orientation is paramount, or what I called the reverent longing for the currently unknown spheres of activity where the answers to such how/why questions have already been elaborated, and to which we must attune our thinking organism to become receptive to these answers, which will surely arrive in unsuspected, unanticipated, unfamiliar, etc. ways and forms. In that pursuit, we will often find the low-level truths which point towards influences that are seemingly beneficial for our current incarnation, also actively conceal the significant expenses of those influences for our transincarnational development. As we know, the intellect's modern purpose has been to conceal the deeper cognitive currents which lead us into pre-birth and post-death experiences, where our higher-level intents are at work. And, again, because 'higher cognition' is reduced to what we are currently familiar with, it is assumed the mystical/psychedelic experiences also basically lead us into these same cognitive currents. 

That isn't to say we should forsake the intellect altogether, but rather it should be used within its lawful domain, becoming a tool for our higher Be-ing to express its experiences to ourselves and others during normal waking life, helping to do its small but critical part in building the gradient from epoch to epoch of our spiritual evolution. It is only when it projects its current perspective 'up there', as you say, that it oversteps that lawful domain and then rests satisfied that whatever it is currently doing to know the higher worlds is practically the best that can be done, that it has 'communion with the beyond the beyond'. But what is truly beyond lawfully structures the conceptual-perceptual realm of the intellect in unsuspected ways and these intentional lines of force should become increasingly clear to us on the modern path of initiation, which doesn't rely on ancient or modern traditions or conveniences for its gradual ascent. Instead, it seeks to deeply illuminate the cognitive currents underlying those traditions and developments which are still active now.

Thanks for this further clarification, Ashvin, I'm following. This reminder in particular:

the low-level truths which point towards influences that are seemingly beneficial for our current incarnation, also actively conceal the significant expenses of those influences for our transincarnational development. As we know, the intellect's modern purpose has been to conceal the deeper cognitive currents which lead us into pre-birth and post-death experiences, where our higher-level intents are at work. And, again, because 'higher cognition' is reduced to what we are currently familiar with, it is assumed the mystical/psychedelic experiences also basically lead us into these same cognitive currents.

seems relevant. A constantly challenging pitfall is to take these inquiries as a leisure, optional activity, forgetting the expenses and waste of common resources we cause by choosing to not address the "second batch of questions" seriously enough, despite being in a position in life where we could do it. When we are happy to enjoy the freedom but not to take the responsibility that comes with it, we are setting the preconditions for further suffering. I realize this can be constantly experienced at many levels, through big ans small occurrences of suffering, in us and around us.