The Mandala effect
I am coming off Vyvanse 20mg, and some antidepressant supplements as well as a cup of coffee.
In other words, it may not be the best time for me to try to describe the idea that I am about to.
When I am completely sober or coming up on Vyvanse, itès much easier for me to think of these things. But I did have the urge to at least try, so I will.
I was about 20 years old when I first thought of what I now call the "mandala" effect. The first time I had ever experienced this, to my memory,
is around the time I tried mescaline and noticed that everything was connected by light or electromagnetic radiation.
I have always been aware to some degree, of the interconnectedness within the universe. However, for much of my life, I had not thought about it.
On mescaline, I experienced the very, very surface of this effect, and frankly an amphetamine could've granted me the same kind of thinking or insight
had I been clear-minded enough.
At age 20, I thought psilocybin would possibly be a prime agonist of the conscious realization of this phenomenon or hypothesis.
At times, I think about cause and effect, how one thing changes in a way which changes something near it, which changes something near it, etc.
I've wondered if this chain reaction goes literally through the entire universe and then overlaps and interferes with itself like a wave in the water
would. I may have wondered if this process was lossy or not, as in that it's detail, structure, or degree of effect gradually deteriorated in a manner
separate from natural phenomena that might suppress or increase its effect.
As a teenager, I sometimes had the impression that, for example, certain areas of space were so empty of reality that they could not carry "signals" or influences from earth to distant regions of the universe. It's the same kind of thing with the relation between what's outside of a black hole (or its event horizon) and what's inside it. It's possibly, perhaps likely, that a friend of mine named Bart thought in this manner as well.
As with anyone who experiments with psychedelics (including, in my opinion, responsible use of amphetamines and other stimulating drugs, and possibly cannabis though cannabis has failed to bring me much insight, or especially, clarity), my view gradually changed from one of separation, lack of interaction, individuality, etc. as a way of seeing the universe, into one of connection, association, similarity, similarity within difference, and best of all, the ability to realize that what we are taught verbally is a black and white version of how reality can, and in some ways does, function or exist.
Before, I may have thought of influence in a more physical manner. For example, a man who is locked in prison can not physical hit someone outside of that prison.
This may have made sense. But, what became obvious to me is not only that the locking up of this man would change the energy he gives off and how he influences
reality spiritually, such as an increase in the pressure within the electromagnetic or electrical radiation that parts of his brain, heart, and body emit (which, to the government's best efforts, have not been fully contained through technology. Actually they partially have) that this energy will actually reach society, its members who are outside of the prison. If that man is suffering greatly, the energy could exert an effect that manifests just as physically despite initially coming in an energy-based or "spiritual form." That means others could become more violent simply because of this energetic radiation being emmited by the imprisoned individual.
I have come to believe that while the concept of energetic pressure within an individual, machine or system is completely real, so is the likeliness that the universe will always manifest an extra way for energy to escape from the confines of imprisonment. Some drugs give the impression that one's energy-releasing centers, degree of effect on their exterior, spiritual channels, or simply the related ability for someone to safely blow off steam (become less angry) has changed. And in fact they have. For myself, risperidone blocked the ability to recognize that unfair situations would be fair in the grand scheme of things. I was no longer able to open the "release valve," so I would end up exploding into a rage-filled physical tantrum.
But in the end, reality always found a way for my energy to escape. And, at that time, one of the more pronounced ways in which it did so, instead of a smooth processing of thoughts and emotions that led to a form of metabolism, converting unpleasant thoughts into useful coping strategies, insights, etc, was for me to change reality by using my body, and altering it by damaging objects and people through violence.
Not to mention, the mental energy must have driven everyone to the mental hospital later on in their lives. Or at least that's probably what Jesse Lang's mental energy did to my life.
Sure, governments may come up with technologies that suppress even those effects. They try to patch every possible channel, "leak" or form of expression or release of energy that a person can exert. But it never really happens. So they change their goal. Their goal is to change the energy output into a less relevant type, a kind of energy or reaction that does not harm them (as the government or secret authority) as much.
I have an idea that not only is the universe interconnected, it interacts with itself on a real-time basis. I don't believe the speed of light is a constraint for this. The idea that I like to think of is that as conscious entities, or souls, we are a sort of mandala, the universe itself with a central point that is offset for each individual. We make serious distinctions or assumptions when we decide that our skin is the outer boundary of our body and everything else is not part of us, or not part of our direct influence. Is it any less direct than the internal processes within us?
For one thing, we can think of ourselves as being separate from the universe. There are different ways to think about this. For instance, some of us may think that we are the inverse function of the reality external to us. If you force a separation between us and our exterior, then there are two sides as in a mathematical equation, and indeed our so-called "skin" would be like the equal sign and what's inside would balance and complete what's outside. The other way of thinking about this is that we are in the universe, but not fully connected to it. After all, there is a reason as to why certain drugs exist that we consider dissociating; that they separate our view of reality from the way it really is, or our mind from our bodies. Some people may see themselves not as an inverse equal to their exterior, but a tiny fraction of the whole, one human out of 7 billion. Yet others may see that they are not separate from the universe, that there seems to be a physical (mass-involved) thickness that separates their body from their surroundings. However, they are exactly within reality nonetheless. The molecules that react with each other may not necessarily make the distinction that there is an "inside" of the body and an "outside." There is a physical wall called skin, and the molecules may follow such matters in how they function. Similar distinctions can be made between the brainstem and the cortex, or the brain and the body. Or perhaps even one country and another, one race and another, or one planet and another. Yet they all react within the same universe, ultimately. One may see themselves as a sort of deviation from undisturbed, idle existence. An imbalance that separates them geometrically, but not existentially.
Furthermore, this process of geometric imbalance and tendencies toward rebalance may continue indefinitely, after the person dies, from before they were born, etc. When someone dies, does their body not continue to react chemically or energetically, sometimes in ways we may perceive as being slower or quicker than during active life? Harnessing this influence is an interest of mine at times, but I'm sure my energy will do just fine when my soul's no longer in this body.
Anyway,
now to the part that tries to explain the mandala. When we have an ego, we are the universe existing from a specific point, a sort of bias that can cause the universe to become differentiated. In a sense, something that can cause it to experience itself from outside. Similar to how our neurons are not physically connected to each other yet are able to interact with each other, or wireless technology for that matter, our influence extends outside of our bodies. Speech is an example of how we can influence others without touching them. Removing a step in a staircase and watching the person fall for it (pun intended) is an evil way that one can observe such an effect.
At all times, what some may call a vibration, seems to connect every part of us to every part of everything else, with a specific level of detachment to create our individuality. Our bodies, extended from our minds within our brains, react with with their environment to influence it. The changed state of the environment then provides a bias when that object interacts with another. Such biases continue to cause changes in cause-and-effect reactions that provides definition to our influence upon our environment. We interact with ourselves using the outside. In a sense, the universe is like a feedback machine that alters itself in exact correlation with its effect on itself. Instead of being a feedback loop, it is more of a novelty loop, it uses feedback to increase (or decrease) its novelty or complexity.
What I am suggesting, is that we are the center of the mandala. our bodies are the center of the (our) universe and we, as beings, are the universe itself. Being at the center, our energy radiates, travels, jumps, or occurs outward (and back inward too), rippling through the entire universe. What is fascinating is that it does not need time or gradual travel to do so. Some of our energy can instantly transform objects far away, light years away, objects that are, "physically," at the outer regions of this cause-and-effect mandala. Our mandala does not just function within thre-dimensional space. In a literal sense, it may function in an all-encompassing sense. We are the center of a spatial, temporal, geometric, massive, social, societal, planetary, universal mandala. Our area of effect occurs within any quality of reality.
Looking at one or more of Alex Grey's paintings, I noticed the conveyance of an idea that there are realms based on symbolic reality, in which a person can take a single step to and enter a galaxy not of their own, from which they came. We see galaxies as being extremely, unreachably far from each other. Yet, there may be realms in which the galaxies are very close to each other and can be travelled through very quickly. They are realms that connect the universe symbolically, or using different geometric orders of arrangement, that can be accessed subconsciously. Or sometimes, through a psychedelic drug, consciously.
Similarly, this mandala has such characteristics. One could even, for simplicity's sake, state that the mandala is not a circle with outer limits but more of a taurus-like shape, emphasizing that one need not travel far to the outer limits of it, but rather take a single step backward from their center or where they currently are.
We are the center of our own mandala, and through feedback effects we are also at peripheral areas of it as well. We are also in the periphery of others' mandalas. In synchrony, we exert our effect on reality and this effect or change or transformation translates perfectly into the transformation exerted by another entity. The displacement from "centrality" is a characteristic or important component of the "dimension" that allows the same energy or transformation to be different from two subjective points of view.
Phew.....................................
Love, Daniel
I am coming off Vyvanse 20mg, and some antidepressant supplements as well as a cup of coffee.
In other words, it may not be the best time for me to try to describe the idea that I am about to.
When I am completely sober or coming up on Vyvanse, itès much easier for me to think of these things. But I did have the urge to at least try, so I will.
I was about 20 years old when I first thought of what I now call the "mandala" effect. The first time I had ever experienced this, to my memory,
is around the time I tried mescaline and noticed that everything was connected by light or electromagnetic radiation.
I have always been aware to some degree, of the interconnectedness within the universe. However, for much of my life, I had not thought about it.
On mescaline, I experienced the very, very surface of this effect, and frankly an amphetamine could've granted me the same kind of thinking or insight
had I been clear-minded enough.
At age 20, I thought psilocybin would possibly be a prime agonist of the conscious realization of this phenomenon or hypothesis.
At times, I think about cause and effect, how one thing changes in a way which changes something near it, which changes something near it, etc.
I've wondered if this chain reaction goes literally through the entire universe and then overlaps and interferes with itself like a wave in the water
would. I may have wondered if this process was lossy or not, as in that it's detail, structure, or degree of effect gradually deteriorated in a manner
separate from natural phenomena that might suppress or increase its effect.
As a teenager, I sometimes had the impression that, for example, certain areas of space were so empty of reality that they could not carry "signals" or influences from earth to distant regions of the universe. It's the same kind of thing with the relation between what's outside of a black hole (or its event horizon) and what's inside it. It's possibly, perhaps likely, that a friend of mine named Bart thought in this manner as well.
As with anyone who experiments with psychedelics (including, in my opinion, responsible use of amphetamines and other stimulating drugs, and possibly cannabis though cannabis has failed to bring me much insight, or especially, clarity), my view gradually changed from one of separation, lack of interaction, individuality, etc. as a way of seeing the universe, into one of connection, association, similarity, similarity within difference, and best of all, the ability to realize that what we are taught verbally is a black and white version of how reality can, and in some ways does, function or exist.
Before, I may have thought of influence in a more physical manner. For example, a man who is locked in prison can not physical hit someone outside of that prison.
This may have made sense. But, what became obvious to me is not only that the locking up of this man would change the energy he gives off and how he influences
reality spiritually, such as an increase in the pressure within the electromagnetic or electrical radiation that parts of his brain, heart, and body emit (which, to the government's best efforts, have not been fully contained through technology. Actually they partially have) that this energy will actually reach society, its members who are outside of the prison. If that man is suffering greatly, the energy could exert an effect that manifests just as physically despite initially coming in an energy-based or "spiritual form." That means others could become more violent simply because of this energetic radiation being emmited by the imprisoned individual.
I have come to believe that while the concept of energetic pressure within an individual, machine or system is completely real, so is the likeliness that the universe will always manifest an extra way for energy to escape from the confines of imprisonment. Some drugs give the impression that one's energy-releasing centers, degree of effect on their exterior, spiritual channels, or simply the related ability for someone to safely blow off steam (become less angry) has changed. And in fact they have. For myself, risperidone blocked the ability to recognize that unfair situations would be fair in the grand scheme of things. I was no longer able to open the "release valve," so I would end up exploding into a rage-filled physical tantrum.
But in the end, reality always found a way for my energy to escape. And, at that time, one of the more pronounced ways in which it did so, instead of a smooth processing of thoughts and emotions that led to a form of metabolism, converting unpleasant thoughts into useful coping strategies, insights, etc, was for me to change reality by using my body, and altering it by damaging objects and people through violence.
Not to mention, the mental energy must have driven everyone to the mental hospital later on in their lives. Or at least that's probably what Jesse Lang's mental energy did to my life.
Sure, governments may come up with technologies that suppress even those effects. They try to patch every possible channel, "leak" or form of expression or release of energy that a person can exert. But it never really happens. So they change their goal. Their goal is to change the energy output into a less relevant type, a kind of energy or reaction that does not harm them (as the government or secret authority) as much.
I have an idea that not only is the universe interconnected, it interacts with itself on a real-time basis. I don't believe the speed of light is a constraint for this. The idea that I like to think of is that as conscious entities, or souls, we are a sort of mandala, the universe itself with a central point that is offset for each individual. We make serious distinctions or assumptions when we decide that our skin is the outer boundary of our body and everything else is not part of us, or not part of our direct influence. Is it any less direct than the internal processes within us?
For one thing, we can think of ourselves as being separate from the universe. There are different ways to think about this. For instance, some of us may think that we are the inverse function of the reality external to us. If you force a separation between us and our exterior, then there are two sides as in a mathematical equation, and indeed our so-called "skin" would be like the equal sign and what's inside would balance and complete what's outside. The other way of thinking about this is that we are in the universe, but not fully connected to it. After all, there is a reason as to why certain drugs exist that we consider dissociating; that they separate our view of reality from the way it really is, or our mind from our bodies. Some people may see themselves not as an inverse equal to their exterior, but a tiny fraction of the whole, one human out of 7 billion. Yet others may see that they are not separate from the universe, that there seems to be a physical (mass-involved) thickness that separates their body from their surroundings. However, they are exactly within reality nonetheless. The molecules that react with each other may not necessarily make the distinction that there is an "inside" of the body and an "outside." There is a physical wall called skin, and the molecules may follow such matters in how they function. Similar distinctions can be made between the brainstem and the cortex, or the brain and the body. Or perhaps even one country and another, one race and another, or one planet and another. Yet they all react within the same universe, ultimately. One may see themselves as a sort of deviation from undisturbed, idle existence. An imbalance that separates them geometrically, but not existentially.
Furthermore, this process of geometric imbalance and tendencies toward rebalance may continue indefinitely, after the person dies, from before they were born, etc. When someone dies, does their body not continue to react chemically or energetically, sometimes in ways we may perceive as being slower or quicker than during active life? Harnessing this influence is an interest of mine at times, but I'm sure my energy will do just fine when my soul's no longer in this body.
Anyway,
now to the part that tries to explain the mandala. When we have an ego, we are the universe existing from a specific point, a sort of bias that can cause the universe to become differentiated. In a sense, something that can cause it to experience itself from outside. Similar to how our neurons are not physically connected to each other yet are able to interact with each other, or wireless technology for that matter, our influence extends outside of our bodies. Speech is an example of how we can influence others without touching them. Removing a step in a staircase and watching the person fall for it (pun intended) is an evil way that one can observe such an effect.
At all times, what some may call a vibration, seems to connect every part of us to every part of everything else, with a specific level of detachment to create our individuality. Our bodies, extended from our minds within our brains, react with with their environment to influence it. The changed state of the environment then provides a bias when that object interacts with another. Such biases continue to cause changes in cause-and-effect reactions that provides definition to our influence upon our environment. We interact with ourselves using the outside. In a sense, the universe is like a feedback machine that alters itself in exact correlation with its effect on itself. Instead of being a feedback loop, it is more of a novelty loop, it uses feedback to increase (or decrease) its novelty or complexity.
What I am suggesting, is that we are the center of the mandala. our bodies are the center of the (our) universe and we, as beings, are the universe itself. Being at the center, our energy radiates, travels, jumps, or occurs outward (and back inward too), rippling through the entire universe. What is fascinating is that it does not need time or gradual travel to do so. Some of our energy can instantly transform objects far away, light years away, objects that are, "physically," at the outer regions of this cause-and-effect mandala. Our mandala does not just function within thre-dimensional space. In a literal sense, it may function in an all-encompassing sense. We are the center of a spatial, temporal, geometric, massive, social, societal, planetary, universal mandala. Our area of effect occurs within any quality of reality.
Looking at one or more of Alex Grey's paintings, I noticed the conveyance of an idea that there are realms based on symbolic reality, in which a person can take a single step to and enter a galaxy not of their own, from which they came. We see galaxies as being extremely, unreachably far from each other. Yet, there may be realms in which the galaxies are very close to each other and can be travelled through very quickly. They are realms that connect the universe symbolically, or using different geometric orders of arrangement, that can be accessed subconsciously. Or sometimes, through a psychedelic drug, consciously.
Similarly, this mandala has such characteristics. One could even, for simplicity's sake, state that the mandala is not a circle with outer limits but more of a taurus-like shape, emphasizing that one need not travel far to the outer limits of it, but rather take a single step backward from their center or where they currently are.
We are the center of our own mandala, and through feedback effects we are also at peripheral areas of it as well. We are also in the periphery of others' mandalas. In synchrony, we exert our effect on reality and this effect or change or transformation translates perfectly into the transformation exerted by another entity. The displacement from "centrality" is a characteristic or important component of the "dimension" that allows the same energy or transformation to be different from two subjective points of view.
Phew.....................................
Love, Daniel
