• Psychedelic Drugs Welcome Guest
    View threads about
    Posting RulesBluelight Rules
    PD's Best Threads Index
    Social ThreadSupport Bluelight
    Psychedelic Beginner's FAQ
  • PD Moderators: Esperighanto | JackARoe |

DMT, Shamanism, and Death

Eschaton

Greenlighter
Joined
Jun 7, 2008
Messages
45
Hey guys, its been quite awhile since I last posted here, so I figured I would stop by to see if any of you would care to read some of my latest DMT-inspired material. For those of you that are interested, I have recently taken some time to extensively update my site. The topics covered are something that I believe will be of high relevance to many of the posters here, hence why I am dropping by. Please understand, my website doesn't have ads or anything, i.e., I am not doing this for any kind of money or egoic BS. This site is strictly for sharing my thoughts with like-minded people; most of all, it is a personal hobby that I enjoy immensely. So please, if you care to, take the time to read a little bit of what I have written. If you do, let me know what you think; I would really appreciate any and all feedback.


http://www.wedietorememberwhatwelivetoforget.com/

And so, the big question: What happens to our consciousness when we die? Do we merely cease to exist and fade to black, or do we experience a continuity beyond our ability to imagine? To effectively answer this question, you must first and foremost have an experiential frame of reference upon which to base your deductions, otherwise any effort made will ultimately be stifled by the conceptually limited scope of merely inferential knowledge. This is because inferential knowledge cannot replace first hand experience, especially in this case where we are dealing with such a proverbial black hole as death. Induction via the scientific method doesn't stand a chance to provide a definitive answer to this perennial question because this experience cannot be observed objectively and it most certainly cannot be reduced to mere mechanics of biology, as made clear by Near-Death Experience research.

This is to say that, in order to truly understand death, you must be formally acquainted with it experientially; literally, you must experience death and somehow live to tell about it. Understandably, the vast majority of people lack this prerequisite for forming a conceptually deep understanding of death and so they are obliged to seek higher council, so to speak, when confronted with such questions beyond their ability to answer. It is for this very reason that we have depended upon enlightened individuals* to provide us with a relative frame of reference upon which to base our beliefs about our existence. When such individuals are lacking, or are disposed of for their influential nature by corrupted individuals, our collective understanding suffers greatly and all too often we are coerced into a state of unconscious malaise, such as the state we inhabit right now. Our only way to combat this unfortunate unconsciousness is by consulting individuals whom have experienced enlightenment, otherwise we are sure to remain in the dark with our governmentally sanctioned view of reality.

*It must be noted, that by merely saying "enlightened individuals", I am leaving a lot open tointerpretation. So, to make myself perfectly clear; enlightened individuals are people who have come to have a Universal frame of reference due to experiences in their lives that, over time, directed them toward integrating their psyche with the world. Some individuals experience enlightenment during certain instances, such as mystical, near-death, or psychedelic experiences, often changing their lives forever; some come to experience it through years of devoted self searching, without the need for such a psychic catalyst.

Regardless of means, all of these individuals report startlingly similar experiences: It is this historical psychic consensus that we must investigate if we are to make sense of our current unconsciousness, first and foremost because it is the only frame of reference that cannot be tainted by our leaders despite their efforts because of its fundamentally archetypal, psychic nature, but most importantly, because of what it reveals about our future; in fact, many enlightened individuals saw these dark times coming. Many argue that the emergence of psychedelics in the modern Western world was a cue for a much needed reflection on our part. I tend to agree; though taboo, psychedelics can provide a truly consciousness-expanding experience that, if properly integrated, can lead to a drastic revolution of mind. The kind of which we so desperately need right now.

Enlightenment is a rare, often fleeting state of consciousness during which a truly Universal frame of reference is bestowed upon an individual. Men isolated by geography and thousands of years have been having this same experience throughout the history of our civilization and even further back into our prehistory. It is, without a shadow of a doubt, the archetype experience that ultimately laid the foundation for our oldest spiritual traditions which sought to definitively answer that which we do not know. This is due to the fact that the those whom are predisposed to experiencing such a state of consciousness often have a great sphere of influence upon their respective communities by default of the inherently sought after and universally relative knowledge that they possess and willingly distribute. And although relatively few have experienced enlightenment, the multitude are able to relate to these spiritually minded men because enlightenment has two microcosmic parallels which nearly every person whom has ever lived has experienced.

These experiences are, of course, that of déjà vu – the distinct feeling of knowing that you have done something before – and synchronicity – the experience of realizing a highly peculiar coincidence that could not be merely due to chance, but must owe its occurrence to a purpose beyond our ability to make sense of (it must be accepted that human beings have been having these experiences for tens of thousands of years at least, as we are no different today biologically than we were during the last glacial epoch which began 100,000 years ago. So it can be safely assumed that, unlike today where these experiences are marginalized as merely peculiar due to our lack of felt spirituality, these experiences once held a very sacred place to our ancestors, who, I would imagine, believed such experiences to be divine revelations).

"The sentiment du déjà vu is based, as I have found in a number of cases, on a foreknowledge in dreams, but we saw that this foreknowledge can also occur in the waking state. In such cases mere chance becomes highly improbable because the coincidence is known in advance. It thus loses its chance character not only psychologically and subjectively, but objectively too, since the accumulation of details that coincide immeasurably increases the improbability of chance as a determining factor. (For correct precognitions of death, Dariex and Flammarion have computed probabilities ranging from 1 in 4,000,000 to 1 in 8,000,000.) So in these cases it would be incongruous to speak of "chance" happenings. It is rather a question of meaningful coincidences. Usually they are explained by precognition – in other words, foreknowledge." Carl Jung, 'On Synchronicity'

"...when an external event touches on some unconscious knowledge, this knowledge can reach consciousness. The event is recognized as a déjà vu, and one remembers a pre-existent knowledge about it." Carl Jung, 'Answer to Job'

"...Meaningful coincidences are thinkable as pure chance. But the more they multiply and the greater and more exact the correspondence is, the more their probability sinks and their unthinkability increases, until they can no longer be regarded as pure chance, but for lack of a causal explanation, have to be thought of as meaningful arrangements . . . Their 'inexplicability' is not due to the fact that the cause is unknown, but to the fact that a cause is not even thinkable in intellectual terms." Carl Jung speaking of synchronicity

These peculiar experiences of predestination and highly unlikely coincidence last for mere seconds, but if experienced repeatedly, are enough to open ones consciousness to the possibility of a higher intelligence. Inversely, enlightenment is a consummative experience of predestination and beyond-chance coincidence that can last anywhere from a few minutes to a few hours and it often changes a person forever. The climax of the experience involves a full blown epiphany of the Oneness of the Universe: time ends, Eternity is effectively realized, and subsequently, death is experienced as a transition of being; not the end of our existence, eliminating any fear of dying. The person thus raptured experiences the death of his ego; his merely limited sense of self is totally dissolved, enabling him to comprehend for the first time the Ground of All Being; the Eternal Universe of which he understands that he is. All that was previously unconscious is revealed to consciousness: it is as if the entire mystery of life dissolves before ones eyes, leaving one to comprehensively feel and understand the predestined purpose and synchronistic order behind all things and events. The concept of God presents itself as a divine totality symbol of Oneness and paradoxically, reciprocity (Good/Evil etc). Life is seen to be an eternal search for love and understanding, despite all evil and unconsciousness that befalls us; it is all understood to be necessary for a purpose beyond our merely self-conscious awareness.The realization dawns upon consciousness that, "I am God." (This is precisely why Christ equated Himself with the Father, because He was acutely aware that He is the Father; He is God, of which we All are, which, by the way, was his principle teaching.)

"When you make the two one, and when you make the inner as the outer and the outer as the inner and the above as the below ... then shall you enter [the Kingdom].... I am the Light that is above them all, I am the All, the All came forth from Me and the All attained to Me. Cleave a [piece of] wood, I am there; lift up the stone and you will find Me there." Jesus

This experience presents itself as fundamentally absolute and psychically self-affirming; in fact, it is felt to be the most important experience of the subject’s life, often obliging them to lead a life devoted to the dissemination of their newfound knowledge. It is for this reason that, for millennia, we have depended upon these rare individuals who were granted this insight to help us understand that which we are incapable of understanding by ourselves. This is the very basis of religion: the inexperienced multitude follow by an act of faith a predisposed few whom are sanctioned as the arbiters of esoteric knowledge about our existence (God) by default of their divinely imparted wisdom. However, as previously mentioned, this dynamic puts us as adherents in a position of great vulnerability, hence the need for faith in regards to what we are made to believe about our existence by our divinely chosen representatives of the Truth.


There is much, much more at the site.

Take it easy guys.


%)
 
P&S maybe?

Also, site doesn't render properly on my phone (Android, running WebKit). :/
 
P&S maybe?

Also, site doesn't render properly on my phone (Android, running WebKit). :/

My apologies if I posted this in the wrong forum. :o

And it doesn't surprise me that my site doesn't work on a phone. =D

Yahoo sitebuilder can only handle so much. :X

:)
 
The realization dawns upon consciousness that, "I am God." (This is precisely why Christ equated Himself with the Father, because He was acutely aware that He is the Father; He is God, of which we All are, which, by the way, was his principle teaching.)

Nice Eschaton, I initially saw this at another forum for which I am not a member so I have to respond here. I like the site and I like the thoughts.

I grew up listening to the skeptic side that one has to die to completely know what happens. Yet there are documented cases of NDE's where a person IS dead, and has absolutely no activity to record for many minutes. That's why I do not buy the Sam Harris or Michael Shermer argument that a person isn't really dead and they were hallucinating when having NDE's. I have to say the skeptic argument is boring (yawn) and doesn't hold water as well as some of the thoughts you put forth. Another part of the skeptic argument that reminds me of a 12 year old girl is when they say "prove it", meanwhile all along life is full of subjective experience. If we stay with the skeptic argument all we can say DMT does is "derrange" the brain since none of the insights are provable. But many of us know the DMT state is fascinating and far beyond any regular hallucinating. So goodbye to the skeptic side. I am all for the scientific process for many things EXCEPT anything to do with explaining where consciousness comes from. It simply can't. Our brains are made of the same elements that many things are yet we are conscious.

Hello to the large thoughts you put forth so clearly. :) Much of what you write is much of what I already believe and have seen.

I have never seen someone go from spiritualist to materialist after DMT. But I ALWAYS see people go the other way arount, from materialist to spiritualist. I'm all for the scientific method. But in order for science to grow we have to get out ahead of it with philosophy and big thoughts first.
 
Last edited:
Wow hey, what a coincidence, I to came to all of these realizations to last week when I blasted off on DMT for the first time. it's realy wierd how esentialy every body's DMT trips are the same but not. Near the middle of it though i seemed to see all these connections, weather they were gears or just connections i dont know but i felt like I was but a single cog on on a gear of unimagenable proportion meshing together with other wheels. it then changed and i feel as though i was traveling with the electromagnetic pulses in my head along pathways of braincells. each cell was connected to a few others and once you got to a cell you could choose which path to take and i felt as though i was visualizing my thinking, showing what memory i was at and what it tied to like a huge inter web of thoughts and ideas.
 
no one has any idea what happens after death. it's the big question, and pretty much the only real big one.

dmt is nutty though, no doubt.
 
Wow hey, what a coincidence, I to came to all of these realizations to last week when I blasted off on DMT for the first time. it's realy wierd how esentialy every body's DMT trips are the same but not. Near the middle of it though i seemed to see all these connections, weather they were gears or just connections i dont know but i felt like I was but a single cog on on a gear of unimagenable proportion meshing together with other wheels. it then changed and i feel as though i was traveling with the electromagnetic pulses in my head along pathways of braincells. each cell was connected to a few others and once you got to a cell you could choose which path to take and i felt as though i was visualizing my thinking, showing what memory i was at and what it tied to like a huge inter web of thoughts and ideas.

Did you see any entities?

Did you check out the site?

Let me know what you think and I am especially interested to hear if you have seen the entities yet.

:)
 
Nice Eschaton, I initially saw this at another forum for which I am not a member so I have to respond here. I like the site and I like the thoughts.

I grew up listening to the skeptic side that one has to die to completely know what happens. Yet there are documented cases of NDE's where a person IS dead, and has absolutely no activity to record for many minutes. That's why I do not buy the Sam Harris or Michael Schermer argument that a person isn't really dead and they were hallucinating when having NDE's. I have to say the skeptic argument is boring (yawn) and doesn't hold water as well as some of the thoughts you put forth. Another part of the skeptic argument that reminds me of a 12 year old girl is when they say "prove it", meanwhile all along life is full of subjective experience. If we stay with the skeptic argument all we can say DMT does is "derrange" the brain since none of the insights are provable. But many of us know the DMT state is fascinating and far beyond any regular hallucinating. So goodbye to the skeptic side. I am all for the scientific process for many things EXCEPT anything to do with explaining where consciousness comes from. It simply can't. Our brains are made of the same elements that many things are yet we are conscious.

Hello to the large thoughts you put forth so clearly. :) Much of what you write is much of what I already believe and have seen.

I have never seen someone go from spiritualist to materialist after DMT. But I ALWAYS see people go the other way arount, from materialist to spiritualist. I'm all for the scientific method. But in order for science to grow we have to get out ahead of it with philosophy and big thoughts first.

Thank you for your kind words.

Funny you should mention Sam Harris; his book the End of Faith really gave my inner atheism legs, so to speak. But I'll be damned if that didn't completely and utterly dissolve once I started investigating the psychedelic dimension.

You are one of the very few who are aware of the NDE literature regarding clinically dead people coming back hours later. I appreciate your knowledge and am glad to hear that you hold similar views.

What are your thoughts on entities?

%)
 
Hey, good to see a recent thread about this topic. Ive been a 'past life' BL member! lol (back when I was at university before working 65+ hours a week)
I have now finished my work for a few weeks and am taking some 'time out' to find myself again.

I have not tried DMT, but have done a plethora of reading on the subject from watching 'the spirit molecule' through to reading many DMTNEXUS almost front to back.

The thing that hinges for me is that 'the most simple explination is usually the right one'.

Soo... I am going to take a big leap. here, and do the worst thing possible which is to "assume"
So. lets 'assume' that DMT is produced through the Pinelal gland, and that that gland does indeed have 'optic nerves' in it such as a '3rd eye'..

Well... The most simple answer would be that of course it is obvious that you will hallucinate vividly if you release a large ammount of DMT into the brain that directly affects a gland which has optic nerves attached to it..

Now.. Im not trying to suck the 'fun' (to put it very lightly) out of DMT, I am just trying to bring up an idea from someone who has never before been to the 'other side'..

Could someone please shed some light on this thought pattern?
 
Nice man! I really like the site! :)

I'm loving the ideas in this thread too, I haven't done DMT either, but have done quite a bit of reading on it as it interests me a lot.

I'm currently too stoned to contribute more or even fully comprehend all of these ideas, I shall attempt to digest more
 
This is your site? oh wow.. i wish to say thank-you personally.

I came across it a while back, when the background was yellow and the image was an Alex Grey painting of the 'eye of consciousness'. I thoroughly enjoyed the reading and reached very much the same conclusion's myself through several breakthrough experience's on DMT. It was a pleasure to read through and find that someone was able to portray so well in words what i could only understand on a mental level. :)
 
I suppose the problem with all the claims of religious or holy men is - are they lying? My guess is that a good 99.9% of them are. I remember when the Beatles went to see the Maharishi he claimed he knew "masters" who could levitate that lived "just over in the next village". Of course everytime the Beatles asked to see this silly fucker from the next village floating in the air he couldn't be found.
 
Thanks for posting that man, I enjoyed reading immensely. I spend a great deal of time contemplating such issue as consciousness, 'life after death', the nature of free will etc, and haven't really come to many conclusions.

The conclusions I have come to however, is that the Dualist notion of the separated ego, or mind, that is distinct from the body, seems to be much closer to the money than any other theory put forward. From this view the only plausible, to me, view with regards to existence after death is that the mind 'lives on' somehow, or is reborn into an alternate form of life.

I'm very intrigued to read more of your thoughts - I've actually bookmarked your site for later reading.

[OFFTOPIC]
If you want your site to be more viewable (i.e. without Yahoo site builder leaving it's odd coding style all over it) I recommend http://www.w3schools.com/ for learning HTML - you'll only need to know a few tags (html, head, title, body, center, p, a, img, b, u, i) for your site to look exactly the same[/OFFTOPIC]

Thanks again!
 
I suppose the problem with all the claims of religious or holy men is - are they lying? My guess is that a good 99.9% of them are. I remember when the Beatles went to see the Maharishi he claimed he knew "masters" who could levitate that lived "just over in the next village". Of course everytime the Beatles asked to see this silly fucker from the next village floating in the air he couldn't be found.

Perhaps their version of the truth was simply that-- subjective. Maybe they saw the levitating master after they ate three feet of cactus? Does that make it less real?

The point is (and this applies to the entire thread): you have to find your version of the truth, and live it in the present moment. When you can do that, you've truly become enlightened.
 
I don't think it's fair to say that 99.9% of holy men are lying, i'm sure many do, but there are many 'holy' men that just preach what they believe.

I'm not a religious person, at least with respect to believing in an interventionist God, however I can imagine that if i did have some reason to truly believe, I would see signs for His belief that I see as something else currently.
 
I'm not a religious person, at least with respect to believing in an interventionist God, however I can imagine that if i did have some reason to truly believe, I would see signs for His belief that I see as something else currently.

This runs concurrent with what I posted above: you've come to your own definition of what is the truth (currently, it appears you aren't drawn to Abrahamic religions) and you've made it your reality (for whatever reason).
 
You all know there's a Philosophy and Spirituality thread? I think this discussion would be more appropriate there.

~psychoblast~
 
You state that the only way we can understand death is through experience, yet we conclude that we can only get it by taking the word of "enlightened" people who somehow, without dying, understand what happens when you die?

I don't buy it.

Carl Jung had his place and time, it has long past. And arguing that the transcendent/spiritual knowledge gained by various "holy men" in different parts of the world has it's roots in essentially the same experience is simply inaccurate.

To put it simply, there is no "basis of religion" that applies to all religions.
 
Perhaps their version of the truth was simply that-- subjective. Maybe they saw the levitating master after they ate three feet of cactus? Does that make it less real?

The point is (and this applies to the entire thread): you have to find your version of the truth, and live it in the present moment. When you can do that, you've truly become enlightened.

I'm not sure many religious men approve of psychedelic drug use tho. Their argument is often that psychedelics can, at best, "point the way" but to become really enlightened you must spend 60 years walking round in sandals and believe in what the good book says.

I guess the other question is who decides whether or not someone is enlightened? A lot of people claim to be but are they? The Dalai Lama talks the talk but you look at how the "enlightened" tibetan monks treated the native people of Tibet - as slaves who had their hands chopped off if they dared steal a loaf of bread - and you think "And these guys think they're enlightened?"
 
Just the same as Christians who clamber for homosexuals to burn in Hell, etc...Buddhism has its misguided followers, but on an infinitely small scale over the history of time. Not many Buddhists have killed in the name of Buddhism (because it is obviously contrary to Buddhist thinking).

As far as enlightenment... who else can determine your enlightenment but you? A yogi probably considers a student enlightened when their behaviors align with a certain pre-determined way of acting, even if just below the surface the student is feeling utterly apprehensive.

And on religious figures (especially Buddhists) disregarding the power of psychedelics: I think they're simply scared of the potential power of the trip. A trip on mescaline reveals many things to a student over the course of ~8 hours... it would take decades of meditation to achieve the same effects in a teacher's zendo.

To me, that feeling of total empathy and understanding of seemingly everything in the universe is the moment of Enlightenment: I'd say I am enlightened as a result of my psychedelic trips. Meditation provides me with a deep calm and an increased ability to focus, and living consciously helps me to be an overall good person, but these things don't result in such a radical shift.

Maybe the point of meditation or living in a zendo as a monk is simply to give one a sense of purpose. Ultimately, life's meaning is created by the individual, and giving that individual regimented ways of living results in a life that is filled with things to keep them busy-- almost like the unenlightened person living in the consumerist society of the outside. Instead of sweeping the zendo and sitting on the zafu and chanting auuuummmmmm, they are buying cheesburgers and driving cars and making money.

after all, we all have buddha nature
 
Top