Since our initial communications and as suggested when I said I would try
to be open to the idea that ‘the world is me’ next time in Salvia space, I’ve
had the opportunity for a few ‘visits’. On a couple of occasions in
particular the idea of ‘me’ sitting and typing ‘your’ words to myself
did seem strangely compelling. But what you say about bouncing off experiences
with our own trajectories is very relevant. I would say a very significant
factor affecting this trajectory, the conclusions we come to about the
experience, is what we perhaps anyway believe to be the case. I’m not
claiming to be any more immune to this than you. I might argue that being
prepared to re-visit the space is an advantage, in order to validate the
conclusions, but we all, each of us, bring our own histories, expectations and
intentions.
The reason I mention this particular point is influenced by the other
reader’s feedback re ‘Universal Consciousness’. What I’d like to
suggest is that our description of the altered state, even our recollection
of it, our making sense of it, is affected by how we think we might like it to
be, or, perhaps more accurately, what we think we already know. In particular
I think that the experience of being ‘at one with everything’ relates to
(and is influenced by) a ‘classical’ understanding of the ‘mystical’
state. By this I mean as typically described in the ‘Eastern’ traditions.
It’s understandable that the explosion of LSD on to the sixties scene was
accompanied by the search for better philosophical and spiritual systems. It’s
understandable how people turned away from western orthodox religions looking
for something that better described their experience. And to see how ‘Eastern’
thought got a generally favourable reception in comparison to the West’s
failings.
However, ‘Eastern’ thought is not plant-based. Well, to be more
accurate about it, it is plant based in the sense of that’s where its
origins lie (i.e. its basis), but it’s no longer plant driven. The
plant origins have been forgotten, often to the point of denial and taboo. My
concern whenever this happens is that the traditions (and the resultant
institutions) become vitiated.
What does this have to do with you? Well, what it has to do with anyone who
sees "no need" to commune with plants, "no need" to
re-visit, re-validate and re-fine one’s conclusions about the experience, is
the tendency to otherwise think that one’s experience was the ultimate
be-all and end-all revelation.
There is also the problem with recall, i.e. in trusting that the memory can
accurately recall all aspects of the experience as time goes on. Part of the
familiarity of returning to Salvia-space for me is the feeling of, "oh
yes, now I remember".
In ordinary reality our arguments are almost necessarily polarised (even
polemic). So statements such as, "the world is me … is you"
inevitably carry the flavour of, "that’s your opinion (and you
are mistaken)".
In Salvia-space it’s not so much like that. It’s more like I can see
that "the world is me" and at exactly the same time I can see
that it isn’t. This is not so much the reconciliation of
opposites (again, as sometimes espoused in Eastern traditions), - agreeing to
differ in interpretation, but a simultaneous and quite utterly impossible
co-existence of two contradictory points of view.
My ‘trajectory’ in the couple of particular experiences I’ve had
where I’ve been specifically considering your, "the world is me"
proposal, was to find this extraordinarily funny. The idea that you and I are
the same entity, that I am in fact writing words back to myself, having
an ‘argument’ with myself, made me chuckle and smile, - not laughing it off
as a silly notion in a dismissive way, but in the realisation of how it was in
fact true.
The problem I have with turning away from the plants is that I don’t
trust the memory’s ability to recall the impossible. The reason I
mention ‘Eastern’ philosophy is not to take a sideswipe at it, but
to suggest examples not only of the obviously gross excesses of western
orthodox religions, but also of seemly better intentioned traditions that have
still become vitiated by losing contact with their original impetus.
– That impetus is, of course, the dimension directly revealed via the
plant allies. Thus the emphasis on ONENESS, often stressed, frequently
capitalised, can become nothing more than mantra. I suggest that this
historical lesson is what will happen with the individual too. It’s quite
literally the lesson of history.