Main Menu

With Surrender in Mind

Started by free-range, March 07, 2019, 09:55:00 PM

Previous topic - Next topic


"True surrender is never an enslavement, but rather a step toward the discovery of real power. It is the active yielding to a larger intelligence, without trying to control the outcome. True surrender is not blind. It requires real discrimination–-the capacity to recognise the necessity of completely opening oneself and letting go. Surrender does not have a finite object; one does not give oneself to something limited and bounded. If one does, then it is most likely submission—to the teacher's personality or the Cause."

Submission: a developmentally regressive retreat from maturity and genuine surrender.

Surrender: a progressive step beyond egocentricity toward a fuller connection with being.

The Toad Narcissists

"Submission has a narcissistic quality, in that followers seek to bask in the reflected glory of their leader as a way to inflate their self importance."

The toad narcissist often uses doses that overwhelm the system. With doses so high, the system has no choice but to submit to the incredible power. In this way, the toad narcissist somehow guarantees the experience of a full release via force. Much like frenetic force is typically used to achieve the release that is orgasm, for example, the toad narcissist uses the strong dose to force the full release.

But release can also occur using a contrary approach. Through surrender, a genuine and intentional opening allows for the release to reveal itself. After all, the direct experience of Spirit (pure presence, samadhi, satori, the All, zero point field, etc.) reveals that it is always, already there. By using a gradual approach to find how Spirit can be revealed through a gradual process of releasing that which veils its omnipresence, the system is met with a 'soft power'. The power of the experience is thus revealed via surrender, thus genuinely empowering the individual.

The toad narcissist's forceful approach is to offer the direct experience of Spirit revealed via submission, thus disempowering (or falsely empowering) the individual. Seen in this lens, one could say that the forceful approach is a violation and that the gentler approach is a liberation.

It would be another space to discuss whether or not the direct experience of spirit is qualitatively affected by the approach or the nature/methodology of the revelation.

The Approach to the Summit
Descriptions and reports of the full release suggest that it is not always experienced the same way, much like each dip in different parts of the ocean has a different feel, or that no one foot steps into the same river twice. Ancient bodies of wisdom as well as modern explorers have already created a reliable-yet-iterative cartography of the psyche, the nature of existence, and the multi- dimensional and holographic aspects of reality. Moreover, the idea that there are myriad experiences of the One are apparent upon learning about different descriptions, ancient and modern, of the state of singularity. For now, I'll enjoy the reports of these intrepid voyagers as the armchair psychonaut.

My discourse here is about how the direct experience of a full release is arrived at. Reliable technologies access the direct experience of Spirit (note that I am not meaning only trance states or other explorations of dimensionality, but of non-duality) in a variety of ways: certain styles of meditation; dark rooms/light deprivation, the hypnagogic/flickering effect, extremely large (dissociative) quantities of certain substances (many DMTs, LSD, mescalines, etc.), sound (i.e., isochronic beats), movement (shaking, dance, etc.), and sex. Some of them are approached gently and some forcefully. The gentle approach could be argued to be the most refined one.

A good example is orgasm. Orgasm is often more easily achieved through intensified stimulation where 'more' is required to achieve the release desired—submission. In Karezza or Tantric practices, however, orgasm is approached through a more subtle process, allowing the release to be revealed through relaxation—surrender. Similarly, some meditation approaches use sharp attention, mental concentration/control/discipline; others approach the state of Satori/Samadhi through a diffuse attention (TM, Zen, etc.). Again, the former suggest submission while the latter suggests surrender.

Generally, the gentler approaches of surrender take more time, allowing  the nervous system to relax; the machinations of letting go are honed to the point where transcendence is reached consciously as opposed to a dissociation that occurs unconsciously. With large doses of external, exogenous substances however, no time is needed—just more quantity of the substance. The exception, of course, is 5-MeO-DMT taken at certain quantities by certain methods (IM, smoking, insufflation, etc.). This substance—which is perhaps the very endogenous compound that is analogous to direct experience of Spirit—reliably reveals the state with a relatively small range of factors to be considered.

Factors unique to the God molecule
With such a narrow range, the approach to the direct experience of Spirit (which is perhaps the very function of this molecule) can change from genuine surrender to forceful submission in just a few hundredths of a gram (dosing protocols of bufo alvarius secretion and the pure molecule, for smoking, are available on 5Hive), whereas with 5-MeO-DMT the experience is relatively short—one second of infinity is all it takes to experience all of infinity. The approach—not the length of time—is of most interest in regards to the quality of the process of revealing what lays behind/beyond the veil. A few hundredths of a gram more may turn the opportunity for genuine surrender into a forceful submission.

So what happens when the desired state is not achieved? Often the remedy is an increase in the quantity of the substance, or more attempts at submission. But what about more surrender? What about the psychosomatic, sensorimotor material that makes up the veil? If there were to be less of that cellular material, there would be less need for more of the substance. However, this would require more time. More time is often used with methodologies and orientations that are therapeutic, psycholytic, trauma-informed, etc.

I have pointed out here that using more substance generally indicates an approach I call submission. More, in this case, basically means excessive. But what is excessive? It is the power that is in excess of what is required to allow for a surrender : a minimum effective dose. Arriving at a minimum effective dose (ED), as well as a (psychologically) dissociative dose (DD), is a process of discovery. As we approach the direct experience of Spirit, or dissociation, we can discover small 's' self in and by degrees.

I will use an analogy to explicate myself. The helicopter can take us to the summit while we sleep, while we are 'blindfolded', or even against our will, plowing through myriad fears (heights, abrupt movement, noise, etc.). The helicopter can also take us to the summit more consciously, with open eyes and a welcoming but not insistent window view, maybe taking breaks and checking in with the passenger along the way. The latter is the empowered, intentional choice of the person—a conscious ascension. The former is the prescribed offering of a forced ascent, usually initiated by the pilot (the toad narcissist) making sure you get to the top regardless of the quality of your experience on the way up and all too often without regard for the quality of your experience on the way back down.

Effective and dissociative dosage levels are unique to the individual for a variety of reasons. Discovering that unique DD requires time: less time than with other modalities of psychedelic or 'medicine' use, to be sure, but more time than the submission approach used by the toad narcissist. The helicopter either needs to have a bigger engine (force/dose) to get to the top or needs the load to be lighter (surrender/letting go). One solution is for the passenger to consciously lighten their load. This makes the ride up more of a conscious choice: the individual releases the material that veils the direct experience with Spirit (the summit, so to speak) and in so doing less power (dose) is required. Indeed, empowerment results from the conscious, genuine surrender.

Surrender empowers us.

As I argue for a surrender approach for using bufo alvarius or pure 5-MeO-DMT, I do not negate the value of a dosing regime that unconsciously overpowers the system by way of submission. From a non-therapeutic perspective, the emergence/dissolution of the body/form/ego consciousness—regardless of how it happens—may be ultimately what propels or accelerates humanity's evolution. With this lens, would it matter how empowered a person is when having a full release?

On an interpersonal level, it is compelling to opine, that yes, empowerment liberates the person from constricted/contracted ways of living. A liberated life probably leads to the further empowerment of others—the hundredth monkey myth. On a supra-personal level, it may be that a full release in and of itself is enough to catalyst the same effect. Yet even with the hundredth monkey hypothesis, after the rate of population growth is considered (more embodied godheads exist today than ever existed in sum before), is facilitation that emphasizes empowerment (by way of arriving at the full release via genuine surrender) able to match or overtake the rate at which humans are being born?

This is where the topic of dovetails potentially to epi-genetics. Those who have a full release through submission, if we are to trust/believe/hypothesize that a genetic transformation is occurring, or at least seeded, maybe, just by having children, catalysing the transition toward a collective new dawn/awakening. The latter idea would then champion the toad narcissist. In this case, large doses (without needing to discover the DD) served indiscriminately to as many people as possible would you be the fastest approach to ensuring that full release seeds are planted and the hundredth monkey myth is enacted. The former idea would champion the surrender approach, used by those offering a psycholytic/psychotherapeutic methodology. Empowering the individual to arrive at the full release through genuine surrender would be the most comprehensive (and time-consuming) methodology; the interpersonal field thus being the level at which humanity will thrive and evolve best.

The toad narcissists may not have the time to consider these ruminations and I don't expect that they, as I describe them, are reading this right now. Those practitioners who are interested in empowering individuals via genuine surrender in their approach may be more inclined to take the time to read this. In any case, it's likely that there isn't a 'best' way. The full release of the ego structure can happen many ways.
One of them is with surrender in mind.
—surrender completes us—


Incredibly well-written, free-range. I hope that this post gets wide readership.

And I would add that the full release of the ego structure is not always what is needed in order for a healing process to occur.

Tim Lon

The big question, does the end result justify the means?
From this heart, to be the singularity is all.
From this mind, to be the singularity without full surrender, is bittersweet.
For the singularity to be complete, ...