>>12009420I meditate and think it's good but it might be a similar thing at that high-level, yeah. It's about unbinding and unravelling so you can imagine at high-levels there's nothing really contextualising your experience, even the perception of space and time falls away. Different states to the drug-induced but comparable in this matter.
As for fire kasina, I thought the idea was that your senses/brain filters out new data, simulating a flame based on past experience but in your actual vision not the mind's eye (imagination), then allowing you to alter that simulation being as its independent of the real thing (though the 'real thing' was interpretive to begin with).
>>12009411idk. they're all just models built on models. it can accommodate plenty, manifold. there's no reason they couldn't be something else or come to apparently differing end-conclusions (colloquial derivations of the formal, model terms to mind terms but separate models not necessarily conflicting) while still being coherent and useful. particularly because at that level an 'end-conclusion' only makes sense within a model's terms, a model reality, not to speak generally. like try to reduce radiation to basic experience and you misrepresent it in the model's eyes. it's speaking about its reality and not a presupposed general reality. interpretation is governed by so many factors that there's probably always some arbitration and misinterpretation, in the sense of simple errors or the need to fill in what needs to be filled but can't be cleanly dictated by something beyond your pseudorandom decision).
But in the case of a model you're setting the terms, to say the way you set the terms (the model itself) was done incorrectly according to the model's terms (which you've set, incorrectly) seems meaningless.
