FrgttnDeer

@Nihal217 How is your sense of self?

@Your place at Heart I meant don't do the thing in the picture... but hahahah yes watch out

@Your place at Heart Haha, bad idea don't do it

I've read that awaking/stream entry is only the beginning of the path. What do I do to deepen the enlightenment? Still self-inquiry?

I think they are both valuable. Also shadow work. But who am I? hahahah

@Blissout If I'm not mistaken even Shinzen Young got enlightened using self inquiry.

I would be extremely careful with weed if you ever had a psychosis.

"I will destroy my ego"

@Nahm Yes... Well, intentional might be the wrong word for it. Not having all the information makes reality something instead of nothing. It's like: you have infinity and every part of it has a perspective. From the perspective things are things and duality exist. With no perspective I don't know what you'll get. Everything, nothing, are they even different? Maybe perspective is mandatory.

I've heard about this seeing a whole life before, and it makes sense. I remember a few weeks ago I was walking around and thinking. Am I moving through the world or is the world moving through me? And then on a similar note: time isn't moving forward. Since consciousness has no attributes it cannot change, only contents change. It's difficult to explain, but it was experienced clearly.

Thanks! Actually useful advice

I don't understand all this quantum stuff. so inspiration = contact with akashic records cool

@Serotoninluv When I was imagining this I realised, there wouldn't be two people in that case. If you had acces to someones mind, you just would be them. No communication. Communication is misunderstandig.

Take a look at the self. I recommend Ralston's work and definitely try Kim Katami's two part formula. In the meantime, I think you'll enjoy this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DaH4W1rY9us

@Serotoninluv I like to think there will be a way to connect minds. You know REAL communication. Would that even be communication? Is anything really communication? Ah maya...

@SoonHei That made it quite clear

@Leo Gura I agree. I really don't know anything about how Copernicus and Galilei did it, but they had to have arguments that were valid from the viewpoint of the paradigm they wanted to overthrow. So deconstructing materialism has to be done with rational arguments. Or at least rational arguments must be used to point out where rationality fails. This is your strong point. I'm looking forward to your new book. I hope you can find a way to reach a big audience.

With the statistical methods used now they have reason to. If we want to bring about a scientific revolution, it's going to take more convincing methods. Like you said we should stop using bulldozers and start using small butterfly catchers. But first you have to convince the scientific community that small butterfly catchers are an OK method. We better have a good argument. I'm really wondering how we can bring about this sort of revolution. It should be possible.

@Leo Gura I don't think you are being critical enough here. They don't all come out positive in meta-analysis. A problem with meta-analysises is the file-drawer problem. A meta-analysis only gives an overview of published studies. Many studies are not published because they fail to find significant results. In addition to that, many of these results are the results of dubious statistical methods. It is possible to attain significance for any data if you just keep applying different statistical methods. An honest researcher should decide BEFORE he collects data, which pieces of the data he is going to analyse and with which methods. This is as much a problem with non-PSI psychological research btw. Fun fact: one of the studies ("Feeling the future" by Daryl Bem) mentioned in the book caused a revolution in psychology. Not because it proves the existence of PSI-phenomena but because 'if a study like this can get significant results, something must be very wrong with our statistical methods'. Furthermore, many of these studies fail to replicate. If a significance of one in a billion is found then a significant replication should not be a problem. I only looked into some of these studies, so I am not sure if this is the case for every one of them. But I would advise learning some statistics and reading the papers yourself before believing everything you read. One of the problems I think is that, as you said, it is a big step to start doing this kind of research because you will be ridiculed. I think that before you take this step as a researcher you must REALLY believe it is true. As with all believes you try to protect it, so when you find insignificant results you get tempted to not be very honest with your methods. Same thing happening on the other side of the argument. I do think the problem is a lack of open-mindedness in the scientific community, which causes dishonesty on both sides.

How do you know this?

@PsiloPutty I agree. But I'm not complaining

https://www.reddit.com/r/streamentry/comments/9e4eva/practicea_rapid_path_to_awakening/ I saw this on reddit a few days ago. It's a technique to investigate the sense of self and achieve awakening. The technique looks logical: First part, observing selfless space. Second part, evoking the sense of self and observing it. And in that way observing it's impermanent and conceptual nature. It's supposed to get you awakened on average in less than a week. It seems too good to be true, but nothing lost in trying it. I have been trying it for a couple of days. No spectacular awakening event has occurred, but my sense of self seems to have changed. I lost the knot behind the eyes. Clearer head, less negative emotions, less I-related thoughts or concern. Maybe it's placebo. I-related emotional patterns (shame, pride) still happen. When they are noticed they can be interrupted. It's like they are a habit, but now I can stop them because they have no reason to exist. Maybe it's not placebo If you want to try it, take a look at the ebook with stories of people who went trough the process. https://www.en.openheart.fi/114 Please let me know your thoughts.

lol

How do you know this?