Petals

@Thetruthseeker I haven't gone through the thread, so maybe someone has recommended this. I enjoy listening to the 'Conspirituality' podcast from time to time and Aubrey Marcus is also talked about in a few episodes. Maybe you want to check it out.

if you are not serious enough about it to pay one tuition, then why do it? I don't know how much it is for one semester. apart from that, is it not allowed to visit some lectures without enrolling?

in the end, you can only know by testing it. so why not go to some seminars and lectures and see how you like it? you have a job, so there is no risk in dropping out if you don't like it.

if you do it for the sake of learning, why jump through all the hoops? there is so much stuff online and books, so you can pick and choose what really interests you. if you consider getting a job in these fields, then you probably need to do it. or if you love socializing and want the experience of community. there are also online courses from renowned universities and professors. those might also keep you on track. that's my opinion, but you probably already had some of the same thoughts. (edx.org for example)

I do not have suicidal thoughts but thank you for trying to help. Nor do I deny that death is an illusion from the highest perspective. But the highest perspective doesn't help much on the levels of reality we find ourselves on - here on earth and in the possible afterlife. Therefore I think that such statements need to be qualified and used with caution.

Ok, I don't know for sure but I just want to remind you, Leo, that this is the kind of thing that played a role in someone killing himself. And the fact is, you don't know if it's true. I get that it seems so to you from the vantage point of your trips but have a look at the field of parapsychology or near-death experiences which hint at the possibility that sth of the personality is retained and therefore that ignorance remains after death. Even the greats of the 20th century when it comes to spirituality have not espoused the view of your quote, at least many of them have not. I am not here to declare the truth of the matter because I don't know. I just want you to be cautious and entertain the possibility that you are wrong. You don't need to take me seriously but please take other authorities seriously who do not agree with you on this. Maybe you are open to what I wrote, but then you need to qualify your statement.

@integral like you I scored a 1. I would agree with you that you need at least sth like 8,9,10 for good functioning in the world. I scored a little on superiority. I think my sense of superiority comes from being interested in stuff that nobody else seems to be interested in. My MBTI-type is INFP.

@How to be wise I am not trying to defend 'Conversations' but you looked up a Wikipedia article, so that doesn't prove much. It even says 'most experts saying' so there is no consensus as it seems. And science can be wrong, too. Maybe there was one specific culture in which females were dominant and there this idea first arose. I don't know. I am curious what the other instances of false information are.

I don't see much of a problem. All that Ralston says (I think) is that states are not Consciousness which is fair enough I think. Ralston thinks that psychedelics produce nothing but states. Imagine the sky is very cloudy and you want to see the sun. Ralston says 'Let's wait down here till we see the sun'. Leo says 'I will take a plane and go beyond the clouds. Then I will see the sun.' The sun is always shining but you don't always see it. Ralston thinks it's illegitimate to take a plane which doesn't make sense. After all it's the same sun. It's still the same sun when you descend below the clouds again.

Joep Beving - he has many good ones.

it's not Schumann but Bach-Busoni (an encore probably).

At the moment I am listening to the second conversation Leo had with Curt Jaimungal on the Theories of Everything channel. There at about 1:52 Leo mentions that he has experienced 'things you would not believe' in the context of siddhis, clairvoyance, telepathy. So my question is - has he talked about such experiences in one of the Actualized videos? If not, are you, Leo, going to make a video about these experiences in the future? I know that most teachers advise you to not take them too seriously or to ignore them. But if they occur, they are part of reality and therefore of interest.

I'm never here in the dating section, so I am not an expert. But have you really tried? Maybe read your post again and you will see that you base all your complaining on hearsay. Why do you trust all that? You will only know when you go out and try. When you talk to a girl, where are these 10% and all the conceptual 'knowledge' that you listed here? It's not present. You are present. You are here and the other person is here. That in itself is utterly astounding. You are alive! It is totally counterproductive to 'hate all women'. They are just trying their best to be happy, just as you are. They are afraid of suffering just as you are. Focus on your commonalities. Think 'we', not 'me' against 'them'. So do your best and the rest is not in your hands. Let go of the conceptual baggage and try to be present.

I would argue that the unpleasantness is not part of the package deal. There is a sensation present, then there is an automatic interpretation of it as pain. But the pain is only painful (i.e. unpleasant) because you interpret it as pain. You interpret it as pain, so it is painful. But if you pay close attention to the sensation you can recognise that it is just a sensation that got interpreted (by a hardwired automatic process) and that there is in fact nth painful about the sensation itself. If you have massive pain it will be very hard to prevent that interprative process. But try it on small discomforts and pains.

@Leo Gura But somehow this answer doesn't seem quite satisfactory. Gravity does not just exist anywhere floating around without any context. It is one thread in the tapestry of what we call a 'physical universe' (even if it is not physical). The whole thing is not random (fine tuning-argument). Gravity does a certain job and without that specific job being fulfilled we or anything else wouldn't be here. So I guess the question that I am trying to get at is not 'why does gravity exist?' but 'why does gravity exist in the very way that it does?'. Infinity is cool but it doesn't feel like God is just churning out every random thing just because it is part of infinity. So what I think I want to get to is that there is some kind of Will behind the universe and that this Will (by definiton) has a certain aim and that that aim can be reached via this universe which necessitates the specific (strength of) gravity that we have. (???) apropos 'not every random thing' - could you make a video about harmony and beauty? what, how, and why it is?