Rasheed

This is what Sadhguru writes about sex in his book "Karma" (page 66) 'Now, body memory works on all the levels we have discussed earlier in this chapter. But a very important and large aspect of this memory is physical (as distinct from psychological and energetic). In Sanskrit, this physical memory of the body is called runanubandha. Runanubandha is the physical memory you carry within you. It is a result of blood relationships, as we have seen earlier, but also, more important, a result of sexual relationships. Wherever there is physical intimacy—particularly of a sexual nature— the body registers the memory deeply. And so the arrangement of committed relationships in any society is based on a bedrock of profound intelligence. Logic is simple: since a significant exchange of memory occurs in any physical encounter, if you confuse the body’s memory with too many physical impressions, your system grows confused. Once your memory system becomes complicated, it could take a lot more work to settle your life. It is important to emphasize that there is nothing wrong with runanubandha. It is an essential part of life. Without runanubandha between a couple, for instance, a future generation could not be perpetuated. And without runanubandha between a mother and child, a child could not survive. Only question, however, is how to make it supportive rather than entangling; how to ensure, in short, that a bond does not turn into bondage. For anyone on a spiritual path, simplifying runanubandha becomes particularly important, because the ultimate aim for the seeker is to transcend physicality. If one nurses such an intention, it is wise to keep the body as a simple process, uncluttered by the encumbrance of too much' My question is: Basically to get enlightened one should not have sex? What does it mean that after sexual experience, since body registers memory deeply, and if you got lot of body memory, you can't get enlightened, this means sex is against enlightenment? What if you a man only had sex once but that one time he had sex with women who slept with 20 other men (i.e she has 20 units of stored memory within her body), that means this man who had sex once, now has that memory stored up of 21 other humans? This whole memory shit does not make sense to me. This goes against Osho when he said it is cool to have sex and he actually advises to do it. This goes against Leo's viewpoint of sex. What is runanubandha? All of this boil down to according to Sadhguru, if man has sex with lots of women, he can't get enlightened? WTF? vice versa for women... If you want more, read Sadhguru's book Karma from page 66 to 69, just 3 pages about this sex memory stuff.

Cool, thank you very much for help, I really appreciate it.

Ken Wilber in his book recommended book on Gestalt therapy. I read it. Here's the book: https://www.amazon.com/Gestalt-Therapy-Excitement-Growth-Personality/dp/0939266245. I think 'Gestalt therapy' is great, I especially appreciate Friedrich Perls for developing it in 1950s. The reason I am asking this question: "What is the Main Premise of Gestalt Therapy?" is because Gestalt therapies main technique and main premise reminded me of mindfulness. Basically, Perls focuses upon body-awareness, awareness of the senses and one of his main practices is conscious eating. He loved to say: "Lose your mind and come to your senses". So, what is the main premise, point of Gestalt therapy in your opinion?

Good point. When I read Perls’s book he also advised to feel one’s feelings fully… Thanks for feedback.

Here is my meditation background: Started to meditate at 16, (as I remember, probably 14... truth be told but at 14 I think I meditate only 30 minute a day I probably bumped to 1 hour at 15), I am saying 16 because from 16 I started to do 1 hour meditation per day (I definitely remember that at 16 I did 1 hour, probably at 15 I did anywhere from 30 min to 1 hour per day), at 17: I did 2 hours per day (1 year), at 18 I did 4 hours per day (for 1 year) and at 19 I am doing 2 hours per day, every day right now as well. I followed that regime every day for a year including 4 hours per day. I read many spiritual books including Osho's Vigyan Bhairav Tantra, practiced meditation seriously with great theoretical foundation (basically I know the shit I am doing...) and today, I am reading Om Swami's 'A Million Thoughts' and this guy kind of explained to me right now why I am not super-conscious Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh-type (before that I had doubts why I was not getting this super-conscious results these non dual teachers are selling): That is because there are different levels of meditators, here is the guide: Ordinary Path Mild meditator is one who holds one or two sessions of meditation in a span of 24 hours, generally at dawn and dusk. The length of an average session of meditation for a mild practitioner is between 30 minutes to an hour. Average meditator is one who holds three sessions of meditation in a span of 24 hours. Each session lasts about one hour. If they have been following this regime for a minimum of six months, they can be safely classified as average meditators. Extraordinary Path Keen meditator is the one who meditates an average of four times in span of 24 hours, each session lasting a minimum of one hour. A meditator who meditates unfailingly with this discipline for at least one year can be called a keen meditator and not just someone who does it for a few weeks. Intense meditator is the one who holds an average of six sessions of meditation in a span of 24 hours and does so on a regular basis, minimum period being six months. Average session of such a meditator lasts between 60 and 90 minutes. Anything more than that is considered supremely intense. Basically I have been anywhere from mild (1-2 hours per day) and keen meditator (4 hours per day) all of these time and that is why I did not had any 'enlightenment'. I was wondering why I am not experiencing super conscious shit Rajneesh talks about and now I know, Osho himself used to sit for like hours on an end in his room meditating even when he was running his cult in Oregon and Pune...Intense meditator level shit. Om Swami himself said that meditating 1 hour or doing a 4 hour retreats, did not gave him any 'enlightenment' experiences as well. Right now, I realize from that meditation to go somewhere it must be done in a retreat settings for months. Like 10 hour meditation per day for 5 months. Om Swami himself did 22 hours of meditation, for 6 months straight. Meanwhile all this time I thought 4 hour per day meditation for a year, or 2 hour meditations for years would lead to super-conscious state and lead to becoming someone like Osho...That happens to be a bullshit. (P.S. Fuck yeah, I got all personal development, focus, self-actualization benefits from meditating this much but not enlightenment type of Osho talks about. I can stop thinking but at the same time I cannot sit without a thought for a day like Osho can. I am like: I can stop thinking...then monkey mind will come, stop it and be conscious for respectable duration...) I had a plan for meditating 2 hours everyday for 14 years (10,000 hours) but now I realize that won't lead anywhere because to have that super-conscious type of shit enlightenment you must meditate for pro-longed period of time, intensely for like 10 hours a day for 6 months. I think now I understand why Leo says meditation is bullshit. Why he says this non-dual teachers are bullshitting as well. Even though I never taken any psychedelics yet, if what Leo says about 5-MeO is true, all these non dual motherfuckers are bullshitters. Why to sit 10 hours a day for 6 months when with deconstruction and 5-MEO, you can become way more conscious than all these non dual teachers? All I can say that meditation is great for personal development, but at the same time if you have to meditate 3 hours a day in order to just be average meditator, I mean this is unrealistic. Leo himself advises to meditate 1 hour a day, every day in the past... I won't stop my meditation practice, I am still probably going to do at least 1 hour per day, or 2 because meditation is powerful for personal development, self-actualization, emotional mastery, focus, etc...but reading 'A Million Thoughts' really opened my eyes. I still think meditation is number one personal development practice and amazing for self-actualization but for enlightenment, I think Leo is way more correct than non-dual teachers. If 5-MeO and psychedelics are real deal, I don't think non-dual gurus will advise it because they will put them out of business real quick... And another question I had : What will 2 hours of meditation per day for 14 years lead? Does it lead to same state individual reaches if one meditates for 10 hours a day for 6 months straight without failing? Now that is a question Om Swami does not answer in a book, but I only read half of it maybe he answers it there I don't know. Correct guys if I am wrong. Thanks.

Yeah, it is a small book, you are going to finish it quickly, it is pure gold. Must-read. Put it on your reading list. It is basically smaller version of his amazing 1st book 'the Spectrum of Consciousness'

I read his recommendation in the book 'No Boundary' and there he outlines which therapies are on which level on his 'spectrum of consciousness'. In that book he advises that one of the best therapies for 'centaur/existential' level is Gestalt therapy.

Thanks you, got it.

Does 6 month, hardcore 10+ hour meditation lead to God-realization? If not, and if meditation cannot lead to God-Realization, then what's the point? When I said meditation is great for self-actualization, I meant the same thing as you Leo for human benefits, but of course for serious existential understanding that is ain't enough...I am the proof for that for example.

Om Swami won’t agree with you upon that point…Then why did Buddha left for 6 years, Mahavira 12, Om Swami meditated 15,000 hours…? Also, why did Leo do over 200+ psychedelic trips?

So, 2 hours of meditating even for 15 years won't get me anywhere, retreats and 6 month of 10+ hours of intense meditation is necessary to get what non-duality is talking about. P.S. I think 1 hour a day meditation is amazing for personal development and self-actualization work but not for consciousness work...as I concluded. I meant Osho before he started to run ashram, he spent hours in meditation from like age 12 and up. And then he kept it up his entire life, that is what I meant. I know that he was already woke when he built his cult, of course...

P.S. At the same time, don't think that I am bullshitting meditation. MEDITATION IS STILL FUCKING AMAZING but for: Self-Actualization Personal Development Self-Improvement Fulfillment Reprogramming one's mind Living consciously Psychology I am simply discussing meditation here in ENLIGTHENMENT, RELIGION, SPIRITUALITY, CONSCIOUSNESS WORK context, like you gonna get enlightened and never get incarnated again, Gautama Buddha type of shit.

I want to read literature aka fiction books because it will make it easier for me to socialize I guess because many people are into literature and non-fiction. Thing is I like to read psychology, philosophy, religion aka non-fiction and reading fiction for me is tough. Right now I am reading Virginia Woolf's 'to the Lighthouse' I am halfway there, I don't like it even though Virginia Woolf is one of the greatest fiction writers of all time. I don't like fiction because it is impractical, it does not teach me anything valuable like non-fiction reading of psychology, spirituality, personal development does. Another thing I discovered about these fictions books: They are way too long. For example Tolstoy's main book is like 50 hours. Dostoevsky's 'Brother Karamazov' is 40 hours. His book 'Idiot' is 30 hours long. James Joyces's main book is 30 hours. (I am listening to them as audiobooks that is why I am writing hours here) (so right now I realized I probably won't be able to read this, it is way too much.) Imagine that!!! These books are super, super long. I have no problem reading huge books because I have read super complex, super long books. for example Ken Wilber's 'Religion of Tomorrow' is 40 hours long. I read that book and loved it. Thing is I can read Ken Wilber for 40 hours without any problem. I can read long non-fiction book because it is non-fiction but I can't read 40 hours of Dostoevsky or Tolstoy i.e. fiction...That is my problem. That is why I am talking about length. If non-fiction is long, that is great but for fiction...Hell no. So my question is: WHAT TO DO? Can reading summaries of these books be enough? Probably summaries will be shorter but at the same time, I don't want to be faking like I read these books when I only read summaries of them. That is because main reason I want to read fiction is to help me socialize, to become what Mark Manson calls in his book Models: "a man with artistic taste" Should I read summaries? What should I do? Are summaries enough for me to understand these books?

If you guys are interested in Jung and Freud and recommendations on what to read, I would advise you to first read Ken Wilber's 'No Boundary' where he gives recommendations about this exact topics. Excellent book. Concise, to the point, beautifully written.

That is the point, what if someone wants to do both...Sadhguru's point starts to not make any sense when we are talking about living an active life because he also says since body memory gets accumulated through hands as well, Indian's don't shake hands. WTF, you should do if you are wrestler, boxer or a pro fighter, I mean you got to touch people...Honestly, it is confusing... + Osho advises and point of view about sexuality is way different and more evolved than Sadhguru's + Leo's advise about sex and consciousness is completely different as well.

Thanks. Entire point which got me confused was: I want to date, do pickup and develop myself into attractive man and at the same time be conscious , hardcore into consciousness work and Sadhguru’s point did not make sense to me because of that

Thanks guys but truth be told, you confused me even more...

Dale Carnegie advises in his book: How to Win Friends and Influence People to focus upon becoming a great listener and be genuinely interested in other people’s opinions…

Do you also advice watching movies in order to connect with more people rather than literature?

I don’t know bro about that, when it comes to fiction I love both so that is probably ain’t the reason…

My goals are from doing this: to connect with people on social level, like friend to friend Also, to connect with women on man to women level. ———— So @Yarco you are telling me that reading literature for those goals is stupid and I need to watch movies instead? Right now, I am contemplating reading summaries of those literature books, but at the same time I don’t want to fake it but will that be considered faking? Come on, I can’t imagine most people reading 50 hours of Tolstoy, they probably are faking as well…Who knows.

Does day-game depend on the season (time of the year) and weather? Like day-game is more suited for summer, warm weather than winter...or is that ain't true?

When do most intellectuals write their first book? I googled it and found that for example Jordan Peterson, Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris all wrote their first book in late 30s... So, let's say individuals wants to write a serious book about psychology/philosophy, at least he/she should be in my mid 30's to do it?