RedLine

So, why are you using words to make me understand something? Why are you writing in this forum? "See the ‘problem’ with your misunderstanding?"

Go to the point: people suffers or not? people are narcissistic, are attach to their egos and suffer for it or no? Yes, so there is suffer, so you can not state at the same time Reality is love and there are people that are not in love. That is not Love anymore. The only thing you can say is: reality is Nothing, reality is non-linguistinc; you can define reality in negative terms but you can never say reality is Love because it is a concept and you need to deal with the consecuences. If you say reality is Love then it is already something so you need to deal with the consecuences of that something linguistically.

Yes. My goal is understand Being, my goal is Truth. So there is this idea, in the spiritual/philosophica community: Ultimate reality = Love. So I am trying to deal with this idea (my goal is not to be offensive, I am only concerned with discovering the truth, I apologize if I have seemed arrogant in my thread) Why I disagree with this idea I think has been clearly explained in the OP.

You don´t say that the sun is hot as a metaphysical statement. You can say Universe is Love as a methaphyisical statement, or you can say the Universe is Love as a relative statmement which means nothing because it implies there are differente degrees of love including suffering, so you are admiting that there are suffering. Absolutely not what I mean.

Of course not everything is black or white, but to understand reality you need to do simplifications. Languaje is not reality, it is a tool to understand reality; you need languaje to communicate reality with others. What I mean is that the Truth is not only subjective; basically because you (you as a source of experience) are not the hole reality/truth; so subjective is not the whole map. To understad Truth you need to understad all spheres. And yes, Leo and his disciples are not very interested in objectivity (which is fine, but then you cannot pretend you know everything) and sciencie in general is not interested in experience.

Enlighment is not your subjective experience but it is a subjective experience. Again: not everything is experience. There are truth/reality you can not experience. Other people are experience reality at the same time that you and you can not "see through their eyes". With your comment you are admitting that everything is not Love. If you state everything is love you can not state at the same time that there are degrees/modes of Love. You can play the game of non-duality or you can play the game of language but you can not play both games on the same time. If you use languaje you need to obey logic and deal with the problems of the languaje. From the moment you use the term Love (a concept) you are in the languaje game, so you can not say that evertything is Love (absolute love) and at the same state that there are different degrees of love, because saying that you are agains the concept of absolute love, it goes against logic.

You always take everything to subjectivity. It is not everything about you sir. There are others; there are common knowledge (objetivcity or intersubjetivity, it is the same). There is more of that that you can experience subjectively. Materialism/sciencitifc religion - objective bias Actualized.org - subjective bias

Are they permanently in silence without thoughts/mental noise? Or do they have the same mental noise that before enlightment but they are aware of them?

One more thing: He doesnt´even tell if had a meditation routine or what was his phenomenology between the sesssions (what was his stage of conscisuness). Maybe that what his mistake is, he was doing that trips but then he didnt´meditate at all so he was going back to his ego stage and also could integrate the experience. Only psychodelics is not a good a idea, you need strong meditation background also

@Kailash Bhattarai I can give an answer: every person is different why some people spend decades meditating and dont get results? why some people do it with a few years of meditaiton practice? why Ramana Maharsi entered in the non-dual state and never leave without meditation or psychodelics? why self inquiry works form some people and not for others?

@ivankiss Thank you. This is the kind of answer I was looking for. So would you say you control your thoughts (you decide to create them or not, so you can choose be in the state of empy mind or no)? or it is more like you are just aware of the thoughts and the state of empty mind just happens once in a while without you choosing it?

exactly what is the point of doing anything that's our goal with the meditation practice: do nothing, just flow you cant do nothing right now because you are attach to the thoughts, that's why we need mental exercise (meditation)

They used remote vision in cold war so actually they know what to do with that.

This is not about dogma, religions or spiritual schools. It is about states of consciusness. It is a phenomenological development wich can be studied cross-cultural and it is always the same.

Don't demonize alcohol or other drugs diferrent that psychodelic. Each person can be affected differently and can make different use of them. The closest thing to spiritual experiences I had in my life before taking psychedelics was drinking alcohol. Much more empathy and "brotherhood" with the people around me. More humility and peace. I still enjoy getting drunk when I party occasionally, I think it is an excellent drug. I dont´think is morally bad. I am aware that there are people who do them wrong, causing them to return to their ego and damaging their spiritual progress (Ken Wilber in his diairos for example). It's not my case. Stanislav Gorf stated somewhere that often the closest regular people got "spiritual experiences" was drinking alcohol.

Buddhism has serious difficulties in accessing the non-dual state due to its own nature. Usually they stay in the casual state (witness). So they don't know much about God. Leo is right. Someday perhaps I will create a thread on this topic to explain this with a bunch of references.

For me cannabis = more neurosis and monkey mind

This guy is great. It is a good example of you can be enlighten an be a normal guy, you don't need to act as a guru or buddhist monk

You are confusing 2 different things: 1. God does not intervene in the affairs of man: for example, millons of people suffered and died in the Holocaust, included children. Were these children guilty of something that caused them to suffer in the hell of concentration camps? Definetly not, they are children so innocent. 2. If you are a demon you suffer more because you are more attach to your ego and less to God. So, in this sense, yes, you are rewarded for your effort and for your morality

What meditation technique does Shinzen Young recommend on a regular basis? I have seen a lot of videos of him but he never teaches the standard technique. I am just curious. Maybe just sit and try to be aware of everthing without judging?

You don´t take 5-MeO and then become perfect for the rest of your life. This is not how it works.

I just read the book. It contains 33 lessons with lots of exercises and lots of rutine tables, but it doesn´t tell you which routine you should use or how you should switch routines as the days go by. What routine should I use in week 1? what routine should I use in week 2, month 2, month 12 etc? Should I just pick the routine I want? Isn't it very random and chaotic? I would like to follow kriya yoga on a structured path like Culadasa teachs for samadhi meditation, for example. Can someone offer me some guidance?

Vanitiy, the devil's favourite sin.

SDS is not actually SDS, since you start 90 degrees and unconsciously slowly your head back down, so you need to readjust your position every 45 minutes or so, unless you want to end up with back and neck pain. This is my experience with SDS.

Short answer: yes, it is bad for you. I loved Chief Keef, but it is the price I have to pay to persue the Hero's Journey.