Endangered-EGO

@Nos7algiK My point is the "wanting" stops by doing the method for a prolonged time. So why does it matter if I do it or not with the intention of getting there again if the intention stops. One more question: What's the alternative? Stop the search?

@Nos7algiK That means that by your prediction. If I stay in front of the mirror again starting with the intention of "getting there" again.even after 10 hours this will not happen? I'm going to try it either way, so just clarify if the issue is the wanting, or the method.

Start with that. That's a real pointer. The "there's no you to awaken" is not helping people who had glimpses. This is only helping people who don't know there's a conceptual self and a higher/no self.

@AminB501 All Hindu teachers make bullshit predictions. Sadhguru f.e. and shunyamurti talks about a post materialist nearly apocalyptic world. Take it with a grain of salt. IMO they see the problem and believe that people need to awaken to survive it. They are enlightened, but they aren't able to predixt the future.

@mw711 I'm asking :"How do I get there again". You say:"There's no I to get there". This is BS. Go talk like that to a master he'll throw you out of his class. I'm not talking about language, I'm merely using language.

@The0Self Any idea on how to maintain that state except to stay in front of the mirror?

@James12345 @hoodrow trillson @mw711 b @James12345 So I guess I'll just stay in front of the mirror, and there's nothing else to do.

@hoodrow trillson void screen is accurate. No thought either. But not in a DP/DR sense. There wasn't a real reaction from ego mind during it. Of course the weirdness brought me back. @mw711 bro, we're far beyond that conceptual self. I'm very well aware of the absense of self when merging and when the sense of self disappears. You're misusing pointers from nondual teachers. You're right in how you're pointing, but you're not right in saying that I had no no-self, because i use language? "Does the experience want that thought to articulate everything like that, for it, to prove to itself that there's no I"? Sounds retarded to me.

What's not quanitfiable in addition to existence, consciousness, awareness, conentration, mind, which might be unconsciously believed to be quanitfiable. For example some neurologist believe consciousnes is quantifiable by setting an arbitrary line in neuro-activity, based on memory or lack of memory I guess. Which is similar to putting an arbitrary line between hot-cold or dark-illuminated. Any subjectivity is also not quanitfiable. Psychology-scales are just based on the best case and worst case the subject can imagine. So pleasure, love, suffering, pain etc is not quantifiable either. (I am currently deconstructing my very materialist worldview.) Thanks for your help.

Let's engineer a better, more enlightened, loving and less suffering population with CRISPR.

Okay, quantifying is secondary, awareness of thought is primal.

@Preety_India Can you elaborate? That doesn't mean a lot to most people.

@Windappreciator That's how we make sense of a big part of reality, by quantifying it, or by creating dualities.

@Stovo Its because in US democrats hate republicans and republicans hate democrats. The more democrats wants abortion, the less republicans want it and vice versa. In eurooe most people just hate politicians in general except maybe the 5% extremes. Basically nobody gives a shit. Either people like the new laws or they don't. Politics isn't a show in Europe. Most people can't even name a single Eu-parlament member. I can name 2. Ursula von der Leyen and Jean Claude Junker (who isn't one anymore.)

What's your definition of a "sin"?

@Johnny Galt The Nazis of course! J.k. probaby the CCP, they'd engineer peaceful citizens, take any agressive behaviour, pathologies out of the genomes. We're not too far from it.

@Preety_India Teachers usually use specific questions for spiritual assesments. If the answer is "no, I don't know what you're talking about" then the teacher sais:" ok, go sit down and continue your practice." If the answer is "yes, i know exactly what you mean" then there's a new practice. I doubt that you can measure spiritual development by counting the posts.

@Leo Gura I actually agree... The path is different for everybody. It would be nice to constuct a hierarchy of spiritual practice. Fundament would be mindfullness meditation, then contemplation, then self inquiry, then integration for example. The fuel for development would then be philosophy, love, motivation, wonder etc. Similar to maslows hierarchy, like you don't need to work on your self-esteem if you can't feed yourself properly. That's like stupid people taking psychedelics for fun, that would never develop them spiritualiy. @Javfly33 Thank you, this thread actually made me rethink how I perceive spirituality. Based on my spontaneously imagined hierarchy, you should have enough "fuel". You use too muc fuel to fuel itself. Now use that fuel, for development, to "leave earths gravity" instead of gaining speed.

@Javfly33 This forum might just not help you in what youre doing. 1. Leo's theoretical videos are just how you're going to make sense of your awakenings. 97% theory post-awakening and 3% practical tips. 2. Most of the comments here are just not helpful at all and way too esoteric. For example there was a 17yo dude who went through the dark night of the soul bc of strong determination sitting and got no real practical advice, even though EVERY mindfullness teacher can easily guide him through it... This forum will not take you to the next step. I can speak from my own experience, this forum helps you make sense of awakenings, but it's not going to liberate you and it's not going to bring you towards abiding enlightenment. 3. You're thinking about this stuff, which is philosophy and not real experience. Thinking about it is only the fuel for motivation to inquire into the nature of reality. I don't believe that Leo's pointer ever helped anyone, because they just sound too outrageous and it's just not leading anywhere if you're pre awakening. 4. Awakenings are not going to enlighten you. You need integration after awakenings. Realising you being consciousness is not that hard, just requires honest self inquiry for a few weeks or months. 5. Listen to other teachers. Rupert Spira. Adyashanti. Shinzen Young, he gives you methods you can do 24/7. Eckhart tolle. Kundalini yoga. And other reputable teachers. There's no secrets. @Leo Gura How can you say that he's just not serious enough about it if he has 3200posts on your forum?

@AminB501 We're talkingabout the same thing. Somehow I always get trapped in mind again, until I meditate. And then I'm back in ego mind.

I noticed somethings months ago, but I tend to forget those things. My mind has survival as one objective. "Escaping suffering/pain" and on the other hand it wants solve the problems so consciousness can expand. However disfunctional minds when they get too much traction, they can't stop solving problems, and when there's no problem it tends to create it's own. Or just looks everywhere to find new problems or potential problems etc. I'm trying to find a way to condition the mind to help me in a functional way. Not just to let the mind solve problems, but to love problem-solving as much as the absent peaceful state of no-thought. It's just my mind doesn't want to do that because it's dangerous/misleading/illusory and it fears that it can't function with only positive stimuli. I'm trying to develop a method, me and most other people really need to achieve that. To become a highly functional and fullfilled human being. Best I've found yet is to consciously create a feeling of love and project that on every object of consciousness the mind shows. But then you need to convince the mind it wants that, to get the snowball rolling.

@Tim R I have made 3 test runs woth heads or tail. I just missed a 95% of statistical importance. I'm not gonna waste 1h of meditation for heads or tail. Where nobody can check the results for themselves.

Okay. I've noticed a back and forth about manifestation, consciously creating reality and some people claiming it's possible or not. Either some of us can, or one of us can do it, or it's not possible for any of us. I can quantify it and calculate the propability. I'm going to set up the experiment. If enough people are willing to take part in the experiment, I'm going to make it, do the math, quantify it and calculate the probability of it being pure luck or manifestation. We're going to play the lottery: here's the experiment: I'm going to play 6 out of 49 numbers (once every week), post them here in the forum before the results come. Then, anyone who wants to manifest those numbers can try to. [IF]; we get [AT LEAST] 2 or 3 numbers right. There is a 1% chance of it being luck and a 99% chance of it being manifeststion. (Just an example). Then we are going to play it next week again. If it works again, the probability will be multiplied if it's a win, or divided if it's a loss. So if it works again. It would be 1 in a 10 000 chance of ot being luck and 9 999 out of 10 000 chance of it being mafineststion. If you believe you are able to manifest. It's quanitfiable, it's just a matter of how quantifiable it is and how practical. Now I also know the common excuse. " The universe just wants to show you it's possible but doesn't want you (the ego) to profit from it. Great. We're going to chose 2 sets of numbers of which only one is going to be played and the other set not. If manifestation works. It doesn't matter if we get1, 2 or 3 numbers right every week, we could add up the probabilities until we get a 1 in a 3.5million chance of it happening, which is 5 sigma and will be written in the new physics books. Every scientist, physician, mathematician can make that experiment. It's easy, it's quantifiable and it's going to show you the proof of it being true (or not) "Oh it's just your ego". No it's not my ego. It's sharlatans ego's being delusional or making money from naive susceptible people. "Don't waste your time on such nonsense". It's not nonsense. It might not be enlightenment, but it's an experiment that's worth it. If it's proven wrong, then nothing happens. Of it's proven right (5sigma), then consciousness directly influences and manifests reality, and it's the most important findinging in the whole history of science. "Consciousness isn't quantifiable because it transcends the materialist paradigm". I agree, however Siddhis and psychic powers don't. James randi gets a lot of criticism because he made the rules of chosing impossible probabilities limited in time. We're not going to do that. We're going to do that for one year straight if necessary and calculate the probability. It could be between 50% chance of manifestion being real up to 99.999999999% chance of it being real. There might not be any proof, of it being possible or not, but at least we could say that f.e. "manifestation has an 80% chance of being true(if many people pray for some numbers to show up in the lottery)". If you have any idea why it wouldn't work, we can ways redesign that experiment to include zour variable. So if anyone wants to take part in the experiment I'm going to set it up and ask a mathematician friend to help me not make any mistakes with the probability part of it.

@Tim R It's exactly that. But we're going to measure it haha. People get lost into that type of manifestation which comes with psychological issues.

@Nahm I have no problem with, god's will manifesting, or consciousness manifesting what it wants. So many people get deluded into the new age "wish your reality into existence". @Moksha Best evidence I've fround was this study from Dean Radin: < @Tim R maybe tommorow.