Fran11

Personally, I do not claim that. If you are interested, by experimenting yourself. If you are not interested, and still claim that X is a dogma, without any experience, that itself is a dogma. There's no easy quick way of separating the wheat from the chaff. It takes work on your part.

There are people who just take things on blind faith, yes. But it is also true that there are many asspects about spirituality that you can confirm by direct experience besides God Conciousness (which is the main spiritual theme Leo talks about and everybody here knows about). But of course from the POV of someone who isn't experienced in these other asspects, people who claim such things will look like dogmatic fools. Just like someone claiming that God is not a belief would also come across to most people outside this forum. Of course you should not blindly believe in these things, but rather making your own experience if you are interested.

Have you considered genetic causes? There's an enzime called Monoamine Oxidase, which degradates DMT, some people naturally have much higher levels. There could be many other biological causes besides that one. But this is hard to know for sure. I would try other psychedelics and routes of administration.

The awakening moment itself will probably be deeper on psychedelics. But if you are able to achieve a sober one in meditation, it means your baseline everyday conciousness is significantly high. Like being on a low to moderate dose 24/7. Better going for both IMO, they potentiate each other.

Not only will affect America, but the whole globe unfortunately.

This.

@Gidiot I'm sorry but I don't feel you have understood my perspective. I'm NOT advocating for solid Blue. But it is often demonized by Green and it's healthy asspects are neglected. That allows for a lot of Red barbarity. Of course Green is of much value and even more so. I'm tired of repeating this. Seems that many of you guys don't even give the benefit of the doubt to anything you think it is slightly conservative-sounding. If you are gonna keep misunderstanding and implying that don't even bother to repy. I advocate for a healthy Green which integrates the lower Stages. But in practice what happens is that teens and young adults (the top wealthier third of society at least) just absorbe Green ideas (which is good) but they start off from there without any sense of why the lower stages came to be in the first place. The main point is that demonizing specifically the order of Blue in a still highly Red enviroment doesn't work. You cannot deal with the barbarity of Red only using the soft Green aproach. Red is fucking brutal and ruthless. It's hard to really have sense of this if you live in a developed society. There is value in Green's compassion for Red of course. But it's very naive to think that will be enough when Red is still so prevalent. They will still rape and kill you, which is what happens on a daily basis.

Cute strawman.

I understad that in a developed society Green is almost a neat positive with no downsides. But in societies with low socioeconomic developement, advanced ideas get imported fast becasue of globalization and the country may not ready for them. You yourself have said many times that one cannot skip stages. In a society with 5-10% Red, maybe reacting against the order of Blue is not problematic. But with 35% Red, it is. Please really contemplate this before dismissing me as a conservative. I agree with Green values. I made a post about Gender Deconstruction and you took me as a crazy radical liberal. I'm even trying to become a vegan believe it or not But at least in my country I do notice the downsides of a part of the young population jumping to Green too fast without integrating lower stages. If they did, there would be no problem, but in practice it doesn't happen. I'm open to dropping this perspective if someone explains why it's incorrect instead of deffending Green as an absolute good without taking the context into account. That's a tier one attitude, we're better than that.

C'mon, you yourself said until Yellow all Stages basically misunderstand and hate each other.

In practice, that's rare. LOL Really? Red rapes and kills you and your familiy Is that simple. Really try to imagine what's like to live in a society >30% Red.

In my experience Green is prone to denying healthy asspects of Blue and Orange. Integration comes with Yellow. In my country it's really problematic to have one third of the population in Red, and Green demonizing the order of Blue. I understand that in first world it works different because there's much less Red.

People, all major spiritual traditions and gifted persons recognize the existance of subtler levels of reality and their (limited, yes) effects upon the "physical" level. It's only unexperienced normies whose only "spiritual practice" is mentally masturbating about non-duality that deny this. Call me arrogant or whatever, but that's the true. If you go deep enough you will realise this at some point.

God-Conciousness requires no ego. Occultism doesn't (there is some correlation of course). That's why in Western traditions they start by the latter.

You are taking psychological phenomena for granted, and making a false duality beetween it and spiritual phenomena. Please really contemplate this.

Yes, I agree with that perspective, I'm also against taking things by blind faith. I feel many people here deny the occult because they are very biased towards Eastern spirituality, in which the occult is looked down on because they believe in renouncing life and going straight for liberation. Although they do recognize the existance of these possibilities. In the Western esoteric traditions the occult is more mainstream. But they also talk about non-duality and enlightenment as the ultimate goal. About LoA in particular, to me it's a rather sloppy new age way of calling various occult teachings and practices. I personally know by direct experience that the occult is real because I've experimented with it. But I would not try conviencing people to just believe me but rather making their own experience.

Yes, I agree that some people's explainations for certain phenomena are plain childish magical thinking. But it's also true that physics, psychology and neuroscience are extremely bought into the materialist paradigm, and therefore make the laws of nature seem much more rigid and deterministic than they really are. So lets not swing the pendulum too much towards that side either and play the "debunker".

Why do you make a duality beetween "material explainations" and "spiritual ones"? Even if what happened was just that you started paying more attention to the car, reductionist materialism cannot completely explain this, as it happens with all psychological phenomena in fact. It is a common materialistic bias to assume correlation means causality when dealing with conciousness and psychology. Just like when a scientist sees neurons firing as you see the color red, he mistakenly assumes that your brain is generating the color red and that is all there is to it. Although the color red itself cannot be reduced to neurons. I assume if you are on this forum you understand that that's not all there is to it, although a material correlation can be found. The same happens with all psychological phenomena, like attention. Be careful assuming that just because a material correlation can be found that's all there is to it. You are taking psychological phenomena for granted and think there cannot be anything "spiritual" about it.

I was talking about this particular thread. Bye, I don't care talking to agressive and close-minded people.

Nobody said that meditation = enlightenment. Stop making strawmans. Your perspective doesn't bother me, it just shows that you don't know what you are talking about, that's clear to anyone with at least a little bit of experience. Even Leo said it was a begginer's mistake. My intention was helping you understand, not to defend meditation. But go on thinking you know better than everybody else.

"Law of Attraction" is a rather sloppy way of calling various long-standing serious occult teachings and practices. Most of you guys are very biased towards Eastern spirituality, in which the occult isn't mainstream and has a bad reputation, because they go straight for enlightenment. That's why you are close-minded about some of these concepts. So if you want a more holistic understanding of spirituality I suggest you broaden your sources.

That's the point I'm trying to get across. People take no-mind literally. Thinking actually becomes higher quality as the illusive "individual mind" melts in awareness. Although there are also moments of total silence. I loved how in your last video about Ego-developement you talked about the connection with Universal Intelligence and the level of insight it produces, it would be great to have a whole episode about it.

@Member Do you have any experience with mediatation at all? Have you ever had any moments of high minfulness at all? It sounds like you only have a conceptual understanding, mostly based on taking literally a silly little drawing of a person and a dog, and really bought into this perspective without experimenting for yourself. Take care and don't meditate then, nobody wants to downgrade to the level of a dog Can't believe I'm even reading such a thing of this forum.

So Leo knew that Leo was setting him up?

Comparing a dog's conciousness with a meditative human's conciousness is silly. Even in enlightened people the "mind" still functions, they wouldn't even be able to speak if it wasn't so. But it isn't percieved as an individual mind anymore, it is one with the field of conciousness. That's what "no-mind" means. Mindfulness or being present is not necesarily not thinking. I could be studying and at the same time be mindful of the thoughts appearing in awareness. Stilling your mind in meditation is done in order to gain control over it. It doesn't mean you are going to permanently erradicate thought and become mentally impaired. That's a misconception.