Majed

@Leo Gura how do you reach those extremely profound and rare understandings of reality ?

@Leo Gura actually it can be a form of spiritual progress because it expands your worldview, makes you discover a new fresh perspective, and makes it easier to interconnect with other material. Islam is a very rich traditions, with many philosophers and so forth. plus understanding islam will makes it easier to understand chrisitianity, judaism and other things since they're related. plus understanding the quran will makes it easier to understand islamic history since the book was so core to the religion. yeah but when it comes to the holy books of hinduism, central books like this are a must read, because they're just so influential that they affected the worldview and culture and behavior of so many people, that integrating them will make it easier to understand all of hinduism.

@Leo Gura God is a separate issue from religion. i'm not talking here about god but about religion. like for example understanding god won't make you understand the history of nazism. to understand nazism you have to study nazism. well same applies to religion here. i'm talking more about the history, the tradition, the architecture, the culture... not really god. of course god is only accessed through mystical realization, but you know religion as i described it above is still valuable to study. but again i could be deluded, it's hard to prioritize in this work. on the one hand i can't follow you exclusively, i need to look at other sources, on the other hand i don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater. it's a hard balance to find.

but leo how can you talk about chrisitianity and islam if you haven't read the bible or the quran ? imagine someone talking about your content without having consumed it first. plus i'm sure you'll get much more insights into islam or christianity if you read these books. i mean cmon reading the bible or the quran is the minimum to be able to talk about it. i feel like we have very silly notions of religion here: "oh religious people are stage blue fundamentalists who are too stupid and take the metaphorical content of the books literally. all religions are basically the same, pointing towards god, but in different ways" i feel like that's an insult on the understanding one could get of these religions if studied properly.

@Leo Gura maybe just for educational purposes ? in order to make better sense of people's worldviews and explore diverse perspectives, as well as helping you develop big picture understanding. because it's impossible to make sense of islam for example, properly without reading the quran to understand what these people believe and also the original insights within the book.

@Leo Gura btw leo, is it useful to read the sacred texts of hinduism, buddhism. or the torah, the bible, tao te ching and the quran or is it a distraction? btw have you read them ?

@Leo Gura hey leo, is it normal you say that god is somehow the biggest realization, whereas for me i just contemplate and instantly have insights into god? in fact the first time i watched your video, before even having done any spiritual work, just watching your video on what is god, i had a realization into god and felt blissful.

@Leo Gura that's why existential work is important

@Leo Gura exactly and even when people call themselves "atheists" the conditioning is still there, not realizing that they're taking a position towards something that is not relevant and defining their worldview as the opposite of that. it's like you never define your beliefs as the opposite of animism, or greek mythology. why do it when it comes to christianity, or islam ?

felt quite yellow to me

@Leo Gura i meant you're sexual but have a preference for girls. i should've used sexuality instead of pansexuality. i was perplexed.

if gender is a social construct how come leo says that he's only attracted to girls, when "girls" is a social construct and have no biological reality ?

@manuel bon look buddy any word is a social construct but we need to communicate

@Leo Gura i understand you but then you're pansexual but have a preference for girls. and very specific kind of girls. so actually the big umbrella of sexuality is pansexuality not heterosexuality. heterosexuality is a subcategory of pansexuality. so most people should start out with pansexuality meaning sexually attracted to everything, then see if they have specific preference. rather than heterosexuality and then discovering that they like something else.

@Leo Gura you're cheating i didn't say you had access to porn

@Leo Gura like when you're horny and have nobody to fuck, then if i gave you any girl you would be happy to fuck her, or would you rather finish with your own hand ? personally i think it's proposterous to say that you'll finish alone. finish meaning you'll jerkoff with your own hand. plus upon listening to your case , you're unlike most guys, most guys would be happy to fuck any girl lmao. plus it depends, if you're successful with women and you have a lot of options, maybe your taste will be more sophisticated, than if you had less options.

@Leo Gura but i doubt the majority of girls won't make you hard. i guess this applies to men as well. hard means horny.

@Leo Gura i mean yeah just be a little bit less stingy and go have sex with a guy lol. because what you're saying is it's a matter of taste. but people's taste aren't so absolute. so you can actually enjoy gay sex. if we compare that to food, most people eat of everything. so i don't know why when it comes to sex, people would have such stingy tastes. plus have you tried that before, like watching gay porn, or kissing a guy... maybe if you did it'll change your mind. you need experience. personally my sexuality is very fluid , i can get attracted to everything and nothing including family member, animals, and children. of course men, women, trans people as well. so i think i'm the rule not the exception. since it's only a matter of taste. and people's taste on pretty much everything in life is very loose, like on food...

@Leo Gura because if what you're saying is true, of course you're gonna find one guy who you're gonna be attracted to who shares some of the features that you like in girls

@Leo Gura yeah but in this case the boundary is much more loose you could be attracted to feminine men, or to trans men...

i hope @Leo Gura would answer this

@Leo Gura i mean you don't need to not have sex to have an insight into whatever. this has nothing to do with this.

paul b preciado is quite a fascinating philosopher. i would put him somewhere from green to turquoise, maybe green/yellow i don't know.

@manuel bon the categorization of people into two categories men and women, is arbitrary. just because people have different chromosomes and reproductive organs, doesn't mean they should be categorized differently. people have many differences that are not subject to categorization, different eye colors, different heights, different hobbies, different lengths of hair... but we don't separate and create two categories out of the differences, like we never say people with blue eyes are a different category than people with brown eyes. they're both people with different eye colors. we don't label people with blue eyes as the blues, and people with brown eyes the browns, and assign that at birth as some kind of feature that make this person who it is. plus this categorization of men and women indicates that these are the only two possiblities, which is cleary not the case both in terms of reproductive organs, for example people who are intersex, do not have reproductive organs that fit into these two categories. and also in terms of chromosomes, xx and xy aren't the only chromosomes patterns, you also have x, xxy, xxxy, xyy... all that make the distinction between male and female collapse.

@Leo Gura i mean your 3 parts series is quite useful too