Gesundheit2

Belief in Karma is an indicator of victim's mentality. The stronger the belief, the bigger the victim. After all, if Karma is true, then it's irrelevant cuz it's outside of our control/understanding. And if it's false, then it's a waste of time and energy.

Enlightenment is knowing what matters and surrendering your will in what doesn't.

It's not okay that some things in this business are not backwards compatible. Ex: React Router v6.

A man does not feel attracted to a woman, or women. A man merely gets horny and fucks everything in sight

Logic is context-dependent while intuition is not. Ex: A chess game requires logic, not intuition. This comparison is logically invalid since you said "I think". Have you said "I feel", it wouldn't have been

In my experience, most people who think about the limits of logic don't really understand logic. I've been guilty of that myself. A certain level of logical maturity should be required before anyone is to be allowed to question logic. Not that logic isn't limited, but that if you pick someone randomly and ask them what logic is, its methods, and how it works, chances are they will crumble down very quickly, because they haven't actually studied logic to begin with. They basically chose to spiritually bypass logic, because it's cool to transcend as quickly as possible, isn't it?

Yes. Observation and inspection are of the most fundamental practices of scientific exploration that lead to breakthroughs and scientific discoveries. In the case of awakening/enlightenment, observation and inspection of the self, the mind, thoughts, perception, the ego, etc. are of the main practices, even though geared more internally rather than externally. We might say that philosophy/spirituality is the esoteric form of science while layman science is the exoteric form, and both are two sides of the same coin. Spirituality is more like going back to the basics, while layman science is like building on top of the basics that we already have, until better understanding emerges. So yes, technically, awakening/enlightenment is a science. At least it should be treated as a science and not as a dogma. Genuine curiosity and ambition run the show rather than obligation. Modern layman science might look complex on the surface, and culture might have given it a halo of divinity, but don't let the these things trick you. Science is really simple when you understand it, same as when you experience spiritual clarity. In my experience, science is the only way to truth, as long as it's understood and done properly. I don't know any other way.

Most hippies are "enlightened" until you touch their ego. The rest are just flat out deluded.

?

I fucking love my life!

If you want to summarize most women in one word, it's jealousy. Jealousy is the modus operandi for most women. It makes up most of their identity, because the rest of their identity is based up on this one emotion. It's what they use to navigate the world. Most women even confuse jealousy for feeling/intuition/love, because they don't have much of that to begin with. A woman's biggest objective in life is to make all other women jealous of her.

Yes, but I imagine it could be. For example, I think it can be super interesting if we take an ashram and make a controlled clinical study under conditions that Leo specifies and then examine the results empirically. Maybe we'll discover something there, or maybe not. But I think it's worth trying at least.

I agree with you that awakening is a permanent shift rather than an intellectual insight. However, Leo said a couple of times that he doesn't want to stop at the traditional level of most teachers. They stop at no-self, and he wants us to realize The Self, so that's his aim with this work, and I'm not against that, especially that Actualized is supposed to be broader than just awakening/enlightenment, because Self-Actualization includes and transcends tradition. I can verify from my own experience that awakening is not limited to spirituality. I experience awakenings all across the board all the time.

Okay, I've thought about this and it's still not convincing. I'm not gonna cite my critique here, though. Just wanted to let you know.

God is the recognition of awe in the truth.

Spiritual enlightenment checklist (embodied): Full understanding of religion, science, and nonduality. Full recognition of the truth in the baseline state. Minimum suffering. Maximum peace of mind. Maximum mental health and stability regardless of circumstances. Maximum functionality within the human realm.

I have an idea! Will talk to Joseph soon when it's fully matured.

@AdeptusPsychonautica Actually I think his response here is fairly reasonable and worth more consideration.

@Leo Gura If what you're saying is true and your method is scientific, then how is it possible that Martin Ball, Adeptus, some forum members who did 5-MeO, and many others disagree with you? I'm asking seriously. If you claim science, then you should be responsible for it and face the criticism head on instead of just silencing, ridiculing, and threatening to ban. No one is against what you're saying if you can provide empirical evidence, at least I'm not. I'm not trying to pick holes in what you're saying. But there seems to be many obvious holes that are hard to ignore, especially for someone who cares about science and the truth and therefore feels the need to speak up, like myself. Science is about objective truth, which is made through collaboration, massive data, and consensus, not just anecdotal reports, regardless of how truthful these individual reports might be. If you claim science, then make your claim and let others criticize it and scrutinize it to death. And then we'll know what works and what doesn't. That's how science is done. In this case, 5-MeO users (psychedelic in general) give different reports and accounts of their experiences. So there's obviously no consensus, and therefore no objective truth, only one's personal subjective and anecdotal truth, which I'm not against by any means. Science is challenging, that's how it's supposed to be. But you seem to not want to face any challenges in this particular case, at least so far. Anyone who disagrees with you is wrong and not awake and had not gone deep enough. That's the general theme of your responses from my pov. Can you see that what I'm saying has at least a little bit of truth to it?

@Zeroguy It's just the tip of the iceberg, but you can consider it a freebie ??⭐ Lol

@Zeroguy

You are speaking the truth, but looking elsewhere. The truth is this statement that you wrote, as long as it describes you. Make some tea and drink it.