Tetcher2

That's great to hear. All that was ever needed with this psychedelics, suffering, detox, meditative/yogic practices, energy levels, thyroid, SIBO bullshit was to realize it's all imaginary. Surely the POV that imaginarily promoted those issues will no longer imaginarily promote them, will no longer need to take imaginary psychedelics and if it does the existence should just repeat how imaginary it is instead of feeding the drama of it, although what's strange is that POV didn't like when (imaginary) doctors told it those issues were psychological (ie imaginary). Imagination likes to contradict itself ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Culadasa the author of The mind illuminated is dying of cancer. It's interesting to hear the experience of a master meditator (first part of the video) It's interesting that he says that he can't repress the feeling of panic when he can't breath, and being master meditator doesn't help in that regard. I remember dying of suffocation, if one stays aware during the breath arrest comes a point where the panic turns into bliss when you realize that the suffering of suffocation was self created and you're now effectively free of the breath you go into the deepest meditative state without psychedelics.

Same POV that can't handle a meal laughs about people that can't throw sexual energy around like a sprinkler.

@Leo Gura How do you explain that death, suffering and everything else is imaginary but not SIBO or energy levels after meals in recordings that we can access now in your blog (eg https://www.actualized.org/insights/water-fast-ends-carnivore-diet-begins) ? Are variations of perception of imaginaryness in the present moment linked to the reason you dislike Sadhguru making jokes of Vedenta as a reality check ?

What I don't understand is if meat eating is "okay" then why is murder such a big thing ? If you murder a human it's just +1 to the 70B animals murdered yearly.. it's just a legal matter basically but the whole lives spanning karma thing is bullshit

You're right. I just read your exchange with Adeptus on youtube and it made me feel compassion for you. Avoid posts like the one I had linked if you are able to, simply report your harassers to mods. Take care.

I deleted my old account (randomized my password) after I fell for a bait in the Soonhei thread, I was tired but it's not an excuse, I better follow this work from a distant place of silence and witness. You can delete my old account and this one too after I'm done. So my feedback about Leo's work is the following : Consciousness work : I find value in your work when it comes to your trip reports, protocols and research. There are few contradictions for instance when you say "what I communicate is only what is true at my current level of consciousness, it couldn't be otherwise" but then you threaten to ban anyone who challenges that love is the ultimate, or temporary experience doesn't make it less true. As per your first statement, and you made false statements in the past (eg. that you were rewiring your brain during your enlightenment experience on youtube, or the healing in god mode) someday you may hit a permanent experience or understanding and speak differently. Overall I like and I'm in tune with what you communicate in your trip reports (I consider your last video a glorified trip report), especially now that it's clear you don't push people to do psychedelics when they are in a bad spot (unlike Martin Ball who says to double down and face your fears). I don't find the angle of attack that tries to blame Soonhei death on you credible. Conscious politics : I mostly disagree with your entire conscious politics arc : - Spiral dynamics : its merit is to introduce some common vocabulary and framework of understanding but to me is fundamentally flawed, especially the idea of verticality (one stage is superior to the other). Let's compare stage blue and stage yellow : a stage blue farmer has a life of hard labour, has to work from 6am to 7pm, has little to no entertainment, manages to live like this for decades supported by his religiousness. A yellow stage academics spends his day debating people, living in his head building models and imagining interactions between systems but has the luxury of this time only because the blue farmer is producing food for him. If the academic had to replace the farmer he would have no clue and couldn't handle the rigor of such a life, physically exhausting, no mental entertainment, he would be unable to take over the farm. How can you say that the stage yellow is superior to the blue stage ? The blue farmer is a stronger being than the yellow academics on many levels (and the yellow is stronger on others, they are complimentary not superior/inferior). One counter argument is to say that the farmer can be yellow and the academics blue, it highlights another flaw of the SD : you can twist the SD model any way you want, if something doesn't fit your narrative just add a bit of percentage, eg "he has some green which explains why he said that but he really is mostly orange !", it has no predictive value. Saying Trump is red is an illustration of that, you're putting him on the same level as a low education burglar or murderer. - Trump/conservatives : This point is linked with the SD point because there is the underlying notion of value that I disagree with. First you say that all criticism is untenable, that you are Trump and Trump is Leo, that love is the ultimate, etc. Yet you are so strongly biased against Trump that it throws all the previous statements in the bin and make you look like you don't integrate your own realizations. And don't say that your stance on Trump is compatible with those statements, you nag him, you call him stupid, you are not equanimous. I don't feel strongly about Trump either way, my problem is the implication of your stance to your respect of democracy. Trump is not Hitler, to my knowledge he never made hateful comments about races or minorities unlike Hitler, the idea he would put people into death camps isn't serious. Now Trump got elected on key ideas that he advertised clearly, and those ideas are certainly in the purview of democracy. Tightening borders is in the purview of a democracy, citizens have the right to tighten their borders, medicare, monetary policy, foreign affairs, etc all those are in the purview of a democracy. Once he was elected his political opponents should have folded to some extent and reevaluated their positions towards the choice that had been made, this is democracy. If all you do is resist everything and refuse to reevaluate the slightest then you are not a democrat (as in pro-democracy). Overall if you are truthful about wanting to minimize the drama in you can just remove the society section altogether and drop the conscious politics arc.