emil1234

ive had tinnitus for the past 2,5 years ish. im pretty sure what triggered it was overdoing the wim hof breathing method. at least it started pretty soon after i started practicing the wim hof breathing method, and ive read online that others got themselves tinnitus through his method as well. apperantly its not uncommon id say generally from 1-10 its probably a 3-4. id very much like that cure lol

im interested in hearing your stories or your arguments. personally i see absolutley no reason why the nature of mind should not be the nature of reality. materialistically we have 0 idea why the universe exists or how it came to be. from the perspective of the mind its possible to achieve nearly complete understanding of the universe. furthermore, literally 0 evidence from the purposed "external world" goes against the findings of the nature of the mind, quite on the contrary, the newest findings such as quantum mechanics seemingly support the nature of the mind as the nature of reality. If there actually WERE an external world completely independent of the mind, there would be nothing keeping it from contradicting the nature of the mind, but this is not the case. the "external world" and the findings of the mind synergise and allign perfectly, with 0 contradictions. this i think is a good argument You could say the mind would be capable of constructing a compatible and believe, yet still false theory of itself / reality working with the information it would have accumulated through sensory input from the "external world" thus far. however new information that is unknown to the mind should still be able to contradict this mind theory, and this has not yet been the case. the nature of the mind has remained the same for the past 3000 years, and scientific discoveries have yet to contradict the nature of the mind, again on the contrary, scientific discoveries support the nature of mind

"And the search for the end of seeking begins anew" nice quote haha, ty for sharing. enjoyed the read, resonated a lot

@Someone here thats very true. life is indeed such a marvelous miracelous gem

@Someone here yea i agree. i merely meant that materialism has so verrry damn little knowledge about the universe, and the mind seems to have it all answered

@Hojo yes this is basically my understanding as well. however i think some buddhists would disagree with this, which puzzles me

@Javfly33 i simply meant that its nonsense to say that a realization can be "higher" or deeper, at a higher lvl than brahman or god / infinity, because infinity has to include everything, including all levels which could be said to be deeper or higher, which is what some buddhists talk about

@Razard86 lol what the fuck, this guy is legendary

now dont get me wrong; locally theres a lot of bullshit. im chronically constipated and my asshole is itchy. there are wars and bullshit. but disidentify from what u label as good and bad, and see the objective miracelous harmony of the universe. the universe truly shouldnt be, but it is. and whether or not you believe in god, you cannot deny that we are in eternity right now, and eternity is all there is. this moment is proof that existence/eternity equals experience. fuck i love life. i cant believe i exist. its. so. fucking. epic. every moment is too good to be true, its such a fucking gift embrace the miracle and dont hold anything back, express the miracle u are. this was a bit of a rant but i felt like sharing

@Leo Gura whats your thought on meditation/practices leading to different states of consciousness? such as the buddhist No-Self route vs the hindu big Self route? it seems the buddhist claim to go "further" than the hindus, in the sense that they disidentify from the big Self, or Brahman, and thats sort of the end of the route for the buddhist practicioner. However the hindu way seems way more alligned with your teachings, in the sense that the hindu aim for Brahman, the big Self, and then they deepen their relationship with the big self, which seemingly can go on to infinity. I think the hindu method might be more alligned with what you refer to as "high consciousness", where as the buddhists are more focused on ending suffering through negation of all identifications. the term mahasamahdi i believe is when someone approaches what u describe as near formless total infinity. notice that this a hindu term, and not really spoken of within buddhism

check out this one too. dude literally descripes yogic himalayan experimentation with intentional temporary physical death experiences lasting up to 15 minutes.

so ive been doing consciousness work for the better part of 3 years, and have had multiple awakenings so far, but recently had my most intense sober awakening, to that of immortality. for a long time i've been consumed with the question death, existence and non-existence. and then it was crystal clear. it wasnt intellectual, it wasnt a thought, it wasnt in reference to any previous experience, or any quote or teaching by spiritual masters. it was just a "knowing". a very distinct knowing, i looked at my hand, and i broke out in laughter, laughing for 30 minutes straight at my own fear of death. i spent so much time worrying about non existence and death. and it was so hilarious that i'd been so ignorant . it was so clear to me. Of course I'm eternal lol, eternity is simply what is. existence / experience is simply the apperance of eternity. we are in eternity right now, how could it be any different? eternity is the case before, during and after human life. there is no difference

in support of the argument against the "natural" state: this person claims she reached the "natty state" as refered to by frank, and while her experience sounds similar to franks', its also vastly different, claiming she encounters entities, out of body experiences, feeling peoples emotions etc. what i dont like about frank yang is that he somewhat attempts to invalidate all former states of consciousness, (god, awareness, brahman) as totally invalid and mere side quests on the way to the "natural state", as if the natural state is the only true realization

thats trippy

saw a couple of his videos, he seems like a complete lad

who is this guy?

well certain schools of buddhism reject the idea of "an absolute", or the idea of Brahman. I may be misinterpreting things, but the buddhist concept of "anatman" or no Self seem to contradict a lot of what other spiritual traditions talk about. The idea of transcending the "brahman" or the universal Self.

If our consciousness really goes to another "place", or at least leaves the body or the mind during cases such as near death experiences, people who have clincially died, DMT breakthroughs, deep god consciousness states etc, my question is this; isnt it illogical that the brain remembers these experiences, if they didnt take place within the brain? Afterall memories are stored in the brain as a result of experiences of the brain, thats at least my understanding. I have a hard time making sense of this. people who have clinically died reports remembering what happened during the time they were dead. people who report their soul leaving their body and going to another dimension doing DMT trips remembers what happens, even through the experience allegedely takes place in a completely different reality Now I am aware that it is extremely commonly reported that people have very vague memories of these experience, sort of like trying to remember a dream. its a very weak memory most of the time. however what im saying is that if our consciousness does truly leave the mind/body, the brain should have no recollection of the experience whatsoever after the experience ends a possible solution is that the brain is a transmitor that can tune into different frequencies, thus creating a bridge between the experiences and the brain. this does however not answer the question of people who have clinically died. another solution is that "consciousness" is capable of carrying memory / information. whats your thoughts on this?

first off i wanna say that im a great admirer of your work. however one thing i've been thinking a lot about is the matter of sleep / unconsciousness. if consciousness is literally the fabric of reality, and not something generated in my brain, how is unconsciousness like sleep possible? furthermore, there must be some correlation between the brain and consciousness, since if for example I take a hard punch to the head, i can lose consciousness. ive been thinking about this quite a lot, one solution is that if consciousness can scale up infinitely, it must also be able to scale down infinitely, hence something like sleep / unconsciousness. I've also been considering; am i even truly unconscious when I'm asleep? when I wake up, i'm quite clearly able to conclude whether or not my sleep has been good or bad. hence there must still be something observing during deep sleep? or maybe I simply judge the quality of my sleep in contrast to my waking conscious state? Another thought I've had is that sleep never happens since its not observed. but would it then be possible to sleep and never wake up? i guess regardless of one sleeping 1 hour or a 100 years would feel the same, since the notion of time does not exist during sleep. I believe you said in one of your videos that sleep happens because one is identified with the body. however im not sure what you mean by "identified", and how this answers the question of unconsciousness.

yea i like him

cool man. i kinda like the idea that we dream all the time during sleep but just dont remember it

@Razard86 well frank yang says there is a realization beyond god realization, which cant be achieved through psychedelics, and that this realization debunks god realization and eternal consciousness. thats a pretty rough contrast to leo EDIT;

what do u all think about him claiming to debunk basically everything leo talks about? saying that god realization and consciousness are just mental fabrications

wtf is alien consciousness? heard it mentioned on this forum a couple of times now

i also really love sadhguru. however i found a contrast between his a leo's teachings - sadhguru stated a couple of times now, that god is NOT love? that it is rather an intelligence. this kinda shocked me, since i usually resonate hard with basically everything sadhguru says, and his and leos teaching are basically alligned all the way. the way i see it there are a couple of possibilities. he could be holding the information back in order to maintain his reputation, which he has done before, such as for example that he doesnt really want to share his knowledge in regards to alien species. he could be talking about god in its state of nothingness, which as I understand it is completely devoid of all qualities, including love. It is also possible that he has not realized the infinite love of god? which to me seems a bit implausible, since the dude seems conscious as fuck. or we are just all fucking deluded heheh ofc not. i would like to hear leos input on this, since ive also heard him talking positively about sadhguru in the past. link to sadhguru saying god is not love;