Monkey-man

@Andre Quinonez I think YES, I think even autists and scizophrenics can. Also, I don't think sociopaths would ask such question, real physiological sociopaths probs don't care whether they can change or not coz they feel good about their state of being, so 99% you aren't sociopath if thats your concern.

i also have strong fear of heights and constant dreams of falling down from heights from the early age

@YellowButterfly should be gradual. you learn simple maths in first grade, and then advance towards trigonometry in higher school. same should be with meditation and staff half of my all years at school was such a waste of time, imho its a waste of time for almost everyone. i'd better meditate for all that time instead of pretending that i'm listening to teacher. also i think the very reason why teenagers have low interest to studies is because they develop huge self-image by that age

@lens I don't agree, you still wanna eat, you still have your wants and needs, so you still will earn money and consume. but you probably gonna pick things that you really need and really enjoy for the sake of enjoyment, and avoid things that you do to compensate yourself so even capitalism will progress towards higher-quality consumption and things that ppl really need and more healthy kinds of enjoyment dogs are in non-dual state, and they still do things and play and enjoy life

@George Paul all of the above @lens to not turn it into blind faith schools have to teach why exactly (to not to suffer) natural state is important to realise PLUS applying that (maybe teach meditation and other practices and also theory) enlightening will make current system work better, all starts from healthy psychology

Is there research about serotonin, dopamine, oxytocin levels in enlightened brain compared to ordinary?

@Mighty Mouse do you really want that full enlightenment? most seekers will be happy to be in some nondual state that feels fulfilled, peaceful, and where suffering from body/mind identification doesn't exist anymore. n i think its totally fine. i don't see why anyone can crave for more unless they are very hardcore fans of true nature of reality, i think 90% of truth-seeking only exist from sense of unfulfillment

Autism is not about lack of intelligence. They can be very intelligent, its about inability to communicate. On the other side of spectrum we have schizophrenia which is about being all over the place. Depends on the severity, most of autistic people can be treated. I know one enlightened neuroscientist who claims that he treats them (and also other kind of disorders) through being aware of being aware techniques. Also he talks to them at ease without relating to their names, past stories and their personas as if they are not a person and as if they are not his patients and not sick at all. So once they are in awareness of presence they forget their autistic self-image and suddenly transform and open up. I guess its a long process overall coz once therapy session finish and parents come back for them they put on their autistic mask again. I think its really mind-boggling discovery that he told. It tells a lot about problems of identification with self-image and dualistic perception of 'me vs world'. However most of psychotherapists usually feed them with bunch of pills instead. So I assume they can similarly become enlightened (also remember full-circle thing - become so deep in your head that distinction between inner and outer falls). I did similar experiment with my very shy nieces, they are not autistic but couple of very shy and introverted kids of age 8 and they don't talk much with anyone except with their parents, so whoever tries to hear some verbal communication from them usually ends up with nonverbal or 'yes and no'. So one day while they were playing with their gadgets as usual, I just started talking with them (while doing my own things) without referring to their personas, names and to any other kind of referrals. I also didn't differentiate between myself and them so I didn't imply any kind of boundaries and past stories during conversation. I didn't force them to talk, didn't imply that I expect them to answer, didn't ask to recall anything or to do anything at all. And the most important thing is that I didn't remind them about their personality and about how shy they are (which is often done by all other relatives who try to talk to them). I just started talking to them about some kids staff, so during next 2-3 hours they became super-open, spontaneous, energetic, noisy, they started to talk a lot, dance, play, make jokes, laugh etc. Also before and in the midst of experiment I talked with them with referring to their names, personas, past stories, my own persona, setting up boundaries and distinctions between us, once I did this they were gradually closing up again, becoming shy and self-conscious again turning attention to their gadgets. Simply, its about recalling your self-image and trying to fin into your role vs forgetting self-image and just being no one. So the moral of the story is in what that enlightened neuroscientist said about importance of unconditionality in childhood. During our childhood we often hear that there's something wrong with us in different ways and fed with apple from tree of knowledge of good and evil. These apples are distinctions of me vs world and 'things that wrong about me vs 'things that aren't wrong about me' and they gradually form our self-image. So then we just play our self-image role during adulthood coz we subconsciously assume that world expects us to be that character and play that role. Its imitation of life, or simulacra and simulation that Baudrillard meant. So depending to what extent we were fed with such apples in childhood, it is then more difficult to get rid of dualism, coz distinction between me vs other world can become really strong. However, kids who were unconditionally loved by everyone around can become enlightened much easier once they are adults (and even during teen years) coz they didn't develop such a strong distinction between 'me vs world'. However, this is really subtle thing coz loving without conditions is tricky thing, coz how the hell you can maintain balance between unconditionality and survival of kid (implies conditioning and conditional love). I think raising truly psychologically healthy kids is almost an art.

Is spontaneous fart or burp on the first date authentic? Jokes aside, where do you draw a line? And why? man I’m confused about 100% authenticity thing, how do u reconcile 100% spontaneity and careful planning, or with infinite farts and burps

@Leo Guraso what's your current permanent stage of awakening? u didn't mention that in video. Since you talk about god's vehicle, I guess you are in non-duality in terms of oneness but with a subtle sense of that someone(god) is doing you? what adiyashanti calls sense of divine self/will. but im interested if suffering still exist on that level? i mean suffering from identification with body/mind. if you now identify with divine self, do u still identify with body/mind? ps. sorry for projections, just asking.

patriarchy comes from biological inclinations first of all. Female is one who becomes impregnated so they tend to enjoy surrender more and male tends to enjoy domination and responsibilities more. Can't really change anything about it. People should just embrace their hormonal structure. Otherwise this happens:

Deconstruction led me to end, I don't know what can possibly be known by any human or any entity. I think nothing can be known for sure, even absolute truth will tell you in the end that: everything exist and doesn't exist in the same time. Any knowledge is a metaphor of infinity which is indefinite, any philosophy, science, art are all metaphors, any information whether visual, sound, smell, intuition etc is a metaphor of infinity, nothing can be known directly. Even absolute truth of one unbound nothingness and infinite happiness leaves enlightened people for an openness towards deeper truths!!! So what if truth is just another metaphor? Therefore, what is it all about if not about feeling good? Any thinking arises to find strategies to feel good, any feeling is what make us to function at all. But on the other hand, how can we know if feeling itself is the most important thing? How can we know that its about choosing good over bad? Good feels good and bad feels bad, so what? Many people will feel bad for their entire lives, that doesn't exclude them from reality. Then are feeling of 'good' and love inherent to reality or is it just part of living organisms? How can we know if its about playing in infinite playground? Coz even if we become truth how can we know that all is good, well, perfect? What is it if not powerful feeling? -> how can we know that any feeling of good exist outside the perceptions of living organism? -> how can we know if nothingness governed by love or some good power? is nothingness a 'good' power? is it love? can we assign any good qualities to god? i guess i just wanna say that how can we know that god is good? If whatever you think or feel about it is just another metaphor of god among infinite number of other metaphors. How can we know that suffering is a metaphor of lack of god, while happiness or absolute truth is metaphor of god itself? What is it if not hierarchy of metaphors? How can we know that reality is hierarchical from absolute god to not much god to no-god if everything is equally god? Therefore, suffering is just as god as absolute truth or absolute love, why not? And what exactly put feelings on pedestal of metaphors? ps. might sound non-sensical to you, but i think it will trouble you too at some point of your deconstruction...

@SOUL true. but whats after that

@SOUL true. but whats after that

@lens if absolute truth can be just as relative as anything else

yes but how can you be sure about it?

I'm curious. I don't know adults who are happy most of the time and who don't suffer time to time, but do you know such happy people? I don't mean enlightened people who became like that, I mean people who are sorta always-happy from birth. PS. I guess I mean someone who is sort of stable happy or peaceful happy most of the time, so someone who has enough of serotonin most of the time, but not necessarily high on endorphin.

I hope that Leo can now finally shoot a video on stages of enlightenment prior to this final stage, I think this is really the number one controversial thing in all of enlightenment discussion.

btw if there's no sense of doer, is there sense of observer?

so is that happy end for Leo, no more drama, only they lived happily ever after

Every time I have some 'significant' meditation/self-inquiry breakthrough/insights/higher consciousness state I feel like slacking off, laid back, chilling etc and so I waste next couple days or even week not being as productive as before. WTF? How not to slack off after every spiritual 'achievement'? This is horrible! Its as if my mind feels that it accomplished something and get tired, and forces me to go and have a break instead of doing work! And then after a break I realize that I was horribly deceived by myself. Its not nice.

Leo, did you skip all the other stages like self-realization?

holy shit its happening

in regards to passion vs no-passion, Daniel Ingram pointed out that excluding non-dual awareness and some other common characteristics, final enlightenment has different implications in feeling and perceptional field for different people. So it might be that some people become passionate after enlightenment and some experience nihilism. Probably in terms of perception and emotions you get what you crave for, how about this! Then there's no wonder why nondual schools are so different in their approach and characteristics. This reminds me Jim Carrey's The Mask movie, where mask multiplies owner's personal characteristics. So Jim Carrey's character is a joker and he becomes even bigger joker when he wears mask, while his antagonist becomes even more evil when he wears it. its not to suggest that enlightenment can make 'evil' person even more evil, but here you might see where Zen-Devilry arises from. Zen-Devilry is more about exaggerated nihilism rather than evil as I see it. Then, nihilist might become even more established in his nihilism whether it is devilry kind of nihilism or peaceful nihilism after enlightenment, one who wants to be achiever and passionate will be established in passionate life, while one who wants love and staff will experience bursts of love after enlightenment. Hey that makes perfect sense, why the hell absolute truth should be same for all in terms of feelings and thinking if truth is not about these things? Absolute is same for all in terms of nondual awareness and realising true nature of reality, but why everyone should interpret or feel about this in the same way? Everyone has their own inclinations, different chemical balance in brain structure and might feel and think about their nondual life differently.

Do enlightened ppl still think about why god created the world? (or about why there is world of appearances of nothingness)