Search the Community

All of the stuff attained and taught by teachers of nonduality is still within the dream. Same with Buddhism. You have been tricked into a spiritual nondual dream by people who have never realized what God is and who have fooled themselves and their students into thinking they awoke. People like Shinzen Young, Spira, Bernardo Kastrup, Tolle, Mooji, Ken Wilber, Daniel Ingram, Frank Yang, Nahm, Winter Knight, etc. It's all more dreaming. I have warned you guys repeated against this. You guys think I am being arrogant but I am just telling you how it is.

How many times do I have to tell you? Nonduality is not God-Realization.

DMT is awesome. You won't stop breathing. It can be scary at high doses, but the nice thing is you can dial in the dose by taking small puffs. No need to blast yourself. At low doses DMT is easy to handle. At high doses it's very challenging, but in a good way. It's just freaky powerful. You don't really understand what conscious is until you do a moderate to high dose of DMT. That's when you'll realize that nonduality and Buddhism are bullshit.

Then we can say that the sentences "a cat is an animal" and "it will probably rain tomorrow, say the experts" are actually the same sentence, on the level of absolute nonduality, or nothingness. This is holy frickin ...................................

Deep Simplicity (chaos theory) and Infinity and the Mind (infinity in many varieties) GEB is great for understanding fundamental pure math ideas about the limits of logic, and it's certainly a Yellow book, but it is rigidly materialistic and misses the very heart of nonduality despite bumping its head into over and over. He even has chapters on Zen and just can't grasp consciousness to save his life and tirelessly confuses it with mind. I wasn't as impressed by this book as Leo, it was mostly cute cleverness and a whole lot of work.

This whole thing screams lack of construct-awareness and lopsided bias for self-made fictions. I'm about to use a lot of words here but believe me that none of this is meant to be a counter-construct. Rather, my aim here is to burn all constructs to the ground, including my own. "Space and time have to exist just as much as Consciousness does" - you literally just made that up. Your statement has the same philosophical weight as the flying spaghetti monster. I don't say this to try to dunk on you: from my POV I seem to see something that you seem to be missing, and I wish to make this clear. Before I say anything else, you make the mistake of treating space and Consciousness as two distinct bedrock substances, both somehow equally fundamental. This is apparent in the way that you attempt to bound (your concept of) Consciousness by (your concept of) space: And yet you also seem to be on-board that Consciousness circumscribes All. If you acknowledge that your pursuit is to mutually bound Consciousness and space, please see that you are cognitively operating in duality while backwards-rationalizing your duality by paying lip-service to so-called "Oneness." Let's cut the crap: if reality is ONE BEDROCK SUBSTANCE, it can't be both "space" and "consciousness." Either Space eclipses consciousness or Consciousness eclipses space. And whichever one we decree is greater makes the lesser NONEXISTENT through OSMOSIS. Leo's recent video on not-knowing is really crucial for you. If you've already seen it, I urge you work on integrating the lessons immediately. Nearly 100% of everything you claim to know (including concepts of what does or does not exist) is spawned nigh-arbitrarily on the spot by your own hyperactive mind - that is to say, there is nothing fundamental or true about any of your knowledge. This is abundantly, inarguably the case when you introspect from the vantage point of supremely elevated consciousness. The only reason you fight tooth-and-nail for the "existence" and "reality" of "space" and "time" (or any other "thing") is because you're closed off to the possibility of their Absolute absence. It is in fact YOU who is maintaining a rigid duality in thrusting forth the assertation that "space (qua space) exists." When Leo or I say that space does not exist, this is not a dualistic assertion. Nor is it a knowledge claim. Rather, we are choosing to not confine our minds to a narrow, arbitrary insistence. We honor the blank canvas of not-knowing wherein our constructs fall apart like sand castles, for this is the only way to gaze upon the truth with clarity. A passage from Plato's Timaeus - clearly a nonduality analogy: "Now imagine that a man were to model all possible figures out of gold, and were then to proceed without cessation to remodel each of these into every other,- then, if someone were to point to one of the figures and ask what it is, by far the safest reply, in point of truth, would be that it is gold; but as for the triangle and all the other figures which were formed in it, one should never describe them as "being" seeing that they change even while one is mentioning them; rather one should be content if the figure admits of even the title "suchlike" being applied to it with any safety." In this hypothetical, Plato gives us the example of someone who models "all possible figures" out of gold. If I were to point at one of the figures and ask you, "what is that?" the only real answer here is "gold!" even if this gold took the shape of a triangle. To say that the figure itself is a "triangle" is untrue, for it is in fact "gold." Likewise with the square-shape. We are so tempted to say "Look! it's a square!" but the moment we say that, the square is remolded into a circle. So now we must amend our statement: "Oh wait, no, its a circle now! But it used to be a square!" If this is the level at which you are identifying + knowing these figures, Plato would say that you risk being unsafe, for truth is not on your side. Your cognition is at the whims of flux, and at every turn what you once thought was right becomes wrong. By declaring that these shapes exist, you are getting bewitched by a façade, while being totally ignorant of the underlying being and substance at play. It matters not in what way the gold is configured. All that is true and Absolute is this: IT IS GOLD. Likewise now with space and Consciousness. Consciousness is free to appear to you in the shape of a concept which you call "space." So is this apparition real? does it exist? What is the true being here? If you answer "that thing right there is real, and it is space," then you are getting bewitched by a façade. All that is true and Absolute is this: IT IS [ Consciousness ]. When it comes to BEING, there is only ever ONE answer. Consciousness, God, Infinity, Love - whatever you want to call it is fine. The labels are interchangeable. But it is singular. This singularity leaves no room for "space" or "time" to be bandaged on top as something distinctly recognizable. Insofar as space/time ever existed in any capacity - on the level of BEING it is fully absorbed and vaporized by INFINITY as though it never were. This is the necessary fate of all finitudes. "You cannot sidestep the terminological issues, so you have to create a system of language to understand them. This is why intellectual rigor and philosophical technicality are important. Substantial for the Actualized book, the imprint of which upon reality could be extraordinary. No issue, no aspect, can be left unturned." I hope you can respect the "intellectual rigor" of this word cascade even if you feel somehow compelled to disagree. This one was for one philosopher to another That being said, respectfully, your entire methodology is limited and frankly untrue. I'm surprised that an Actualized fan is this wedded to language and finite sense-making. If you really care about TRUTH, you would be well-served to just NUKE your entire paradigm of meaning, and to re-learn life as a nobody. When you really get it, you will be unable to utter such statements as the one I highlighted above in red. I enjoy this kind of intellectual questing, but really only as entertainment. I'm painfully aware that it all means nothing. ----- Tl;dr Just go bask in a state of no-space and you'll see how myopic it is to claim that space is in any way Absolute/on the level of Consciousness. Your relative map that attempts to combine the relative with the Absolute through language is holding you back.

Choosing science over Truth, a grave mistake I hope none of you make. I'm very fond of Schmachtenberger. He's more developed than me in many ways. However, his mind has been thoroughly influenced by the Ken Wilber Integral school and that entire community to the point where he cannot even say that idealism is true over materialism. He is still on the fence about that due to Wilber's 4 quadrant model, which is NOT awakening. You cannot be awake and still believe in 4 quadrants. You have to be extremely careful with all of these Tier 2 people. Their development is so impressive it lulls you into a false sense of what the goal of this work is. The goal is not Tier 2. The goal is God. And God is not Tier 2, not Tier 3, not Turquoise, not Coral, not Integral, not New Age, not nonduality, not Zen, not Buddhism, not any of that. And that doesn't mean there isn't lots of cool stuff to learn from the above. I just have to make sure you guys don't get stuck in that.

Well, that's where my new awakening course will come into play. It will be a deconstruction of absolutely everything, including science, Buddhism, Advaita, and nonduality. Working on that.

Yes, that's a good way to put it. Although technically it's about MORE CONSCIOUSNESS. There is such a thing as MORE consciousness than you currently have. Way more. You are describing classic nonduality, neo-advaita, or Buddhism, which is not God-Realization. Spirituality is badly corrupted by people who don't know what the highest consciousness is because they've never accessed it. The highest and purest spirituality is about becoming so conscious that you are fully conscious that your mind constructs all of reality around you and all sense of other. This is God-Realization. Once you reach God-Realization you've solved the entire riddle of existence. The common element is that you are God dreaming up everything and everyone, including all spiritual teachings and teachers.

Check out the Science and Non Duality (SAND) conference occurring October 19th- 22nd in San Jose California Featured Speakers include: Adyashanti Rupert spira Robert Lanza Plus +100 others The cool thing about conferences and seminars is that you can meet a lot of people who are super interested your topic of choosing. Apparently, you can save $100 if you register before July 15th. After that, tickets are $599. I'll be going, so let me know if you do too!

Samadhi is basicly not leaking any energy out. Desire is the source of leaking energy outwards. What u desire there u exert energy to or attention to. Exerting energy to and attention to is synonymous. If u don't exert any energy u're in nonduality. Or in other words, try not to give your attention to anything at all. It will take u to the same place of nondual Self. (Can also make u realize what attention is.)

It's not about hierarchy, it's about ensuring you don't fool yourself into thinking you're awake when you're not. Unfortunately standard nonduality teachings have fooled many people into thinking they are awake or understand what awakening/consciousness is. When people are fooled into thinking they've reached the top, they cannot reach the actual top. This is not about being superior, it is about fully waking up to yourself as God. That is not possible if some Buddhist convinces you that you got it. It would be like convincing a child that there is no more mathematics to learn after 5th grade, and anyone who claims there is, is just being egotistical and trying to create a new game of hierarchy.

I've been quietly following the discourse taking place here for a while, and I'll now speak up to say that it's quite funny/sad/absurd to see Leo defer to a "stage blue" rhetorical tactic when he cited the recently leaked Floyd footage to mitigate the culpability of the murderous officers. Within 10 seconds of Floyd opening his car door the officer points his gun at Floyd merely for being confused and unsettled. At this time Floyd has presented no physical threat to the officers whatsoever. To save my own life I could not conjure what mental gymnastics must be taking place in order to interpret this video as anything other than additional evidence that Chauvin deserves no sympathy. Yes, Leo, you pompous enlightened simpleton, the police SHOULD absolutely be coddling a discombobulated subject for 10 minutes when the alternative is a potentially fatal altercation. Leo should be beyond embarrassed to have allowed these ignorant words to escape his private thoughts. It appears he's been duped into giving credence to some feeble alt-right narrative that seeks to conflate the likes of a disconcerted black man with a dangerous criminal. It's rather disgusting and quite disappointing that Leo would use his platform to rhetorically lessen the culpability of a murderer by claiming Floyd brought this on himself. Make no mistake, that is in fact what Leo is doing here. Despite presenting no threat to any officer Floyd was at gun-point within 10 seconds of opening his car door. The fact that he could have avoided this fate had he not been discombobulated is completely irrelevant. This next quote is where things get really problematic. We're really treading dangerous waters now. We've only seen Floyd's behavior while his mental state was compromised to a foreign substance, so exactly what substantive basis could Leo possibly have for callously casting him into an unflattering "stage red" category? I would ordinarily deem it an uncharitable interpretation to ascribe outright racism to this faulty perspective, however, when I consider this rhetorical folly alongside Leo's ignorant defense of disgraced/banned YouTuber Stefan Molyneux, a blatant white supremacist (evident from his wikipedia page) seen below, I can only wonder whether these foolish perspectives are facilitated through an underlying racial prejudice. When you've resorted to defending an obvious white nationalist with the phrase "his heart is in the right place." There is definitely something wrong. I want to strongly advice all of you to avoid lending credence to Leo's political takes. It is true that Leo has amassed one of the most useful compendiums of knowledge pertaining to nonduality, and this is great, but don't allow his role as a credible voice in this field to lure you into his political ignorance.

Isn't nonduality synonymous with God? God manifests itself in everything, creating the illusion of separate objects. Thus monism is the actual form of God. Isn't it?

None of these nondual teachers are teaching God-Realization. Enlightenment is NOT it. You are imagining enlightenment and nonduality to keep yourself from realizing that you are God. It's a total illusion.

There is Absolute Truth. And you are it. Absolute Truth is not a perspective. It's not even right to think of it as nonduality.

God/Infinity is beyond nonduality. Although it doesn't contradict it.

Well said. One of the big traps I see in my spiritual friends is when they make maps about the depth of their not-knowing. This is obviously a fabrication, because they're still dealing with maps. But to them it feels like they're engaging in not-knowing, because that's what their map says. A map about not-knowing which claims to not be a map. What a perfect tool for a spiritual ego! I've tried encouraging them to burn the map, but they can't see how that's different than what they currently have - "map, no map, same thing! it's all one!" - they say as they continue to feel as though they've understood. My strong opinion is that, when you ACTUALLY understand. You humble yourself, and you're truly left with nothing. This manifests in your behavior as silence and acceptance. Because you understand, viscerally, personally, and immediately the profundity and ineffability of Infinity drowning out everything else you've ever known. There isn't even room to "communicate" "with other people," this all falls apart into true union. People who happily mix and match nonduality with their relative experience OBVIOUSLY don't "get it." You can just sense it in their haphazard delivery. They have no respect for the raging storm of true not-knowing. They would shit their pants if they actually (in direct experience) left the shelter of their maps. This is a large part of why I personally don't engage in nondual/spiritual rhetoric. I've been to those peaks of consciousness, so to speak, and it shut me the hell up. In the NOW I am not aligned with those peaks, so it's totally out of integrity for me to even pretend to know anything about them. When I return to those peaks, I will once again be stunned into silence. Basically, no matter where I find myself, there is no room for me to communicate any kind of map on The Truth while maintaining inner balance, because either I do not know, OR, I do know, but my life has vanished. This is not to say that spiritual rhetoric should never occur. There is definitely value in propagating the possibility of enlightenment as a beacon of Hope. However, if you are in the position of spreading enlightenment, you have to be REAL fucking careful about how you use your words, because 99.9% of even the most spiritually advanced people usurp words to primarily feel good about their current existential condition moreso than to be truly benevolent.

Today I want to show you how the Buddhist phrase "Emptiness is form, form is emptiness" actually directly relates to nonduality and God, just in a rather implicit way. First we have to understand that the fundamental unit of reality is consciousness, it is all that there is. There is no nonduality without consciousness. But what is consciousness? Consciousness is simply the capability to take on any properties whatsoever. These properties are things like colors, sounds, distance, depth, time, space, thought, feeling, and infinitely many more. Because consciousness is the only thing that there is, it is not limited to any set of properties. So it can take on any properties it wants to. This is the ultimate power of consciousness. It can be arranged in every possible configuration. In this way, consciousness must itself be empty of qualities inherently in order to take on any qualities. So it actually directly relates to emptiness in this way. Form is what all of these qualities of consciousness are. Emptiness then actually just refers to pure consciousness that doesn't have any qualities. So this Buddhist saying is actually talking about consciousness being capable of taking any qualities. Obviously, these qualities, i.e the form, is also just consciousness. This further implies that one is God, because there is just one emptiness which has manifested in different forms. It is all one in other words. It implies oneness, because all form are emptiness. No form can thus inhibit emptiness, and all forms are also it, so it gives emptiness the power to take on any form whatsoever. This is the power of nonduality, there can be no limitations, because all limitations are just form, which is emptiness, which itself isn't constrained by form. It implies that YOU are God. Emptiness is just another name for God. It also implies omniscience, immortality, love, and more, but I won't go into why its so for now. I just thought it was cool how this phrase actually contains implicitly in it the no limitations, infinite possibilities, and oneness aspects of nonduality.

Leo, your life purpose course is excellent! A couple months after implementing your advice I'm already making more money doing what I enjoy (programming) than I'd have ever expected. 100% worth it. I have some questions though: Can nonduality be a domain of mastery? If so, what kind of life purpose can mastery over nonduality lead to (meditation teacher, for example)? What fields can one create big breakthroughs and innovate by mastering nonduality? When you interviewed Peter Ralston, he mentioned that more people would be enlightened if they were more open minded and contemplated. Is there any fundamental reason why one couldn't create a technology that would modify humans to have more of those qualities (through gene editing for example) so that we could get almost everyone enlightened? If there are ways, what fields would be best to investigate to create these technologies? The quickedt catalyst for this path seems to be psychedelics, and very few do them let alone for spirituality. @Leo Gura

@Cykaaaa thanks. funny thing is it has been like 4 or 5 years since I started getting into nonduality, and listening to Leo, Alan Watts and Ropert Spira. This the first time I experienced borders breaking. I will be near this stuff. Got a lot of Life decisions to make.

5-MeO will take you way beyond nonduality and classic enlightenment. God-realization makes nonduality and enlightenment look like a joke, which they are. Just more dreams. Keep going deeper

- This is my 3/4th time doing shamanic breathwork Today I revisited shamanic breathing for a couple of reasons (I'll get into that later) Physical effects we're the same: Vibrating skin, contracted eyes and mouth (that's the best I can describe it, It's a physical reaction similar to biting into a lemon, only without the sour taste), after a while my whole body was tingling, this is the order in which it spread: Teeth->Eyes->Cheeks->Upper part of the skull, it also started in the fingers and worked it's way up my arms, later on it started in the toes and worked its up to my balls which felt... weird. But not discouraging. I felt really thirsty and hungry after, even though I ate and hydrated before I did it. What lead me to do it today I didn't really have a goal going into this one, I've been looking into making psychedelics since Vacation is near (perfect time to do it) I saw news about a youtuber who I used to watch as a kid, Dead at 23 years old - Cancer. I was perplexed, couldn't believe my eyes... It reminded me of something. We're always so close to death, death is here, death is now. these frail bodies of ours won't last forever. a quote (by Steve Jobs) popped into my mind "You are already naked, there is no reason not to follow your heart". I'm naked, aka I don't have anything. Nothing is mine. Because life is rented to me by the universe. I am a real estate tenant and the universe is my landlord. I have the freedom to do anything I want and exit (die) through the same door when I'm done. ^ That ultimately let me to doing it again The aftermath Even though the trigger to doing this again was Death, I didn't think about death while doing it. Every time I did it, shamanic breathing always gave me a confidence boost for a little while. First, my bad memories surfaced up (as they usually do with breathwork) but its always a different topic, this time It was about self-doubt, I realized how I was lowkey doubting myself all the time, I realized that I am unlimited and that I am creativity, it wasn't nonduality but.. It was saying that I can, as an ego. I can be happy, I can be independent, I can run a business, I can live a purposeful life, I can have friends and I can have a girlfriend. the whole thing was centered around healing this doubt within me, saying that I can't have a great life. It made me aware of the stupid pressure my family was putting on me, If you want to have a great life you will need to work on everything, right now I am career focused and I'm leaving all the relationship stuff for later, that is my choice. I'm now aware that I (as well as everyone else) will have to put significant time into these important areas, and one way to do that Is to focus on one at a time. My friends choose to Party first and then (hopefully) work on their careers, that's their choice. they choose Immature relationships to build up experience first. and that's fine. My last "trip" was a lot more emotional, It centered around abuse. I actually cried during that "trip". an ongoing pattern here is that my mind always picks a topic for me and then brings up memories related to that topic. And that's shamanic breathing for you

@Carl-Richard I have not banned anyone. Usually other people here are more stricter, I just give points unless somebody is a spammer. I dont think I am unreasonably judgemental. If I called you all the wrong pronouns and gave you advice that does not apply to your gender, you would lose your shit really quickly. That happens to me everyday, just imagine that. You gotta go out in clothes youre uncomfortable wearing or you get beaten. Like guys wearing pink shirt and colorful skirt and makeup. Imagine what that would be like. Why are you undermining that so much for the sake of being right? I dont even think you are right. Alright, thats a good observation there. We dont even know what transphobia is here. And I dont even think many of you can imagine what it is like to be trans. I can see how thats a big obstacle and I am sorry I assumed you know. Defining it as something that makes trans people potentially uncomfortable is really broad and subjective. What if we just mention that our gender is really personal and whatever ideas we have are specific to us, without claiming any objective universal truths? I have no problem if you identify with your biology. Just dont shove it down my throat. (Some people think trans people are shoving stuff, when its actually the other way around often times) Imagine I called you madam instead of sir and then got surprised why you react confused. if this kept happening to you all the time, if you had to explain yourself, usually against a majority that disagrees with you, you would lose patience with constantly explaining. Just dont deny any experiences, unless theyre dangerous, and be mindful that what you think may only apply to you and nobody else. If I created a thread saying that cis men are not men because they just assumed they are men because society told them they are and they did not find an authentic way into their manhood, unlike trans men, how would that feel? I dont think Its any different, but maybe you have some comments on that? I think if anyone thinks its any different, they are having a double standard there. If they claim also that all genders are equal. I think points should be given. Or at least I will be giving them. I dont see how transphobia is any more understandable or more justifiable than racism or islamophobia for example. Or slut shaming, victim blaming, homophobia, aphobia (fear of asexuals), etc. I simply get a lot of hate in my life from my parents, friends, teachers etc. It is draining for me and I dont have the energy to explain things to strangers. I can put links to explanations into my bio that people can research, if they care. If they dont care about being accepting, they cannot be on this forum, because I am not willing to sacrifice creating a safe space here for myself and others. I am not trying to change the whole world here. Ofc not. Some people think they are showing me a way out here. They are not, I am aware that I have to toughen up, but then this is just one online space that should be liberal according to its guidelines, therefore I feel like I can enforce these guidelines, if somebody calls me mentally ill, invalid, dangerous, deviant impure or whatever. Or who is closeminded and unable to reflect. I think it is worth it to fight for a more diverse and accepting actualized.org forum, for Gods sake, we preach love and nonduality and truth here. I am seeking truth about myself every day by having this experience. This is not some impossible goal, theres like just a couple of you guys, if you all stop denying my validity, if you just let me live my life and stop trying to impose your views down my throat, I will be chill, its not hard.

So, I am 2 years in my philosophy major and on some disciplines I am starting to not see the value of studying and writing papers about. I do like to study things like social and political philosophy, which really do bring my perspectives into a new light, but things like modern philosophy starting from Locke and going on to Hume, Kant, Hegel etc. and philosophy of language create knee jerk reactions in me and even though I read them, I feel that they don't bring me any value. They bring me just some nice fantasies of how people thought the world works in the past and I see how most of the problems they raise would be solved with a nondual approach. Their theoretical base seems shaky to me. I do not condemn them for thinking that way. They did the best they could in their time, but it's really hard for me to entertain or make myself read about them. Although, if I would write papers on these by bringing non duality to the table, my teachers would just think I am nuts, except one, who may entertain the idea. Writing papers becomes hard when you know about nonduality. My teachers are so caught in the rationalist trap that they dismiss nonduality entirely and see it as a dogma where some mystics do pseudo-science/pseudo-philosophy and have some funny experiences. Actually, I would dare say that my teachers are just running in circles trying to find truth when it's been there for thousands of years, hidding in the background, tainted by eastern cultural baggage. I would personally just drop the degree altogether but I am already 2 years in and I am doing some things on the side in the city where I'm at for my real career. Although, I have already failed some classes I don't like such as: -Medieval Philosophy -The origins of european philosophy (because of the teachers there) -Modern logic (highly technical, failed only the last exam, which was the hardest) QUESTION: How do I keep doing this soul draining kinda need-to-play-dogmatic paper work till I finish college? Any way I can make it easier on myself? It's just one more year, and I'm gonna specialize in moral philosophy in this third year, after which I'm gonna continue with my music career.