Leo Gura

No, not right now. Short on time. But I plan to start one in the future. I like Kriya yoga, but I'm no expert on yoga. Not a big priority in my life. Not really. That would be something which would require dedicated work which isn't high on my list of priorities. I would keep the practices separate. Law of Attraction is still good and important if you want to sculpt your mind and succeed in life. Nope I would probably get upset. But I would also come to understand why it must be so, and that would take some of the edge off. 6) Not much. That's an area I require much more work in. 7) Closer to my own age. 8) Depends on how you define "place". In the US I've lived in 4 different states. 9) No, but I own a sharp ninja sword. All trespassers will be sliced Try to treat the situation casually. Go answer the door if you must and then return back to your meditation like nothing happened. No, I don't have much doubt any more. Seen too much at this point. But of course I'm always open to being proven wrong in the future. If that happens, I will be open to it and report my discoveries and errors back to you guys. 1) Dying prematurely, before I fulfill my mission. 2) Morrowind Because for now my focus has been on building Actualized.org rather than going balls-to-the-wall on myself. My diets fluctuates a lot. These days I eat more meat because I don't find it very sustainable to only eat plants. I basically starve to death that way because I don't eat any wheat or dairy products. Healing is quite a common ability actually. There are many legit healers around. Which is not to say there aren't frauds on TV. I real healer probably wouldn't be showing off on TV. Apply everything you learn and use your consciousness to help elevate the world. I don't know for sure. Probably in the 300-range. Of course that excludes all the books I read in school and college. I'm talking post-college. Good books on epistemology are quite rare. My understanding of epistemology largely comes from years of my own personal contemplations, not books. Although I will be adding some more epistemology books to my book list in the future as I'm doing a lot of research into it right now. Yes, one. All fears are the same. You must face them head on or they will enslave you. Either way will work. Some yoga and walking meditation is healthy I think. Too much sitting isn't good for the body. You should watch my video: Meditation Technique: Do Nothing "Do Nothing" is a very specific technique. A few points about this: Yes, that's sorta my style. I like to be a bit abrasive and confrontational. I also do that because it amuses me. When I speak, it's like I'm acting in a play, or like I'm doing standup comedy. The fact is that most of the things I say are so obvious that they should be common practice. So some outrage is warranted. It would be dishonest to speak about such things nonchalantly. Society is a chimp circus, and it needs to be called out for it. In this way, I'm sort of channeling George Carlin when I speak. It's a bit over-the-top on purpose. Of course my ego is still intact, so it must show through in my work. That cannot be avoided. All enlightenment teachings are misleading, by definition, regardless of style. I find "modest" styles and teachers to be extremely misleading, even if they are very enlightened. I speak to a very broad general audience on Youtube where most people have no idea what enlightenment is, nor are they serious about pursuing it. So my style is aimed at getting them interested. That's a very different challenge than what someone like Peter is doing. Peter is only teaching small handfuls of extremely hardcore students. I teach A LOT more stuff than Peter or your typical nonduality teacher. I talk about lots of pragmatic things which have nothing to do with enlightenment. The aims of my teachings are more ambitious. A lot more territory must be covered to assemble THE BIG PICTURE which no nondual teacher gives you. My communication style will evolve and improve in the future as I become more conscious and authentic. I always tell you guys to think for yourselves and to don't believe me. My videos are already long, and I'm tired of saying it. It should be obvious that all my words are merely words. Comparing me with Peter is rather unfair. You can compare me to him when I'm 65 years old. Wheat is just empty calories and is hard for your body to digest. Without eating wheat, it is almost impossible to become fat. What's wrong is that reality is immaterial. I like having one girl who I like. I don't think polyamory is healthy or sustainable. Nope. Sometimes in early 2018, hopefully. Beans, no. I have tried, but nuts make me feel nauseous. They are too rich for me so I avoid them. ??? If you want that, you should be the one telling me. I want to make an entire course about it. Too much hassle. It takes dozens of hours to prepare things like that. Yeah, we'll get to it at some point. It's not an easy topic to cover meaningfully in 1 video.

@Max_V Nothing whatsoever is egoic unless you make it so.

@Ocean Yes, of course. The circular logic which holds together every paradigm is the only thing there is to create a sense of solid reality. Which is precisely why people are so adamant about continuing their circular logic. No circular logic, no reality.

There are 1000 different techniques I haven't covered, because it would take 100 years to cover them all. It's a good technique which I'll cover in the future. But also, if you think doing love and kindness will enlighten you, good luck with that. It's quite indirect.

@Phill You need to realize that there is no substitute for action. How do you develop discipline? You just fucking do it. You take that lazy ego and you force it to submit, like a dog. And if you are too lazy to do that. That is it. You're stuck forever.

@BjarkeT That's precisely the point of research: to investigate things which you have no clue about. If you only research the things you know, then you're researching in a circle.

You are not realizing that your intent to do research is biased, paradigm-locked, and not genuine. You only want to do the kind of research that fits your paradigm and validates your core assumptions about reality. If you really cared about doing research, you would be eager to smoke some DMT, rather and coming up with excuses for why not to.

Of course there is a reason. The reason is: Absolute Infinity!

Of course sanity/insanity go full-circle.

Well of course. That's what no-self means: no distinction between self/other. You had an enlightenment experience into the nature of What is another?

@egoless In that case we had an honest miscommunication. Sorry.

I mean, most musicians do drugs. Drugs are part of that sub-culture.

@Chrissy j There is an old Chinese proverb which say something like: He who is saying it can't be done shouldn't stand in the way of the one doing it. The problem is that those psychologists writing for Psychology Today are themselves neurotic as hell. There is a big difference between working on yourself and being an academic who reads books about dysfunctional people. You can read every textbook ever written about psychology, but it will not grow you much as a human being.

The issue is that that sentence is ambiguous. It can be read in two ways: Leo said Sadhguru is a liar Leo disagrees with the person calling Sadhguru a liar What I mean is that I have never criticized Sadhguru or called him a liar. If other people are calling Sadhguru a liar, that is their opinion. As far as I can see, Sadhguru is not a liar and I don't see any good reason to criticize him.

Isn't every musician a junkie? I don't see any problem with being a junkie and a musician. As for being an academic, that will be much harder. But then again, no path to raising the consciousness of humanity at large will be easy. Anyone who tries to raise consciousness in ANY field will be met with strong resistance. That is the nature of ignorance vs consciousness, God vs Devil. We are lucky we don't live in a time where we would have been burned at the stake just for having this conversation.

What are you talking about?? I have NEVER said that. I have never even implied such a thing. Don't put words in my mouth and be careful with your sloppy citations and sloppy misreadings. You mislead people very easily like that.

No, that's where you are mistaken. My description is as wrong as all the others. The problem isn't with the description, it's with the mind not wanting to understand it.

Because you cannot communicate Truth. All attempts to communicate it are lies by definition.

Scott is one of the most deluded thinkers I have ever heard speak. The self-appointed master of reason has been hoisted by his own petard. Oh the irony... When you hear people speaking of "reason", run for the hills. Reason is the #1 tool of the ego. Reason has absolutely nothing to do with truth. The mental gymnastics that Scott goes through to backwards-rationalize Trump, are truly astounding. And Sam is right to call him out on his shit.

That's called faith. The opposite of science. You are turning science into dogma. Which is the problem. If you stop doing that, then there's nothing wrong with science. But that's a big IF. Cause you insist on holding it as dogma. The problem is that you hold a thing as dogma while telling yourself, "It's not dogma". But telling yourself that doesn't make it true. That's precisely what religious fundamentalists do. They hold dogmas which they believe are not dogmas, but truth, but which are in fact dogmas.

The significance is that, once again, everything is made out of nothing. Jacques Derrida and Post-Structuralism nailed the true nature of language.

Lol, Scott Adams critcizing Sam Harris is like Harvey Weinstein criticizing Al Franken. But also -- of course -- rationality is highly irrational. How could you not expect such an artificial duality to collapse?

@egoless I have a 25 hour course which explains all that. It will save you years of beating around the bush. This is a nuanced topic which required a giant course to properly explain.

Watch your asses when following/idolizing any human being. People do that because they are too lazy to actually do the work themselves. No one will enlighten you but yourself.

"More accurate term" is a relative notion. For different people different terms will work best given their preconceptions. And everyone has their unique preconceptions. To me, "death" is the best description of it. But other people might not resonate with that. Personally, I like using the most shocking descriptions of it, because it's a very shocking thing. To me, the essence of enlightenment is the shock and total mindfuck of it. To me, any description which leaves that out, is highly misleading because it doesn't properly communicate the staggering radicalness of this insight. "Death" is a great term because when the average person hears that, they go, "OMG! That can't be true! It's too radical! He must mean something more metaphorical by that." But no... I mean your actual death! That communicates the gravity of this thing. The problem with "Being in the present moment" is that is has zero gravity to it. It's a completely non-threatening description. People misconstrue that as like sitting at the bus stop waiting for a bus. That ain't it. Calling enlightenment "Being in the present moment" is like calling a nuclear bomb a firecracker because both are a kind of explosion. But the magnitude of the explosion makes all the difference in the world!