dualnon

How do you clean your drinking water? Have you found a way to remove forever chemicals and hormones?

Ultra fast wireless communication between brain and server would eliminate that issue.

What do you mean by this. Are you saying that it is not a state one can attain? Or are you saying that it is a real state, but is not useful or worth pursuing? Surely centerlessness should still be pursued even if your consciousness goals extend far beyond it... or no?

Can you describe the phenomenology a little? Has your realisation of no-self permanently shifted your day to day perception, if so.. how? What does your moment to moment experience appear like? Also, How come you don't talk about centerlessness in your videos? I've never heard you talk about it, or even claim to have attained it after all these years of awakening and enlightenment talk. Maybe you have... but I am not aware of it, so I imagine you haven't spoken on it much.

Are you referring to the "Beyond God Realisation" video? As I understand it Frank was talking about how "God" is just a more expanded experience of ego, and that there is more to go to arrive at total permanent centerlessness. He wasn't exactly saying that Leo's insights are below "traditional Enlightenment". He was outlining some trappings on the path that prevent people from attaining centerlessness, which is something that Leo doesn't really talk about... I wonder if Leo's attained it. If he has, awesome. But if not, he should.. and THEN critique Frank. From how Leo talks about and dismisses the no-self insight, I am not sure he's actually had it. Not deep enough to realise permanent centerlessness anyway. Maybe he has... But I don't think so simply because I've never heard him mention it. And I've watched basically everything he's put out on enlightenment, consciousness and nonduality.

More power to you man!

hey, thanks man! ❤️ Definately both!

I partially agree to that. I think Frank articulates the goal of meditation a LOT better than Leo. And I say that having tried both, and been an avid viewer of Leo for years and years. The whole thing about dissolving the centre of solidity in the head is brilliant, and something Leo doesn't point to quite so directly. And I'd say at the end of the day that's really all you need to go all the way. At least if your goal is Anatta realisation. Which I understand is not the be all and end all in Leos books.

That's interesting to me. I have a few friends that I share Franks videos with who are just not interested in it ?. But for me there was an instant resonance that catapulted me into deep deep practice. I love Leo's videos too, I've actually been watching him for a hell of a lot longer than Frank and I've gotten a lot out of them.. but just nothing as visceral and embodied as the shifts I got from Franks guidance, more intellectual stuff. It's funny because, since getting the shifts my way of thinking has changed a lot too. My perception of the relative world has been updated. So now when I watch Leo's videos I resonate a lot more, and he says things I've been contemplating on by myself. So I can appreciate his work a lot more since doing the work via Franks methodology.

I basically just watched his videos on a loop and practiced Vipassana, got all the Jhanas, my first cessation and stream entry within a few months. Permanent changes in perception as a result. I don't know what Kriya Yoga is.

I haven't done 5MEO but I've done basically everything else.

Speaking from experience, Frank has done more for me practically than Leo has. Although, Leo has done more for me theoretically. I've attained stable states of consciousness totally naturally because of Frank. I've never gotten anything of the sort from Leo, and in day to day life that makes a difference.

essentially "trust me bro"

Have you seen Terminator, or 2001 A Space Odyssey? If not. Check out those films and you'll understand why people are afraid.

There is a lot we still don't understand about gender and its relation to transgender issues. As a society, we can't even agree if gender is a social construct or not. I think a lot of the rigorous scientific work and ethical contemplation gets lost amongst all the political activism. So it's tricky. But the fact remains that if there are trans adults, there are trans kids. The question then is, do trans kids benefit from adolescent hormonal intervention and do the benefits outweigh the risks? While in some cases it's clear that trans kids do benefit, in others it's clear that they don't. Take Jazz Jennings as an example, the hormones she was on prevented her genitals from developing enough for vaginoplasty. I often find these kinds of conversations are quite pointless, because they often boil down to moral arguments, which end up being subjective and the outcomes have such varied results that its impossible to say something is true in all instances. In some sense there's a lot of similarity to the debates that surround the topic of abortion. And similar to the abortion debate, I think there is a way to resolve these things if you look at things from a slightly elevated perspective. The current solution to most trans problems is surgical and hormonal intervention. For a lot of trans people this is an adequate and good solution. But it doesn't provide much insight into exactly why it is a good solution, except for the fact that it seems to lower instances of gender dysphoria in trans people. But what causes dysphoria anyway? What causes someone to be trans? What is gender? An alternative solution could be for us to look more deeply at the social structures that cause one to feel their body does not align with how they feel. To address the pain point for trans people, which more than anything is social cohesion. Right now, the major limiting factor for social cohesion amongst trans people is that their gender identity (a set of typically expected behaviours associated with their biological sex) conflicts with their socially perceived self, the biological body. Perhaps it would be helpful to recognise that the current solution for trans people is not an absolute solution, and is actually one that arises out of a need that is determined by the current social environment. In countries like Iran for example, gay men are sometimes forced to transition for the sake of social cohesion, as it is culturally unacceptable to be gay, so instead they can live their lives as a woman. So perhaps, if the social environment were to change and gender was recognised as a socially constructed set of typically expected behaviours associated with ones biological sex, and biological sex seen as something categorically distinct from gender, there might come a time where it is recognised that gender non conformity is not an issue of a person not displaying the "right" characteristics and behaviours of their sex. But instead the socially constructed boxes we put people in not being able to account for that individuals naturally expressed characteristics and behaviours. If that time comes perhaps the instances of gender dysphoria would decrease substantially to where hormonal and surgical intervention is a very rare thing. Because the expectation of how one should be is not as rigid as "boy/Man girl/Woman" but it is accepted that one can be as they are, no matter their biology. But this could only happen if we are willing to seriously address the concerns and experience of trans people. And also not treat it simply (and ignorantly) as a medical issue. But a response to the growing need for social integration amongst gender non conforming individuals.