Search the Community

Burn through your karma. Shadow work. The best way to grow up the ladder is to do as much shadow work as possible. Really get to know everything about yourself as the human that you are, for this incarnation. Treat yourself as soul that is on a journey and is growing as much as possible. The Seth material by Jane Roberts and the Psychic Being by Sri Aurobindo are both good reading material that can teach you how to do this from a yellow/turquoise perspective. You'll have to do a lot of learning, detaching, and meditation. You will want to get to the point where you can see/feel the screen, where you are above your emotions and thoughts as the witness. When you die, you can imagine whatever you want. Nahm's dreamboard idea helps bring positive things into your life, and the actions you take will carry over. What do you want out of this life, deeply, feel into your soul. Love. Deeply. Do good things that feel in alignment with who you are and your purpose. Rather than worrying about the next life, make this one the best you can. This carries over, not the feelings of not wanting to be human - as the soul actually loves learning and being all sorts of things - what you can do is direct your life in a way that includes the next life. Do you have a goal that you would like to accomplish that would take more than one lifetime? Often, martial arts teaches that it takes a few lifetimes to become a master - and so people learning think in terms of next life aptitude. You can direct your soul in any way you like. But the best way is to open your heart and follow what that intuition tells you. Also, Love. Love deeply, as Love is what opens the doors. Practice Love. The soul has an inherent direction to move towards, and it is all just about uncovering that soul and moving in what feels most 'right' to you. Reincarnation is like a katamari, you pick up as much stuff as you can (learn as much) and when you die, you get to "make" your next world based on what you have learned. Maybe you will want to be human again, maybe something else. Think of yourself as an archeologist uncovering hidden aspects of your deep psyche. Practice your death, pretend you are dying right n ow and go through all of the experiences - do you feel complete, or that more needs to be done? Do those things, practice your death again - until you are at peace. ^Take what feels right and throw away the rest, or set it aside - follow what works for you. Break me in don't break me down Swimming in these empty towns I wonder if it's all so master planned Diving into sweeter bliss Falling fair before we miss Taste the taste before it's gone and you're too late Won't change what I am To find who you are Can't stay in these lines When I'm bursting at the seams My body might collapse If I carry one more dream If I carry one more dream I could be anything I could be anything Breaking out beyond the night Reeling in the quieter times Saving all the flavors of my mind Reflecting on the lessons learned The broken bonds and bridges burned Take the taste of hate and throw it away Won't change what I am To find who you are Can't stay in these lines When I'm bursting at the seams My body might collapse If I carry one more dream If I carry one more dream I could be anything I could be anything

@CuriousityIsKey You would need to reach enough spiritual power and advancement so you get to choose. If you are interested in fully freeing yourself of the reincarnation cycle, without merging with God, but in a way where you can keep living as the illusionary you, then get the book "the way of the death defier" by John Kreiter.

There are methods that can be utilized to explore this subject personally. All I have to say is that yes from an absolute perspective it's nonsense, but also keep in mind that the notion that are humans living on a planetary sphere is also nonsense from an absolute perspective(because it's all God pretending to be various finite forms). If you want to know whether or not reincarnation has any validity in this dream you'll just have to explore that possibility personally. So stay open to it, neither believing in it nor not believing in it. And realize that if you find reincarnation to be a part of this reality, it likely plays a major role in the evolutionary process(being that it's a mechanism for consciousness to evolve/stagnate in its development, not the biological hypothetical kind of evolution that's presented to you in universities).

What if someone can conscious about reincarnation? He/She can know other people past lives too.

@mojsterr I would suggest you be very careful what belief's about Karma you adopt as truth. There are many distorted ideas around Karma that religions and spiritual groups disseminate. This isn't correct based on the expanded states and OBE's I have experienced. The vast majority of people upon what we call physical death will find themselves at the same level of consciousness or slightly more expanded. Most will have to "die" many more times before they expand to the state of all that is or the God head. The essence that is you is always you. Even when you expand your awareness to the level of God, the awareness that is you is still there. You don't lose yourself in an ocean, who you are only becomes more. You become the entire ocean, to use your metaphor. Once again, be careful what belief's you adopt. You can certainly create all kinds of Karmic wheels or loops of reincarnation for yourself, but it is you who are creating them. I recommend you awaken deeper. When you do, you will take back your sovereignty and stop giving your power away to something outside of you.

@Carl-Richard I'll focus on (1), since I'll admit to not having enough familiarity with the concept of methodological vs ontological reductionism to articulate the distinction. I've read and studied quite a bit of philosophy, and I don't recall that distinction being emphasized much. If I had to venture a guess about methodological reductionism, I might emphasize the differences between logical positivism which tries to separate its methodology from ontological questions, and something like the Vedic system where ontological claims are used to frame and contextualize its methodology. This is just a guess, I could be missing the mark here. As to (1), ontology can be understood as an aspect of metaphysics. Ontology is concerned with what does and does not exist. For example, whether or not karma and reincarnation actually exist is an ontological question. Metaphysics on the other hand, deals more broadly with the overall structure, function, and meaning of Reality. Returning to the examples of karma and reincarnation, Metaphysics would try to articulate why those processes are a necessary part of the overall structure of Reality. As the example of karma should hopefully illustrate, there is of course plenty of overlap between ontology and metaphysics. For broad existential questions (such as whether the being Reality is mental or physical), an exploration will likely involve both metaphysics and ontology. So the boundaries between the two can get a bit fuzzy, and in practice I've seen the two terms used interchangeably at times.

You missed the mark if you still think other people exist to be awakened. There is no 2nd to wake up. Non dual = not 2. Reincarnation, past lives, future lives. These are all just concepts given to you by teachers. Illusions, lies. All of these forum posts, there are no people behind them. That's just an idea you made up in your mind. The forum itself doesn't exist, because there is no server to host it on. Even me typing this to you, I don't exist. There is no one that typed this. This post just exists. If you have a dream and in it Leo wakes up, and then 100 other people also reach the highest awakening, how many people have woken up? 0. People in dreams aren't real. Stop thinking that you live in a physical body, that you're looking out at a physical world that actually exists. Think of it more like you're watching a movie, or you've had a VR headset on since the moment you're born and everything you see is an illusion. If there is a hand on the screen that looks lifelike and moves perfectly in tune with how you want to move it, how would you know if the hand was real or in VR? How can you even tell if the reality you're looking at isn't 2D instead of 3D? You live in Plato's Cave for 1. Sure you can go visit Leo, you can even touch him and it will all seem perfectly real, but that doesn't make it real. It's still just a dream. "If you die in the game, you die in real life" - Your actions still have consequences so don't do anything stupid with this knowledge. NPCs will still attack you, and the VR suit you're wearing has very realistic pain inflicting sensors.

I assume you turned "anti-reincarnation" because of Leo's ideas? Be careful not to fall too deep into his ideology. He's mostly right about things, but he has his biases and blind spots. A "series of lives" is an experience in itself. It adds another dimension to existence. Each life on its own is an experience, but when you go from life to life, retaining/building some quality, that gives a whole additional layer of complexity to each life you have. But if you have doubts.. remember we live in infinity.. if you want a soul, you should be able to get one if you want??

You’re making too many assumptions reincarnation is just a map

I was elaborating on the fallacious thinking around reincarnation. I don't understand.

I remember ~6 past lives and the concept of reincarnation is quite useful. There appears to be continuity in the experiences that I have and lessons learned. It also integrates well with spiral dynamics That being said I'd still say that it's no more real than physicality itself

Death is a very important and valuable tool for beings on the path of reincarnation and karma. It is quite normal for beings still on that path to get lost in their games and illusions and to lose sight of the greater purpose and goal of their journey. Not only do such beings get a little lost and confused, but they also begin to create a great deal of pain, fear and confusion for themselves. So, death was created to allow these beings to interrupt their passage so that they could, with some regularity, be brought back to their intended path. Death allows a means for the being to bring their journey to a halt and return to a higher consciousness for guidance and help. Without its merciful release, those beings would become very weary and traumatized. If this is the case - they are not immortal, but still on the path of karma and before liberation. An eternity of experiences is fun, interesting and infinitely exciting. If you ever require rest, you may simply still your being and put down your burden and you will instantly find yourself in that state of blissful, balanced, harmonious oneness that is your truest nature. This will be as normal as a night's sleep currently is.

@lmfao Nobody reincarnates. What is thought of as reincarnation is when memories stretch beyond the current physical body. You are not your body or your memories, thus you didn't reincarnate into this body or any past bodies.

according to all spiritual traditions this life is a kind of test, and there is reincarnation. This cannot be known, but if even the Buddha said it, we are not going to throw it to the ground either. according to that theory, if you take the shortcut and don't do your homework, there will be very unpleasant consequences for "you". what you have to do is fight for your life, and that's it. you have nothing to lose and there is nothing better to do

Should life be celebrated or should one try to escape samsara all together like Buddha suggests? According to buddhism, Buddha regarded even one moment in samsara to not be worth to be existing in it. Was Buddha overly dramatic ? Wouldn't total non attachment to samsara lead to indifference to life? According to Buddha we are in cycle of reincarnation in samsara rightnow. According to Buddha we should give all effort to escape samsara asap. Do you agree with Buddhas logic ?

I'm a big fan of the Matrix movies. I think the amalgam of action and existentialism draws me in. Are we living in a simulated reality? The whole idea of a simulated reality is predicated on being able to escape it; that it is actually possible to do or even desirable. Neo finds out it is possible to do despite finding it undesirable at first. If the desire increases enough then it will reach some threshold whereby there is no going back: a choice has to be made. Is it the red pill or the blue pill? I think that, already, if you know that it is possible to escape reality because you've glimpsed it, then the choice is already made and you've swallowed the red pill without knowing it. The other idea behind simulated reality is that it is being simulated by someone totally outside of the simulated reality. They are like the Gods on Mount Olympus whose soap opera has consequences for their creations. But unlike the Greek Gods our simulator overlords are shadowy and cryptic. Hope is not lost however because once we unplug from the simulation we become one of those Gods and we too can play with the simulation itself. It's the difference between being the user of an app and being the programmer of the app. The parallels with Enlightenment should be obvious because we are looking to "wake up" from reality. Once we have glimpsed the ox's tail we have already taken the red pill. One of the biggest drawbacks of the simulation hypothesis is the possibility of infinite regress. What if the simulators themselves are being simulated? How many levels of simulation could you wake up from? The unspoken problem here is the assumption that Thomas Anderson is Neo or knowing if Chuang Tzu was a human or a butterfly. If and when you awake from the simulation, do you in fact get to keep your identity or do you wake up as someone else? This idea is at the heart of reincarnation whereby some essence of you lingers when you wake up into your new body and reality. And this leads on to asking if consciousness itself persists after death or does the whole world (simulation) disappear with you? It may be that when Enlightenment occurs the old you will simply disappear and be thoroughly forgotten. But. Neo can always jack back into the simulation when he likes and he effectively lives in two different worlds. Enlightenment is not a one way street, you could have a foot in both worlds. This is what the quote "Before Enlightenment carry wood chop water. After Enlightenment carry wood chop water." means. The idea of infinite levels of simulation may also mean that there is not just one Enlightenment but many awakenings available to you. This actually seems sensible. There should be nothing special about where you wake up to, except maybe becoming a God comparatively. In fact in Neo's case his "real" reality is quite miserable and tough despite being a kind of God in the Matrix itself. What if there is no simulation? Until you awaken you won't know.

Žarko Karišik Durmitara. He was amazing spiritual teacher from Serbia. His spiritual path was a combination of hatha yoga + Jung's active imagination. His approach was healing and reintegration of the psyche first and after that enlightenment happend to him (the lowest type of enlightenment, as he said to me). He wrote several books, the main book is "Naša joga i prosvetljenje". In english it means "Our yoga and enlightenment". However his books are writen only in serbian/croatian language so probably you won't have any use of them. Also he passed away and i don't know who is selling his books now. But you can check his blog and read some of his writings with the help of Google translate. http://durmitara.blogspot.com Probably this will be more helpfull to people from the Balkan area and to those who understand serbian/croatian language... The other spiritual teacher (or should i say writer because of his blog and book) is David Davidya Buckland from Canada. You can check his blog too: http://davidya.ca He is writing about different stages of enlightenment, about healing, reincarnation etc. I hope that is helpfull to you in some small way...

Hi Leo, Hi everyone, I have been consuming your stuff for some time by now. I was actually wondering whether it would be worth the time here to write a lengthy comment. I really do think that many of your non-esoteric teachings on your channel are quite valuable and courageously unconventional. And I also think that we should develop ourselves, and grow and refine our consciousnesses. That is good stuff, I appreciate it! From what I know I think that you are amongst the top league of Youtube high consciousness content providers. And I pull off my hat for that fact that you put it out for free. Props for doing that! But! With all due respect, Leo, in what follows I do not intend to adulate you, since that would be rather boring and not provide for a good discussion. I would like to share my overall critique of your teachings. And since other people also find the way you teach as somewhat aggressive, I say „If you dish it out, you have to be able to take it.‟ ;-) I myself like to be outright and outspoken, so to me it is not such a big problem. My critique is not all-encompassing. I did not watch every single of your videos. But a good chunk of it. Don’t let being as good as you are delude you into believing that you are infallible (you not rarely sound as of you believe yourself to be that). In every of your videos I have to more or less frown at several points due to the flawed reasoning that you display, or I notice points where you contradict yourself, even to things that you mentioned minutes ago in the same video (I could cite examples if you are interested, but they are not my main point here). Well, that is all okay, we all make mistakes and err from time to time. Yet I would not expect such mistakes of someone who thinks he is „god‟ (even the way you define that catchword)… It also sometimes seems to me that you wish to maintain a kind of „aura of enlightenment‟. You address too little self-doubt in your videos. Because you have to. Since if you would admit your doubts or occasional mistakes your teachings would not be as well received anymore (more on that later). Overall I get the impression that you – thanks to all the personal development and study you have done – have grown a huge, even somewhat arrogant and overbearing, spiritual ego. I miss humility a bit. This calling-yourself-god stuff is probably the most ludicrous outgrowth of it. From the way you speak I get the impression that you regard yourself as highly spiritually advanced, but that does not make you being exempt from ordinary manners. Straight away, I think it would be honest if you would just admit that you are just some guy, a human being of material form with quite some clever insights into life and the world, but whose spiritual pursuit is at odds with materialist science. As to that topic: What made me very curious, and what for the sake of transparency I think everyone of us needs to know, is why you did not react to this guy’s invitation to discuss with him, which you yourself wanted to do. Were you afraid? Was that one of your egoic defense mechanisms, afraid of transparency? Of course, materialist science is your natural enemy, that is why bringing it into disrepute is part of your agenda. Polemically imitating your manner I can just as well say that: „that is all it is… a spiritual ego that tries to defend its own spiritual deceptions.‟ I myself come from a Buddhist background, but was thankfully able to outgrow that stuff. That, to my experience, not many spiritual people seem capable or willing (I guess: most probably capable, but not willing) of performing. But why? Since we are at the topic: Why don’t you have a look at Early Buddhism? I see all your spirituality as a piecing-together and blending of old brahmanic teachings with new age hippy stuff, making it your own kind of cult. From what I have seen you are completely oblivious to Early Buddhism, which would wipe out your beliefs about non-dualism, god, nothingness as god.. Anyway, I know what it is like. I do meditate, I went on meditation retreats, I used to believe in reincarnation, enlightenment, karma, non-material realms – the whole gamut. I was married to the spirituality for many years. So… I kind of know my craft. But my „spiritual ego‟ was not able to defend itself against the rough honesty of existential, materialist nihilism. Are you afraid of that? Now, I know you well enough, you will probably say that I am deluded and don’t see the full picture, and so on. And what I reply to that is that you are not honest enough to see through your own spiritual craving. You deliberately picked out a form of spirituality that suited you and now take any bias to reinforce it. I know that one problem about giving up long-cherished beliefs is losing one’s face. It was quite embarrassing for me to reveal to my social environment at some point that I had renounced my faith in the teachings of the Buddha. Since before for years I had been talking to people a lot about Buddhist philosophy and occasionally even tried to encourage other people to look at Buddhist teachings and win them over and so on, then at some point you having to admit that I found out that I was wrong and misguided was not all-too pleasant. And it was emotionally inconvenient as well. Since Buddhist spirituality guided my world-view and gave me purpose and direction, and then I had to realize that I was naked in the cold... Let us face the facts: I guess that in your situation it would be far more unpleasant, since you have created a huge identity around being „the spiritual guy‟ („god‟, that is...) along with even a long-standing Youtube channel were you have been delivering that stuff to the whole planet for a decade. If then at some point you have to realize that you were completely mistaken, admitting that would get you into big trouble. What is more: that would feed the trolls for years to come. So in a sense you are imprisoned by now. You have invested so much into it that you now have to stick to that stuff, since contradicting it by now would be a huge mess. If you ask me, I would nonetheless encourage you to take that step …but I know how the ego works. ;-) And when I now say that, I would not be surprised if spiritual people will try to ridicule me or come up with some clever paradoxical spiritual nonsense, or be ultra-loving (to show my non-compassion) or whatever ...since I „do not understand the spiritual complexity and succumb to the ego mechanisms‟ yada yada yada… the usual thought-terminating clichés, those knockout arguments which you in turn reproach the opposite side (the materialists) for, but generously commit yourself, and which, if you were able to let go of them, would enable you to see through your fallacies. „You see? You guys have spiritual egos trying to defend themselves. That’s all it is.‟ Frankly, if you ask me than you can go and buy yourself a scoop of ice cream for the great „insights‟ that you had while under the influence of hallucinogenics. Of course you can always claim that there is stuff that is not accessible to the rational mind. For obvious reasons: claiming that is a survival strategy. The rational mind is the natural enemy to your ridiculous beliefs. So for those beliefs to be able to survive, they need to delude people into thinking that there was anything that is not accessible to the rational mind... "You see? The ego trying to defend itself" ^^ If you were honest and careful in your arguments than you would admit that all that probably shows is that the brain seems to be able to perform fancy stuff while under the influence of drugs. Apply Occam’s Razor, for a change. There is no need to get spiritual about it. But if you go about it with the preconceived notion of non-duality, enlightenment, emptiness, and all that stuff, than of course that is what you can experience with drugs, it is just a confirmation bias. That’s all. Just the fact that you, admittedly, can hardly (if at all – which I doubt) gain access to this stuff by non-material ways, that is, by not resorting to a material substance, should show you that what you experience is induced by a material cause, and belongs to the material world only. You yourself once mentioned something along the lines of „trying to achieve these states without hallucinogenics‟ would be „a waste of time‟. But I know the way the cookie crumbles. Your egoic spiritual defense mechanisms will that and come up with fantasy. Why would I deny and fight against spirituality? Because I want to defend my materialist ego? Actually, I would love to live in a world that is mystical, spiritual and somehow endowed with meaning and direction, but I am honest and experienced enough to no longer fall for that lie. I don’t like to kid myself. I would like to see materialism proven wrong, but none of that spiritual stuff convinces me anymore. If your thinking is sharp enough, you notice the fallacies and trick of your mind quite easily. And why should scientists think differently than I do? What agenda should fuel their disenchantment of the world other than the quest for truth? Capitalism, perhaps? Lol. Ego business? How come? In fact, by disenchanting the world science has inflicted on us humans what Freud appropriately has called „narcissistic injuries‟. Narcissistic injuries neither serve capitalism nor the ego. They were simply inevitable with the progress of science. What spirituality (as a backlash, so to speak) has been trying to do is to re-enchant the world. But since science is so good, spirituality these days has to resort to especially tricky things and esoteric reasoning, that are often, say, of epistemological nature and cannot be downright falsified. So then if anyone tries to attack that spirituality, these attacks are suffocated and ridiculed, thereby using the same defense mechanisms that you are blaming the materialists for using them. You will, for instance, call materialists narrow-minded, or say that science has an ego is just trying to maintain itself by putting down spirituality. If you ask me, that is what you are doing. Science is just disenchanting the world with the gloves off. I am not in the least bit intimidated by your teachings, if that is what you think. What worse could the world get than what science has turned it into? To use one of your favourite phrases: „Stop bullshitting yourself!‟. In addition to that, I don’t know if you have ever noticed Leo, but what I personally don’t like about the way you teach is that you blurt some of your theories, for instance your series about the mechanisms of survival, as if you have realized something of ingenious brilliance and crazy significance, while in fact most people with some common sense or decent education are able to understand and are half-aware of this stuff, anyway. When I watched that episode I was literally just bored of it, even anticipating correctly what was to come. But you proclaim that stuff as if you speak from some kind of higher plane of existence. In your episode „Is gender a social construct‟ you ask something like: Where in the nature you find gender? And that nature does not now any such categories. Well, that is a good point. But then again, where in the nature you see your „spiral dynamics‟? Nature does not know such stuff. Would you mind applying that same constructivist skepticism to your own ideas (Spiral Dynamics, in this case), for a change? What I see is just growing complexity amongst society, resulting in people of more complex consciousness, sometimes even more refined consciousness, if you will. But to argue that we are developing along lines of spiral dynamics and categorizing people into stages of spiral dynamics is a coarse generalization. Why is it that some people can embody a range of many stages in one person? Because that same persons spirals through many levels of consciousness in one mind? Anyway, I do miss skepticism of you applied to your own teachings. You like what you teach and don’t bother to apply some skepticism to it, unless it serves your purposes. I think that you are over-confident, especially about your esoteric stuff, and it does not seem to me that you apply double standards, guided by your likes and dislikes. You proclaim your stuff without a shimmer of doubt, as if you were infallible, which I guess is necessarily to convince oneself and others of it. And you do not even shy away from defending your own carnal craving for an intimate relationship with the opposite sex that you mentioned in the episode about „Burning through karma‟ by simply redefining the ancient idea of karma to suit your purposes. Please look up the definition of karma as it is understood in Early Buddhism and recognize that you just like to gerrymander your spiritual ideas to your liking. Just as you like it. Because it serves your purposes. It is all ego business. Again, I think you have some quite valuable and insightful stuff on your channel. But I would like to encourage you to outgrow spirituality. And to stop deluding people. Alright, this shall do for now. I could go into this stuff with more detail, but I would like to hear an initial comment on it first. Best Karl-Heinz

Hi Leo, Hi everyone, I have been consuming your stuff for some time by now. I was actually wondering whether it would be worth the time here to write a lengthy comment. I really do think that many of your non-esoteric teachings on your channel are quite valuable and courageously unconventional. And I also think that we should develop ourselves, and grow and refine our consciousnesses. That is good stuff, I appreciate it! From what I know I think that you are amongst the top league of Youtube high consciousness content providers. And I pull off my hat for that fact that you put it out for free. Props for doing that! But! With all due respect, Leo, in what follows I do not intend to adulate you, since that would be rather boring and not provide for a good discussion. I would like to share my overall critique of your teachings. And since other people also find the way you teach as somewhat aggressive, I say „If you dish it out, you have to be able to take it.‟ ;-) I myself like to be outright and outspoken, so to me it is not such a big problem. My critique is not all-encompassing. I did not watch every single of your videos. But a good chunk of it. Don’t let being as good as you are delude you into believing that you are infallible (you not rarely sound as of you believe yourself to be that). In every of your videos I have to more or less frown at several points due to the flawed reasoning that you display, or I notice points where you contradict yourself, even to things that you mentioned minutes ago in the same video (I could cite examples if you are interested, but they are not my main point here). Well, that is all okay, we all make mistakes and err from time to time. Yet I would not expect such mistakes of someone who thinks he is „god‟ (even the way you define that catchword)… It also sometimes seems to me that you wish to maintain a kind of „aura of enlightenment‟. You address too little self-doubt in your videos. Because you have to. Since if you would admit your doubts or occasional mistakes your teachings would not be as well received anymore (more on that later). Overall I get the impression that you – thanks to all the personal development and study you have done – have grown a huge, even somewhat arrogant and overbearing, spiritual ego. I miss humility a bit. This calling-yourself-god stuff is probably the most ludicrous outgrowth of it. From the way you speak I get the impression that you regard yourself as highly spiritually advanced, but that does not make you being exempt from ordinary manners. Straight away, I think it would be honest if you would just admit that you are just some guy, a human being of material form with quite some clever insights into life and the world, but whose spiritual pursuit is at odds with materialist science. As to that topic: What made me very curious, and what for the sake of transparency I think everyone of us needs to know, is why you did not react to this guy’s invitation to discuss with him, which you yourself wanted to do. Were you afraid? Was that one of your egoic defense mechanisms, afraid of transparency? Of course, materialist science is your natural enemy, that is why bringing it into disrepute is part of your agenda. Polemically imitating your manner I can just as well say that: „that is all it is… a spiritual ego that tries to defend its own spiritual deceptions.‟ I myself come from a Buddhist background, but was thankfully able to outgrow that stuff. That, to my experience, not many spiritual people seem capable or willing (I guess: most probably capable, but not willing) of performing. But why? Since we are at the topic: Why don’t you have a look at Early Buddhism? I see all your spirituality as a piecing-together and blending of old brahmanic teachings with new age hippy stuff, making it your own kind of cult. From what I have seen you are completely oblivious to Early Buddhism, which would wipe out your beliefs about non-dualism, god, nothingness as god.. Anyway, I know what it is like. I do meditate, I went on meditation retreats, I used to believe in reincarnation, enlightenment, karma, non-material realms – the whole gamut. I was married to the spirituality for many years. So… I kind of know my craft. But my „spiritual ego‟ was not able to defend itself against the rough honesty of existential, materialist nihilism. Are you afraid of that? Now, I know you well enough, you will probably say that I am deluded and don’t see the full picture, and so on. And what I reply to that is that you are not honest enough to see through your own spiritual craving. You deliberately picked out a form of spirituality that suited you and now take any bias to reinforce it. I know that one problem about giving up long-cherished beliefs is losing one’s face. It was quite embarrassing for me to reveal to my social environment at some point that I had renounced my faith in the teachings of the Buddha. Since before for years I had been talking to people a lot about Buddhist philosophy and occasionally even tried to encourage other people to look at Buddhist teachings and win them over and so on, then at some point you having to admit that I found out that I was wrong and misguided was not all-too pleasant. And it was emotionally inconvenient as well. Since Buddhist spirituality guided my world-view and gave me purpose and direction, and then I had to realize that I was naked in the cold... Let us face the facts: I guess that in your situation it would be far more unpleasant, since you have created a huge identity around being „the spiritual guy‟ („god‟, that is...) along with even a long-standing Youtube channel were you have been delivering that stuff to the whole planet for a decade. If then at some point you have to realize that you were completely mistaken, admitting that would get you into big trouble. What is more: that would feed the trolls for years to come. So in a sense you are imprisoned by now. You have invested so much into it that you now have to stick to that stuff, since contradicting it by now would be a huge mess. If you ask me, I would nonetheless encourage you to take that step …but I know how the ego works. ;-) And when I now say that, I would not be surprised if spiritual people will try to ridicule me or come up with some clever paradoxical spiritual nonsense, or be ultra-loving (to show my non-compassion) or whatever ...since I „do not understand the spiritual complexity and succumb to the ego mechanisms‟ yada yada yada… the usual thought-terminating clichés, those knockout arguments which you in turn reproach the opposite side (the materialists) for, but generously commit yourself, and which, if you were able to let go of them, would enable you to see through your fallacies. „You see? You guys have spiritual egos trying to defend themselves. That’s all it is.‟ Frankly, if you ask me than you can go and buy yourself a scoop of ice cream for the great „insights‟ that you had while under the influence of hallucinogenics. Of course you can always claim that there is stuff that is not accessible to the rational mind. For obvious reasons: claiming that is a survival strategy. The rational mind is the natural enemy to your ridiculous beliefs. So for those beliefs to be able to survive, they need to delude people into thinking that there was anything that is not accessible to the rational mind... "You see? The ego trying to defend itself" ^^ If you were honest and careful in your arguments than you would admit that all that probably shows is that the brain seems to be able to perform fancy stuff while under the influence of drugs. Apply Occam’s Razor, for a change. There is no need to get spiritual about it. But if you go about it with the preconceived notion of non-duality, enlightenment, emptiness, and all that stuff, than of course that is what you can experience with drugs, it is just a confirmation bias. That’s all. Just the fact that you, admittedly, can hardly (if at all – which I doubt) gain access to this stuff by non-material ways, that is, by not resorting to a material substance, should show you that what you experience is induced by a material cause, and belongs to the material world only. You yourself once mentioned something along the lines of „trying to achieve these states without hallucinogenics‟ would be „a waste of time‟. But I know the way the cookie crumbles. Your egoic spiritual defense mechanisms will that and come up with fantasy. Why would I deny and fight against spirituality? Because I want to defend my materialist ego? Actually, I would love to live in a world that is mystical, spiritual and somehow endowed with meaning and direction, but I am honest and experienced enough to no longer fall for that lie. I don’t like to kid myself. I would like to see materialism proven wrong, but none of that spiritual stuff convinces me anymore. If your thinking is sharp enough, you notice the fallacies and trick of your mind quite easily. And why should scientists think differently than I do? What agenda should fuel their disenchantment of the world other than the quest for truth? Capitalism, perhaps? Lol. Ego business? How come? In fact, by disenchanting the world science has inflicted on us humans what Freud appropriately has called „narcissistic injuries‟. Narcissistic injuries neither serve capitalism nor the ego. They were simply inevitable with the progress of science. What spirituality (as a backlash, so to speak) has been trying to do is to re-enchant the world. But since science is so good, spirituality these days has to resort to especially tricky things and esoteric reasoning, that are often, say, of epistemological nature and cannot be downright falsified. So then if anyone tries to attack that spirituality, these attacks are suffocated and ridiculed, thereby using the same defense mechanisms that you are blaming the materialists for using them. You will, for instance, call materialists narrow-minded, or say that science has an ego is just trying to maintain itself by putting down spirituality. If you ask me, that is what you are doing. Science is just disenchanting the world with the gloves off. I am not in the least bit intimidated by your teachings, if that is what you think. What worse could the world get than what science has turned it into? To use one of your favourite phrases: „Stop bullshitting yourself!‟. In addition to that, I don’t know if you have ever noticed Leo, but what I personally don’t like about the way you teach is that you blurt some of your theories, for instance your series about the mechanisms of survival, as if you have realized something of ingenious brilliance and crazy significance, while in fact most people with some common sense or decent education are able to understand and are half-aware of this stuff, anyway. When I watched that episode I was literally just bored of it, even anticipating correctly what was to come. But you proclaim that stuff as if you speak from some kind of higher plane of existence. In your episode „Is gender a social construct‟ you ask something like: Where in the nature you find gender? And that nature does not now any such categories. Well, that is a good point. But then again, where in the nature you see your „spiral dynamics‟? Nature does not know such stuff. Would you mind applying that same constructivist skepticism to your own ideas (Spiral Dynamics, in this case), for a change? What I see is just growing complexity amongst society, resulting in people of more complex consciousness, sometimes even more refined consciousness, if you will. But to argue that we are developing along lines of spiral dynamics and categorizing people into stages of spiral dynamics is a coarse generalization. Why is it that some people can embody a range of many stages in one person? Because that same persons spirals through many levels of consciousness in one mind? Anyway, I do miss skepticism of you applied to your own teachings. You like what you teach and don’t bother to apply some skepticism to it, unless it serves your purposes. I think that you are over-confident, especially about your esoteric stuff, and it does not seem to me that you apply double standards, guided by your likes and dislikes. You proclaim your stuff without a shimmer of doubt, as if you were infallible, which I guess is necessarily to convince oneself and others of it. And you do not even shy away from defending your own carnal craving for an intimate relationship with the opposite sex that you mentioned in the episode about „Burning through karma‟ by simply redefining the ancient idea of karma to suit your purposes. Please look up the definition of karma as it is understood in Early Buddhism and recognize that you just like to gerrymander your spiritual ideas to your liking. Just as you like it. Because it serves your purposes. It is all ego business. Again, I think you have some quite valuable and insightful stuff on your channel. But I would like to encourage you to outgrow spirituality. And to stop deluding people. Alright, this shall do for now. I could go into this stuff with more detail, but I would like to hear an initial comment on it first. Best Karl-Heinz

1) Soul (GREAT animation movie, which shows you, what's the meaning of life 2) Peaceful Warrior ( about the POWER OF NOW, really clasic !) 3) I origins (about reincarnation, love story) 4) Cloud Atlas (reincarnation during many ages) 5) Interstellar/matrix/inception ( those doesn't need any description) 5) Many famous like Pocahontas, Wish Dragon, maybe not directly, but with a lot of good meaning. 6) Vanilla sky - kind off ;-)

Could you please elaborate more on your direct experience? Our character, thoughts, psyche emerges from our DNA, experiences, parents, society and etc. DNA comes from our parents. So where is the reincarnation?

This song is about reincarnation which involves resolving the disparities in one’s inner world. What non-duality is cannot be taught. It has to be realized through understanding. Embarrassment has the same level of reality as ego. It’s not real but it will bite you repeatedly. That’s just the way it is. Not ever having lived your life wholeheartedly is a tragedy comparable to being a slave to the ‘should’s’ and ‘ought-to’s hurled at one by the super-ego and the cultural ego. The recipe is to not give a shit about what other people think of you. If you care about what they think you’re just an inauthentic Care-bear. It’s difficult sometimes to be an authentic Care-bear. To die seven times and pass through the upper four Hell realms in one lifetime takes the will of an Authentic Care-bear. Authentic Care-bears and Grizzly Care-bears are seemingly paradoxical characters. Human beings who use narcotics can easily become careless Care-bears who experience unexpected repercussions. Sometimes these situations can only be undone by Authentic Care-bears or Grizzly Care-bears or maybe even an Eternal Cosmic Grizzly Care-bear. Believe me when I say you don’t want one of these Beings to be riding your ass but you’ll be eternally grateful if they come to your rescue. Live free and wild while you’re in this wilderness of life. Don’t show concern just because other people are watching. Expecting Unconditional Love from others or using it as a standard for oneself to live up to is unrealistic. Love is a state of consciousness. It becomes a station only for a rare few at the station of Authentic (genuine) Care-bear or higher.

You have your whole life (probably) to do the high consciousness spiritual stuff. Get all the sex, partying, etc out of your system now while you're young. Otherwise it'll always be there in the background as a regret, an itch you never scratched that's always calling to you. Set yourself a time limit to do all this hedonistic stuff, X number of years or by X age. Then you can get serious about more "meaningful" things. Don't go halfway and try to do both, or you'll probably just end up unsatisfied in both areas or it will take twice as long. Unless your spiritual belief system includes the need to reach a certain level to escape the reincarnation cycle, or to be free of sin at your time of death which could come at any time. Those are the only situations I can think of where there's a harm in delaying.

No, if liberation hasn't happened, then once the gross body dies, then the subtle body (and mental impressions/mind) goes on to another loka (plane or realm of existence). In Advaita Vedanta there is reincarnation for those that aren't Self-realized and identify with the mind/ego/body. When the person is reborn, the new physical body is accompanied by the old mind with the impressions or “grooves” from previous lives, but stripped of actual past life memories. My two cents.

According to Richard Schwartz, who channeled Jesus and works in the field of past life regression hypnosis therapy, we plan our Life and our biggest challenges before being born. There is not just a Plan A but many. Plan B, Plan C,... The question "What would Love do?" Guides you towards the best plan.Many times the plan doesn't really work out due to free will and reincarnation occurs. We choose our parents and our names. This whole deep suffering thing remains mysterious, albeit it might aid the Soul in purification and Karma Balance which are two of its Ultimate goals. [Yesterday I read about Junko Furata's abduction from around 30 years ago, her last 44 days of existence consisted of literal torture, beatings, being burned alive serveral times, gang raped etc, so it's really questionable how one could ever agree to such.. or think of the holocaust] Not too sure what to make of the Soul council and stuff. I am almost convinced that Death will lead to instantaneous reincarnation, from this perspective anyways, unless you are like super spiritual and highly developed. Wish I had access to psychic people who could do some channeling in this regard for me