Joseph Maynor

It's a very nit picky sense that I get after watching a lot of his videos. Don't take any teacher too seriously. Let them resonate with you, but at the end of the day, you are the only guru for you. Eckhart Tolle is in my top 3. So, he's way up there for me. He's very wise when it comes to Enlightenment. And he's a great communicator. Each Perspective has a unique conceptual system of Enlightenment. And that's just the way things are. The problem comes when you go from using conceptual systems to believing in conceptual systems. And we all fall victim to that. So, I'm not judging him as if I'm above him or anything like that. It's just a sense I get. I think the original context of my remark was I was suggesting that Eckhart Tolle might be the kind of person who could benefit from psychedelics. It might be something that could really give him that tiny bit more awareness. I know LSD worked like that for me. LSD gives you a kind of super-mindfulness. And that can be really useful to your Enlightenment work.

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ENLIGHTENMENT AND CONCEPTUAL UNDERSTANDING There's a difference between Enlightenment and Conceptual Understanding that a lot of Enlightenment people miss. And Enlightenment benefits Conceptual Understanding, and Conceptual Understanding benefits Enlightenment. One of the ways that Conceptual Understanding benefits Enlightenment is by increasing awareness of the Paradigm of Paradigms. In other words, we're not always conscious of everything we're clinging to. Conceptual Understanding gives you the awareness to bring it all into high-relief. So, Conceptual Understanding is not bad per se. Enlightenment is about BE-ing in the moment without pre-judgments or pre-expectations. You're not gonna be able to surrender like that if you're clinging to 'need to know BE-ing'. It's 'need to know BE-ing' that's the problem. It's clinging to paradigms and beliefs about BE-ing that's the problem. You can think all you want to solve pragmatic problems in your life. But if Enlightenment is what you want -- you gotta make sure you're not clinging to Tier-One Conceptual Understanding. And that's why Conceptual Understanding is relevant to Enlightenment.

This isn't perfect, but it's in the vicinity:

BE-ing is not something to know, it’s something to surrender to. Trying to know BE-ing keeps you from surrendering to BE-ing in the moment. It’s what causes tail-chasing in Enlightenment.

I agree with this 100%.

Actually it’s more intuitive than that about Eckhart Tolle. It’s just a sense I get. And I could be wrong, right. I haven’t watched all of his videos. And I like Eckhart Tolle, he’s my third favorite of the famous gurus. For me it’s Adyashanti and Mooji kinda both at the same level as 1 and 2, and then Eckhart Tolle at 3. So, I rate Eckhart Tolle very highly. I’m just nit-picking on a vibe I picked up after watching many videos of his. It’s a stiff vibe like I mentioned. It’s a tendency to conceptualize BE-ing, even if it’s ever so slightly. On another issue you raised: there’s a difference between rigidly clinging to paradigms about ‘reality’ to loosely clinging to more or less useful frameworks. This is one way Conceptual Understanding helps Enlightenment. I’m not stuck in Tier-One Epistemology or Tier-One. Most people are stuck by default in Tier-One Conceptual Understanding which screws up their Enlightenment. There is a sense in which work in Conceptual Understanding helps Enlightenment. But I agree with what you say — every Enlightenment teacher has to have some framework for teaching Enlightenment.

‘Need to know BE-ing’ is a trap in Enlightenment.

It's a paradigm. 'The Paradigm of Soul.' It's a conceptual system in the Conceptual Understanding. It's a conceptual interpretation of BE-ing.

I think Eckhart Tolle would benefit from doing psychedelics like LSD, Mushrooms, or DMT. Just a sense I get from his vibe. There's a stiffness in there. He kind of clings to his little nut of theory. That's why I don't put him at the level of Adyashanti or Mooji. For me psychedelics really evened me out and got me outta my nut of theory when it comes to Enlightenment. For others psychedelics produce different reactions. For me, psychedelics got me outta theory and into BE-ing when it comes to Enlightenment. Psychedelics helped me transcend the Paradigm of Paradigms. If you're had enough of the right kinds of psychedelic experiences, you probably know what I'm talking about. So, I can't discount psychedelics in good faith because they helped me over that final obstacle to Enlightenment about six months ago, which was transcending 'need to know BE-ing' and just BE-ing in the moment without pre-judgments or pre-expectations. The last time I did LSD about 4 months ago now really drove that point home to me -- it showed it to me

I wonder what Adyashanti thinks about using psychedelics on the Enlightenment Path.

Curious

Why are you trying to 'know' for Enlightenment? That's like expecting a steak to taste like a strawberry.

It’s a paradigm — a ‘belief’ about ‘reality’.

Really? This sounds a bit suspicious. I like Leo, but let’s not warp reality either. Leo does not need us to warp reality in his favor.

I call B.S. on that. People make a lot of shit up.

I hear ya. But we're very lucky to live in SF.

I don't think his growth rate 'tanked' necessarily, but Leo definitely had already established a sizable audience by the time he started to get more esoteric. And I think to this day, those earlier videos probably drive a lot of new people to Leo's channel. And then they get exposed to the esoteric stuff. I know I was attracted to the earlier videos initially. I was not happy when Leo started to do the Enlightenment videos initially. I think this was back in 2015 (3 years ago now). Obviously, now, I'm at a much different place than I was then. But when you're expecting Stage Orange-Style Personal Development, Enlightenment talk sounds like a total distraction and mistake. I was big into Stage Orange-Style Personal Development all throughout 2014 when I was watching Leo's videos. And I think a lot of other people come to Personal Personal Development from that perspective, initially at least. It took a couple of years for the Enlightenment stuff to click with me. I really didn't like it when I first heard about it. I thought it was spiritual bypassing and a distraction from doing the relevant work at hand. But now, I think very differently, right. So, I came around eventually, and ultimately flourished with Enlightenment.

What made Leo popular was his Stage Orange-style earlier Personal Development videos, don't forget that. Leo did not start out doing esoteric topics like Enlightenment until after he got popular with the earlier videos. So, I think it's a mistake to think Leo got popular by marketing Enlightenment videos. He was already popular, and then he shifted gears into the Enlightenment videos. I remember when it happened. But half of Leo's videos -- his earlier videos -- were mostly all Stage Orange-style Personal Development videos. It would be interesting how successful Leo would have been if he started off doing the Enlightenment videos straight away. That's a hard thing to do because you don't got the attention. Leo had the attention, and then he switched gears after he already had it. If anything, whether intended or unintended, Leo did a bait-and-switch from the Stage Orange-Style Personal Development to mostly covering Enlightenment. Try getting popular on YouTube starting out doing the Enlightenment videos, that would be an interesting test. Probably much harder would be my guess. Just because you're gonna have a much smaller slice of the pie of viewers that are even gonna be interested in you in the first instance. You gotta get on people's radar screen to become popular, right. The dog has to like the dog food. Early Leo:

Do you do the exercises as specified in the book, or have you evolved to where you're doing your own subset of the routines?

I think a lot of the 'gurus' that people think are Turquoise are actually at Green. Adyashanti and Mooji are at Turquoise in my opinion. The others, I'm not so sure about.

Hehe. I’m Enlightened and on an ideological warpath. Something dudn't compute.

Yeah, but you’re seeing ‘red herring’ from your own perspective. You’re Perspective-Locked in your own perspective. You assume that Leo’s perspective is wrong. What if I turn that around on you and assume prima facie that your perspective is wrong. You write this horribly organized intro to this discussion. I could have judged you based off that alone and assumed you were in la la land yourself — but I didn’t. I’m not saying you’re wrong in everything you say — but I think you’re too bought into your own perspective. You’re on a mission to invalidate someone else’s perspective. Leo does the work, he’s not some schlock. Before I criticize Leo — and I do — and I like to believe I do it with love as a motive — I like to make sure I realize too that I’m coming from a unique perspective, and that my perspective is only one amongst billions of human perspectives. This idea that there’s ‘one right’ perspective on Enlightenment is false. Every Enlightened being has their own unique conceptual system of Enlightenment. So that humbles me before I criticize Leo. I realize that someone could do exactly the same thing to me. And how would that be constructive to me? It could be. But this I’m right about Enlightenment and you’re wrong as if you’re stating an empirical fact about reality is totally unsustainable. If you were Enlightened, the only reason you would criticize Leo is to try to see if you can help him with a sticking point that you see from your perspective. And then he could do the same for you, if he were so inclined. And on and on she goes — that’s what this Forum is about. The one macro-level thing that I think is screwing Leo up (and has been for some time now) is taking his psychedelic trips way too literally. But that’s from my perspective, and I realize that. From Leo’s perspective, I haven’t done enough psychedelics. He thinks psychedelics have helped him — I think they’ve screwed up his conceptual understanding of Enlightenment, and have also set him on an unfortunate course of massive distraction and confusion in Personal Development (in my opinion). Leo was much better off pre-5-MeO-DMT in my opinion insofar as the content of his videos is concerned. So, there you have it — round and round the argument goes from each individual perspective — and there’s mine to add to the gigantic pile for what it’s worth. Opinions are like bellybuttons, everybody has one.

The problem with Russell’s ‘History of Western Philosophy’ is it’s a bit biased. That’s why I didn’t recommend that one. Russell puts his own Materialist spin on the History of Philosophy. I would avoid his book as a noob to Philosophy. But he gave a good college try for sure. It’s like the History of Western Philosophy through the eyes of a 1950’s Materialist and Logical Positivist. Russell had a dog in the fight in Philosophy and kinda defined his book in terms of what he thought Philosophy should be. There’s a quote in there where he claims that there was no genuine Roman Philosophy — which basically implies that the Romans stole all their Philosophy from Greece. That’s just not true!

There’s a reason why Enlightened Masters aren’t arrogant. They aren’t insecure about their own conceptual systems anymore, and they also see that ‘beliefs’ about ‘reality’ don’t got squat to do with Enlightenment. You’re only arrogant when you’re trying to stave off something that you perceive as a threat. Arrogance is an Ego Defense Mechanism against anticipated criticism. If you could care less about chess and you overhear someone yell ‘checkmate’, it’s no more significant to you than hearing a bird chirp. Alternatively, imagine the difference someone emotionally and intellectually invested in playing a game of chess feels when the person across the table yells ‘checkmate’. You’ll probably feel like shit because you feel like you ‘lost’ something. An Enlightened person isn’t playing that kind of game. That’s why Enlightened people appear so chill and compassionate. They no longer have a personal dog in the dumb fight, yet they see everybody else doing this.

As another nod to Leo, I say the Forum has benefited me as well. I was doing what I'm doing now before the Forum, but on my own. The Forum adds a social element to Personal Development that kind of acts as a synergy factor. My growth has really benefited from doing it in a community versus alone. Also the Forum can actually function as a sanity check for you too. If you're just off on your own, you don't have that.