Leo's Blog Discussion Mega-Thread

[Leo Gura]

3 minutes ago, Nemra said:

@Leo Gura, in your experience, would you say that awakenings happen because your changed state pushes you to realize something without your will?

Yes.

It's all about state change. Awakening is just a change of state.

If you state changed radically enough, the insights would come automatically, without you even needing to question.

Quote

For you, how do awakening and contemplation affect each other? Which one actually depends on the other?

It can work both ways.

The more you contemplate and comprenhend the logical structure of God/Consciousness, the deeper and richer your awakenings will get. So much so that you can unlock entirely new orders of awakening.

Edited 18 hours ago by Leo Gura

[Nilsi]

8 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

@Nilsi Zizek raking in millions? Bro, get real.

Zizek is a confused old man. He ain't anywhere close to God.

He's been the most successful European public intellectual since Derrida’s death - easily a millionaire.

And don’t dismiss him too quickly; he’s much sharper than his antics suggest. If you listen to his more serious talks, it’s clear he’s miles closer to God than fools like Jordan Peterson or many so-called religious figures. He’s giving Osho vibes. Now, is he as close as a hardcore mystic like Ramana Maharshi? Probably not. But that’s a pretty high bar to clear anyway.

 

Edited 18 hours ago by Nilsi

[Leo Gura]

@Nilsi I have listened to a lot of Zizek speak. And I could not tell you one thing I learned from all his babbling.

He is the most useless speaker of all time. How can a man babble so much and say nothing of significance? It's astounding to me.

Edited 18 hours ago by Leo Gura

[Nilsi]

Just now, Leo Gura said:

@Nilsi I can honestly say that I have listenes to a lot of Zizek speak. And I could not tell one thing I learned from his babbling.

He is the most useful speaker of all time. How can a man babble so much and say nothing of significance? It's astounding to me.

You’ve praised Hegel and Lacan in your blog posts before, and Žižek is at least as insightful - if not more. Reading them mostly feels like babble too, but if you really put in the effort, there’s profound insight to unpack (and a method to the madness).

[Yimpa]

14 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Zizek is a confused old man.

 

[SwiftQuill]

Zizek is a communist SJW pseudointellectual. He promotes the religion of Postmodernism.

[Nemra]

8 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

The more you contemplate and comprehend the logical structure of God/Consciousness, the deeper and richer your awakenings will get. So much so that you can unlock entirely new orders of awakening.

When do you think a person is capable of awakening to something through contemplation? After a few awakenings without contemplation?

Are there only logical structures or more to be comprehended?

[Nilsi]

2 minutes ago, SwiftQuill said:

Zizek is a communist SJW pseudointellectual. He promotes the religion of Postmodernism.

He’s a Hegelian and a critic of postmodernism, political correctness and naive forms of social justice.

Maybe if you had read the source material he's influenced by (mostly Hegel and Lacan) and actually listened to what he’s saying, you’d have something more original to add.

Edited 18 hours ago by Nilsi

[SwiftQuill]

1 minute ago, Nilsi said:

He’s a Hegelian and a critic of postmodernism, political correctness and naive forms of social justice.

Maybe if you had read the source material he's influenced by (mostly Hegel and Lacan) and actually listened to what he’s saying, you’d have something more original to add.

I don't care about the source material. I care about the arguments the person makes.

I used to be a Zizek fan in the past. I found him to be very intelligent. But over the years I saw through his bias. He is intellectually arrogant. He might have an interesting, sophisticated conception of how the world works, but that's only his perception. And he promotes it as though it's an objective truth. I've seen him defending and promoting many of the worst aspects of the woke religion. He might be "critical" of certain aspects of postmodernism but he is a marxist still.

He is by no means dumb. Nor is he low hanging fruit. But he is still a wokie I won't waste my time with listening to.

[Leo Gura]

8 minutes ago, Nemra said:

When do you think a person is capable of awakening to something through contemplation? After a few awakenings without contemplation?

Contemplation alone is very unlikely to cause an awakening. A change in state is needed. Change in state is created by either days of nonstop meditation or psychedelics.

Quote

Are there only logical structures or more to be comprehended?

Depends on how you wanna define your terms. There is much to comprehend about Consciousness. Way more than nondual people say. Do not be fooled by the simpleton nondualists.

Edited 18 hours ago by Leo Gura

[Leo Gura]

Marxism is NOT post-modernism. It is modernism.

[Jannes]

When it comes to spiritual entertainment there is of course Alan Watts.

 

 

[Leo Gura]

23 minutes ago, Nilsi said:

You’ve praised Hegel and Lacan in your blog posts before, and Žižek is at least as insightful

The only reason I praise Hegel is because Hegel understood Infinity. Zizek has no idea. Just because he calls himself a Hegelian don't mean a damn.

Edited 18 hours ago by Leo Gura

[Clarence]

40 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

I don't have a specific answer. You cannot explain God in such detail.

Don't you feel that your understanding of God is incomplete if you can't know God in such detail?

[Nilsi]

1 minute ago, Leo Gura said:

Marxism is NOT post-modernism. It is modernism.

Žižek isn’t even a Marxist, if that’s what you’re getting at.

I’m curious - what is Hegel for you? Turquoise or Orange? Because depending on what you want, you could argue either way.

[Nilsi]

3 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

The only reason I praise Hegel is because Hegel understood Infinity. Zizek has no idea. Just because he called himself a Hegelian don't mean a damn.

Hegel doesn’t talk about infinity, though (at least not explicitly, but I know what you're getting at). He speaks of absolute spirit as the fundamental reality and its journey toward realizing its own absolute nature - which is exactly what Žižek does too, in his own fucked-up way.

You know, he has to be original to have a career. If he just regurgitated Hegel in a dry, technical way, no one would care. He’s doing it more subtly, but trust me - if you’re really looking for it, you’ll see it beyond any shadow of a doubt.

Edited 18 hours ago by Nilsi

[Leo Gura]

1 minute ago, Nilsi said:

Hegel doesn’t talk about infinity

He absolutely does.

I have quotes on my blog.

[Nilsi]

1 minute ago, Leo Gura said:

He absolutely does.

I have quotes on my blog.

Maybe that’s how it’s translated in English, but that wasn’t really my point anyway.

[Nemra]

@Leo Gura, thanks for answering.

10 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Way more than nondual people say. Do not be fooled by the simpleton nondualists.

Noted.

I barely listen to anyone nowadays.

[Nilsi]

23 minutes ago, SwiftQuill said:

I don't care about the source material. I care about the arguments the person makes.

I used to be a Zizek fan in the past. I found him to be very intelligent. But over the years I saw through his bias. He is intellectually arrogant. He might have an interesting, sophisticated conception of how the world works, but that's only his perception. And he promotes it as though it's an objective truth. I've seen him defending and promoting many of the worst aspects of the woke religion. He might be "critical" of certain aspects of postmodernism but he is a marxist still.

He is by no means dumb. Nor is he low hanging fruit. But he is still a wokie I won't waste my time with listening to.

I'm not even a fan. I've been very critical of Žižek in the past - not for his political or cultural views, which I couldn't care less about, but for his metaphysics.

I've made this point a million times before: while Hegel and Lacan are, in my view, the truly important metaphysicians of the European tradition, it's precisely through their great critics - Nietzsche and Deleuze respectively - that all their pathological aspects are sifted out while their deep spiritual insights are retained.

But I won't make this argument again here - you can check out this post I made a while back for more on that:

or the argument I’m building in this thread:

Edited 17 hours ago by Nilsi