Leo vs Sam Haris

[allislove]

Leo vs Sam Haris is duality. Leo = Sam Haris

[Amit]

@dimitri yeah also Leo=Apple 

[allislove]

@Amit of course, you've got the point. 

It's easy to say, when you have this realization on the experiential level - completely different story.
You even may cry, just releasing..   

[Jacobsrw]

@Amit Sam Harris fails to make existential distinctions that explain metaphysic matters. He completely deduces all his formulations and postulations down to a rationalistic analyses.

Leo accounts for both the rational and metaphysics areas, which turns out to be far more integrated and holistic. Harris is very limited to materialistic propositions. He even goes as far as to project a materialistic lens onto his mystical experiences with psychedelics. This is an extremely limited way to interpret.

Harris has many leaps and bounds to make before he really understands the depth of what Leo discusses.

[Amit]

@dimitri I got the experience, did you? I got no tensions what may I release by crying?

@Jacobsrw isn't any metaphysics deduced by the use of rationality itself? as human consciousness, rationalistic analysis all you got apart from blind faith. if you rejected materialism just after someone told you so, I will suggest you try to start using your mind sometimes. 

Edited May 25, 2020 by Amit
spelling

[allislove]

@Amit ?

[Preety_India]

@Amit

I'm not projecting anything. I'm saying that you have a long way to go if you are still embedded in rationality. True Spiritualists have transcended that long ago. 

Sam Harris cannot understand the depth of irrationality and metaphysics. I don't follow Leo blindly. I have every book of Sam Harris. I learned nothing new from it that a young university student cannot write. Sam Harris regurgitates the same rational answers of logical reasoning and arguments that people did in the 1970s. He is not offering something new. 

Like Leo said just now, if you want to grow, you won't find that depth in Sam Harris's work. Because the universe cannot be explained by logic alone. Sam Harris is skeptical about a lot of things. He is not open to it. He talks about supporting mystical experiences but at the same time demonizes religions which are full of orthodox mystical experiences. A person like that doesn't grasp the complexity of things. Leo is very open minded, the most open minded so far, plus Leo is a careful balance of open mindedness and common sense. Therefore he doesn't take the garbage of conspiracy theories in the name of open mindedness. Leo's intuition is on point 

And nobody including me is a blind follower of Leo. Most have come to Leo after following a lot of other teachers. And Leo is high caliber. 

 

 

 

[Preety_India]

 

America has a ton of stage orange. A person like Sam Harris can easily cast a wide net and become popular with the crowd. But Sam Harris will fail terribly in a stage Green and Turquoise society. People like Sam Harris can become extremely popular in countries like America and India because most people in these countries are blue and orange, they focus on dogmatic thinking about race and religion and are very status and success oriented. America is a definition of Orange Success. These countries are far from green. And a man like Sam Harris that sells rationality is bound to impress the public. Because he says things that the general public in America are waiting to hear.. 

That's why Sam Harris is not very popular with the Leftists in America because a lot of the people on the side of the left are stage Green and they can see the holes in Harris's philosophies and thoughts. 

Sam Harris would have also become extremely popular in India if he was born here. He would have suited the stage blue and stage orange in Indians. Because people in these stages love the language of rationality since for them everything has to have a theory or explanation and some things need to be included and some things need to be excluded like a Mathematically accurate formula. 

But the universe has highly intelligent forces at work that work beyond the realm of physics and Mathematics or chemistry. 

Sam Harris is simply an intellectual like so many others. But he is not a profound wise awakened being. 

 

 

[The observer]

1 hour ago, Amit said:

@The observer No, because I am able to decide from the source itself, any secondary critics not needed.

Not you. Leo ??‍♂️

It was a joke, and now it's ruined 

[Jacobsrw]

@Amit you misunderstand the purposes of rationality. Metaphysics transcends the parameters of rationality. Materialism and rationality are useful up until a point from which pragmatism is required. Beyond this point, one requires using tautologies, paradox’s and esoteric conundrums in order to explain reality. Neither materialism or rationality are competent in this endeavour.

Edited May 25, 2020 by Jacobsrw

[Tanz]

Most of what Sam Harris talks about is for his own survival.  Meaning he will choose topics that will earn him the most views/attention and money as possible.  He does not do it intentionally, its more of an unconscious choice.  

His attachment to his ideas and persona limits his ability to bring people together and transform them in the ways he is trying to do.  

[Amit]

@Preety_India I found spiritual people some of the most rational beings, so what do you mean by transcending rationality? Every book for what, decoration? why do you think the left is not dogmatic. Why do you take SD for the truth? he appreciates religion for values like compassion, awe, devotion, and feelings of oneness. Please let me know about these mysterious forces, you have encountered.

[Amit]

@Jacobsrw you are talking from the perspective of an unawakened person, and that's correct. but can you take the perspective if you are deriving it for yourself?

@Tanz you can say this about anyone, even a monk who is meditating in a remote cave is doing it for his ideas.

 

[Preety_India]

30 minutes ago, Amit said:

so what do you mean by transcending rationality?

It does not mean being irrational. You're taking it the wrong way. It means having already understood the limits of rationality and going further and beyond. 

Like @Jacobsrw explains, there is only a point to which you can use rationalism to explain things. Beyond that point, rationality loses the power to understand or explain things.

Compassion is just a quality. You don't need religion to be compassionate. But people who are religious have mystical and paranormal experiences example stigmata, these can't be explained by any rational science. 

Materialism and rationality cannot explain the Esoteric. 

 

[Jacobsrw]

@Amit correct, I am unawakened. However, from the few mystical experiences I have had I can attest of the insufficiency rationality contributes in explaining them. Rationality is effective and useful in the world of mind and concepts, beyond this it becomes redundant. Inability to notice this, only exhibits one’s attachment to the realm of conceaptuality.

The true depths of reality are unexplainable from the vantage point of rationality. 
 

Edited May 25, 2020 by Jacobsrw

[The observer]

12 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

But people who are religious have mystical and paranormal experiences example stigmata, these can't be explained by any rational science. 

Materialism and rationality cannot explain the Esoteric.

The mystical/paranormal can be explained as hallucinations, delusions, insanity, or mental illness from the rationalistic pov. But you wouldn't take it as a valid explanation because you've already bought into the spiritual paradigm.

I'm not saying either explanations are true. I'm just saying that finding convenient explanations doesn't sound like transcending rationality.

Edited May 25, 2020 by The observer

[TheAlchemist]

I love his waking up app, been using it daily for a year now.. He has a way of explaining things that resonates with me and the meditations have helped me experientally understand what is meant by nonduality.

I see a lot off black and white thinking here, why does it have to be either "Sam bad" or "Sam good", we can take the useful stuff and leave the rest out that doesn't resonate.

We really only feel the need to defend some teacher if we identify ourselves with them or attack them if we feel they threaten our identity . Just bounce around the ideas loosely, there is a seed of truth in everything

Edited May 25, 2020 by TheAlchemist

[Preety_India]

8 minutes ago, The observer said:

I'm not saying either explanations are true. I'm just saying that finding convenient explanations doesn't sound like transcending rationality.

Understanding the limits of rationality is transcending rationality. Once you do this, you don't rely on rationality anymore and look beyond. Most people who are rationalist are content with how rationality defines things or fails to define things. That's called living in a box 

 

[The observer]

1 minute ago, Preety_India said:

Understanding the limits of rationality is transcending rationality. Once you do this, you don't rely on rationality anymore and look beyond.

Perhaps I would consider that transcendence of rationality, but not transcendence of the mind. In this case, you're right, and I have nothing more to say on this topic.

[Jacobsrw]

@The observer Ultimately, language is limited when explaining reality. To best explain it, one should be silent.

However, it still has the caliber to be expressed and represented in varying degrees and qualities. Rationality is only but one formulation of linguistical expression. Many other forms of language far exceed it. That’s the main point.

@TheAlchemist great point. I think the purpose here was to more clearly delineate the differences between them, not assert whether one is bad or good. 

I also have Sam Harris’ waking app and sometimes listen to his podcasts. He provides value undeniably, but it must be noted he is  extremely limited in what he can provided when regarding spirituality. This must be understood otherwise listeners will interpret his level of metaphysics as accurate when it is more so explanations through a materialist lens.

@Preety_India rationality has its purpose. It’s knowing when to use it and when to abstain from it.

Edited May 25, 2020 by Jacobsrw