Leo featured in suicide cult article

[Thought Art]

12 minutes ago, zurew said:

What's hard here is that, for example in an acadamic field their are commonly agreed upon standards and you need to get through those first to be able to test you hypothesis and ideas. But in the spiritual field you can't assume any standards so all the critique that you recieve can be dismissed rightfully or not rightfully. So how would a good critique would even look like, i don't know, its very hard and tricky in my opinion.

Becuase you can always say, that you haven't got there yet. Or that you can test in on your own. There are a lot of spiritual teachers out there, and it doesn't seem like that there is an agreement everywhere and in every direction.

So basically because no one can hold anyone accountable, anyone can claim anything and basically no one can attack anyone's ideas about anything in the spiritual field. And basically anything can be dismissed according to that logic. Basically you can't ground spirituality in anything, because it is the ground itself. I think the main problem lies here.

What you are saying is right in a certain perspective. But, I think that you can ground it in direct experience. There’s a lot of information out there and a lot of spiritual practices are actually rather grounded. Taoism for one..
 

@Inliytened1 Yes, that is hypocritical. (Side note I is understand hypocrisy is part of survival and relativism.) I like the Rob is a critic.

Edited March 8, 2022 by Thought Art

[zurew]

7 minutes ago, Inliytened1 said:

A materialistic critic is just going to shut you down as a crazy person so it's almost futile to explain thi gs to them.  You can spend some time on it but it may not be worth it to you.  Or at least they would have to be willing to hear your POV 

Yes, i agree with that. If someone is not even open to use different kind of epistemology to ground his/her worldview, then the whole discussion is a waste of time. And I agree with Leo on that, his work first need to be deeply studied before anyone tries to critique it.

[Thought Art]

5 minutes ago, zurew said:

Yes, i agree with that. If someone is not even open to use different kind of epistemology to ground his/her worldview, then the whole discussion is a waste of time. And I agree with Leo on that, his work first need to be deeply studied before anyone tries to critique it.

And the problem with that is 100s or 1000s of hours people don’t have or want to spend 

[Inliytened1]

7 minutes ago, zurew said:

Yes, i agree with that. If someone is not even open to use different kind of epistemology to ground his/her worldview, then the whole discussion is a waste of time. And I agree with Leo on that, his work first need to be deeply studied before anyone tries to critique it.

@zurew @Thought Art and again im not saying Adeptus has any ill intentions with his ciriticsm.  Im giving him the benefit of the doubt that he is concerned for youth who stumble onto the community and the community as a whole.   But as @zurew mentions, cirtiquing spirituality takes a nuanced approach.  I think he needs work on his approach.  That's just a little constructive criticism for him

 

[Thought Art]

@Inliytened1 Yeah,  I like adeptus and enjoy his videos. But, we don’t see eye to eye on things. 
 

I look at people like facts of nature. It’s not for me to change them. 
 

I personally think his reaction is he is afraid of losing his own mind from tripping so he holds extra right to consensus reality. 

Edited March 8, 2022 by Thought Art

[OBEler]

Adeptus is just a human being. Most people get upset if someone destroys their worldview. Only few will question their. 

Adeptus had an Example for disproving leos insights: We cannot be in a dream because if a stone hit you, you will be hurt no matter what. Adeptus, I was in a dream where I was hit by a stone and I felt pain. I could not imagine otherwise, it happend. So how will you differentiate dream from reality, it is basically the same. 

Edited March 8, 2022 by OBEler

[mandyjw]

3 hours ago, Gesundheit2 said:

Lol. Are you for real, Mandy? Cuz you seem to be doing exactly the same thing you're denouncing.

If you have a problem with what I'm saying, I'd suggest contacting me via PM considering that we know each other quite well. However, do please, tell me how I'm doing the same thing. 

2 hours ago, zurew said:

So according to the definition you use, it seems like actualized.org is a cult. What has to be changed for actualized.org to not be a cult anymore? Please be specific about it, the more specific the critiques are, the better.

No longer banning or demeaning other teachers, presenting yourself as the authority on spiritual matters. No longer presenting the website as an organization when it is one person's business. No longer presenting enlightenment as a grand and special, exclusive attainment. No longer teaching pick up and manipulation of women, spiritual students are manipulated into "seduction" of spiritual authority in the same way. 

[mandyjw]

2 hours ago, Thought Art said:

 

…He does know a lot of things you don’t know Mandy. Be humble. 

I need to be humble? I need to be humble? Have you read anything Leo writes on here? "Rupert Spira isn't awake"? "There still other people for Rupert Spira?"  Have you seen any of Leo's videos? Read anything he writes here? But I need to be humble?

 

 

[AdeptusPsychonautica]

@Inliytened1 

OK, there are some fairly shocking misunderstandings and hand-wavings going on here, so lets try and clean them up one by one.

Quote

Just like you state that Leo cannot know your own subjective spiritual experiences - by the same token you cannot know his.  So if you had mystical experiences in the past you would also know it is premature to assume that during is DMT trip he did not become fully God and have these abilities.

Yes, one person cannot know the subjective experience of another - hence why I NEVER criticize Leo's subjective experience, only the objective claims that he says resulted from these experiences. If indeed he gained the objective power to cure all diseases and ailments then this should be fairly easy to demonstrate, quickly silence sceptics, and usher in a new age of humanity. Since this hasn't happened then I feel fairly confident that he did not actually gain such abilities.

What you demonstrate here though is deep confusion about the difference between subjective states, and the objective claims I am critical of. I can only suggest you try and fully understand the fundamental difference between objective/subjective because otherwise you will keep barking up the wrong tree. 

Quote

The criticisms seemed rather to make a mockery of things rather than to question it objectively.  This is probably why Leo doesn't take you as a serious critic.

I would argue that it is the exact statements I am critical of that makes a mockery of things, and Leo alone is responsible for those.

As for Leo not taking me as a serious critic, I somewhat doubt that - but of course we would have to get into what you even mean by "serious critic". Still what is more important to me is that I take my criticism seriously by making sure I can back up what I say with reason, logic, and evidence.

Regardless, its not like I am here puppy eyed looking for approval from the master ?

Quote

Anyone who had had mystical experiences and come back and talked to "normies" about them is normally greeted with "your insane! Or you sound like a prophet!"  I know from direct experience 

I also know from direct experience, and that 30+ years of experience working with these states has given me the insight not to running my mouth off to "normies" or YouTube in the direct aftermath of a life changing experience. Its a very poor benchmark to judge whether someone has had such an experience simply on the basis of your own anecdotal haphazard reaction to it. Believe it or not many people come back and handle it with serenity and grace.
 

Quote

@AdeptusPsychonauticaseems a bit hypocritical here.  He claims Leo cannot know his own subjective experiences but then assumed Leo's subjective experience was delusional.   You see? 

That's an absurd misrepresentation.

Nowhere did I ever claim that Leo cannot know his own subjective experience. Now you and I have talked in person and you seem like a smart guy, but this shows a real lack of comprehension about the basics of what I am saying, along with the aforementioned confusion you have around subjective/objective. Let me try and clear this up once and for all...

I HAVE NEVER stated that Leo is delusional for having had a subjective experience, or that he cannot know his own subjective experience. That is one of the most ridiculous strawman arguments I have ever seen.

What I HAVE criticized is the OBJECTIVE claims Leo makes as a result of these experiences. Leo saying he experienced being God is a SUBJECTIVE claim (Not a problem), Leo claiming that BECAUSE he is God he can cure all human diseases is an OBJECTIVE claim (problem). I have no doubt at all that he had the subjective experience he describes (its actually funny that you think I doubt this), but I absolutely doubt the objective claims he makes about being able to bend physical reality as a result of these experiences. Hopefully that is clear for you now.

Lets try another example to drive the point home. If someone on the forum was talking about killing themselves or another person then you would (hopefully) recognize these as OBJECTIVE claims and do something about it - right? I'm sure you would because you recognize that such language potentially has real life implications, and so would not just shrug it off as POV or perspective. You might even take action based upon those claims like banning them from the forum, or talk about their behaviour publicly as an example of what is not acceptable within the community, and to describe it as a "red flag" - I can only hope the analogy is not lost on you.

Its really not that difficult mate, but to address your comment further - no its not in any way hypocritical, its simply that you are utterly confused as to the nature of the actual case being made. You see?  

Edited March 8, 2022 by AdeptusPsychonautica

[zurew]

2 hours ago, mandyjw said:

No longer banning or demeaning other teachers

@mandyjw

This is a fair critique and at the same time it doesn't.

First of all, it could be the case, that he is not open to any crtisism, however in my opinion this is sort of a content vs structure problem here. What i mean is that he won't engage with crtisisms that are attacking the structure (god realisation on epistemic levels) of his teaching, but he will rather engage with crtisism that comes from the same epistemic foundation as him (i assume here). this is not unique to Leo, because if you look around in science you won't see that anyone will engage with a mathematician's critique about for examaple the field of psychology. Because they are different, they have different purpose and they have a different epistemic foundation. You can only make fair statements if you put yourself in the same epistemic foundations, that you want to critisize. Now, you can of course disagree with that, and attack the structure itself, but i don't think that such arguments could be useful for anyone. Everyone have their own biases,  why they want to use different kind of epistemic foundations, so at the end of the day, it all can be argued, but what can be really achieved by that. Different people attracted to different foundations, they can feel free to use those roads to reach their own destinations.

You could say, that Leo does attack other spiritual teachings on a structural level and he shouldn't do it, now that would be a more fair critique in my opinion, compare to the ones that i have heard so far. Because this would be some kind of a double standard here, that he won't allow others structural critques ,but he does allow it for himself at the same time.

2 hours ago, mandyjw said:

No longer teaching pick up and manipulation of women,

I don't really know how does this related to actualized.org being a cult, but feel free to elaborate if you want to. If you don't agree with his statements on pickup, thats okay, but i don't think its bad when someone presents his own thoughts and knowledge about a particular subject.

 

2 hours ago, mandyjw said:

No longer presenting enlightenment as a grand and special, exclusive attainment.

But it does unique, doesnt it? How many enlightened people you see running around?

Edited March 8, 2022 by zurew

[AdeptusPsychonautica]

2 hours ago, OBEler said:

Adeptus is just a human being. Most people get upset if someone destroys their worldview. Only few will question their. 

Adeptus had an Example for disproving leos insights: We cannot be in a dream because if a stone hit you, you will be hurt no matter what. Adeptus, I was in a dream where I was hit by a stone and I felt pain. I could not imagine otherwise, it happend. So how will you differentiate dream from reality, it is basically the same. 

Well first of all you got the example wrong as it didn't have anything to do with dreams, and secondly it was used in an argument against Deepak Chopra - Leo was not mentioned in that video at all, and I have no idea if he believes the same thing as Deepak. I can only hope not since I find Deepak Chopra to be a fire hydrant of piping hot bullshit ?

[Thought Art]

@mandyjw 

1 hour ago, mandyjw said:

No longer banning or demeaning other teachers, presenting yourself as the authority on spiritual matters. No longer presenting the website as an organization when it is one person's business. No longer presenting enlightenment as a grand and special, exclusive attainment. No longer teaching pick up and manipulation of women, spiritual students are manipulated into "seduction" of spiritual authority in the same way. 

1. First one it probably a good point. Still need to observe more and contemplate more on the teacher thing. I think those teachers have different goals. It’s not obvious to me yet how “awake” people are. 
 

2. The usage of .org is used primarily for non-commercial platforms and education platforms and does not imply a group of people. Google that.

3. Enlightenment isn’t for most people. But, seems to me he is making it more accessible than it would be otherwise. Also, he has stated in videos that enlightenment is not a single mountain but a mountain range with many facets and different peaks. 

4. teaching pickup in a healthy way (which I think he does…) is important for men who would other wise remain creepy sexually frustrated men. I think learning how to mate is a skill set men don’t just magically have and are born with. We have to learn somehow… relationships and dating is a set of skill sets and there are male and female teachers who teach every aspect of dating and sexuality. Learning pickup is healthy. You may not agree.

5. Authority. You are the only authority. Leo has taught me to take back my own authority. . 

 

 

Edited March 8, 2022 by Thought Art

[Thought Art]

13 minutes ago, AdeptusPsychonautica said:

Well first of all you got the example wrong as it didn't have anything to do with dreams, and secondly it was used in an argument against Deepak Chopra - Leo was not mentioned in that video at all, and I have no idea if he believes the same thing as Deepak. I can only hope not since I find Deepak Chopra to be a fire hydrant of piping hot bullshit ?

Yea, him and Deepak share many views you would find stupid and outrageous.

So do I…

So do a lot of people.
 

Reality is an illusion of consciousness. There’s nothing actually here… 

[AndylizedAAY]

You know, I have this fear at the back of my mind of me losing access to actualized.org because of how demonized it is (this fear my be rational or irrational). I know that I have to transcend actualized.org at some point but I'm just getting started. Also, there is a lot to read on the forum even with just one conversation. How do I sort the wheat from the chaff?

[AdeptusPsychonautica]

7 minutes ago, Thought Art said:

Yea, him and Deepak share many views you would find stupid and outrageous.

So do I…

So do a lot of people.
 

Reality is an illusion of consciousness. There’s nothing actually here… 

And many more don’t share those views, so I’m not exactly sure why you are making this point as if its a popularity contest ?

Still, I think its certainly a topic that is ripe for discussion and in no way do I claim any expertise whatsoever in this area. In the video in question I simply stated my position , the reason for my position, and the flaws in Deepaks position.

Whether or not reality actually is an illusion is a whole other topic, but the specific argument put forth by Deepak within that documentary was total plop ?

[AndylizedAAY]

Sorry, I don't want my post to be a distraction, do you think it's a distraction or is it relevant to the conversation? Is it being ignored?

[AndylizedAAY]

@AdeptusPsychonautica Are you the one who posted the article against Leo? I'm not attacking you, just confirming. If you have, then are you not banned because Leo claims that there will be articles a lot worse against him?

[lostingenosmaze]

13 minutes ago, AndylizedAAY said:

You know, I have this fear at the back of my mind of me losing access to actualized.org because of how demonized it is (this fear my be rational or irrational). I know that I have to transcend actualized.org at some point but I'm just getting started. Also, there is a lot to read on the forum even with just one conversation. How do I sort the wheat from the chaff?

Better take some notes, who knows what will happen at this point. Leo had his deepest awakening yet and it's only natural more people are going to put him in the spotlight.

8 minutes ago, AndylizedAAY said:

Sorry, I don't want my post to be a distraction

Don't worry about it, this just the nature of an internet forum and there's a multitude of reasons a post could be overlooked

[Thought Art]

48 minutes ago, AdeptusPsychonautica said:

And many more don’t share those views, so I’m not exactly sure why you are making this point as if its a popularity contest ?

Still, I think its certainly a topic that is ripe for discussion and in no way do I claim any expertise whatsoever in this area. In the video in question I simply stated my position , the reason for my position, and the flaws in Deepaks position.

Whether or not reality actually is an illusion is a whole other topic, but the specific argument put forth by Deepak within that documentary was total plop ?

In terms of intellectuals, and plenty of ancient texts this is known. 
 

it’s easy to say others are wrong. 
 

No, what Deepak is saying and reality being an illusion are totally related topics. The problem is also, when we react to a sound bite or a small thin piece of information like a few sentences from a documentary we aren’t really reacting to anything of substance. Most short sentences or paragraphs are fragile for arguing. 
 

Adeptus, what is the building block of reality?

(love your channel btw)

Edited March 8, 2022 by Thought Art

[AndylizedAAY]

@Thought Art Who is Rob and why are you specifically asking him? You know, there was this conversation on the forum about someone seeing Andy which is my name. There are many Andys out there but although I don't remember the description of this person, it seems to fit me. I bring this up because Rob might be someone important to the conversation that I am missing out on.