Leo’s Blog Comments on John Vervaeke Were Too Negative

[bmcnicho]

I agree with Leo’s larger points that the scientific paradigm is limited, and that the goal of this work is far beyond intellectual models.  

However, I think that Vervaeke is a great example of a high-consciousness scientist and is something that we should want to see more of.  He’s probably at a higher level of conscious development than 99% of people, so criticizing him just based on the fact that he’s a scientist seems a bit reductive. 

The two videos linked were part of a 50 episode series on the Meaning Crisis, the content of which is a great example of Stage Yellow moving towards Turquoise.  Vervaeke is quite open minded, and the things he speaks about seem to mostly transcend ideologies.  The lectures integrate a wide variety of perspectives from philosophy, psychology, neuroscience, mythology, history, religion, mysticism, and insights into the nature of consciousness from meditation in an attempt to address this question

Obviously, these are all relative and not absolute areas of study, but they address issues that are very important to a large number of people.  Yes, the solution to the Meaning Crisis is ultimately to realize that all meanings are relative and to instead fully embrace Being.  This is a large component of Vervaeke’s proposed solution!  But the nuances of how people can embody this understanding in everyday life can be aided by conceptual knowledge of these topics

I think Vervaeke is an effective example of Spiral Wizardry in action.  He’s had multiple discussions with the largely Stage Blue Jordan Peterson, keeping it focused on the important issues and not letting things get derailed by Peterson’s low consciousness hang ups.  He also talks to Stage Turquoise people about consciousness and meditation

Vervaeke does still seem to have some materialist beliefs that hold back his further growth (although I think he’s open to things beyond materialism).  Keep in mind though, that most of his audience are also going to be materialists, and you need to appeal to where someone’s currently at to help them progress further.

In this blog post, Leo seemed to almost denigrate science in a way that seemed more extreme than his previous statements.  Science is still one of the best tools we have for finding answers to relative questions about the nature of the world.  Cognitive Science especially is a relatively new field of study, that seems to have a lot of potential for helping people better understand the nature of the mind.

Even if someone were to achieve total permanent enlightenment, they’d still proceed to live out the remainder of this current dream, and it would be nice to have tools like science to help understand what’s going on around us

[Leo Gura]

He's very developed for sure.

But that's exactly why it's such a trap. You can get stuck in that high development and never realize Absolute Truth.

The better the model the bigger the problem, as they say.

All these integral Tier 2 intellectuals are very impressive humans. But none of them are awaken. And that's why I call it out. So you don't become like them.

The highest human development != Awakening

[Kksd74628]

@Leo Gura

I agree on what you said, but you should make video, blog post or state it on the forum that even if something doesn't directly make you god-realized it can still be benefical stepping stone towards that, because as you know we have to go through spiral dynamics, ego-development and other similar models' stages in order to reach higher. Everytime when someone in sheep stages even uses word spirituality it is vote for higher consciousness collectively. I mean at least I'd like to see society reach higher levels in my life time.

-joNi-

[integral]

The more developed you are the more critical Leo is, it's a compliment. 

Edited July 19, 2022 by integral

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, Kksd74628 said:

@Leo Gura

I agree on what you said, but you should make video, blog post or state it on the forum that even if something doesn't directly make you god-realized it can still be benefical stepping stone towards that

Did I not say it was "Good stuff"?

I wouldn't have shared it and called it "good" if it wasn't beneficial and worthy of your time to watch.

I don't share bullshit.

I didn't share it merely to criticize it. But the criticisms were necessary because if I didn't make them then you would have assumed I endorsed everything Verkaeke said and that that was all there is to awakening.

[Leo Gura]

4 hours ago, bmcnicho said:

Leo seemed to almost denigrate science in a way that seemed more extreme than his previous statements.

Yes, this stance is necessary if you want to profoundly awaken.

Sorry, that's how it is. If a guy as smart and developed as Vervaeke can fall into that trap, how much moreso will you?

Do I not have a duty to warn against that?

[Happy Lizard]

5 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

He's very developed for sure.

But that's exactly why it's such a trap. You can get stuck in that high development and never realize Absolute Truth.

The better the model the bigger the problem, as they say.

All these integral Tier 2 intellectuals are very impressive humans. But none of them are awaken. And that's why I call it out. So you don't become like them.

The highest human development != Awakening

I've watched these two episodes and what you say in your posts resonates with me, however, I don't really know where to go or what to do from there? I understand that science is making models and it will never grasp true reality this way...Is the ultimate philosophy of life is to understand reality experientially ? 

 

[Leo Gura]

41 minutes ago, Happy Lizard said:

I've watched these two episodes and what you say in your posts resonates with me, however, I don't really know where to go or what to do from there? I understand that science is making models and it will never grasp true reality this way...Is the ultimate philosophy of life is to understand reality experientially ? 
 

Well, that's where my new awakening course will come into play. It will be a deconstruction of absolutely everything, including science, Buddhism, Advaita, and nonduality.

Working on that.

[UnbornTao]

11 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Well, that's where my new awakening course will come into play. It will be a deconstruction of absolutely everything, including science, Buddhism, Advaita, and nonduality.

Working on that.

What about your book?

[Leo Gura]

8 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

What about your book?

Course will come first.

Book will takes 5+ years to complete.

[Vibes]

22 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Well, that's where my new awakening course will come into play. It will be a deconstruction of absolutely everything, including science, Buddhism, Advaita, and nonduality.

Working on that.

@Leo Gura How much the new courses will cost?

 

[Leo Gura]

2 minutes ago, Vibes said:

@Leo Gura How much the new courses will cost?

I don't know yet.

[Razard86]

7 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

He's very developed for sure.

But that's exactly why it's such a trap. You can get stuck in that high development and never realize Absolute Truth.

The better the model the bigger the problem, as they say.

All these integral Tier 2 intellectuals are very impressive humans. But none of them are awaken. And that's why I call it out. So you don't become like them.

The highest human development != Awakening

I get what you are saying....you can become so smart/logical that it blocks you from the illogical nature of reality. The basis of nature is beyond the limits of logic as you have said logic was created by infinity. Logic is a limitation. If you refuse to give up logic you will never reach God. The Spiritual Path is really the path of the insane. 

Logic is based on survival and selfishness. Spirituality is about doing the opposite. Releasing all identity and exploring the unknown. But its hard for someone attached to reason to do it. I think I told you in the past my gateway video into Spirituality through you was the Everyone Operates From Good Intentions. I was only able to do that, through a leap of faith. 

It made me laugh because my first reaction was "this is B.S." but since I knew about bias from psychology I had an intuitive feeling to hear you out. Then when I pushed play you were like 'Most people would turn off the video at this point." I was like YEAH I ALMOST DID!!!

Even after the video I was only half convinced but I decided to try to look at life from that lens as an experiment...and I saw it! 

So yeah...people who are too logical will suffer the confines of that logic. Love isn't restricted to logic, Love is for its own sake.

[r0ckyreed]

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Course will come first.

I haven’t been following much, but will your new awakening course be strictly focusing on psychedelics as a means to awaken or will it also focus on contemplation and sober ways of awakening as well?

While I grant that psychedelics can raise consciousness, I am skeptical that they “produce” awakening. If that were so, then anybody who takes them could awaken, but the thing is that realization is more than just a pill, it is a state of mind. How is it that there are psychonauts who aren’t God-Realized if all it really takes is a drug-induced state? That’s why I stress mastering the sober state. Until the sober state is mastered, all other “higher states” will be inhibited or reflected by the other undeveloped states (I.e., sober state). 

It’s not as simple as plugging 200 trips of 5-meO. With some peoples minds, no amount of psychedelics will breakthrough. Behind the scenes contemplation and integration needs to happen. 

Edited July 19, 2022 by r0ckyreed

[Nilsi]

10 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

All these integral Tier 2 intellectuals are very impressive humans. But none of them are awaken. And that's why I call it out. So you don't become like them.

I'm confused by your definition of awake. If people like Wilber and Schmachtenberger are not awake, then nobody is. They obviously have had awakening/enlightenment experiences, but choose not to live from that place 24/7 and follow their dharma instead. I don't see how you could claim being awake (it seems like you implicitly do), if you don't allow for any dualistic activity in someone awake.

EDIT: It seems to me you are advocating against narrative, and I definitely see how that could lead you to a more pure awakened state but I see it more as a preference. I myself enjoy the story and want to be fully engaged with it and that's just not possible from a state of pure solipsism.

Edited July 19, 2022 by Nilsi

[UnbornTao]

20 hours ago, Nilsi said:

I'm confused by your definition of awake. If people like Wilber and Schmachtenberger are not awake, then nobody is. They obviously have had awakening/enlightenment experiences, but choose not to live from that place 24/7 and follow their dharma instead. I don't see how you could claim being awake (it seems like you implicitly do), if you don't allow for any dualistic activity in someone awake.

You're confusing intellectual prowess with enlightenment. It is possible to be very smart but not enlightened.

For example, Nissargatta was awake and also illiterate.

There's no correlation between these two things.

Edited July 20, 2022 by UnbornTao

[Nilsi]

2 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

You're confusing intellectual prowess with enlightenment. It is possible to be very smart but not enlightened.

Ramana quit school as a teenager. Nissargatta was awake and illiterate at the same time. So, there's no correlation between these two things. They aren't mutually inclusive.

That's not what I'm pointing to. I'm quite confident that if you were to sit down with Schmachtenberger and really push it, he would agree with Leos "metaphysics" completely.

[thepixelmonk]

Vervaeke had a good debate with Bernardo Kastrup who I'm a big fan of, hosted by the same guy that interviewed Leo, thought it might be worth mentioning:
 

 

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, r0ckyreed said:

I haven’t been following much, but will your new awakening course be strictly focusing on psychedelics as a means to awaken or will it also focus on contemplation and sober ways of awakening as well?

While I grant that psychedelics can raise consciousness, I am skeptical that they “produce” awakening. If that were so, then anybody who takes them could awaken, but the thing is that realization is more than just a pill, it is a state of mind. How is it that there are psychonauts who aren’t God-Realized if all it really takes is a drug-induced state? That’s why I stress mastering the sober state. Until the sober state is mastered, all other “higher states” will be inhibited or reflected by the other undeveloped states (I.e., sober state). 

It’s not as simple as plugging 200 trips of 5-meO. With some peoples minds, no amount of psychedelics will breakthrough. Behind the scenes contemplation and integration needs to happen. 

There will be a heavy emphasis on psychedelics but also a heavy emphasis on deconstructing all anchor points of the mind.

Psychedelics alone are not enough. You must use them with proper understanding. Which is what the course will teach. Nobody teaches it.

56 minutes ago, Nilsi said:

I'm confused by your definition of awake. If people like Wilber and Schmachtenberger are not awake, then nobody is.

You're just assuming that.

There is a qunatum leap between those guys and serious awakening. They are not even in the same ballpark. They cannot even imagine what awakening is. Sorry but someone has to say it.

Quote

They obviously have had awakening/enlightenment experiences, but choose not to live from that place 24/7 and follow their dharma instead.

They have had some degree of awakening, but not the degrees I am talking about.

Quote

I don't see how you could claim being awake (it seems like you implicitly do), if you don't allow for any dualistic activity in someone awake.

I allow dualistic activity. But I also clearly see who isn't fully awake. It's quite obvious to me by how they talk.

Quote

EDIT: It seems to me you are advocating against narrative, and I definitely see how that could lead you to a more pure awakened state but I see it more as a preference. I myself enjoy the story and want to be fully engaged with it and that's just not possible from a state of pure solipsism.

It's a much deeper issue than that.

31 minutes ago, Nilsi said:

I'm quite confident that if you were to sit down with Schmachtenberger and really push it, he would agree with Leos "metaphysics" completely.

No he won't.

[Nilsi]

34 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

There is a qunatum leap between those guys and serious awakening. They are not even in the same ballpark. They cannot even imagine what awakening is. Sorry but someone has to say it.

They have had some degree of awakening, but not the degrees I am talking about.

I can't help but think you are needlessly strawmanning them. They are not in the business of teaching awakening and that is the crucial point, Schmachtenberger talks about waking up and makes it clear that he is in the business of showing up and cleaning up. I'm seriously trying my hardest not to come into this with my own prejudices and it took me quite some time to form these opinions, but there are just so many hints that make it obvious that they ultimately are acting in service of Love and Truth. Just watch Daniel Schmachtenberger interview Ken Wilber; or there has also been one episode of Schmachtenbergers Digital Porch series, in which he explicitly mentioned that he's in the business of increasing Love in the Universe. If I were to show them your videos about Personal development and they were as dismissive as you are, they would just call you a narcissistic sleezy life coach and all the Love and Beauty would be lost on them. I'm not claiming to be ultimately right and it's obviously a pointless discussion but that has been bugging me for some time now and I would love if you could go more in depth on this at some point.

EDIT: They are conscious leaders, while you preach water and drink wine; you are not trying to see the God in anyone but yourself, and that is not the highest Love.

Edited July 19, 2022 by Nilsi