What is Leo's main shtick really about? Psychonautics vs. Spirituality

[Galyna]

2 hours ago, Breakingthewall said:

Everything is myself. But when i imagine something, it's real. Everything is infinite. This about the others  don't exist sound flat, like a dogma.

 

 

You still believe in yourself....that is the problem.

We all do. But there is a way to bypass this illusion, lucid dreaming might help a little bit.

[Devin]

It's not illusions, It's all real, people are real, it's all created by God, everything is God, there's nothing more outside of what is being experienced right now, no other experience being had, no other lives being lived, whatever YOU experience right now is all there is. Whatever experience God creates next is all there is at that moment, there's no past, no future, the people that are no longer experienced no longer exist, if they are re created in a future experience then they will exist then.

Edited October 6, 2022 by Devin

[Leo Gura]

@Consilience I know you doubt me. But a Love anyways

You'll understand when you truly Awaken.

Buddhism is a NOT Awakening!!!

Get this! REALLY FUCKING GET THIS!

YOU MORON.

The Buddha, is a fucking dream!

I love you anyways

Edited October 6, 2022 by Leo Gura

[MichaelJohn]

I guess I never stop dreaming. This human dream is already infinite. There's no cessation to a thing that is. The idea of cessation is already made null when it is conceptually tied into a word. Null is itself an undefined concept within computer science. To say it is made null is to also inhabit a concept. The idea of not thinking and detaching is also conceptual. There is no end to this game because it never began and because it is not a game. The point of this rambling? None at all. And that is the point. Leo is the same as the rambling. To make sense of a concept that is null is as foolish as when trying to refer to memory that is unoccupied while programming. Dream as you wish. If that means disagreeing and agreeing, then so be it. You are null so go and do not go. 

[Inliytened1]

36 minutes ago, Devin said:

It's not illusions, It's all real, people are real, it's all created by God, everything is God, there's nothing more outside of what is being experienced right now, no other experience being had, no other lives being lived, whatever YOU experience right now is all there is. Whatever experience God creates next is all there is at that moment, there's no past, no future, the people that are no longer experienced no longer exist, if they are re created in a future experience then they will exist then.

That is correct.  This is a dream. An elaborate one at that- and it must be.  Otherwise it couldn't be what you call "reality".. People are real because imagination and reality is a duality that collapses on awakening.

 

[Inliytened1]

2 minutes ago, MichaelJohn said:

I guess I never stop dreaming. This human dream is already infinite. There's no cessation to a thing that is. The idea of cessation is already made null when it is conceptually tied into a word. Null is itself an undefined concept within computer science. To say it is made null is to also inhabit a concept. The idea of not thinking and detaching is also conceptual. There is no end to this game because it never began and because it is not a game. The point of this rambling? None at all. And that is the point. Leo is the same as the rambling. To make sense of a concept that is null is as foolish as when trying to refer to memory that is unoccupied while programming. Dream as you wish. If that means disagreeing and agreeing, then so be it. You are null so go and do not go. 

You are noticing paradox which is finitude when you try to grasp the Absolute.   You ARE the Absolute so you will run in circles trying to capture it.  Godel discovered this and called it the incompleteness theorem 

[MichaelJohn]

@Inliytened1 No, why try to capture a non thing? On the same hand, why would a non thing try to capture a thing? There is no doing except for this one right here. Capturing is Being just being(; I'm having fun with myself, as I always have. Whether that includes doing or not doing, I am. Also, I have greatly enjoyed your comments in many different posts! Thank (me) you for your wisdom. 

[Inliytened1]

29 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

@Consilience I know you doubt me. But a Love anyways

You'll understand when you truly Awaken.

Buddhism is a NOT Awakening!!!

Get this! REALLY FUCKING GET THIS!

YOU MORON.

The Buddha, is a fucking dream!

I love you anyways

@Consilience leverage Buddhism to realize no self.  To actually become God.  You created Buddhism and its a hell of a lot closer to Truth then christianity or judaism. 

[caspex]

On 10/2/2022 at 10:28 PM, Carl-Richard said:

The category of "focusing on states over growth" is distinct from "focusing on growth over states". In one sense, the categories describe a difference in degrees, so of course there is overlap, and of course both psychedelics and meditation impact both states and growth. What I'm saying is they're useful categories. Why are they useful? Because Leo says that ALL the people in the other category are "not awake", and it's because ALL the people have a different focus than him. If all people fit into one place because they're all doing the same thing, then that is a good justification for placing them in a category.

@Carl-Richard I see, I apologize for strawmanning your model.

Even if Leo has a different definition of awakening, both the categories still go up the same mountain at which the peak is God. Your model I believe says that Leo emphasizes states over growth/integration. But even with that being the case, it would still be true(if it is) that Leo has experienced higher states than those in spirituality category. Meaning he has every right to say those people are not awake whether he has integrated these states or not. Fact of the matter is that he has seen from higher up the mountain, albeit, temporarily. Even if his baseline may exist lower than those he calls not awake. 

So whether awakening is defined as having higher growth or higher states experienced, Leo's claims of other Gurus not being awake enough(compared to where has been), still holds true. Even though at this current moment he may be less aware than those other Gurus. 

Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe your model attempted to explain his claims as false as he misunderstands the difference in the categories you have outlined. 

Edited October 6, 2022 by Swarnim
Fixing the format

[Inliytened1]

14 minutes ago, MichaelJohn said:

@Inliytened1 No, why try to capture a non thing? On the same hand, why would a non thing try to capture a thing? There is no doing except for this one right here. Capturing is Being just being(; I'm having fun with myself, as I always have. Whether that includes doing or not doing, I am. Also, I have greatly enjoyed your comments in many different posts! Thank (me) you for your wisdom. 

Indeed and welcome ?

and even if you stop enjoying it - thats fine too.  You have the magical ability to self reflect.  This intelligence is baked into what you are as God - and though we only taste a slither of intelligence- it is Love nonetheless 

[Hello from Russia]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

@Consilience I know you doubt me. But a Love anyways

You'll understand when you truly Awaken.

Buddhism is a NOT Awakening!!!

Get this! REALLY FUCKING GET THIS!

YOU MORON.

The Buddha, is a fucking dream!

I love you anyways

Do you find buddhism and buddhist stuff useful nonetheless?

I am amidst creating a life purpose theme for myself that is tailored directly into helping higher consciousness teachers become more visible & empowered. Every time you criticize buddhism or other people/tradition it makes me bit questioning myself/these people more, which is good, but a bit derailing, haha, cause I value your takes a lot

I feel like despite some epistemic dangers, of course, of making these people more popular and them spreading their teacings, there is still an enormous value to be had for people, if not for truth directly, but for all other aspects of life and their overall development.

Right now I feel rather inadequete to judge the ability of different teachers to lead to truth, that's why I'm not making my core focus on it and focus more on very deep holistic health & wellness and highly in-depth personal development guys. Guys that are at least 2-3 stages above people like Andrew Tate if I recall his name correctly (Watched only like 1 vid of him) and other mainstream teachers and actors

There are backlash\backfire reactions & negative effects to everything. But I feel like with these guys, their negative effects are much more healthy/not really that damaging. Even if a person catches some damaging new age belief or two, I find it's still much more better than what he may catch listening to conservative self-development content on youtube or wherever

Just curious about your opinion on this, @Leo Gura, there are for sure gradations of stuff.

I think if you made a balanced critique on New Age culture like you did with Jordan Peterson episode, it'd be very useful for everyone to hear your points, especially since you like to sort of dismiss these guys a lot, yet you share way too many simillarities and teach a lot of what these guys are teaching/aspiring towards.

With some parts maybe where you are superior to them (epistemology, truth-seeking, etc), but with some where I feel they have a bit more comprehension of practical health and wellness methods, and might have some more practical insight/experience with conscious living when it comes to optimizing your surroundings for example, building physical community, various forms of activism, etc etc, as well as some some more in depth stuff on relationships and emotional\psychological health, unique takes on finding a life purpose, etc etc.

Your relationship stuff is great, for example, but it's more focused on very initial stages of relating. Which is amazing and great too and of course it's an artform. But in a sense it's fairly easy compared to the depth of relating when you're relating with your long term partner/spauce, your friends, within community you live in, with other people even, if you're a politician for example, or some kind of a boss that has people under him. The way these people relate is often truly remarkable and inspiring and it's a bias of theirs of course which they happenned to flourish in. The way mainstream PUA's relate to different people around them makes me puke in comparisson, despite them being very charming when it comes to girls of course

 

Edited October 6, 2022 by Hello from Russia

[Carl-Richard]

36 minutes ago, Swarnim said:

Even if Leo has a different definition of awakening, both the categories still go up the same mountain at which the peak is God.

Psychedelic states aren't equal to meditative states. They're also in different categories. That isn't to say they don't overlap.

 

36 minutes ago, Swarnim said:

Meaning he has every right to say those people are not awake whether he has integrated these states or not. Fact of the matter is that he has seen from higher up the mountain, albeit, temporarily. Even if his baseline may exist lower than those he calls not awake. 

That doesn't mean he has experienced more growth. You're just adopting Leo's definition. You're assuming awakening means higher states instead of higher growth.

The sad thing is that this entire problem originally had a very effective partial solution: you distinguish between "awakening" (high state) and "Enlightenment" (high growth), but he dropped that term from his vocabulary, exactly because his focus isn't growth, so here we are.

I say partial, because again, you also have to distinguish between psychedelic states vs. meditative states; psychedelic awakenings vs. meditative awakenings; synthetic vs. organic.

 

46 minutes ago, Swarnim said:

Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe your model attempted to explain his claims as false as he misunderstands the difference in the categories you have outlined. 

My claim is that the way he talks about it is inaccurate.

It's like being a math student and going to the psychology faculty and telling the professors there "Hah! You didn't graduate college! You're not a professor! Because if that was true, you would be teaching me in my classes!" That would be to miss the categories that separates them.

[caspex]

@Carl-Richard But wouldn't you agree that whether it be psychedelic states or meditative states, they occur on the same mountain taking you ultimately to God? Or would you say that psychedelics take you to a different peak, a different aspect of God, compared to where a meditative journey will take you. 

 

[Carl-Richard]

16 minutes ago, Swarnim said:

@Carl-Richard But wouldn't you agree that whether it be psychedelic states or meditative states, they occur on the same mountain taking you ultimately to God? Or would you say that psychedelics take you to a different peak, a different aspect of God, compared to where a meditative journey will take you. 

I don't see the utility in framing it that way. Psychedelic states are different from meditative states. Both can help you grow your baseline ("growth"), and both can help you reach higher temporary peaks ("states"). There are differences and there are overlaps. Recognize the differences and recognize the overlaps.

I feel like I'm in a really unfair situation, because something that is so obvious in other spiritual communities feels so difficult to explain here. I don't understand how this is so foreign to people.

Edited October 6, 2022 by Carl-Richard

[caspex]

1 hour ago, Carl-Richard said:

I don't see the utility in framing it that way. Psychedelic states are different from meditative states. Both can help you grow your baseline ("growth"), and both can help you reach higher temporary peaks ("states"). There are differences and there are overlaps. Recognize the differences and recognize the overlaps.

If you mean to say that psychonauts call "awake" being higher up state-ever-achieved wise, and spiritualists call "awake" being higher up baseline-state wise. Then I might have understood your point.

So I have a question in that would you agree if I said that both the persons in the categories exist on the same 'line'(where a higher state is a higher point on the line) where one prioritizes experiencing higher states, even if temporary, while the other aims to grow one's baseline state. GIVEN that being on either category still advances both your baseline and apex and it just being a difference of preference.

This would explain to me how Leo calling someone else on the other category 'Not awake' would be a category error according to your model.

 

1 hour ago, Carl-Richard said:

I feel like I'm in a really unfair situation, because something that is so obvious in other spiritual communities feels so difficult to explain here. I don't understand how this is so foreign to people.

Help a man out! I see use in your model and do not want to misunderstand it.

[Gesundheit2]

7 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

You are only writing on this forum to maintain the illusion of being human.

By imagining that others are reading your stuff you fool yourself into creating that pseudo-reality. That is, until you realize how foolish you've been, and then you wake up.

The very idea that there exists points of view, is imaginary. If you are honest with yourself you will admit that you have never seen a POV in your life.

Being a human is not an illusion. Just the identification and the fixation on this form as some sort of an absolute reality.

Believing that other povs don't exist can become a human illusion too if you identify with it. A human dreaming of being God without realizing the nature of the dream.

[Gesundheit2]

3 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

@Consilience I know you doubt me. But a Love anyways

You'll understand when you truly Awaken.

Buddhism is a NOT Awakening!!!

Get this! REALLY FUCKING GET THIS!

YOU MORON.

The Buddha, is a fucking dream!

I love you anyways

Did I miss some posts?

[Razard86]

There is no distinction between meditative states and psychedelic states. I have a friend who literally transferred his psychedelic trips to me. I didn't see visuals but I experienced the trips when I fell asleep on meditation music with feeling. So you can have psychedelic level trips without visuals through feeling which is just vibration anyway. 

I would suggest more people meditate with chakra music and runs some tests on their own. You may be surprised to see....there is no difference really.

[AuroraDream]

Whats his shtick?... I dont know guys but cmon, anyone who has 666 as a decoration above their mediation space shouldn't be trusted....

[vladorion]

10 hours ago, Swarnim said:

@Carl-Richard I see, I apologize for strawmanning your model.

Even if Leo has a different definition of awakening, both the categories still go up the same mountain at which the peak is God. Your model I believe says that Leo emphasizes states over growth/integration. But even with that being the case, it would still be true(if it is) that Leo has experienced higher states than those in spirituality category. Meaning he has every right to say those people are not awake whether he has integrated these states or not. Fact of the matter is that he has seen from higher up the mountain, albeit, temporarily. Even if his baseline may exist lower than those he calls not awake. 

It's not a fact that Leo has seen from higher up the mountain than any other human. You just believe it because he said so.

He also has no way of knowing it.