Why Does Leo Demonize Survival?

[Carl-Richard]

1 hour ago, SeaMonster said:

If you've noticed, in subtle ways Leo encourages weak-minded people to kill themselves.  He just dresses it up in pseudospiritual garb.

If you want to really lean hard on the caveat of "in subtle ways", isn't this the case for all of non-duality? 

 

 

[SeaMonster]

On 5/10/2023 at 6:26 AM, Carl-Richard said:

If you want to really lean hard on the caveat of "in subtle ways", isn't this the case for all of non-duality? 

When I say in subtle ways, he basically uses NLP-type techniques to induce weakminded people to kill themselves.  

This is entirely different than standard nonduality explanations as those of Rupert Spira, and I KNOW you are smart enough to know better than this false equivalency.  "You are not born and you never die" with a long explication of how consciousness relates to perceived "reality" is VERY different than "God is death and we are already dead."

Those words are chosen for MAXIMUM NEGATIVE IMPACT on the psyche of the weakminded.  And the evidence for my assertion is that IT WORKS.  People have killed themselves after following Leo.  I haven't heard of any of Spira's followers offing themselves.

Of course there's a lot of apologetics and denial around this, but you judge the words by their emotional impact, not by the many possibilities of meaning you can twist them into with labored justifications.

[Inliytened1]

2 hours ago, SeaMonster said:

When I say in subtle ways, he basically uses NLP-type techniques to induce weakminded people to kill themselves.  

This is entirely different than standard nonduality explanations as those of Rupert Spira, and I KNOW you are smart enough to know better than this false equivalency.  "You are not born and you never die" with a long explication of how consciousness relates to perceived "reality" is VERY different than "God is death and we are already dead."

Those words are chosen for MAXIMUM NEGATIVE IMPACT on the psyche of the weakminded. 

meaning you can twist them into with labored justifications.

No they are not.  If you think there was some alternative motive in that episode you are mistaken.  There was not.  It was simply to teach that death, along with your soul, is but a thought in the mind.  In fact - it is a thought in the mind of God.  Death- by you - has never been experienced.   It never will be.  A soul, will never be shown to you anywhere- because it does not exist.  A self that does not exist cannot die.  Thoughts can die, but what are they?  Perhaps They never were anything.  Perhaps what was never anything cannot be something.

Edited May 14, 2023 by Inliytened1

[Carl-Richard]

@SeaMonster

I think splitting hairs between grammatical cases is a bit of a stretch. Besides, you have people like Sadhguru and Osho who say the best thing you can do is to "die consciously", you have buddhists lighting themselves on fire and performing automummification, mahasamadhi, rainbow body. How is that for NLP?

Edited May 14, 2023 by Carl-Richard

[Inliytened1]

17 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

@SeaMonster

I think splitting hairs between grammatical cases is a bit of a stretch. Besides, you have people like Sadhguru and Osho who say the best thing you can do is to "die consciously", you have buddhists lighting themselves on fire and performing automummification, mahasamadhi, rainbow body. This is central to non-dual traditions.

I really hope you aren't heeding guys like osho and Sadhguru.   

[Carl-Richard]

4 minutes ago, Inliytened1 said:

I really hope you aren't heeding guys like osho and Sadhguru.   

I'm just pointing out how trying to single out Leo's use of communication in this instance as irresponsible compared to the larger sphere of non-duality is not well-founded.

[Inliytened1]

4 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

I'm just pointing out how trying to single out Leo's use of communication in this instance as irresponsible compared to the larger sphere of non-duality is not well-founded.

Yes - and to add to that, I would say that well validation lies as a responsibility of the listener.  But first an open mind is required.  Most come in close minded to begin with - and thus they point out a reflection of their own bias.  I don't find any of his public teachings to be irresponsible- for the record,  Meaning Gura.  He gets irresponsible here on the forum- but that is simply his human nature coming out.   With such deep material the responsibility lies with who takes it in and at what level they are at to absorb what is being said.  It does not lie with the teacher. 

[SeaMonster]

2 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

I think splitting hairs between grammatical cases is a bit of a stretch. Besides, you have people like Sadhguru and Osho who say the best thing you can do is to "die consciously", you have buddhists lighting themselves on fire and performing automummification, mahasamadhi, rainbow body. How is that for NLP?

I'm not a fan of Osho or Sadhguru as a spiritual teacher (and Sadhguru specifically BECAUSE of this.)  I would never recommend them as a primary spiritual authority.

2 hours ago, Inliytened1 said:

No they are not.  If you think there was some alternative motive in that episode you are mistaken.  There was not.  It was simply to teach that death, along with your soul, is but a thought in the mind.  In fact - it is a thought in the mind of God.  Death- by you - has never been experienced. 

Again, what you guys are missing is that the EFFECT the message produces IS the message for many (especially vulnerable people.)  

I'll repeat: the message is crafted for maximal negative impact.  You can spin it anyway you want, but it's simply the reality.  Over and over, for many years people have mentioned this impact, either here or elsewhere on the web.

It's not coincidental.

Edited May 14, 2023 by SeaMonster

[Carl-Richard]

36 minutes ago, SeaMonster said:

I'm not a fan of Osho or Sadhguru as a spiritual teacher (and Sadhguru specifically BECAUSE of this.)  I would never recommend them as a primary spiritual authority.

I once posted a chain of 10+ videoes of Rupert Spira delegitimizing the concept of death. You can probably find something problematic in there if you dig for it.

Anyways, I'm actually supportive of the idea of having all spiritual teachings under lock and key by carefully picked student-teacher relationships to prevent these kinds of misunderstandings. This postmodern Wild West era of spirituality is not good for anyone for a myriad of reasons.

Edited May 14, 2023 by Carl-Richard

[Yimpa]

We need to ban guns in video games… yeah, that’s the solution!

[SeaMonster]

4 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

I once posted a chain of 10+ videoes of Rupert Spira delegitimizing the concept of death. You can probably find something problematic in there if you dig for it.

Why is it so hard to admit that the way Leo crafts his message is harmful? If you need me to go trolling for something in Spira's content just to prove a point, doesn't it prove my point, since you DON'T need to go far to find Leo's harmful message? It's pretty much in your face.

[Inliytened1]

43 minutes ago, SeaMonster said:

I'm not a fan of Osho or Sadhguru as a spiritual teacher (and Sadhguru specifically BECAUSE of this.)  I would never recommend them as a primary spiritual authority.

Again, what you guys are missing is that the EFFECT the message produces IS the message for many (especially vulnerable people.)  

 

The effect on someone is a pure result of their OWN pysche!!  Nothing more.   If someone is damaged then they may misinterpret these teachings and are thus warned not to listen.  Are you deaf to all the disclaimers to the mentally ill or unstable?

Edited May 14, 2023 by Inliytened1

[lostingenosmaze]

@Inliytened1  @Leo Gura hasn't put up the updated disclaimers on his "What is Death?" episode btw. You'd think that's the one episode he would prioritize on updating the disclaimers but years has passed and they're still not there ?

 

[Carl-Richard]

58 minutes ago, SeaMonster said:

Why is it so hard to admit that the way Leo crafts his message is harmful? If you need me to go trolling for something in Spira's content just to prove a point, doesn't it prove my point, since you DON'T need to go far to find Leo's harmful message? It's pretty much in your face.

The alleged Leo quote in question was taken from one of his videos out of many 100s of videos, so I don't see why this should be reasonably different. I'm talking about Rupert Spira now. It's pretty much in your face.

Edited May 14, 2023 by Carl-Richard

[Inliytened1]

23 minutes ago, lostingenosmaze said:

@Inliytened1  @Leo Gura hasn't put up the updated disclaimers on his "What is Death?" episode btw. You'd think that's the one episode he would prioritize on updating the disclaimers but years has passed and they're still not there ?

 

Thank you for picking up the pieces, as usual.  Youre always there, in some annoying way

 

 

Edited May 14, 2023 by Inliytened1

[BlueOak]

Whatever you decide is wrong or right about it. Whatever meaning you assign to it and whatever connections you make to other beliefs or experiences you've had.

The Ego can feel threatened and that puts you into a defensive mindset, survival, loss of identity, feel like you are dying, or what you consider important in life is fading away. That happens to all of us in life sooner or later, because that's how life is designed, this work speeds it up. Most people face their identity falling away for one reason or another. Most people feel what they considered important to their life fading away or passing away literally. Whether they are spiritual or not, everybody goes through it.

[Princess Arabia]

7 hours ago, SeaMonster said:

When I say in subtle ways, he basically uses NLP-type techniques to induce weakminded people to kill themselves.  

This is entirely different than standard nonduality explanations as those of Rupert Spira, and I KNOW you are smart enough to know better than this false equivalency.  "You are not born and you never die" with a long explication of how consciousness relates to perceived "reality" is VERY different than "God is death and we are already dead."

Those words are chosen for MAXIMUM NEGATIVE IMPACT on the psyche of the weakminded.  And the evidence for my assertion is that IT WORKS.  People have killed themselves after following Leo.  I haven't heard of any of Spira's followers offing themselves.

Of course there's a lot of apologetics and denial around this, but you judge the words by their emotional impact, not by the many possibilities of meaning you can twist them into with labored justifications.

God is Death and we are already dead. Now go kill yourself. Why would someone tell you you are already dead, then tell you to go kill yourself. Makes no sense. Did you do a survey of weak-minded people who told you thats how they interpreted this message. Thats how you took it. You are projecting your own interpretation. The brain will fish out parts of reality to find things that fits into our belief systems. Someone else could interpret that statement entirely different. Just because you haven't heard of any of Spira's followers "offing" themselves, doesn't mean there are none. People don't normally go around killing themselves because someone told them to do so. Why would someone put out 99 videos of self-improvement and advice on how to better your life put out one video implying you go kill yourself. "God is death" and "we are already dead" makes sense to me; but what doesn't make sense to me is "these words are chosen for MAXIMUM NEGATIVE IMPACT." Infact, none of what you said makes sense, implying that those words are evidence of your assertion and that it works is ridiculous.