Ges
-
Posts
221 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Ges
-
-
-
1 minute ago, Mandy said:
@Ges He basically asked you to examine how you're judging. Go "meta" on judgement, pay attention to how it feels and rather than acting it out and perpetuating it more and more. Otherwise someone is always gonna be a punching bag, while you're always the one feeling the hits.
He asked me "Is it possible?" and I answered "Yes, it is possible". So I answered directly from the meta perspective. Then I went back to the baseline perspective, and gave my thoughts on who's ahead of the other.
-
58 minutes ago, Phil said:
Just pointing out the context was changed, rather than responded to,
essentially bringing the communication at hand, to an end.
Are you seriously saying that?! You? Out of all people?
The reason why you were demoted was because of your cryptic style of communication, I think it was fair in that sense. Many people have complained about it in the past including myself. Your posts can be hard to decipher sometimes. So when someone replies to you, and you think it's out of context, then it's reasonable to think that the problem is most likely on your part, and that it's your responsibility to clarify before asking others to re-read your posts. Otherwise, you're just telling me that I'm stupid for not understanding your crystal-clear communication, or that I'm deliberately changing the context to dodge the addressed point(s).
-
Just now, Joseph Maynor said:
My point is that there is already a huge culture around music and making money out of it. And what music essentially is, is sensory entertainment. So, that's parallel to the philosophical and spiritual entertainment that you seem to be against making money out of. Why do you think it's okay to make money from music, but not from spirituality or philosophy? Music isn't a tangible thing either, materially speaking, so I don't get the distinction.
Don't get me wrong, I do enjoy music, and I'm not against it per se. Again, only trying to highlight the double-standard that seems to be posed.
I hope I understood you correctly and successfully clarified my stance.
-
1 minute ago, Joseph Maynor said:
I would start a different thread for that. I think Phil wants to keep this tread focused on discussing Leo Gura.
It's a very relevant point. I'm highlighting the double-standard there.
-
3 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:
what's going on with most of this stuff is spiritual and philosophical entertainment and the lucrative business model behind this.
Well, what about the music industry (just to name one example)? Sensory entertainment and a lucrative business model behind it.
I mean, there seems to be a double standard against spiritual and philosophical entertainment for some reason.
-
-
@Phil This is useless. I'm out, of this particular discussion at least.
-
@Joseph Maynor Haha. I noticed you don't joke a lot, and found that to be a bit interesting. I thought that you have a certain position on comedy that doesn't think very highly of it. And absolutely, you excel at philosophy, it's your thing. But it's always a good practice to step out of one's comfort zone and try new stuff. That keeps me refreshed, at least.
Though, I don't get why you might not feel completely welcome here. I haven't seen any critiques of you yet. And in my experience, it's pretty much the norm to get some comments here and there when you're arguing with someone. I don't take them seriously anymore.
-
@Joseph Maynor Don't worry about it, dude. I find any discussion that you're a part of super interesting and insightful. You always bring light to more nuances that I haven't noticed before.
-
19 hours ago, Phil said:
Is it possible, that what is currently being considered people judging, is actually your judgement of people, and that these people are a step ahead of you so to speak, in dispelling, working through, inspecting & questioning, the delusional “teachings” of this purporting?
I have given this some thought and reached an answer from my pov. It's my opinion, and it's not meant to offend anyone in anyway, so please feel free to throw it in the garbage can and then the shredder without even recycling it if you want, because I won't elaborate very much because it's more of an intuitive conclusion for me than an intellectual one, and this conversion would probably require a lot of time and effort at this current time and the abilities that I have to communicate and articulate properly.
So, to your question: Is it possible? Yes, of course, it is possible. No questions or doubts there.
But is it actually the case? I don't think so.
While I think Leo has his pitfalls and delusions, I don't think you (or whoever is disagreeing with him) has the bigger picture perspective. I think Leo has it, and it's flying over your heads. I think he understands your position, but you guys don't understand his. I also think that some of his delusions are valid and have more value than you think.
Overall, in my estimation, Leo is not only one step ahead, but many. He claims that he is the most awake human, and I don't think he's overestimating himself. But at the same time, it's almost like he lost some of his eyesight on the way there.
Is Leo advanced? I think he is more advanced than most people, yes. And this is a relative estimation from my limited experience of people.
Is he the most advanced ever? I don't think that's the case, for obvious reasons, like the lack in certain aspects. We might say he's out of balance.
Is he perfect? Absolutely not, and in fact very far from it.
Again, this is just my useless opinion. I might be deluded, brainwashed, manipulated, crazy, etc. And my opinion probably doesn't even matter to begin with, so please feel free to dismiss it or to make whatever you want out of it.
-
20 hours ago, Faith said:
I have Chrome, but yeah, it worked.
Thanks.
No problem. It's my way of saying sorry about the recent events and that one particular comment. I shouldn't have said such things.
-
1 hour ago, Joseph Maynor said:
Leo isn't the only one working on their business or job.
True. But he isn't talking about any of us.
-
27 minutes ago, Phil said:
Thank you, I do appreciate the clarification & the kindness, and that sentiment is mutual. And really, it’s totally understandable…. But, honestly, I’m not convinced that sentiment is genuine, yet at least. That aspect is not really my business though, so I digress.
No problem. And sorry for the inconvenience. -
@Phil I'll stop making comments regarding either forums. It's immature of me now that I think about it.
-
38 minutes ago, Phil said:
“The masculine actually works (Leo), and the feminine sits around, gossips, and judges (Nahm's forum in a nutshell).”
You are welcome here. But, your intentions and words seem disingenuous. Why exactly are you here, utilizing this forum, as opposed to “what works”?
Are you not the source of that judgement?
I was referring to this thread in particular, because most of it sounds like gossip and personal issues, but I was in a reactive state so I didn't say it properly.
Why am I here? Well, mostly because there are a handful of people that I would like to stay in touch with, and they aren't available there. You're one of those people, and I enjoy reading you posts.
The working property is assigned to describe a state of being, not necessarily of utility. As in gossip is opposed to actually working (Leo is working on his business, while people seem to be gossiping about him).
-
It doesn't really matter what Vedanta is ultimately, because we know the map is not the territory. But as a map, it might be useful for navigation purposes, especially for new seekers.
-
9 hours ago, Faith said:
Just a tip for anyone banned. When in incognito mode you can read the Actualized forum.
It's interesting, because some members here are also still there and you can creep on what they say about us. Lol
You can remove the cookies that the browser stores for/from Actualized, you will be logged out and the site will work normally.
It depends on the browser you're using though. For me, I'm using Firefox, so here's how it can be done:
Otherwise, you would have to use another browser or clear your current browser's data or continue using the incognito.
-
7 hours ago, Joseph Maynor said:
By the way I have no problem with someone wanting to make money. I want to make money. We all want to make money. What I have a problem with is when (1) someone sells you something that's unfalsifiable where (2) you blame yourself when you don't get the result and (3) where the aim of the course or product is something that too good to be true: "realize you're God", "realize complete omniscience", etc.
If Leo Gura wants to sell a course that doesn't hit these red flags, I'm in support. He built that audience up and if they want to buy something legit from him, so be it. I just don't want kids and gullible people shelling out $1,000 bucks for something I think fits the concerns I raise above.
My advise to Leo Gura is make a practical course that hits the inverse of these red flags; namely, (1) it's falsifiable, (2) refundable if the person doesn't get the result, and (3) limited in its promise as to the result. He's a smart guy. Falsifiable just means what they're selling you can be proven to be true or false. Something unfalsifiable is where you can't do that.
The reason you want to sell an unfalsifiable, too good to be true product is because the person who bought it will most likely blame themselves when they fail to get the promised result. This is not just some idea I came up with; this is a pattern, a strategy I learned in studying these things. People use these principles all the time to sell scammy products.
That sounds reasonable. I may communicate some or all of that to Leo when there is an appropriate occasion, if that's okay with you. Obviously I won't make a thread and get banned like that, but if I saw the topic coming up, then I may present these thoughts.
Anyway, do you think Leo is legit deliberately trying to scam gullible people? Like do you think this was his master plan from day one or at some point along the way? He still hasn't released the course, though. He said that he won't release it unless it's really good.
As well, if I may ask: What did you like about Leo that made you a fan of him initially? And what changed about him that made you lose that admiration?
-
-
3 hours ago, Joseph Maynor said:
What about the videos on cults?
Unlike this preparatory one, they were late after the accusations. I guess he's developing after all 😁
-
@Joseph Maynor
So basically the Scam video that Leo released is more or less an introduction/lubricant for what's coming next? -
@Joseph Maynor Not trying to defend Leo or anything, but where's the problem in spending money on something that has good marketing? He clearly stated once that it would be like selling water right next to the river, so he's being honest at least.
-
Highest score I've got so far. Other freaks can score above 150, which is a bit scary.
.png.f31fb18d724b9a1db25b04f4088bf59f.png)
.png.b92d8da888771356259e0aba28c3d021.png)
My thoughts of Leo and actualize.org. What do you think?
in The Path
Posted
It is obvious that there is no offense at all. You're not implying that I'm stupid or anything. In which world would that fly?!
You should put more effort in your gaslighting techniques if you wish to continue with me. Otherwise, it's just lazy, and I don't like it.