Actualized.org and Leo Gura must be stopped

[MetaSage]

17 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

Leo say: (I added double spaces after periods for Leo)

 

“The reason I am an arrogant cunt is because I figured out ALL OF REALITY.  And hardly anyone else on this planet has.  How do you think I did it?  By being the arrogant cunt that I am.   If I was humble, I would be just as stupid as your typical academic, nondualist, or Buddhist.  But while they were busy being good little boys and girls and following orders, I was busy wiping my ass with all human ideas.  And that's the only reason I AWOKE as deeply as I did.  This isn't an excuse, this was my method!  The only thing I cared about was TRUTH.  Not any human feelings or norms. I wiped by ass with human norms because that's what was required.  Humility is just a game humans invented to keep themselves asleep.  There is a big difference between being arrogant out of ignorance, and being arrogant out of profound understanding.  Do not confuse the two.”

 

SOURCE 

https://www.actualized.org/insights/actualized-quotes-034

 

he has a point. if someone is authentically and profoundly conscious, there comes a point where playing coy out of social concerns turns into a pretension and lie. There's no point for a master at math to pretend like he isn't a master at it, even though in our society we see that as "showing off" or arrogance. It could simply be an accurate statement of their skill and understanding -- maybe with some ego or pride added.

 

Say Ramana or Buddha. Let's postulate they were deeply "enlightened". You can see a certain certainty or authenticity that for some in our culture could be seen as arrogance. Like,

 

"who do these guys think that they are? Saying they know what reality is, they must surely be full of BS."

 

Well, it might be possible for someone to be conscious of what reality is. How can you tell? I guess ultimately we're bound to their word. A lot of these individuals seem to be honest people, but they could also be wrong. Who knows?

 

This could also be abused by the ego to justify stupid  or selfish behavior. Of course a "normie" would read that quote and say: who the f** is this narcissistic guy? What's he even saying?

 

Rambling off.

[Orb]

@MetaSage the thing is Ramana Maharshi or Siddhartha didn't go around telling people he had total understanding of reality, which is such a foolish thing to say lol. 

 

A skillful teacher points seekers to truth, the fool tries to build himself up by declaring he has the truth. 

 

Leo seems more occupied with building himself up rather than pointing people to the truth.

Edited March 22, 2023 by Orb

[MetaSage]

3 minutes ago, Orb said:

@MetaSage the thing is Ramana Maharshi or Siddhartha didn't go around telling people he had total understanding of reality, which is such a foolish thing to say lol. 

 

A skillful teacher points seekers to truth, the fool tries to build himself up by declaring he has the truth. 

 

Leo seems more occupied with building himself up rather than pointing people to the truth.

 

Yeah, Ramana understood and didn't seem to care about telling others explicitly. Why would he? Likely it was implied in his teachings. He would say "who is the I who knows reality?" "There's no separation." etc.

 

Probably ego is still present in many teachers, you're right. Not denying this possibility here. However, appearing arrogant doesn't necessarily detract from being conscious. I guess it's easy to think if one appears arrogant in one's eyes, she isn't "enlightened".

 

In any case I was simply rambling and sharing nonsense. Don't take it too seriously. 😄 

[Serenity]

It's clear to me that Leo overestimates his understanding of reality. I've noticed him making several factual errors in his statements. He seems to live in an echo chamber where his followers reinforce his views, leading him to believe that he has a superior grasp of reality. However, this is far from the truth, as his knowledge and awareness levels are not infallible. Actually, I would go as far as stating that his awareness level is way below  what he claims. I am truly not impressed. His ego obviously runs the show and a history of repression has led him to build a pretty dense shadow.

 

Don't get me wrong, I acknowledge that Leo is intelligent and has produced some impressive content. Credit should be given where it is due. However, it's important to note that self-praise is not an accurate measure of one's abilities. Additionally, while many are willing to give him credit, Leo often demands more recognition than he deserves.

 

I also find his reactions to criticism quite disappointing. He doesn't take responsibility for his obvious boundary-crossing behavior and instead acts like a child caught in a lie, trying to get away with it. This behavior is not becoming of someone who claims to have a pseudo-mastery of reality and will not fool any discerning individual.

 

Sorry. 

Edited March 22, 2023 by Serenity

[Joseph Maynor]

39 minutes ago, MetaSage said:

 

he has a point. if someone is authentically and profoundly conscious, there comes a point where playing coy out of social concerns turns into a pretension and lie. There's no point for a master at math to pretend like he isn't a master at it, even though in our society we see that as "showing off" or arrogance. It could simply be an accurate statement of their skill and understanding -- maybe with some ego or pride added.

 

Say Ramana or Buddha. Let's postulate they were deeply "enlightened". You can see a certain certainty or authenticity that for some in our culture could be seen as arrogance. Like,

 

"who do these guys think that they are? Saying they know what reality is, they must surely be full of BS."

 

Well, it might be possible for someone to be conscious of what reality is. How can you tell? I guess ultimately we're bound to their word. A lot of these individuals seem to be honest people, but they could also be wrong. Who knows?

 

This could also be abused by the ego to justify stupid  or selfish behavior. Of course a "normie" would read that quote and say: who the f** is this narcissistic guy? What's he even saying?

 

Rambling off.

Here's a question though.  Now that you have the all the TRUTH as the most awake person on the planet, why does the hostility need to continue?  You've arrived! -- so there should be a change in demeanor now.  But we don't get that change in demeanor.  A reasonable person can now say, on his premise, either he doesn't have it, or if he does he's choosing to still be a jerk when it's no longer required.  Therefore, It doesn't seem to make any logical sense what Leo said.

Edited March 22, 2023 by Joseph Maynor

[Serenity]

Those who think his behavior is worthy of a hyper conscious spiritual master (better than Jesus, Bouddha and Spira in his own word) are the kind of person who'd mistake some rusty brass for gold.

Edited March 22, 2023 by Serenity

[Joseph Maynor]

54 minutes ago, Serenity said:

Those who think his behavior is worthy of a hyper conscious spiritual master (better than Jesus, Bouddha and Spira in his own word) are the kind of person who'd mistake some rusty brass for gold.

Young men mostly (or masculine women) who are follower types who are looking for a leader or father figure to tell them what to do and what to believe.  That's his market and he knows it.   He's not going to appeal and I think he's made it clear he doesn't want to appeal to the teacher who is polar opposite of him -- thus he's a specialist, and he's settling into that role or niche more and more over time.  He's part of the Manosphere.  Once this is known, Leo makes perfect sense.

Edited March 22, 2023 by Joseph Maynor

[Serenity]

9 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

Young men (or masculine women) who are follower types who are looking for a leader or father figure to tell them what to do and what to believe.  That's his market and he knows it.   He's not going to appeal and I think he's made it clear he doesn't want to appeal to the teacher who is polar opposite of him -- thus he's a specialist, and he's settling into that role or niche more and more over time.  He's part of the Manosphere.  Once this is known, Leo makes perfect sense.

I have the impression that Leo may be exaggerating his masculine qualities, possibly as a result of both societal wounds surrounding femininity and his own experiences with abuse. It seems that he is trying to distance himself from his feminine side.

 

Promoting the masculine as a solution to feelings of unworthiness can be a profitable business, particularly among men who feel insecure. However, it's important to recognize that a healthy balance of both feminine and masculine qualities is needed for overall well-being. And... for spirituality.

 

I don't think that Leo has intentionally targeted the audience you describe. Instead, it seems that he may be struggling with the same affliction and is attempting to mold himself into an idealized masculine figure. The one he is trying to sell his audience. In any case, the actual market reward this type of attitude and positioning.

 

It appears rather clearly to me that Leo does not value the feminine as much as the masculine. Although he may not explicitly admit it, his writings and attitude suggest that he regards the feminine as inferior. However, it seems unlikely that someone who has achieved a state of "God-realization" would be that resistant to the feminine archetype. My impression is that it would be structurally impossible, as surrendering to one's sense of self is necessary for letting go of the illusion that is ego. 🤷‍♀️

[Isagi Yoichi]

11 minutes ago, Serenity said:

It appears rather clearly to me that Leo does not value the feminine as much as the masculine. Although he may not explicitly admit it, his writings and attitude suggest that he regards the feminine as inferior. However, it seems unlikely that someone who has achieved a state of "God-realization" would be that resistant to the feminine archetype. My impression is that it would be structurally impossible, as surrendering to one's sense of self is necessary for letting go of the illusion that is ego. 🤷‍♀️

 

Leo is a feminine type by nature he might appear as if he is hiding his feminine side but this is just bec he is in the shadow or he chooses not to show it he educates people so it's not relevant to show it or hide it but if you actually met him in person or have interview with him you will see that he is feminine as a default

[Joseph Maynor]

14 hours ago, Omar Osama said:

 

Leo is a feminine type by nature he might appear as if he is hiding his feminine side but this is just bec he is in the shadow or he chooses not to show it he educates people so it's not relevant to show it or hide it but if you actually met him in person or have interview with him you will see that he is feminine as a default

This is the elephant in the room.  You nailed it.  This is why I emphasize shadow work so much.  People tell you who they want to be not necessarily who they are.  But we get to the point on the path where we're ok being who we are!  That's part of attainment.  That's part of self-love.  If you hate a part of yourself, that's like negative law of attraction -- that hate is gonna get mirrored back towards you (by reality) because it's coming from inside you.  This is why we gotta fix ourselves inside before we can fix anything else outside of ourselves.

Culture in general — especially among individuals who are pressured to grow as individuals and compete with others when young naturally — puts the Feminine in the shadow.  Even a lot of Divine Feminine types have quite a bit of the human Feminine in their shadow.  These are the people who don't distinguish between joy and pain and so on.  They think every emotion is weighted the same and don't really value the human or relative judgment regarding feelings.

Edited March 23, 2023 by Joseph Maynor

[Serenity]

3 minutes ago, Omar Osama said:

 

Leo is a feminine type by nature he might appear as if he is hiding his feminine side but this is just bec he is in the shadow or he chooses not to show it he educates people so it's not relevant to show it or hide it but if you actually met him in person or have interview with him you will see that he is feminine as a default

I wouldn't necessarily classify Leo as a feminine type. Instead, it seems that he may be a masculine type who represses a significant portion of his feminine side. Leo seems to have constructed his own ideas of when it is acceptable to show feminine traits and when it is not, which are aligned with his ideal of the perfect man. This ideal appears to be in line with current societal ideals.

 

And yes, as a consequence a lot of his feminine side is in his shadow.

[Joseph Maynor]

58 minutes ago, Serenity said:

I wouldn't necessarily classify Leo as a feminine type. Instead, it seems that he may be a masculine type who represses a significant portion of his feminine side. Leo seems to have constructed his own ideas of when it is acceptable to show feminine traits and when it is not, which are aligned with his ideal of the perfect man. This ideal appears to be in line with current societal ideals.

 

And yes, as a consequence a lot of his feminine side is in his shadow.

I find it notable and odd that Leo has never made a video on shadow work and rarely talks about it.  You're right he has quite a bit of masculine.  I think there's a part of him that doesn't think he's masculine enough though.  He's doubling down on the masculine to the exclusion of the feminine.  There's a little voice in his head that says you're too feminine dude and that's not good.  He is very masculine in his privilege of thinking and pooh poohing of emotions.  He has a feminine side, but instead of being ok with it, he tries to surgically excise it out of himself.  I can totally see this.  He tries to deepen his voice and appear more manly.  If you watch some of his other videos he comes off as quite feminine.  But he doesn't accept that side of himself.  He sees it as a source of ridicule, of not being good enough, as embarrassing.   Everybody has a feminine side and that should allowed to be there.  I have a feminine side and the more developed I get the more I don't give a fark about expressing that openly to everyone.  I used to try to conceal that side of myself because I was worried people would think I'm a p*ssy (weak), childlike, or not heterosexual (gay) or other insinuations along that line.  It's similar to feminine women trying to hide their masculine side, I've seen that too.  Shadow work is so scary and off Leo's radar that he doesn't even mention it.  If you're a teacher in the Manosphere and your audience is masculine men, you kinda have to play that part to lead those men.  But if you look at Jordan Peterson he's quite feminine too in a similar way that Leo is.  But both Jordan Peterson and Leo have the feminine in their shadow.  Jordan Peterson sounds like a woman sometimes to me -- but if you listen to what he emphasizes, it's almost always skewed in favor of the masculine.  I think these two (Leo and Jordan Peterson) resonate with men because men too have feminine sides and naturally want to integrate their feminine, even though they're publicly shaming the feminine a lot.

This is fascinating if you guys and gals have time to watch the below video.  This is Jordan Peterson's daughter interviewing him and his wife.  Notice in certain ways Peterson is more feminine than his wife who has quite a bit of masculine.  The daughter is also very masculine.  They're talking about the Big 5 Personality Aspects Model.

The Big 5 Aspects of Personality Model (Note the OCEAN acronym): (notice each aspect unpacks into 2 sub-aspects)

Openness -- Openness to Experience, Intellect
Conscientiousness -- Orderliness, Industriousness
Extraversion -- Enthusiasm, Assertiveness
Agreeableness -- Politeness, Compassion
Neuroticism -- Volatility, Withdrawal
//

 

Edited March 23, 2023 by Joseph Maynor

[Serenity]

1 minute ago, Joseph Maynor said:

I think there's a part of him that doesn't think he's masculine enough though.  There's a little voice in his head that says you're too feminine and that's not good.  He is very masculine in his privilege of thinking and pooh poohing of emotions.  He has a feminine side, but instead of being ok with it, he tried to excise it out of him.  I can totally see this.  He tries to deepen his voice and appear more manly. 

Yes. I see the same here. And my money is on a deep, unaddressed sense of shame, inadequacy and vulnerability hiding under all of that. Which would explain why he hates emotions. I know he is a cool, really kind type of dude under his posturing. He is able of great sensitivity and emotional intelligence when his shadow doesn't get in the way.

 

3 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

I find it notable and odd that Leo has never made a video on shadow work and rarely talks about it. 

Yes, I have also noticed this. At this point, my opinion is that he doesn't want to touch it with a ten-foot pole out of fear that he'll discover we've all been right. All his actions are attempts to run from what I've been describing above. He would do anything to avoid the shame, the inadequacy and vulnerability. Hence the big as a house self-deception we are witnessing as outsiders.

 

I have done the same, so I can understand what's going on there. 

 

[Serenity]

@Joseph Maynor

 

I believe that Jordan Peterson's fascination with trans people may stem from a sense of envy towards their ability to openly express both their masculine and feminine traits. Additionally, it appears that he may have a significant unconscious feminine side that he struggles to reconcile with both his private and public persona.

 

As a psychologist who teaches the works of Jung, I find this behavior surprising. It's as if he were a shoemaker who walked around barefoot

Edited March 23, 2023 by Serenity

[Joseph Maynor]

13 hours ago, Serenity said:

@Joseph Maynor

 

I believe that Jordan Peterson's fascination with trans people may stem from a sense of envy towards their ability to openly express both their masculine and feminine traits. Additionally, it appears that he may have a significant unconscious feminine side that he struggles to reconcile with both his private and public persona.

 

As a psychologist who teaches the works of Jung, I find this behavior surprising. It's as if he were a shoemaker who walked around barefoot

Peterson talked about being a small kid who used his humor to avoid being bullied when he was a kid on the Jocko Willink Podcast (See video below).  He’s a guy who all his life lived in fear for not being masculine enough.  Instead of accepting his feminine side, he saw it as a real threat to his survival and put it into his shadow.  That’s why he’s embarrassed about being high in agreeableness in that video I posted above (right at the beginning).  Agreeableness is a feminine trait.  He’s a man who wishes he were different than he is and is disgusted with himself in part — and he went that long hating a part of himself and all the internal and external (his teachings)  suffering that entailed.  He was never able to love himself entirely.  He was never able to accept himself entirely.  He was never able to trust or share himself entirely — despite going into the very field where he had the most knowledge to do so.  Ironically he just didn’t have the courage, guts, (balls) to be authentic and to love himself through and through.

If you watch the below video Peterson sounds like a woman pretending to be a very masculine man.  
 

SOURCE

 

Edited March 23, 2023 by Joseph Maynor

[MetaSage]

21 hours ago, Serenity said:

Those who think his behavior is worthy of a hyper conscious spiritual master (better than Jesus, Bouddha and Spira in his own word) are the kind of person who'd mistake some rusty brass for gold.

 

You seem to hold ideals about enlightenment. It is becoming conscious of the absolute aspect of something, usually existence and oneself. It doesn't have to do with how one acts, necessarily.

 

There has been enlightened individuals who did what would be considered nasty by social standards:

 

• Japanese warriors who killed people
• Alan Watts was an alcoholic, as well as Chogyam Trungpa. Nissargadatta smoked cigarettes like crazy
• Didn't Jesus also whipped people and turned tables around in the market? Hearsay has it that he even murdered someone as a kid, and had anger management problems
• Nazis who were into eastern spirituality

 

I'd say that enlightenment doesn't neccesarily change or limit one's behavior. Images of enlightened masters being peaceful, not being angry, etc. ever or never acting stupid is misleading. They're people, still. A persona seems to be "behind" in order to show up in the world.

 

So what can be done now can also be done after enlightenment, including the nasty stuff. I'd imagine that you'd be more likely to act in accordance with intelligent action but this is a relative matter, one of self-transformation, not enlightenment.

Edited March 23, 2023 by MetaSage

[Joseph Maynor]

Leo 8 years ago.  This is when I started watching Leo.  I remember seeing this video come out on my YouTube stream and watching it.  This was when he had like 75,000 k subscribers.  Notice how different he was/is in this video.  This video is more authentically Leo.  He definitely has a feminine side and feminine qualities.  Great topic for him too in this video.  This video speaks volumes about Leo and his path for the past 8 years.  It all hinges on what you consider an imperfection to be.  You must be careful what you judge to be a weakness in development work.  I can't stress enough how important the prior sentence is.  To teach self-love you have to have self-love -- it can't be merely something you're chasing.  You have to have arrived -- it's called embodying authentic self-love.  You can't teach this to someone if you don't have it yourself.  The message is going to come out skewed otherwise.   Leo reminds me a lot of Jordan Peterson.  He doesn't accept himself inside.  He was not able to do this.  Not yet anyway.  Maybe in 10 years (or less hopefully).  I'm 7 years older than Leo so I have a kind of wisdom here from my own path.  Integration of our shadow happens naturally as we age.  What work does one need to do to love themselves? -- that's the question that's the elephant in the room here!  You can't fake self-love/self-acceptance, it's impossible -- you can't fake it until you make it on this.  It's one of the trickiest yet simple subjects of development work and life coaching, and in my opinion the most central and the most rewarding, when true gains are made here.

"What if you [I] could actually love yourself [myself]?"  -- Leo
 

 

Edited March 23, 2023 by Joseph Maynor

[Serenity]

1 hour ago, MetaSage said:

you're confusing ideals of enlightenment with the reality of it. There haas been enlightened Japanese warriors who killed people, and all kinds of examples like those. Don't confuse that enlightenment has to change or limit one's behavior to an idealized image of who someone should behave. 

 

Alan Watts was an alcoholic, as well as Chogyam Trungpa. Nissargadatta smoked cigarettes like crazy. Being conscious of the absolute doesn't mean you can't do stupid things. Didn't Jesus also whipped people and turned tables in the market? Hearsay has it that Jesus even murdered someone as a kid, and had an anger management problem.

 

So yeah, what you can do now can also be done after enlightenment, including the nasty stuff. Of course, I'd imagine, you'd be more likely to act in accordance with intelligent action -- but this is a relative matter, one of self-transformation, not consciousness.

I want to clarify that I am not confusing the concept of enlightenment with its actual reality. It seems like you may have some preconceived notions about where I stand on this matter.

 

Throughout my personal journey, I have come to realize two important things. Firstly, seeking enlightenment alone is not enough. It is crucial to take care of one's mental and emotional well-being both before and after attaining enlightenment. This ensures that one's psychology and development level are optimum after realizing one's true nature. Alan Watts, Nisargadatta and Krishnamurti are good illustration of that point.

 

Secondly, achieving enlightenment does not mean becoming a passive doormat who cannot stand up for oneself or others. Examples from religious texts such as the Bhagavad Gita, the Quran, and the story of Jesus turning the tables demonstrate that enlightenment can also involve being assertive and taking action when necessary.

 

My posts so far have been discussing specifically Leo. My points have been that Leo is neither enlightened, neither psychology in a very good health as he is obviously showing strong traits of narcissism and emotional repression. And I don't think his defensiveness can be compared to the ones of Arjuna or Jesus. In both cases, these spiritual masters were protecting legitimate interests. The difference with Leo is that he is currently protecting his own self-deception and devilry after being caught the hands in the pants, so to speak. I see his recent posts as some typical DARVO.

[Serenity]

3 hours ago, Joseph Maynor said:

Peterson talked about being a small kid who used his humor to avoid being bullied when he was a kid on the Jocko Willink Podcast (See video below).  He’s a guy who all his life lived in fear for not being masculine enough.  Instead of accepting his feminine side, he saw it as a real threat to his survival and put it into his shadow.  That’s why he’s embarrassed about being high in agreeableness in that video I posted above (right at the beginning).  Agreeableness is a feminine trait.  He’s a man who wishes he were different than he is and is disgusted with himself in part — and he went that long hating a part of himself and all the internal and external (his teachings)  suffering that entailed.  He was never able to love himself entirely.  He was never able to accept himself entirely.  He was never able to trust or share himself entirely — despite going into the very field where he had the most knowledge to do so.  Ironically he just didn’t have the courage, guts, (balls) to be authentic and to love himself through and through.

If you watch the below video Peterson sounds like a woman pretending to be a very masculine man.  
 

SOURCE

 

I had no idea about these elements. Thanks for providing context. 

 

I read the informations you provided here as a good explanation why Peterson keeps on trying to escape and box the feminine. What he has been experiencing is nothing else but the collective feminine wound and stigma. 

[Joseph Maynor]

This is worth watching carefully in order to understand what the need to fit in and please someone has an influence on a person.  The child vs./and the parent.  Dad is very masculine.  The tendency of a son to want to please and earn the respect of his father is a powerful force.  If son is very different from father this can set up a very conflicting thing in son.
 

 

Edited March 23, 2023 by Joseph Maynor