Jump to content

is leo delusional, or is it buddhism?


nuwu
 Share

Recommended Posts

cross-posting from the other forum

 

Quote

seems actualized.org's videos are slowly moving away from buddhism, or at least find themselves in a somewhat confusing status. i wish @Leo Gura could share some clarifications about these, since the views are growingly incompatible with traditional spiritual models. both philosophies are interesting in their own way, such that silencing or discrediting opposite narratives is superfluous. summary of discord (from what i can tell):
- in buddhism, all dualities necessarily cancel out into nothingness/oneness. our perspectives are conceived from subconscious vibrations who melt into nonduality with meditation/stillness. in leo's recent videos, the understandings of awareness are unclear, other than absolute infinity implies all impossible and absurd states of awareness, potentially even blends of seemingly incompatible experiences (non-duality + duality?), or subinfinities merging together, or something i dont even know
- arguments pointing at biases are useless, since both buddhism and leo are sustained by powerful egos. former being more cultural and artistic, while latter being a classical body-mind perspective
- oneness is in our heart. nothing should be required in order to (un)reach the absolute, like gravity. countless perspectives are unable to obtain sufficiently powerful psychedelics to "awaken". in contrast, meditation is universal. god can not prevent itself from being itself. but then, what does it mean to "do nothing"? if one is meditating, isnt she already imagining herself not taking psychedelics? its mitigated
- death is imaginary, which may contradict the assumption one must be entitled to attain parinirvana after physical death, even with a glimpse of nonduality. why is such delay required, if bodily functions are illusions? buddhism traditionally shut down all discussions about the "experience" of parinirvana, yet it could be very well be dreams within sub-infinities.
- meditation with calcified pineal glands is, or seem to be less effective due to lower andogenous dmt. so what is the difference between meditation and some ever lasting trips? buddha claims ego's attachments are the source of suffering, but why would such attachments matter when they are themselves imaginary? counter-argument is that if it meditation works for (you), doesnt it mean it works for everyone since (your perspective) is the only one that is provably actual? were you ever aware of a state where meditation doesn't work?
- maybe leo is susceptible to impressive state of awareness and experiences of large infinities, which can be confused with the absolute if you trip hard enough. shouldnt the absolute be transcendental to states and degree of awareness? no sized infinities may ever compare to the absolute. such as it doesnt matter how large numbers can grow, they will never reach infinity unless going back to nil. one could dream being the "god" of infinite civilizations, yet it still woudnt be the absolute. then at the same time, how do we know what it takes to reach the absolute? all awakenings could be the delusion of self-impressionable entities, as far as we know.
- there are anecdotal evidences from that one taiwanese youtuber who experienced both awawakening with meditation and 5-meo-dmt, and reportedly shared an abyssal difference in favor of former. status of leo's meditation practices are unknown. unclear why he doesnt try serious attempts, since it would make communications between the two schools of thoughts easier.
- if everything is a single self-loving entity, why would rejection of anything be ever necessary to obtain truth? this is assuming there is such thing as an "ego" out there who has any level of sovereignty on the matter, but there is no such thing. there would be only one ego, that is yours.

 

n-not sure how much of a foolish rant this is. i find the situation somewhat confusing. what are your thoughts on the matter? i have no idea or attachment about what consciousness truly is, i just want to be comfy and happy

 

content in question:

- infinity of gods

- mouse-leo

- leo's posting style which seems less inclusive to traditional buddhism, reinforcing the observation his views are incompatible

Edited by nuwu
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Blessed2 said:

 

Isn't like one of the most fundamental points of buddhism to acknowledge that "yes, there is suffering" ? 😄

 

Kinda seems to me that buddhism is the opposite of coping.

Yes that's their primary shtick to me, "ending suffering". It's coping with beliefs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Blessed2 said:

Not coping is kinda the first step of the method called buddhism though.

Not coping in terms of admitting suffering? I didn't get far into buddhism, I attended teaching at a temple but I'm no expert. They all seem to focus on ending suffering though, which is clearly a distraction, clearly coping (in regards to having beliefs)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Devin said:

Not coping in terms of admitting suffering? I didn't get far into buddhism, I attended teaching at a temple but I'm no expert. They all seem to focus on ending suffering though, which is clearly a distraction, clearly coping (in regards to having beliefs)

 

When acknowledging suffering, you see it for what it is (total nonsense, confusion, literally just like a mistake). The next step, which everyone takes, is to quit the bullshit.

 

No-one in their right mind would acknowledge suffering and then not end it. Because of the very nature of the suffering.

 

Though yeah, buddhist temples and books etc. can be used as a coping method too. I'd say that happens before suffering is fully acknowledged.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Blessed2 said:

 

When acknowledging suffering, you see it for what it is (total nonsense, confusion, literally just like a mistake). The next step, which everyone takes, is to quit the bullshit.

 

No-one in their right mind would acknowledge suffering and then not end it. Because of the very nature of the suffering.

 

Though yeah, buddhist temples and books etc. can be used as a coping method too. I'd say that happens before suffering is fully acknowledged.

 

So you think the Buddhists end suffering?

Edited by Devin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Devin said:

Buddhism is just another religion, rituals, traditions, they just focus on ending suffering, which is not awakening, it's coping.

“Buddhism is a path of practice and spiritual development leading to Insight into the true nature of reality… a path which ultimately culminates in Enlightenment or Buddhahood.”

https://thebuddhistcentre.com/buddhism

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Devin said:

@Phil @Blessed2 what I see from Buddhism is; meditate, and remove suffering from the world. That's a distraction definitely not enlightenment/awakening/realizing.

 

They teach to remove suffering from the world, that right there is disqualification.

 

"Suffering" in buddhist sense is synonymous with "ignorance" or "mis-perception". Literally the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Blessed2 said:

 

"Suffering" in buddhist sense is synonymous with "ignorance" or "mis-perception". Literally the same.

suffering/ignorance/mis-perception isn't bad, suffering/ignorance/mis-perception is life

Edited by Devin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By clicking, I agree to the terms of use, rules, guidelines & to hold Actuality of Being LLC, admin, moderators & all forum members harmless.