no_name

Member
  • Content count

    765
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by no_name


  1. 4 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

    @no_name You are so stupid it hurts.

    But keep going. Make a fool of yourself.

    You think you are humble? You more arrogant than me. How dare you think for one second you are more conscious than me.

    You have to clue what Consciousness is!

    You are utterly full of shit. And I see through all of your games. The only reason I allow you hear is out of LOVE.

    What’s with the lashing out and the personal attacks? 

    I never claimed to be anything at all. None of this is about me.

    I would assume the most enlightened person on earth would want to address the arguments and not the character of the person making the arguments.

    And then people are surprised this forum is a shit show.


  2. 6 minutes ago, Thought Art said:

    I remember reading in Thick Face Black Heart, the author talks about how people think Enlightened people should be passive, soft and humble when in actuality they can come off as arrogant, and even aggressive at times. People have fantasy.

    People who’ve had enlightenment experience sure can be whatever.
     

    We are talking about the most enlightened person on earth here though, so enlightened, that at most only 1 other human on earth may potentially fully understand his teachings. 

    0CD936EA-AF4A-47B9-94EE-425655BA58AC.jpeg


  3. 8 hours ago, Space said:

    Not at all. Most teachers have a very small % of 'successfull' students, in pretty much any field or domain. Yea it varies a bit, but generally speaking the vast majority of people, 99.99% of people that watch Leo will not be 'successfull'. Particularly in spiritual domains! The vast majority of people who have taken Leo's LP course will not have developed a strong robust career. Same with any course, teaching, university course, whatever.

    What is not obvious to most is that the 'successful' students, those that have realised some of the same truths as Leo, do not need to speak about it and mostly keep themselves to themselves. I consider myself one of them, but even saying that will be interpreted as arrogance or even a dogmatic blind follower. I disagree with Leo on many things, yet I have realised some of the things he points people towards. And I do not speak about them because I don't feel like I need to. 

    Obviously not all the people will get to reach a super “high” degree of enlightenment. He claims no one on this forum understands what consciousness is at all though.

    B78E6A4A-1FBE-4127-80C9-033E5B978E6D.jpeg
     

    He also claims only a handful of people in the whole planet will understand his teachings 

    BB2B7B58-BAFB-4395-AF67-58FB0B168FE3.jpeg
     

    Do you consider yourself to be one of the 5 people he is referring to? Because he clearly thinks you’re not one of them. 

    Let’s do the math. Out of at least a 1,000,000 of his followers, only 5 will understand him at some point in the future. That is 0.0005%. The rest 999,995 (99.9995%) of you are just a bunch of clapping monkeys blindly following him. Like Christians follow Jesus, Muslims follow prophet Mohamed, etc. You are following a teaching you will never understand. How is this different from being a religious fanatic? 

    You guys are so brainwashed at this point you read right through the literal context of the things he is saying. He has done such a great job at gaslighting you, you are basically programmed to gaslight yourself at this point.

    @Ulax is using “brainwashed” allowed on this forum? Or is it also inflammatory? Sorry, but I don’t know what word to use instead of brainwashed in this context and I think it’s an adjective that is civil to use. 

    Also @Ulax he himself used the phrase “clapping monkeys” in the forum before, one of the great things I learned from him I guess, so can I use it in this thread too? 


  4. 38 minutes ago, Something Funny said:

    @no_name and what are you teaching? Have you done anything worthwhile in your life yourself or is shitting on other people the only thing that you are good at? 

    When was the last time you posted something on this forum that didn't create a tonn of drama, arguments, and complaining about other people?

    @Inliytened1 and what about you? I suppose you think that you are very wise and enlightened. But real spiritual teachers don't spend their time on someone else's forum, criticizing other people. They do their own work.

    What work have you done? Leo has thousands of hours of exceptional content to back up what he is saying. What have you got? Why should anyone listen to you instead of him?

    I don’t have enough narcissism and grandiosity to do a few psychedelic trips and then claim I am the only person alive to discover the truth.

    Also, sheep will always need someone to follow and to tell them what to do. That’s why religions were created. Some people just need to have someone to idolize at all times, otherwise their world collapses.

    No one is telling you to listen to us. But please stop engaging with me. I’ve asked you too many times, you have these emotional outbursts that I don’t want to deal with. 

    This is again your moralization talking. Why do you assume that my goal is to post quality stuff on this forum to improve other people’s lives? Maybe I don’t want to do that. Maybe I don’t want to collect brownie points on this forum and couldn’t care less what you or others think of me.

    Is everyone supposed to live their life the way you think is the right way to live? To post on this forum the only right way you want them to post? Don’t you see a huge stage blue moralization trip you constantly go to? You don’t do this and that and so you can’t be right. 

    Do you understand how exhausting your “you should” and “you shouldn’t” are? 


  5. 27 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

    Frankly, this kind of closemindedness makes me not even want to teach you guys. I can go off and hoard all this understanding just for myself and be happier than ever. And no humans will ever know. It will be your loss, not mine.

    I think people can discover it for themselves with meditation/psychedelics. You’re not unique in taking psychedelics and seeing stuff. You can’t reason out and logically explain enlightenment anyways, people need to experience it for themselves. 

    What you’re teaching at this point is just your biases. 


  6. 12 minutes ago, mr_engineer said:

    @no_name Do you see what I had to do to make you specify this?! Fine. I'm letting this go, no hard feelings. 

    Guys, be willing to step up and defend yourselves when shit like this gets thrown at you. No messing around with feminists. Someone uses the word 'misogyny', alarm-bells should be ringing in your mind. 

    Please if you see my posts in the future, don’t comment anything under them. 


  7. Lol, this is hilarious.

    FYI, I said he should be cancelled because he calls himself the “most enlightened person to ever exist”, that he has reached “levels of enlightenment no one will ever understand” - this is false advertising to the gullible minds, very toxic and manipulative. There is arrogant, and then there is Leo level arrogant.

    But if you’ve never studied enlightenment, haven’t tripped, and haven’t meditated even for 5 minutes, and are practically a naive child, you will believe what he’s saying. Look what’s happening to his followers and how emotionally triggered they are getting defending their god.


  8. 2 minutes ago, something_else said:

    Idk, my experience in the world pretty starkly contradicts this statement

    And so do statistics. The average body count in western countries like the UK or the US is estimated around 10, some estimates as high as 14. For BOTH sexes.

    14 long term relationships for the average woman, or man, seems very unlikely. Which means a lot of casual sex is being had by lots of members of both sexes.

    What is the age of people at which this statistics what measured?

    I know lots of women who by the time they are 30 have slept with 10+ guys. And yes, I know it will seem crazy to you, but practically with all these guys they thought they will be together forever :) 


  9. 24 minutes ago, something_else said:

    That seems a tad extreme, but you can just leave if this forum doesn’t resonate with you

    There are parts of it I don’t like too, but expecting perfection from an online forum is kind of unfair in my opinion. Same goes for expecting perfection from a teacher

    Wanting someone to be cancelled is just a desire for revenge and to cause pain and harm to another, which seems a bit much of a punishment for subtle misogyny

    Again, this is not about the forum for me. There are some people on the forum I really like, and I don’t even go here unless I need something. 

    If I claim to be a surgeon, but I am a garbage truck driver, and I have all these people come to me for my surgical services, trusting me with their lives - should I be held responsible for false advertisement? There’s even laws against that.

    How is this different? 


  10. 1 minute ago, Inliytened1 said:

    The only reason that is is if they are attached to someone else or interested in someone  else.  That is the only reason they will do that.

    Exactly, and because they need a shoulder to cry on/someone else to pay attention to them while they are, for example, hurting.


  11. 9 minutes ago, something_else said:

    The majority of people the world, at least in the western world, have plenty of one night stands.

    The average body count of a male/female in the western world is 10, to give some perspective.

    There are plenty of women who enjoy casual sex, it’s just less socially acceptable for them to agree when directly asked because society (and you, apparently) judge them for it.

    It’s not the society programming. Of course there are some exceptions. But a large majority of women are not interested in casual sex. 


  12. Just now, something_else said:

    There is likely subtle misogyny that goes unnoticed by men and me here. However that’s very hard to moderate or enforce I would imagine. Just saying “I always feel so unwelcome here because of all the subtle misogyny” is a valid complaint and expression of how you feel, but it’s not really easy to take any action on. If for no other reason than us guys don’t notice the things that make you upset as much because they don’t affect us. You need to point them out directly instead of saying that the entire section makes you feel unwelcome.

    What suggestions do you have to improve the dating section to make it more welcoming? Beyond getting Leo to actually stop with his stupidly unnecessary insulting language that he sometimes spurts out. It annoys me too because it’s the main thing I consistently see there that’s just totally unnecessary.

    Beyond that I rarely see anyone explicitly disrespect women or say anything that is plainly misogynistic. And a lot of it is just hopelessly misguided men who have not been properly socialised, so when you hear that subtle misogyny from them it is coming from a place of frustration and being essentially unloved by the world.

    Banning such guys is actually kind of detrimental because they’ll end up following people like Tate which are 100x more explicitly misogynistic

    The problem with Leo goes deeper than that. I don’t think it’s his following, or that banning anyone would solve the issue. 

    I personally think Leo should be cancelled because he is pretending to be someone he is not. 


  13. 7 minutes ago, Jacob Morres said:

     

    Ur not above that jsyk 

    Have I ever claimed to be “the most enlightened person to ever exist”? Do I have a following of a million people parroting my actions? 
     

    The problem is not a regular person doing that stuff. But when someone’s claims don’t align with their actions. That’s called a scam. 
     

    It’s like going to a dentist who himself has rotten teeth. 


  14. 1 minute ago, something_else said:

    Most of the attraction advice here is literally just:

    ”go out, be sociable, and talk to lots of women”

    I don’t really see what’s so misogynistic about it. I definitely agree Leo has a really bad reputation for spitting out some nasty one liners like “club sluts” and “monsters from the black lagoon” which are needlessly insulting. But the core advice excluding that horseshit is not really anything that misogynistic

    It’s mostly just trying to get man-cave dwelling computer nerds to go outside for once

    Another problem is that it’s really hard to give dating advice that appeals to both men and women without offending either. It’s because their dating agendas are so different. If we go and look at really female centric dating forums or subreddits as guys it also makes us feel like utter dogshit in the way they talk about and compare us.

    I’m not saying it’s a good thing, but it is something that’s very tough to avoid when giving gendered dating advice. And the forum is mostly male so the dating advice is always gonna be biased

     

    Most misogyny nowadays is subtle, it’s not going to be direct. It’s also easier to spot if you’re a woman - why do you think there is practically no women left on the forum?

    I don’t agree that it’s so hard to give dating advice while not being nasty, offensive, and without name calling. He sets the tone on this forum, and then most of his followers think it’s ok to behave this way, snap at others, act arrogant and entitled, etc.

     


  15. 1 minute ago, Michael Jackson said:

    Short term attraction and getting laid has nothing to do with wether I only want sex or wether I want a relationship.

    Short term attraction is what is needed in either case, because without attraction & getting laid, no relationship will happen.

    Why can’t there be a relationship without getting laid? 


  16. 37 minutes ago, mr_engineer said:

    When you just call someone a 'misogynist' as a personal attack, you attack the person, not the action, your credibility goes down by 90%. Just a heads-up on how everyone's viewing you right now. 

    Just a heads up when you use the term “everyone” it means a 100%. Can you prove that that’s how a 100% of people view me right now? Do you see how this reduces your credibility?

    Also, I haven’t called him a misogynist. I said “misogynistic behaviour”, “being misogynistic”, “misogynistic comments”, “in a misogynistic way”.


  17. 3 minutes ago, Something Funny said:

    @no_name if I remember correctly you didn't want me to taalk to you ever again. So please don't talk to me either. 

    You say you don't want to waste you time arguing here. But in reality you are really toxic and can't stop yourself from coming here for a hit of drama again and again.

    If you don't like Leo so much, why are you even here? Internet is nig, go find yourself a community that you like...

    You are the first one who talked to me in this thread. I actually wanted to say this to you - that you promised not to engage with me anymore. You indirectly commented on my response - this is engaging.

    Also, like I explained, I only commented here for people who find themselves confused with Leo’s behaviour. They are not alone, and they are right to be concerned/doubt Leo’s integrity and his claims to be enlightened.

    I am also not obligated to explain to you why and how I engage with this forum. 


  18. 1 hour ago, flowboy said:

    The lashing style is what attracted me to your channel in the first place (although it was off-putting at first, it became enjoyable later. Like coffee. Or beer. Or working out.)

     

    no esteem for their own mind. Guru seekers. Perhaps even the dumb people that irritate you so much, could be attracted by that..?

    Could you see a part of my comment here that talks about why you would found his style appealing to you? (I’ve tagged you there)