Consept

Yeah it could be righteous action from their pov who knows. But i just dont think its that serious, this isnt a cult, i dont agree with Leo on lots of things but to view him as someone you have to help others escape from would be extreme. In reality if youre starting a business thats a spiritual forum similar to actualized, the best place to recruit would be actualized, if they were claiming anything else i would be skeptical.

To be fair its quite similar food, but either way yes i agree there should be diverse forums or forums that are similar to this one but add something different, of course, no one is saying that you have to just be on Actualized and thats it. Me personally, most content i consume is nothing to do with Actualized. The one issue is, (if we go back to the restaurant analogy lol), dont come into my restaurant and slip my customers notes secretly, about how they can get something similar and cheaper. Do your own independent marketing and get your own customers, this is the same across the board, show me one organisation that would be happy with these types of actions.

Well yeah but if they're going to court that would suggest that it's perceived to be unfair. But that's not the point, again you can steal this concept of a forum around spirituality, it's not exactly a new concept, the issue is going into something someone has built from the ground up and then trying to leech off of it to build their business. If you setup restaurant and someone puts their food cart in your parking lot offering the same food for cheaper, you're not going to be ok with it and just say 'ah well artist's steal'. At the very least it's not a very spiritual and caring thing to do, it's actually quite ruthless and under handed.

I can't think of any group, forum or business in the world that would be cool with members using it to recruit other members to create their own version of it. If they were cool with it, they wouldn't last very long. No one is saying you can't start your own forum or whatever you want to do, you just have to build it yourself, which I think is fair, no?

Hey guys, earlier today i had a coaching session with forum member @Rokazulu in which i helped him with some of his ideas around getting his spiritual business going. I think its a topic that might appeal to a lot of people on here and potentially they could get some value from it hopefully. It was really great talking to him and it was very interesting bringing up things he may not have thought about before and i think we may have set a good foundation for him going forward. It would be great to hear what others think and also if anyone is interested in coaching around business and financial matters with a spiritual twist just drop me a message, its free with a voluntary donation if you feel you got some value out of it. (hopefully this is allowed, its honestly just a way to serve people with what ive learnt over the years)

Thank you brother

This is not too hard to work out who's behind it lol. However I don't think they're appreciating how hard it is to keep a forum going especially if you don't have a consistent way of getting new people onto it, forums can easily turn into graveyards. But wow who thought there'd be so much warfare in spiritual community

I think youre taking things a bit too literal/serious, these are just ideas and ways of looking at the world. Its not a case of "4 gurus said this but 10 said something else so the majority must be right", Sadhguru and others are trying to make you understand something that essentially can not be communicated through language, he will do it using different metaphors and stories that just make you think. Regarding the heaven on earth there has been loads of symbolism around this through history, if you look at Christianity, the garden of eden is pretty much heaven on earth and then humans become corrupted (possible by the mind represented by the serpent), and exiled from it. You can take the whole parable as a metaphor for we could be in Heaven now if we just realise and are content with what we have, which is absolute abundance. This very much is the case in reality. Jesus also said - “Thy kingdom come on earth as in heaven.” Which seems to be about creating heaven on earth rather than being good and going to heaven. I think this echoes what Sadhguru was talking about.

Could you write a couple quotes that you personally disagree with?

I think with any teacher it's better to just judge on the actual content, like for example there could be something in particular he said that doesn't really make sense to you or seems really driven by ego, in which case there could be valid criticisms. But in general I don't think he talks in an overly mystical way, he tends to break things down in ways people can understand, which is one of his strengths in being able to talk to people where they're at. You may not like the delivery but I don't think that negates whether someone is quite advanced, a lot of people dont like Leo's delivery bur that doesn't mean he has a lot of great insights to share and is a developed person. But also it doesn't mean you have to like sadhguru, there are many different teachers that might be able to connect with you better.

The paper isn't great, he uses Osho as the example of what a guru should be, which although I believe Osho was awake he was arguably more flawed than Sadhuguru esp considering what happened with the community he setup. Also generally he's not even saying Sadhuguru is a fraud in the paper. In general ive always got quite deep vibes and general sense that Sadhguru is enlightened and in general has done a lot for mankind, esp with causes like this and trees which are not really fashionable, when the dust clears I think people will be very grateful for his contributions. Having said all that of course he's not above criticism and he himself has said something along the lines of don't just be devotee accepting everything I say, judge everything I say with whether it resonates and makes sense for you

I think i might be able to help with this, drop me a dm if youre up for having a chat via zoom to explore some of these issues

Yeah the thing is fear mongering works to get peoples attention whether it's mainstream or social media. I would say the social media fear mongering is much worse because they have very little checks and balances compared to mainstream, even though they fear monger about their freedom of speech being taken away ?

You have to really be careful with this content and i include Russell Brand in this. If you notice Ralph talks a lot about hot button issues even if he doesn't really know much about the topic and yes there could be some truth there, but he always seems to setup a "I'm on the side of truth against these evils (inorganics), are you with me". This creates an us against them mentality and shifts away from actually trying to learn about a topic in a nuanced way. I think he knows what titles and thumbnails and topics will get the most views and a lot of people realised during the pandemic that if you play off people's fears you can get a shitload of views. Even if you buy that he's a great spiritual teacher, which I don't personally, then that doesn't translate that he would about complex political situations. Its kinda like the Chappelle joke "what does Ja Rule think about this??". There are some yellow political podcasts and content that could give a much better analysis.

If you ever want to chat about it just drop me a message, im studying to be a financial advisor, have a business etc. I know its tough in London, i grew up there and still live near, its like everyones just there to grind and make money esp coming from over seas

I understand why you might think this, but i dont think its a case of Leo just not accepting views. If we look at Nahm as a teacher who, at least previously, holds some authority by being appointed a mod by Leo, it is very important that he meets people where they are at, which i think he rarely did imo. This forum has many vulnerable people on it and just having the inflexible 'you are not your thoughts' reply to every question, has the potential to be quite damaging. I had a couple discussions with Nahm myself and i left it very confused, either he just wasnt making sense or it was just way over my head. As i remember it was a discussion about LOA, in which i was skeptical about manifesting and he left several replies but i just couldnt understand it. Now i think its really on the teacher to teach in a way that could be understood and if we say Nahm is just incredibly enlightened, which could be the case, he has not found a way to communicate to people in a way that resonates, not on a wide scale anyway. So i think he should still make his content and those that want to consume it resonates with i think thats cool, but in terms of being on a large platform and being able to influence people as well as charge for his time, i dont think it works unfortunately.

I think most people that get into conspiracy theories are looking for truth. But they reality is the world is very complicated and nuanced, CTs offer a very simplified way of looking at the world, where there are good guys and bad guys, evil vs good. This is very appealing as it offers a way to understand the world which we all crave, I think there's an anxiety of not knowing. To be clear many other ideologies offer this, religion, politics etc. I think real truth seeking starts with the acceptance of not knowing, being OK with not having an all encompassing world view. Accepting the anxiety you feel of not knowing and being cool with it. From this point you're not tied to any ideology and can take in new information without it having to make it fit into an already established theory. If you notice this is why most CTs spin off and get bigger and bigger because new information has to be explained within the context of a theory. If you're seeking truth you will have to hold multiple ideas in your head at once and not favour one over another just because it fits a narrative. So for example yes Pfizer are trying to make money from their vaccine, but also yes the vaccine will save many lives.

Genuine offer - we can video call and talk through some stuff. Im currently studying to be a financial advisor and have also run businesses for the last 15 years and not had a job for the last 8 years. DM me if you want to set something up

It's out of context though I'm saying that as a potential criteria for making decisions in place of a government. As in if you make a lot of profit and also impactful decisions, these decisions you make can affect that profit positively or negatively, now you may not use this for your benefit but I think the temptation to is a risk. Its like if you're a judge and you have to make a legal decision in regards to a family member, obviously your judgement is going to be affected even if its unconsciously. In terms of just making a profit I don't have anything against it.

There is no matter

@captainamerica I didn't say anything against profits. This dialouge is going off in a lot of different directions and we seem to be talking past each other, you've said a lot but I don't actually know what your point is. Are you making the argument that wealthy, poweful individuals shouldn't be taxed?

Dismissive avoidant and yeah it does line up I would say, I always feel like i want someone there but just kinda in the background

But yeah in theory, after a country has met is expenses etc if there's a profit then yeah you can have a tax I don't see a problem with that, I mean probably they'll make sure they spend all their money

I take your point which as I understand it is if the wealth is concentrated in one country, should that countries wealth be redistributed amongst other countries within the global community. A utopian answer might be that yes all wealth should be redistributed. But of course that would be a complex thing to just impart, having said that there is more responsibility on countries like the US to offer aid, military support etc to less wealthy countries. Regarding being taxed on an individual level for one each person within the system has tacitly agreed to it, so once you've made money you can't just turn around and say I don't want to contribute anymore, if you do then you are free to go to Puerto Rico or wherever and pay less tax if you choose. But in theory you have used the US system and people to make your money, it wasn't done in a vacuum. Also this money that you are being taxed in theory should help others also become successful.

I'll answer your question but answer mine first, as its more relevant to the topic. What is the criteria, apart from being extremely wealthy, for an individual to be able to make decisions that affect a mass amount of people?