Leo's Blog Discussion Mega-Thread

[ryoko]

https://www.actualized.org/insights/hold-off-on-psychedelics-if-youre-young

Just came across this post. Heavily Agree. I had mystical experiences at young ages, it was enough destabilization on it's own. Then, I was watching Leo's videos like it's my curriculum, for a good while. Those were also the best things that's happened to me despite all of the destabilization. Because it gave me something to integrate towards, and even grow out of. It just makes your life so difficult. Like imagine, losing grip on the world around you in your early 20s. hahaha. Also imagine total desensitization to death. For a long time, I was totally paralyzed at the idea of ever being part of this world. And it made me paralyzed from ever doing anything compromised. Body knows best. It forced me to find what I really wanna do, to the point I don't need to care about survival or the need to make money. I'm grateful it pushed me into this, even though it was a rough realization, and the journey ahead is rougher still. 

[Human Mint]

@ryoko You could try them at your 40's. Makes no difference.

Also psychedelics are quite useless if you don't do all the spiritual work besides.

Edited Monday at 12:43 AM by Human Mint

[Yimpa]

Posted 2.0 days after my birthday 🤭

https://www.actualized.org/insights/the-highest-purpose

Wa-Hoot!!!

Edited yesterday at 01:46 AM by Yimpa

[TheEnigma]

On 5/29/2026 at 6:32 AM, Leo Gura said:

You are creating a lot of noise, but the main point still stands. That is how pre-rational people reason.

How come social conditioning is so hard to unlearn? I was raised as a Baptist Christian. But even with a lot of mindfulness and incredible effort it's still so difficult to change my wiring. my friend told me "I know... What happens to us when we are young is just so powerful...!" Even for that friend, they're trying to unlearn all the religious teachings they learned. And now they realized and feel scammed. How come it's so hard to change conditioning learned from a young age?

Edited Wednesday at 11:08 PM by TheEnigma
Typo

[Leo Gura]

@TheEnigma Because the brain is not as flexible as people assume. The brain is a physical structure that gets hard-coded and cemented into shape. The foundation of your mind/sanity goes extremely deep. It is not something that can be toyed with. You cannot just change your brain/mind on a whim. It is responsible for your daily survival.

Edited yesterday at 04:06 AM by Leo Gura

[emil1234]

@Leo Gura i wanna point out that your recent blog post about Osho; hes talking about the concept of God in a religious sense (i've seen the entire clip). He very much affirms that God exists as Consciousness, Existence itself - but he rejects the word "god" because of the connotations the word carries. 

edit; couldnt find the excact original clip, but heres another where he basically says the same thing: 

 

Edited 10 hours ago by emil1234

[Leo Gura]

13 minutes ago, emil1234 said:

he rejects the word "god" because of the connotations the word carries. 

Sorry, not buying it.

There is no other word for God but God.

I refuse to accept that anyone who is allergic to the word because of history is actually conscious of God, because if he was, he would not object to the word.

You don't throw away a perfect word just because some idiots used it incorrectly in the past.

Osho speaks of God as if he doesn't understand what it is.

Edited 10 hours ago by Leo Gura

[emil1234]

8 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Sorry, not buying it.

There is no other word for God but God.

I refuse to accept that anyone who is allergic to the word because of history is actually conscious of God, because if he was, he would not object to the word.

You don't throw away a perfect word just because some idiots used it incorrectly in the past.

Osho speaks of God as if he doesn't understand what it is.

I dont know, you should watch some of his lectures, he seem pretty damn realized to me. 

I dont think he cares about the word. He uses it as a rebellion against modern day religion, rejecting their external, manmade "God". I find his way of using the word quite appropiate in light of this agenda

Edited 10 hours ago by emil1234

[Leo Gura]

16 minutes ago, emil1234 said:

He uses it as a rebellion against modern day religion

Too cute by half.

[Eskilon]

34 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Sorry, not buying it.

There is no other word for God but God.

I refuse to accept that anyone who is allergic to the word because of history is actually conscious of God, because if he was, he would not object to the word.

You don't throw away a perfect word just because some idiots used it incorrectly in the past.

Osho speaks of God as if he doesn't understand what it is.

So if a realized master refuses to use the word, does that mean he didn't realize? Couldn't it be a device he is using as in the case of Buddha too not liking to use the word and even refusing answering methaphysical questions?

I think this is a function of stlye of teaching and nothing else, some stlyes are more preachy and affirmative and others more silent and vacuous. But both are true.

Edited 9 hours ago by Eskilon

[bazera]

https://www.actualized.org/insights/osho-wrong-on-god

He mentions the word "True Self". Isn't that the same thing that you mean by saying "God"? @Leo Gura

Edited 9 hours ago by bazera

[Yimpa]

9 minutes ago, bazera said:

https://www.actualized.org/insights/osho-wrong-on-god

The link doesn't work properly from that link 

 

Update: nvm, looks good when I copy and paste the wrong link into Google search:

Edited 9 hours ago by Yimpa

[vibv]

41 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Sorry, not buying it.

There is no other word for God but God.

I refuse to accept that anyone who is allergic to the word because of history is actually conscious of God, because if he was, he would not object to the word.

You don't throw away a perfect word just because some idiots used it incorrectly in the past.

Osho speaks of God as if he doesn't understand what it is.

No one understands what God is. Not even you.

But we all have unique perspectives, which are of immeasurable worth & beauty.

Out of his perspective it's perfectly reasonable to deny the existence of God.

[Leo Gura]

13 minutes ago, Eskilon said:

So if a realized master refuses to use the word, does that mean he didn't realize? Couldn't it be a device he is using as in the case of Buddha too not liking to use the word and even refusing answering methaphysical questions?

I think this is a function of stlye of teaching and nothing else

I used to believe that but no longer.

If they reject the word, then I will reject their realization. That is my new policy.

10 minutes ago, bazera said:

He mentions the word "True Self". Isn't that the same thing that you mean by saying "God"? @Leo Gura

No. Not even close to what I mean.

4 minutes ago, vibv said:

No one understands what God is. Not even you.

You don't know that.

4 minutes ago, vibv said:

Out of his perspective it's perfectly reasonable to deny the existence of God.

Perhaps reasonable, but false.

[vibv]

9 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

You don't know that.

I don't know what you know. But I know that no one understands God.

Quote

Perhaps reasonable, but false.

It's true. But incomplete.

[iamlite]

Even Osho came under Leo's pen  

[Eskilon]

31 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

I used to believe that but no longer.

If they reject the word, then I will reject their realization. That is my new policy.

 

[Someone here]

Osho rejects the god which is a separate creator old guy sitting in the cloud . And he is true there is no God if that’s what’s meant by god in the minds of most people. That’s all.

[Joseph Maynor]

Who is God?

[Someone here]

2 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

Who is God? 
 

God is what is . That’s Ramana Maharashi’s answer.