Leo's Blog Discussion Mega-Thread

[Raze]

9 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Because it's God and Love.

Those people are clueless.

God is so God that once you experience it, you won't want to call it anything else.

Truly, I only require one word to explain everything.

GOD.

What if you were raised in a culture that’s language didn’t have the word God or love and has something else or nothing at all 

[Joseph Maynor]

I like the post on epistemology.  Epistemology is interesting in how it relates to metaphysics.

[Eskilon]

2 hours ago, aurum said:

Why would 'Pure Consciousness' not suffer from the same problem as using 'God'?

No, because consciousness is more relatable than the word God. If you say consciousness to a person he will get it better than the word God. It is a better pointer.

 

2 hours ago, aurum said:

You could argue he is switching up his answer as a teaching device, but that seems like unnecessary confusion to me.

It is more nuanced and compassionate approach. The same way if you had a daughter who is 5 years old and she ask about death, will you say stuff about it? Probably you will not be direct and with a ready-made answer. Each person deserves an unique answer because no two people are the same.

Edited 4 hours ago by Eskilon

[Stick]

On the 'OSHO wrong on God' blog I think that you are really undermining OSHO.
The dude didn't do a single drug yet he reached such high level of permanent trance.
How many psychedelic trip did it require you to see God? @Leo Gura
OSHO did it all through meditation and contemplation.
Although he didn't fully realize God he was very close.
Gotta give some respect to the goat.

[aurum]

3 hours ago, Eskilon said:

It is more nuanced and compassionate approach. The same way if you had a daughter who is 5 years old and she ask about death, will you say stuff about it? Probably you will not be direct and with a ready-made answer. Each person deserves an unique answer because no two people are the same.

There's tailoring your answer to your audience, and then there's just confusion.

I feel this is just confusion.

[abc123]

13 hours 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.

11 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

That is the whole problem.

He doesn't grasp God. That is why he is resorting to these word games.

Come on dude, you are all about understanding context and making clear distinctions.

- Here is a talk in "Being Loose and Natural" of him saying this:

"The word brahmacharya means that you have come to attain, you have come to know that you are the brahman, the ultimate, the divine – God himself you are. When one starts feeling this that one is God himself...."

- Or read some of his sayings about God here:
https://oshofriends.com/god

 

11 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

That's not all. That's a stupid thing to bother rejecting.

A man of Osho's intellect should know better than to be rejecting a strawman.

You yourself reject the strawman version of God in your episode: What Is God? - Part 1

"....God exists certainly I'm not meaning that there is a bearded man in the clouds sitting down looking upon you and judging you and throwing you into hell that's not what"

So of course, he as well needs to make clear what he means with God and what he does not mean with it.

____________________________________________________________

I find your conclusion a bit reckless here.