Leo's Blog Discussion Mega-Thread

[Yimpa]

12 minutes ago, LambdaDelta said:

Miss Keryo very much!

Remember this beautiful edit they made?

 

OMG, me being da bitch is seriously the highest compliment 🐶

PIZZZAAAAA INFINITYYYY!

[LambdaDelta]

4 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

I know what the deal is.  No need to school me.  Thank you though.  

Could be useful for others reading the thread though, is not necessarily personally addressed 

[Joseph Maynor]

4 minutes ago, LambdaDelta said:

Could be useful for others reading the thread though, is not necessarily personally addressed 

I don't know, but I said it.  Don't take it as an authority.  I don't even know what you look like.  

[Eskilon]

2 hours ago, LambdaDelta said:

Trouble is pretty much everyone has that self-assessment, few ppl wanna admit they're clowns. Using x-ray vision to sort the wheat from the chaff looks more viable, especially given there's not that many regular users here; easy to memorize patterns. Regular posting itself is not a good sign, some of the coolest stuff I've seen from those just dropping in after a couple years of quietly doing the work and peacing out again. 

 @LambdaDeltaI mean, how can one not clown when Leo acts arrogantly? I think it is even justified, arrogance is delusion.

This is, as you said here, a pattern that he displays since years ago, no need to glaze or defend.

Edited yesterday at 09:39 PM by Eskilon

[Joseph Maynor]

Here is the conundrum.  If God is an Individual, then how does the relation exist? 

[LambdaDelta]

13 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

I don't even know what you look like.  

According to @Yimpa, like a stuffed fox looking into the void 🫣

 

 

9 minutes ago, Eskilon said:

 @LambdaDeltaI mean, how can one not clown when Leo acts arrogantly? I think it is even justified, arrogance is delusion.

This is, as you said here, a pattern that he displays since years ago, no need to glaze or defend.

Notice I didn't bring up Leo in this context. I do think he sometimes overdoes it with self-gratifying posting, like calling scientists retarded in 50 different ways and whatnot, at least partly as cope for the sacrifices & loneliness of the path, but there's sufficient instances of him admitting he's only human and not above corruption/ego. Ultimately how he acts here matters very little. In the same way, if he were a cult leader and claimed 1+1=2, would you dispute that because it's said by a cult leader? The arrogance seems more improper to those that treat him like a guru, to me there's no such thing, just a guy I listen to that knows more about certain things, and maybe in the future that'll become redundant too. 

Forum Leo is basically:

 

 

[Natasha Tori Maru]

It's plain hubris to think you can understand precesely what another is communicating or meaning with certain terms.

We have discussed at length, over multiple threads, that words do not have inherent meaning without context. Words are symbols and not containers. The tension is that words have enough shared meaning to create some overlap between minds....

We essentially communicate in our own language, transmitting the weight of our context and feeling out, and try to be understood. 

It's why we engage in good faith discussion.

But more often than not, nothing is discussed in good faith. The discussion ends as it does because we stop treating language as an attempt to communicate. We start treating it like some kind of evidence for prosecution.

Again it's "Not knowing" that has power.

[Adrian colby]

1 hour ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

It's plain hubris to think you can understand precesely what another is communicating or meaning with certain terms.

We have discussed at length, over multiple threads, that words do not have inherent meaning without context. Words are symbols and not containers. The tension is that words have enough shared meaning to create some overlap between minds....

We essentially communicate in our own language, transmitting the weight of our context and feeling out, and try to be understood. 

It's why we engage in good faith discussion.

But more often than not, nothing is discussed in good faith. The discussion ends as it does because we stop treating language as an attempt to communicate. We start treating it like some kind of evidence for prosecution.

Again it's "Not knowing" that has power.

I like to call it abstraction. I was talking to a new Ager and my brother in law overheard. He went to his mother to say I was mental so I ended up having to explain symbolic language and getting to what the person is trying to point at using simile, metaphor ,analogy to similar patterns in different style language or framework. I called it abstraction.  Likening it to the Socratic method or what Pierre grimes would do with dreams. 
 

I did it with my dad in hospital when he was up to his eyeballs on morphine. Everyone else dismissed his slurred rambling and left the room. I had one of the most interesting conversations I’ve ever had with him. 
 

I also get what you say about meaning but only in context. This became very apparent to me while figuring out how AI was stringing words together to make intelligible sentences. It’s also something that has cropped up after my (very recent) autism diagnosis and that is not understanding what people are saying particularly in short group chat comments on the likes of WhatsApp and it’s because the word or sentence lacks the context. Just as with the nature of reality, meaning cannot mean something unless it relates to another meaning. It’s the relationship between the two where any understanding or distinction can occur. 
 

that’s just going to send me off into an expanding contemplation… I’ll stop my brain before it keeps itself awake all night 🫢

[TheEnigma]

14 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

NO!

I am speaking of a level of consciousness of GOD that no one here comprehends. Including that sly dog Osho.

I am never speaking about mere words or even ideas.

I am speaking about things that would make Osho poo his silly pants.

I see so many low conscious religious people be able to be at peace. They will say "When I die, I will just be with the lord." So isn't it easier to be happier with low consciousness? They can just deny it and trust their religion, believe they're just moving on to another life and trick their own minds. Yet you said generally higher consciousness is happier. But higher consciousness also means the individual's mind is more complex and they contemplate more concepts.

Edited 18 hours ago by TheEnigma

[Leo Gura]

9 hours ago, Sugarcoat said:

You guys will ban someone posting quality stuff because they fuck up once then you complain about “lack of high consciousness” on this forum 

We give people so many chances here.

Those people were not banned for saying one wrong thing. They were banned after numerous violations and warnings.

If anything, we are too lenient and kind here. At least we were in the past. Now I am more strict because I learned the hard way that warning people does not make them change their immature ways. You can't warn a troublemaker into stop making trouble. That's what running this forum for 10 years has taught me.

Edited 17 hours ago by Leo Gura

[UnbornTao]

On 6/5/2026 at 9:40 AM, zurew said:

This is just another empirical claim , where you have a sample size of 1 and you make your assertions and 100% confident inferences given that sample and then you expect people to take you seriously when you create another 2 hour video on epistemology and about epistemic responsibility.

Like yeah dude congratulations for your highly intelligent inference -   mystics who dont understand any english are categorically removed from being God realized.

Given the Ralston thread it seemed that you had a basic understanding about language and label usage - that multiple different labels can be used to point to the same thing -  so I dont undersatnd given that why you make confident inferences just purely from label usage.

 

 

It seems that you give more fucks about people simulating understanding by parroting your preferred labels than about figuring out who has what level of understanding irrespective of the labels they use. 

People will use your terminology here and you will be immediately swayed by it and infer from that they have a high level  understanding of spirituality.

Given your super unsophisticated scheme for figuring out who has what level of understanding, its comically easy for anyone to trick you into thinking that they are much more profound than they actually are.

Poetry.

Edited 12 hours ago by UnbornTao

[UnbornTao]

14 hours ago, Davino said:

I don't know why I keep expecting higher intelligence, maturity and consciousness from this forum. Even here, most people lack the seriousness to properly talk about God or even be a highly developed human being. 

If you know you are one of the serious ones or have that calling in you, text me via PM, I wanna know you and get out of the herd noise. Let's do real work.

Haha, yep. Where the drugs at?

[Leo Gura]

On 6/5/2026 at 7:25 AM, Someone here said:

What Leo mean by god is what Osho mean by Godliness.  Leo insists “NO . It is GOD not “Godliness “.  Do you really think the issue is what’s the correct word is for the same concept in mind ? 

You gotta wonder, why is Osho so allergic to the simple term God and needs to twist himself into a pretzel to call it "godliness" instead?

What the fuck is this "godliness"? This is a complicated, weaselly word. If there is no God, then where the hell did the godliness come from? This is like smoke without a fire.

It would be like me saying there's no such thing as cats, but there is catliness.

If you know what a cat is, you don't use words like catliness. Because cat is the direct word. Now, if your audience were under the impression that cats are unicorns, you would not tell them cats don't exist, you would instead tell them that cats exist, and then explain that a cat is not a unicorn. Which is what I'm doing.

Edited 8 hours ago by Leo Gura

[ryoko]

@Leo Gura why are you listening to Osho. He died 30 years ago or something. 

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, ryoko said:

@Leo Gura why are you listening to Osho. He died 30 years ago or something. 

Because it's a broader lesson for you guys who listen to all sorts of gurus.

I don't listen to gurus. I don't need anyone to tell me what God is. I am here to educate and point out traps in this journey.

Edited 6 hours ago by Leo Gura

[ryoko]

Haha. Osho can be stupid sometimes. 

[ryoko]

Sometimes I feel Leo's gone and an imposter has replaced him in his stead. 

[Leo Gura]

Leo was the imposter and God is the replacement

[ryoko]

😂I liked Leo better.

[Leo Gura]

A devil likes a devil.