Leo's Blog Discussion Mega-Thread

[abc123]

34 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Since I heard him deny that God exists.

Kind of a big deal for a spiritual teacher to deny that.

You are acting like I nitpicked him on some triviality.

Some quotes on https://oshofriends.com/god 

"THIS experience is God." < This is literally what you said as well in some of your videos. 

"God is a pure isness, pure existence, and there is nowhere for God to go or come."

Yes, he often prefers to use the word Godliness instead of God. But does that matter? You also call it infinite, eternal, Love and Consciousness. And Osho uses those exact words as well. 

________________________________________________
You also said:

"Why is Osho speaking about God as something outside of Reality/Existence?"   

He only does this when he talks about the 'bearded man version' -> "God is absolutely absurd -- nobody can manage existence from the outside".  Because as you can see on the quote above, he equals God with pure existence already.

________________________________________________

I just think that you and Osho have always talked about the same thing, and so have many other forum members. That's why this discussion has continued longer than necessary.
 

 

 

Edited 12 hours ago by abc123

[Leo Gura]

19 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

Buddha didn't really use the term God. 

"God has no religion."

Hence Buddha is suss.

[Leo Gura]

5 minutes ago, abc123 said:

I just think that you and Osho have always talked about the same thing

That is a shakey assumption.

[UnbornTao]

God is an infinite self-recursive system with perception mediating the bridge between relative love and Absolute Love. 

See? Talk is cheap. Now imagine that it isn't so blatant. Start talking like that. Polish that kind of nonsense and expand on it, and gullible people will love it and start thinking of yourself as "awakened." They won't know the difference. 

Edited 11 hours ago by UnbornTao

[UnbornTao]

12 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Hence Buddha is suss.

Of course. You set the criterion, like how many drugs are taken.

So when are you finally going to turn alien on camera?

[Leo Gura]

The only criterion is consciousness.

I don't set it.

Edited 11 hours ago by Leo Gura

[UnbornTao]

19 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

The only criterion is consciousness.

I don't set it.

Yep, sounds good. I thought you were actually being pedantic about a superficial point like semantics.

Use the quote function, God.

[Terell Kirby]

@Leo Gura your position on religion is somewhat confusing to me at times, so I’m posting to understand and broaden my perspective.

When atheist criticism is brought into the picture, I notice you steel man religion. Yet you’ve repeatedly cited Christianity as wrong and antithetical to truth- I’m sure there’s nuance in your perspective but I’m having a hard time finding it.

Religion is ultimately antithetical to truth, though it acknowledges God exists-it distorts it with human fairytale. If religion is correct in that God exists, atheism is also right that religion is stupid in many ways.

 

Edited 9 hours ago by Terell Kirby

[Leo Gura]

@Terell Kirby Religion is corrupt and stupid in many ways, however, the reason for its existence is not corruption and stupidity.

Religion has a genuine source, which the atheist is ignorant of.

Edited 3 hours ago by Leo Gura

[manuel bon]

@Leo Gura I think osho was pointing at the same thing that you do when speaking about god, but he negates its existence, he wants to eliminate that word, because it’s very easy to get confused with the typical gods people refer to. 
I had no god realisation, but I do resonate and somehow connect with what you Leo say about god. But at the same time when I hear that word I still get triggered, cause there’s a lot of social conditioning around it, so maybe osho’s attempt was to not label it like that. 
 

[manuel bon]

If I would be a god realised guru, I would probably not use the word god to talk about it. But I mean, I say all this but what do I know 

[Stick]

Me on my way to realize I am godliness:

 

Edited 1 hour ago by Stick
refining

[Leo Gura]

43 minutes ago, manuel bon said:

he wants to eliminate that word

That is the problem.

If you were conscious of GOD you would not be interested in eliminating that word, because it is perfect.

When you don't understand the perfection of the word, that's what tells you you don't understand what GOD is.

If the word was wrong, I wouldn't use it. I use it because it right, not because I want to. It is not a personal choice.

I was a fucking atheist, don't forget. I had no love for the word.

Edited 1 hour ago by Leo Gura

[Stick]

Actualized quote #631
How is it possible to be wrong?
Ans: It is impossible to be wrong. If you think that giraffes are god, that is the truth. If you think godliness is god, that is the truth.
If you think your wife is cheating you with the mailman, that too is the truth. Nothing other than the truth exists.

[AtmanIsBrahman]

14 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

I use it because it right, not because I want to. It is not a personal choice.

I was a fucking atheist, don't forget. I had no love for the word.

Why do you choose to use the word God instead of Absolute?

Both words seem accurate to me. The downside is that “absolute” is more syllables and sounds presumptuous and intellectual. Aside from that though, it does avoid the religious connotations of the word God.

[Osaid]

Osho's elaboration, basically.

I gotta steelman him or he'll roll in his grave.

Edited 1 hour ago by Osaid

[Osaid]

Very interesting distinction to make, I kinda like it.

Edited 1 hour ago by Osaid

[Leo Gura]

24 minutes ago, Stick said:

Ans: It is impossible to be wrong.

That is wrong.

Contemplate harder.

11 minutes ago, AtmanIsBrahman said:

Why do you choose to use the word God instead of Absolute?

I don't choose it.

God is the only thing that exists.

10 minutes ago, Osaid said:

Osho's elaboration, basically.

I gotta steelman him or he'll roll in his grave.

Garbage.

[manuel bon]

@Leo Gura I get what you say. But what I mean is not about if the word itself is perfect or not, it’s about the meaning people assign to it.
So even if you say that the word is perfect, somebody listening to your teachings can get triggered by the meaning that society gives to the word god 

[Natasha Tori Maru]

17 minutes ago, Osaid said:

Very interesting distinction to make, I kinda like it.

"No." is a complete sentence - "Every complete sentence requires both (a noun and verb)"

It lies!!! 😅😅😅