Lack of kindness within this style

[PolyPeter]

Hello there!!!  I hope you are all doing epic. 

I am concerned about the quality of all of this work in the love domain.

What I sense, is that after having watched many many hours of Leo's content, I ended up feeling mistreated.

I am willing to try and understand your points of view on this, since I deeply value and enjoy most of the very advanced explanations and topics. 

I would not be the human I am today had I not come across the content on YouTube, and that is truly amazing, for the better. But today, I found that the style itself is a little bit not so gentle. I don't really know how to put it in words, but it feels like Leo is mad at humanity for not being awake enough, and I contrast this communication style in particular against Rupert Spira's style. 

I appreciate anyone taking the time to answer to this message. 

Thanks Leo in particular, a lot of the teachings are providing massive value into my well being, everyday. 

Saludos desde Córdoba, Argentina! 🎶

[Flowerfaeiry]

It’s just his style 💞

[PolyPeter]

3 minutes ago, Flowerfaeiry said:

It’s just his style 💞

It can be! I mean, it is. 

It is also part of his style to take into account infinite imagination. 

which comes to a surprise that when having infinite imagination at your disposal, you may not use it to your advantage when it comes to maximize the amount of love in each communication. 

What do you think about that?

[tuku747]

8 minutes ago, PolyPeter said:

It can be! I mean, it is. 

It is also part of his style to take into account infinite imagination. 

which comes to a surprise that when having infinite imagination at your disposal, you may not use it to your advantage when it comes to maximize the amount of love in each communication. 

What do you think about that?

Tough-Love sort of situation.

His videos seem mostly directed at male, left-brained physicalists who consider themselves rational and evidence-based.

Someone's gotta shake them out of that trance.

Edited March 22 by tuku747

[Flowerfaeiry]

7 minutes ago, PolyPeter said:

It can be! I mean, it is. 

It is also part of his style to take into account infinite imagination. 

which comes to a surprise that when having infinite imagination at your disposal, you may not use it to your advantage when it comes to maximize the amount of love in each communication. 

What do you think about that?

I would focus more on what you want to see in the world and how you can contribute to that than figuring out why Leo is the way he is ❤️

[PolyPeter]

3 minutes ago, tuku747 said:

Tough-Love sort of situation.

His videos seem mostly directed at male, left-brained physicalists who consider themselves rational and evidence-based.

Someone's gotta shake them out of that trance.

Good point. I think this year I lost a friend due to the stubborn mindset he had.

I tried talking to him about consciousness, the unity of existence and the concept of truth itself.

he just sort of attacked back at my arguments and dismissed the entire question I had made: "Is there an absolute truth?" 

and it got me thinking, the depth of the self-deception. the dude is nowadays a graduated physicist. he truly knows the math behind all of current physics, but in the epistemological domain, he gets confused so easily and tries to sweep under the rug the fact that axiomatic systems like the whole of what he uses to map the world, have nothing to do with the gaps in math itself, only because physics "maps to reality", and if the model is wrong, we update it to what reality tells us.

Having said this, I also found out that, I found myself trying to get him to understand my points about the nature of the universe from a non-dual perspective, but he started demanding PROOFs and LOGIC!!! even when there was no proof or logic behind the current assumptions of the current physics models. 

I feel very sad for him, his intellectual pursuits are taking him very far in the technical domain, but also very far away from spirituality. he believes he is his body and that there is almost no space between each thought. and that humanity is not special, like "some of use want to believe" 

anyways, I think that being in a tough-love situation was the initial mode of thinking and behaving that gave rise to the materialistic mindset, and that by reproducing it, it can only create more materialistic-like mindsets... what do you think, Tuku 747?

[PolyPeter]

10 minutes ago, Flowerfaeiry said:

I would focus more on what you want to see in the world and how you can contribute to that than figuring out why Leo is the way he is ❤️

I definitely focus on what I want to see in the world and how I can contribute, this is precisely why I am starting this topic. 

I focus more on what I see and on what I want to create than on why Leo is the way he is, due to many reasons. time is one of them. 

I currently work a lot, as a software developer, I create tons of art, I produce my own music on a daily basis, and also live with my girlfriend, we get to have deep conversations about the nature of the world and why it is pretty pretty amazing just to be alive in the universe. 
 

Somedays I just lay in bed feeling the feeling of being alive and start to cry out of joy. I am infinite love. 

 

It is because I understand conceptually (to its limits) that I am this love, and experientially, directly, that I want to SHARE this understanding with the entire planet. 

 

I find this -not a community- a good steps towards the whole o mankind getting more and more loving. but I can't help it but to mention what amazes me the most. 

 

Again, infinite intelligence and infinite love are very very tightly related. and I know it is difficult to consider everything and by no means I am blaming nobody of how this is the way that it is. I think that we can still make it better as a whole. but it requires a mindful way of criticism and not just screaming at each other, or tough-love IMO.

[PolyPeter]

to begin with, I think that something pretty silly about this forum that could be enhanced, is the looks!!! 

it is a fully functional forum, but really an old-style looking forum, with a couple of bugs here and there.

I can't help it but to think that the experience of using this forum, may contribute to the messages being sent. 

even though it might not be the most important thing in the world, I think it can be much better and by enhancing the looks, enhancing the experience and therefore the overall energy.

this can be done by Leo himself if he wanted to, nowadays there are so many tools that would allow for him to update the entire website frontend in a couple of hours and have a massive user experience improvement. 

what do you think about this idea? do you have any other ideas?

[Flowerfaeiry]

6 minutes ago, PolyPeter said:

I definitely focus on what I want to see in the world and how I can contribute, this is precisely why I am starting this topic. 

I focus more on what I see and on what I want to create than on why Leo is the way he is, due to many reasons. time is one of them. 

I currently work a lot, as a software developer, I create tons of art, I produce my own music on a daily basis, and also live with my girlfriend, we get to have deep conversations about the nature of the world and why it is pretty pretty amazing just to be alive in the universe. 
 

Somedays I just lay in bed feeling the feeling of being alive and start to cry out of joy. I am infinite 

Reading this totally lit me up 

[PolyPeter]

18 minutes ago, Flowerfaeiry said:

Reading this totally lit me up 

Ohhh 🥹 🖤

[Schizophonia]

Leo is nice, he's just a little "dry."
And even then, I find him just normal.

[PolyPeter]

47 minutes ago, Schizophonia said:

Leo is nice, he's just a little "dry."
And even then, I find him just normal.

Hi, Schizophonia

When you say dry, what do you mean precisely? 
Do you ever think that this might be causing some of the viewers to misunderstand the point or to not be focused on the topic and instead distort the communication?

[Leo Gura]

You are right that my style has been harsh which is why I have been softening it lately. But it's still not going to ever be that Rupert Spira style.

I don't like soft and sweet styles of teaching because they do not properly represent the difficulty and seriousness of this work. It's like someone talking sweetly about war.

But I know my style is offputting to plenty of people.

Edited March 22 by Leo Gura

[Breakingthewall]

2 hours ago, PolyPeter said:

Good point. I think this year I lost a friend due to the stubborn mindset he had.

I tried talking to him about consciousness, the unity of existence and the concept of truth itself.

he just sort of attacked back at my arguments and dismissed the entire question I had made: "Is there an absolute truth?" 

and it got me thinking, the depth of the self-deception. the dude is nowadays a graduated physicist. he truly knows the math behind all of current physics, but in the epistemological domain, he gets confused so easily and tries to sweep under the rug the fact that axiomatic systems like the whole of what he uses to map the world, have nothing to do with the gaps in math itself, only because physics "maps to reality", and if the model is wrong, we update it to what reality tells us.

Having said this, I also found out that, I found myself trying to get him to understand my points about the nature of the universe from a non-dual perspective, but he started demanding PROOFs and LOGIC!!! even when there was no proof or logic behind the current assumptions of the current physics models. 

I feel very sad for him, his intellectual pursuits are taking him very far in the technical domain, but also very far away from spirituality. he believes he is his body and that there is almost no space between each thought. and that humanity is not special, like "some of use want to believe" 

anyways, I think that being in a tough-love situation was the initial mode of thinking and behaving that gave rise to the materialistic mindset, and that by reproducing it, it can only create more materialistic-like mindsets... what do you think, Tuku 747?

Physicists easily understand metaphysics; you just have to explain irrefutable truths to them.

Does existence exist? If existence exists, does it have limits? Can it have them? Where? If it has no limits, then you are existence. Otherwise, you would be the limit of existence. If you are existence, and existence has no limits, you have no limits. Or, to put it another way: you are. Expand yourself without limits. That's all metaphysics is about, It's pretty simple.

Edited March 22 by Breakingthewall

[Leo Gura]

17 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

Physicists easily understand metaphysics; you just have to explain irrefutable truths to them.

Just because you explain it to them, and it enters their ears, doesn't mean they fathom its significance.

They certainly won't understand it.

[ExploringReality]

I love your style Leo, it's like being pinned down or whipped with a stick. Maybe I'm a spiritual masochist, but suffering, transformation and hard work is welcomed and sometimes induced to an infrequent extreme amount. The suffering and hard work is surrendered too

Edited March 22 by ExploringReality

[Breakingthewall]

23 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Just because you explain it to them, and it enters their ears, doesn't mean they fathom its significance.

They certainly won't understand it.

It depends. An intelligent physicist has a mind more predisposed to understanding, even if only theoretically, infinity and what it implies. He also understands the complexity and impossible perfection of the structure of reality. If you tell them about God, they'll immediately think you're delusional, but if you use the words reality or infinity, and don't use human terms like love or will, but rather terms like unity or synchronicity, they can understand it. What you can't do is tell them anything that sounds messianic or mystical, only explanations based on their irrefutability.

 It's really easy to make someone intelligent and open-minded see that if they exist, and existence can't be anything other than unlimited, therefore they are existence and unlimited. They'll answer: I'm just a part of limited existence, with a beginning and an end. And you'll tell them that a part of something limitless also has no limits; it's impossible, any partition of infinity is infinite. Therefore, the limits their mind perceives are an erroneous perception. The correct perception would be to perceive themselves as limitless. Not to believe it, but to truly perceive it. Then, they know where to look, in those apparent limits, and dissolve them changing his perspective. They may or may not, but they have to admit that your logic is irrefutable.

Edited March 22 by Breakingthewall

[Schizophonia]

1 hour ago, PolyPeter said:

Hi, Schizophonia

When you say dry, what do you mean precisely? 
Do you ever think that this might be causing some of the viewers to misunderstand the point or to not be focused on the topic and instead distort the communication?

Hi 🖖

 

I mean who is stiff, does not seek to be pleasant.

[Leo Gura]

11 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

What you can't do is tell them anything that sounds messianic or mystical, only explanations based on their irrefutability.

This makes the conversation pointless.

Yeah, you can get them to hold a concept of an infinite universe. And so what?

Edited March 22 by Leo Gura

[Breakingthewall]

Just now, Leo Gura said:

This makes the whole conversation meaningless.

Yeah, you can get them to hold a concept of an infinite universe. And so what?

Then he has to accept that if he is not truly aware of his infintude right now, and he sees himself as limited, it is because there are barriers in his mind, then he could become aware that his mind can be observed, that he can enter the structures of his mind and see them as what they are, structures created based on innate inherited impulses, and that beyond those structures there is another mental vibration very different, the vibration that does not bounce off limits, and that, by definition, is the true one, the other is false since limits are false. what you could not do is make him dissolve those limits, he has to do that, if he can and he is interested, but he has to admit that you are not wrong