Nuancing “Fake vs Real” Spirituality

[Identity]

Hee Leo, hee community,

It’s been a while since posting. To be honest, over the last year or two the newer Actualized material resonated less with me. But this recent video on ‘fake spirituality’ really reconnected me again.

What struck me most was the longing and integrity for God. It reminded me of the genuine leadership Leo embodies, which reignited my motivation to deepen my spiritual practice and connection.

Interestingly, the time Leo has taken away from the regular pace of content creation has been valuable for me too. It gave me space to step back, integrate, and explore other perspectives.

One of the main perspectives I explored was a form of Nondual Tantra. Over the past two years, I’ve participated in a course with six week-long retreats and 10-day retreats, together with my girlfriend.

It was nice to see how well these teachings hold up against Leo’s “pure” yardstick for spirituality. The focus is on inquiry, direct experience, and practice, with with little dogma, and whatever tradition exists is held loosely, without the need to conform.

That said, while I see the value in separating “pure spirituality” from “survival,” I also feel something gets lost in that distinction.

The biggest growth I’ve experienced lately has been about integrating and embodying the spiritual connection I’ve built on my own. In previous years, the spiritual connection and understanding became solid; through years of meditation, 50+ trips, and a general attitude of metaphysical inquiry. There’s real substance in my experience of what the word God points to. By no means do I claim to have mastered this field but that hasn’t been the main growth edge for me.

What’s been most transformative is the integration work, especially during group retreats with around 50 people, where many inquiries are done in relationship with others.

If we use the chakra model for a moment, it seems Leo’s “pure spirituality” focuses mostly on opening the top two chakras. But for someone like me, whose challenge has been authentic expression, going deeper there without integration creates a separation between my solo work and the rest of life.

Simply drawing a hard line between “spirituality” and “survival” can be limiting. A big part, maybe the majority, of the work is allowing insight to permeate into life, into form, into survival.

One retreat exercise really showed me this. Using breathwork and meditation, I entered a mystical state where emptiness and infinity were crystal clear. Yet I could feel how it wasn’t fully integrated, how I longed to feel it in my heart, my bones, every cell of my body.

So while I see the value in a no-bullshit definition of spirituality, and the danger of muddying the waters, I also see the need for nuance. For expanding spirituality to include integration into form: in how we relate, live, and embody.

Just throwing this out there to see if it resonates. Also curious if you, @Leo Gurahave any thoughts on this.

With much love and gratitude.

[Carl-Richard]

The irony is spirituality is survival all up until you're liberated. Spirituality is spiritual ego all up until you disidentify with the ego. The true way to separate fake from real spirituality is what your aim is.

[Sincerity]

It's nice to hear (and see) you've been doing the work. The retreats you've done sound especially interesting. It shows from your writing that you have genuine insight and a developed perspective. 

11 hours ago, Identity said:

If we use the chakra model for a moment, it seems Leo’s “pure spirituality” focuses mostly on opening the top two chakras. But for someone like me, whose challenge has been authentic expression, going deeper there without integration creates a separation between my solo work and the rest of life.

Simply drawing a hard line between “spirituality” and “survival” can be limiting. A big part, maybe the majority, of the work is allowing insight to permeate into life, into form, into survival.

I think perhaps "spirituality" and "survival" could be seen as a spectrum. While I view the lower chakras as holy/spiritual as much as the higher ones, there is some truth in that the higher ones are "more spiritual". It's basically 2 perspectives, both true but looking from different angles. I prefer the former one, as currently in life I've been committed to really developing the 3rd one, and I indeed see it as a very spiritual pursuit.

[Eskilon]

2 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

The irony is spirituality is survival all up until you're liberated

Can you be awake without being liberated? Can you have desires and still be liberated? 

[Hojo]

@Eskilon I think you will still have them but see it as energy flowing not a desire.

[Identity]

3 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

The true way to separate fake from real spirituality is what your aim is.

@Carl-Richard Hmm, what are you pointing to with this sentence?

Do you mean, that the intent behind spiritual practice is the best way to suss out ‘real’ from ‘fake’, since before complete enlightenment there is always a sense of self in the work?

 

[Identity]

1 hour ago, Sincerity said:

It's basically 2 perspectives, both true but looking from different angles.

@Sincerity If I get you right, you’re saying from one perspective all developmental persuits are ‘spiritual’, whilst from another perspectice it can be seen as a spectrum ranging from ‘physical/survival’ to ‘spiritual’. Both being true in their own sense.

Yeah, that’s a nice way of looking at it

[Eskilon]

46 minutes ago, Hojo said:

I think you will still have them but see it as energy flowing not a desire.

An energy compelling you to act？

[Sincerity]

18 minutes ago, Identity said:

@Sincerity If I get you right, you’re saying from one perspective all developmental persuits are ‘spiritual’, whilst from another perspectice it can be seen as a spectrum ranging from ‘physical/survival’ to ‘spiritual’. Both being true in their own sense.

Yeah, that’s a nice way of looking at it

Yup, that’s right. Sorry I said it a bit unclearly.

I also meant to say that currently my aim is really developing the 3rd chakra, and that pursuit is what is spiritual for me now. Simply because that is the resonating step in my journey at this moment. And also because I’m conscious that I’m doing this, and I’m focusing on understanding this energy and applying it. I guess you could say that anything you do, if you’re doing it consciously and with understanding of it’s purpose, it becomes spiritual. That’s my view at least.

[Carl-Richard]

1 hour ago, Identity said:

Do you mean, that the intent behind spiritual practice is the best way to suss out ‘real’ from ‘fake’, since before complete enlightenment there is always a sense of self in the work?

It's the only way. You can use psychedelics alone in isolation, without social distractions or theological dogma to explore DMT realms and talk to entities, without aiming towards enlightenment. You can use meditation alone in isolation, without social distractions, merely to reduce stress and anxiety and become more calm and productive, without aiming towards enlightenment. You can use contemplation alone to become better at your business, your academic work, your social life, your emotional life, your intellectual life, without aiming towards enlightenment. But once you aim towards enlightenment, you can use all these things to move you in that direction. The practice, the path, is just that. It's not the goal. And it's generally not simple and one-dimensional. But your aim, ultimately, can be.

Edited August 9 by Carl-Richard

[Carl-Richard]

2 hours ago, Eskilon said:

Can you be awake without being liberated?

Yes.

 

2 hours ago, Eskilon said:

Can you have desires and still be liberated? 

No. You can have achievements, you can have drive, energy, industry, but on the inside, you're no one.

"People that are a little more perceptive, clearly see that I don't even exist" — Sadhguru

Edited August 9 by Carl-Richard

[Identity]

20 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

It's the only way. You can use psychedelics alone in isolation, without social distractions or theological dogma to explore DMT realms and talk to entities, without aiming towards enlightenment. You can use meditation alone in isolation, without social distractions, merely to reduce stress and anxiety and become more calm and productive, without aiming towards enlightenment. You can use contemplation alone to become better at your business, your academic work, your social life, your emotional life, your intellectual life, without aiming towards enlightenment. But once you aim towards enlightenment, you can use all these things to move you in that direction. The practice, the path, is just that. It's not the goal. And it's generally not simple and one-dimensional. But your aim, ultimately, can be.

Right, I hear you. And can definitely see in my own process also how at times there can be this pure intent, and at times there are other desires/motives behind the same practices.

With that, there is also a new respect for the need to be have a narrow and pure definition of what the word ‘spirituality’ refers to.

Thanks!

[Identity]

21 hours ago, Sincerity said:

Yup, that’s right. Sorry I said it a bit unclearly.

I also meant to say that currently my aim is really developing the 3rd chakra, and that pursuit is what is spiritual for me now. Simply because that is the resonating step in my journey at this moment. And also because I’m conscious that I’m doing this, and I’m focusing on understanding this energy and applying it. I guess you could say that anything you do, if you’re doing it consciously and with understanding of it’s purpose, it becomes spiritual. That’s my view at least.

Yes, well put!

was just reading the ‘conversations with god’ book and this sentence reminds me of what you mention here:

“Being at the spiritual game means dedicating your whole mind, your whole body, your whole soul to the process of creating Self in the image and likeness or God.”

So, it sounds like this moment is calling you to further embody your personal strength, and that being the right step in creating Self in the image and Likeness of God.

Yeah, that’s I guess also what this post was about. Is the fact that becoming aware of what god is, to deeper and deeper degrees is definitely a key dimension.

And yet the creating of self, and life, in the image and likeness of god, seems at least as big a task. And that definitely should be looked at as genuine spirituality.

[Eskilon]

21 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

Yes.

And how does that look like? Is Leo awake but not liberated？ Can you give me an example os someone who fits the awake but not liberated category, and also an example of the awake and liberated category.

[Carl-Richard]

2 hours ago, Eskilon said:

And how does that look like? Is Leo awake but not liberated？ Can you give me an example os someone who fits the awake but not liberated category, and also an example of the awake and liberated category.

First time I meditated and thought I was going to disappear forever and never come back, that was an awakening. Then I kept chasing that state all I could, until it happened again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again. Does that look like liberation? No. But it was many awakenings.

Awake and liberated:

Sadhguru. He talks about having the awakening experience and then it happening again and again and again, until it stabilized and he became the awakening experience. Rupert Spira. He talks about the "moth and the flame" analogy. He talks about at some point he was just tired of going in and out. Then he stabilized.

Gary Weber. He spent 20 000 hours practicing yoga and meditation, speaking about "always meditating until you got the mystical experience, like a carrot or reward for the session". Then at one point, he came out of a yoga posture and his thoughts just stopped. He went to a meeting without any thoughts and has since remarked (paraphrasing) "you would think somebody would notice, like there is a halo around your head or something, that shows there is nothing going on in there", but nobody noticed. It remained that way since then.

Edited August 10 by Carl-Richard

[Eskilon]

21 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

First time I meditated and thought I was going to disappear forever and never come back, that was an awakening. Then I kept chasing that state all I could, until it happened again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again. Does that look like liberation? No. But it was many awakenings.

Awake and liberated:

Sadhguru. He talks about having the awakening experience and then it happening again and again and again, until it stabilized and he became the awakening experience. Rupert Spira. He talks about the "moth and the flame" analogy. He talks about at some point he was just tired of going in and out. Then he stabilized.

So basically you will get liberated when you don't "get out" of the awakening experience, when that remains a constant in your life you are liberated, correct?

 

21 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

Gary Weber. He spent 20 000 hours practicing yoga and meditation, speaking about "always meditating until you got the mystical experience, like a carrot or reward for the session". Then at one point, he came out of a yoga posture and his thoughts just stopped. He went to a meeting without any thoughts and has since remarked (paraphrasing) "you would think somebody would notice, like there is a halo around your head or something, that shows there is nothing going on in there", but nobody noticed. It remained that way since then.

About this I have an interesting quote and a question to share. 

The quote is from Sri Aurobindo: "A quiet mind does not mean that there will be no thoughts or mental movements at all, but that these will be on the surface, and you will feel your true being within, separate from them, observing but not carried away".

Now, how does this fit with the Gary Weber example?

If you are awake and liberated, will you stop to having thoughts altogether and operate based on intuition and spontaneity or you will still have thoughts, but at the heart of it you are a very distant observer, and you can see thoughts happening like you see people walking on the street?

Also, theres a third possibility worth mentioning -- Where you have complete mastery of yourself and you will only ever think if you want. Meaning thoughts cannot happen out of the blue. Which has interesting implications for insight in my view(usually you have no control of when insights will hit you, in this state however, maybe you do?)

Edited August 10 by Eskilon

[Carl-Richard]

39 minutes ago, Eskilon said:

So basically you will get liberated when you don't "get out" of the awakening experience, when that remains a constant in your life you are liberated, correct?

Yas. But even in liberation, there is refinement, in terms of outward behaviors. That's where the different karmas come in (and the difference between enlightened jerks and saints). And you of course have ending bodily incarnations which is a different kind of liberation. Liberation in this life is "jivan mukti". Liberation from all life is a step up.

 

39 minutes ago, Eskilon said:

About this I have an interesting quote and a question to share. 

The quote is from Sri Aurobindo: "A quiet mind does not mean that there will be no thoughts or mental movements at all, but that these will be on the surface, and you will feel your true being within, separate from them, observing but not carried away".

Now, how does this fit with the Gary Weber example?

Compulsive thoughts about yourself virtually disappear. I gave the caveat with 5%, because Gary Weber reports those thoughts booting up again when his blood sugar drops. But he reports being able to use thoughts for problemsolving. But even there, he talks about a lessening of thoughts (he gives the rider and the elephant analogy; that most thoughts about problemsolving is like a secretary reporting what is happening, but the real action happens underneath, and often you don't need that reporting for problemsolving).

Edited August 10 by Carl-Richard