Sadhguru on Dr k

[Natasha Tori Maru]

5 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

@everyone, I'm curious, who here feels energy when watching/listening to Sadhguru?

I do not. 

Which is weird because I normally get reads and feelings from people when I pay attention. 

Just within the context of this interview - my impression was Sadhguru had a bit of mirth with his delivery, almost laughing at 'westerners' not seeing the obvious. It appears to me he is so far removed from the experience of typical seekers his delivery fell flat, as he seems unable to bridge the gap between his experience and the typical seeker.

I have no issue with the substance of what he teaches and says - I think it's valid. 

The delivery was just very odd to me, and I felt wholly unsatisfied with how he answered Dr. K's questions. 

 

[theoneandnone]

4 hours ago, Socrates said:

@Natasha Tori Maru Slopiness and mental gymnastics from newbies are expected, but from Leo, the bar is higher, so you'd better expect me to press him on his BS.

You have been around for over 3,000 years. I think you would have learned maturity and patience by now.

[Carl-Richard]

4 hours ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

I do not. 

Which is weird because I normally get reads and feelings from people when I pay attention. 

Jan Esmann?

 

4 hours ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

Just within the context of this interview - my impression was Sadhguru had a bit of mirth with his delivery, almost laughing at 'westerners' not seeing the obvious. It appears to me he is so far removed from the experience of typical seekers his delivery fell flat, as he seems unable to bridge the gap between his experience and the typical seeker.

I have no issue with the substance of what he teaches and says - I think it's valid. 

The delivery was just very odd to me, and I felt wholly unsatisfied with how he answered Dr. K's questions. 

I felt like Sadhguru didn't know who Dr. K was or what he was about, as if he was being interviewed by a journalist from CNN. And there have been many times he has come off as brash in earlier "in-depth" interviews, like the DiaryOfACEO one, really in most interviews that ask directed questions.

That's seemingly just his style, of not giving people too much charity and just steamrolling them with his message, even if it involves cutting them off. People will get triggered by that, but it also seems to me to be a method to the madness. He is very particular with how he interrupts people, often answering what they were about to ask anyway before they got more than a few words out, and often saving time in some way.

There is a sense where you getting triggered by Sadhguru is more him breaking a social convention of conversation than him being some kind of egomaniac (like, idk, Trump) that just spins bullshit or slings shit at other people. He's always focused on the message, always focused on the cause. And that's what you expect from people in these states (if I may say neuroscientifically; shutting down the default mode network means that what is active is the "doing" network). He is relentlessly doing, constantly, and it can be intense and sometimes triggering.

Edited October 10 by Carl-Richard

[Natasha Tori Maru]

10 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

 And there have been many times he has come off as brash in earlier "in-depth" interviews, like the DiaryOfACEO one, really in most interviews that ask directed questions.

That's seemingly just his style, of not giving people too much charity and just steamrolling them with his message, even if it involves cutting them off. People will get triggered by that, but it also seems to me to be a method to the madness. He is very particular with how he interrupts people, often answering what they were about to ask anyway before they got more than a few words out, and often saving time in some way.

There is a sense where you getting triggered by Sadhguru is more him breaking a social convention of conversation than him being some kind of egomaniac (like, idk, Trump) that just spins bullshit or slings shit at other people. He's always focused on the message, always focused on the cause. And that's what you expect from people in these states (if I may say neuroscientifically; shutting down the default mode network means that what is active is the "doing" network). He is relentlessly doing, constantly, and it can be intense and sometimes triggering.

I agree with this take!

FWIW I do not feel triggered at all when watching Sadhguru - my hypothesis above was just a general possible reason others feel emotional reaction to him. I have never had any sort of emotional reaction to listening to him.

Your point regarding him cutting into a question before the interviewer is valid also - and it is something I had to train myself out of in dialogue with others: I get an immediate sense for where the question is leading to so quickly, I feel the need to interrupt to cut the enquiry off to prevent the person (and myself) from wasting energy. The reason I trained myself out of this? The person often felt unheard, or that I was dismissing them. This resulted in me being labelled a snob and arrogant in my younger years - so I think it is a habit he may have adopted with the thought 'I will prevent you wasting time' rather than 'I know what you are going to say and it is irrelevant'. Just one possible reason he does this, and has good intentions behind it (saving energy)  

On the flip side is - behind that lies the assumption he KNOWS where this is going. And that IS actually slightly arrogant - because sometimes you cannot predict the direction an enquiry will go. It is a huge asset to remain open - and he does appear to be closed off in this way. It shows assumption - another reason his delivery might not agree with others. When I witness this, I see it as a function of certainty and confidence - but many do not see it this way. Speaking for myself - often I know exactly where something is going, but I now hold my tongue as the recipient being heard is a way for me to 'plate up' my answer in a nice way for them to enjoy the eating, rather than gag because I threw the food on the ground and said 'Here, enjoy your gruel'. It makes a point easier to integrate for the recipient. I had to learn patience. 

Quote

I felt like Sadhguru didn't know who Dr. K was or what he was about, as if he was being interviewed by a journalist from CNN.

Yes, I felt this too - but this might also come down to the interviewers. They may have needed to really think on how they can ask questions in different ways to prompt a deeper answer from Sadhguru. When I have interviewed others, I have done extensive research into the person prior to the interview and deliberately targeted areas of enquiry that I felt had not been probed. And formulated my questions in different ways as a prompt to reframe the answer. 

Sadhguru - like Leo - has his style. So it seems to me necessary to take a different approach to questioning him. 

I wouldn't have the hope for him to change his style based on my questions

[The Blind Sage]

7 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

I purchased his Inner Engineering program. It is a pure waste of time. And yet Sadhguru is telling Healthy Gamer that inner engineering will give you a silent mind. Pure nonsense.

@Leo Gura Completely agree on your previous criticisms of Sadhguru (refusing to acknowledge that he's a freak leading to false expectations, arrogance, etc) 

However, hard disagree with your take on the inner engineering program. From what I remember in previous discussions, you only took the preliminary IE-Online, and did not complete the IE-Completion - the in-person 2nd half of the course where they teach the actual practice Shambhavi Mahamudra Kriya

I'd happily concede that the online lectures (whatever you listened to in IE-online) are for normies, even if I personally found value in them. But to say that the entire program is 'a pure waste of time' is quite disappointing when you haven't even learned the kriya, the piece that's equal to 80/90% of the courses value

Now, if I'm mistaken, and you have in fact learned the kriya; I'd genuinely like to know - why did you find it a pure waste of time? It's given me and others tangible results and is far more potent than your average awareness paths like vipassana, vedanta, etc. Especially considering that you yourself are an advocate of kriya yoga Leo. In fact, what actually led me to take the program in the first place was that I was getting inconsistent results from JC stevens book. It's been 6 years since and the only reason I've taken more programs is because they've worked so well. Which is why I'm surprised at your take

 

To be clear, I have gratitude towards Sadhguru because he's empowered me in a profound way, how could I not be grateful for that? But make no mistake, I have no loyalty. This work is about me and my growth, nothing else, certainly not another person or an organization. Should we ever discover immoral acts such as financial/sexual/etc abuse I'd have no qualms in publicly condemning him. But, I'd be a fool to dismiss the practices

For context, it wouldn't surprise me if I left Ishas methods someday for something like ryan kurczaks lineage. But for now, I still feel the alignment so we shall see. However, I seriously doubt I'll ever stop practicing Hatha Yoga taught at Isha, it's fucking incredible. Most people are not capable of serious kriya yoga, or any other meditative process for that matter. They just don't have the bodies capable for it (myself included to a large extent, though Im actively working on it). This is what authentic hatha yoga does, it builds the fundamental integrity & malleability of the energy body so that when you do attempt kriya yoga you'll see results

Edited October 10 by The Blind Sage

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, The Blind Sage said:

However, hard disagree with your take on the inner engineering program. From what I remember in previous discussions, you only took the preliminary IE-Online, and did not complete the IE-Completion - the in-person 2nd half of the course where they teach the actual practice Shambhavi Mahamudra Kriya

I did attend a 2 or 3 day live training.

It is certainly more substantial than the online course, but I still prefer actual Kriya yoga.

My bias is for hardcore practices. I don't like wasting my time with watered down stuff. If I am going to do yoga I want the full deal, not a half-measure.

Edited October 10 by Leo Gura

[Carl-Richard]

1 hour ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

I agree with this take!

FWIW I do not feel triggered at all when watching Sadhguru

Well I do 😛 But again, it's just the "ugh, the social convention, muh feels".

 

1 hour ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

Your point regarding him cutting into a question before the interviewer is valid also - and it is something I had to train myself out of in dialogue with others: I get an immediate sense for where the question is leading to so quickly, I feel the need to interrupt to cut the enquiry off to prevent the person (and myself) from wasting energy. The reason I trained myself out of this? The person often felt unheard, or that I was dismissing them. This resulted in me being labelled a snob and arrogant in my younger years - so I think it is a habit he may have adopted with the thought 'I will prevent you wasting time' rather than 'I know what you are going to say and it is irrelevant'. Just one possible reason he does this, and has good intentions behind it (saving energy)  

To know what the person is going to say next, that's being quick. I've personally dealt with a slightly different problem that I kinda always know what the larger arch of the conversation will be, and I have had to teach myself not to find it simply boring but enjoy digging in the dirt.

[Natasha Tori Maru]

4 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

To know what the person is going to say next, that's being quick. I've personally dealt with a slightly different problem that I kinda always know what the larger arch of the conversation will be, and I have had to teach myself not to find it simply boring but enjoy digging in the dirt.

Do you think you can miss details as a result of seeing the overarching direction? I have this issue - I try to be aware of it.

In addition - I pay no heed to the truthfulness of statements made in isolation. Which can make me irritated when I read a truth because I can think of a few contexts in which it doesn't apply.... I admire logical thinkers who go for pure definitions. And that is because I miss relevant details as I seem to only pay attention to the parts I can directly apply. I default to 'how can I use this' with truth  So I never get to the point of asking 'is this true in all situations?' instead it is 'how is this truth relevant to this and how can I gain leverage with it'. 

Another shortfall of mine I am working on to enhance my thinking.

BOY THATS A LOT OF OVERTHINKING 

[Socrates]

Apart from the slopiness in here, the pod showcases to me how much underdeveloped orange/low green really is, mostly living in fantasy, projections, and ego identification of what you think you know, who you are, and basically mind bullshit. 

Imagine someone telling you, if you don't control the mind, you are "mentally ill", and you get triggered instead of reflecting: "Maybe he is into something". You're unredeemable with that attitude.

Fools don't want to grow; they want to appear smart. Appearances>substance, and drK's channel is so mainstream at this point that these guys are the vast majority.

Smart enough to understand some technical scientific study, but way too dumb to observe life and make conclusions of their own without parroting another fool.

 Unfortunately, this is the content of info-tainment consumption, and that is the result. Too many people think information is the same as wisdom. They are all underestimating the depth of this work.

 

 

 

[UnbornTao]

@Socrates You actually know a thing or two, liar.

[Salvijus]

It shows the level of mastery that he has. Regardless of who he's talking to (and I mean literally anyone) the result is always the same. The intelligence needed to play with the audience and the environment like that is awe inspiring. 

Edited October 10 by Salvijus

[hyruga]

18 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

I don't know why you guys keep hating on Sadhguru. He says correct things.

Stop hating on Sadhguru. He says correct things.

[Salvijus]

Really the talking that sadhguru does is just a smokescreen. He's not interested in chit-chating, he just burns like a flame. The only thing you can do in his presence is dissolve in it. The talking is just to get people's attention who would otherwise not be able to recognize the presence that he is. Something to hold on to as a stepping stone that would eventually take them into more subtle realities. 

Edited October 10 by Salvijus

[Natasha Tori Maru]

2 hours ago, Socrates said:

Imagine someone telling you, if you don't control the mind, you are "mentally ill", and you get triggered instead of reflecting: "Maybe he is into something". You're unredeemable with that attitude.

Unfortunately, this is how the average normie - and even some users here - react to being told this. They refuse to look into it. All they hear is 'he is saying I am the cause of my mental problems, fuck you'. The obhur any responsibility pushed onto them.

It doesn't occur to them it might be THEM generating suffering or illness: despite the fact 2 people can have the same experience, but both are not guaranteed to walk away with trauma. Even that does not promote enquiry. 

It seems obvious to me to want to investigate what is happening there? What is one person doing (or not doing!) that is causing trauma and mental illness. 

Wooooosh 

 

Edited October 10 by Natasha Tori Maru

[Hojo]

@Socrates Its not so much about saying if you cant control your mind your mentally ill

 Its about saying if you cant control your mind your mentally ill then someone asks for clarification and you ignore them

The statement now does more harm than good. Now sadhguru is hurting people.

Its like triggering psychosis in someone in purpose to make fun of them. The statement is not helpful and useless. If the people cant do it already they cant do it 

Its like having an interview to show off how not mentally ill you are compared to others. You see me I sit here no thought for 5 day! I'm not as mentally ill as you are! 

Well thanks for coming in sadhguru.

Those thoughts that come after the fact maybe something is wrong with me is a negative thought thats being put there by a guru. Its an extra thought. That wasn't there before the guru. That means the guru is doing something negative.

That negative thought maybe something is wrong with me is implanted into your brain that will lead to more suffering that wasnt there before you hear the guru. And then you still have 0 ability to resolve it.

If the guru who is trying to get you to stop thinking actually increases the negative thoughts like ' maybe something is wrong with me' they didn't help or solve anything. They make it worse on purpose.

Edited October 10 by Hojo

[Jodistrict]

Sadhguru is a good businessman as demonstrated by the large organization he created and manages.  He has fashioned a message that appeals to a simplistic audience coming from a materialistic culture.   It’s important to keep in mind that his actual demonstrated competence is in business.  The same thing happens in the medicine world.  The guy who runs the Ayahuasca retreat has no shamanic abilities and may even be a sexual predator.  But he is a good businessman, which is why he is the one running a retreat.

Edited October 10 by Jodistrict

[Elliott]

Anyone that claims to be enlightened and then proceeds to commence business to help people leave their "mental illness", is mentally ill. Sadghuru apparently needs to take his own Kriya course..... Sadghuru is a materialist, look at his personal life.

Edited October 10 by Elliott

[Carl-Richard]

1 hour ago, Elliott said:

Anyone that claims to be enlightened and then proceeds to commence business to help people leave their "mental illness", is mentally ill. Sadghuru apparently needs to take his own Kriya course..... Sadghuru is a materialist, look at his personal life.

Da hell

[Carl-Richard]

3 hours ago, Salvijus said:

Really the talking that sadhguru does is just a smokescreen. He's not interested in chit-chating, he just burns like a flame. The only thing you can do in his presence is dissolve in it. The talking is just to get people's attention who would otherwise not be able to recognize the presence that he is. Something to hold on to as a stepping stone that would eventually take them into more subtle realities. 

Yup. If your mind and heart is open, you'll receive grace. If they're not, they must be worked on and massaged.

[Elliott]

9 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

Da hell

He's a millionaire, if he can cure mental illness why isn't he sharing it for free?