Drama Alert! Another YTber is calling us a cult! 😈☦️

[Sugarcoat]

On 2026-07-09 at 0:07 AM, Carl-Richard said:

I wouldn't take my late night "raps" and pleading for the lulz to make me stop too seriously, but kundalini has been active for quite some time (years, especially since I got awakenings when I was taking in Jan Esmann energy).

Not sure I would say it's properly "awakened", but it gets aroused at times, I feel it in my spine and it directly corresponds to a shift/increase/non-dualification in consciousness. 

I not too long ago resonated with somebody saying that the kundalini process starts "from above" in that it's a shift in consciousness that then pulls the energy upward. Intellectual "masturbation" is how I expend a lot of that energy.

 

I'm energetically and philosophically vegan. My "vegan activism" critiques are sort of intellectual masturbation. I wouldn't want to kill an animal in the wild.

"taking in Jan Esmann energy" ....Idk what's more "out there", that sentence or "statistical worldview"😂

It seems to me kundalini energy tries to penetrate the self, relating to the second sentence you wrote.

Interesting point about it "starting from above", I've thought something along those lines before, because before I experienced this obvious rising of energy, I felt my brain/mind was always trying to connect to itself or something, and then when the energy surged up, it seemed as if it was what my brain/mind was subconsciously trying to "connect" to all that time (past 2 years or so). It is unclear tho what triggers the release of the energy, if it is above or below or maybe both. Im having insights as I'm writing this (realizing I might have misinterpreted my experience so I understand my descriptions sound odd), but let me see what you say maybe it helps because of this..... resonance or whatever😂 

"intellectual masturbation is how I expend a lot of that energy". Writing in messy funny ways etc (the late night "raps" you mention) are also included in the intellectualization category for me, or not really but more so the verbal articulation fine tuning thing. It's also very much "energy expending" IME. All the verbal stuff etc has similarity in what's its doing internally, so for me it is obviously connected to this same fundamental overarching energetic process. 

That last part😂 Maybe Earthling Ed would be speechless there, he's great but thats something unheard of what you just said 😂 But I can relate

Edited Saturday at 03:49 PM by Sugarcoat

[zurew]

This is my last reply in this clusterfuck thread and I wont waste any more time on this.

 

 

So allegedly some people here have big issues with closed-mindedness and with someone not using proper learning frames (because "lessons will be lost on them," because "they are not open enough").

I want these people to present a definition of closed-mindedness  to the readers under which they can establish that Leo isn't closed-minded (but me and Carl are). If they can't do that, then I will take it that none of them really care about any of their listed norms in a principled way, and that it is just empty mini-Leo rhetoric on their part.

Present a definition of closed-mindedness, under which a guy who has repeatedly claimed to be the most awake being in the universe, has repeatedly claimed that no one else knows what they are talking about, claimed that he is the standard of epistemology, claimed that he has little to nothing to learn from humans anymore (with regard to spirituality), and who stops 99% of his debates with "you don't know what you are talking about" and then frequently refuses to elaborate; and a guy who wants to dictate what definition of cult ought to be used by everyone; and a guy who has made multiple inferentially justified, highly confident statements about alternative spiritual pathways (like what certain forms of meditation or yoga can do for you or get you to, even though he hasn't seriously practiced them for multiple decades); and a guy who explicitly stated that he can't be wrong about being the most awake being on the planet <--- that this guy isn't closed-minded, and that this guy is inside a proper learning frame (in which he can learn new things and correct false beliefs);

but a guy who gives detailed arguments about why he thinks the way he does, who qualifies most of his statements, and who immediately acknowledges epistemic limitations and clarifies how he can be wrong <--- that this guy is the closed-minded guy, and that this guy isn't inside a proper learning frame.

[ It's very transparent that none of you seriously care about any of these norms. These norms and mini-Leo ticks (where you use one-word catchphrases like "closed-minded" to derail conversations) are exclusively used to enforce Leo's dogmas and none of them are used in a serious, principled way. The moment you would need to apply these norms to Leo, that's the moment when all of you suddenly stop caring about them. ]

 

-------------------------------------------------------

Some people here have been dead silent about a lot of things, and it's clear to me that Aurum is only interested in highly selectively engaging with arguments.

So here is Leo's alien transformation failure spelled out again, since most of you guys extremely conveniently ignored it last time. By the way, do you guys know how your trusted guy responded to @UnbornTao's  "Where is the video, Leo?" question? He said, "I'm not going to bend over backwards over your closed-mindedness." <---- Even though he created the enforcing "bullshit" standard for himself.

That's your Tier 2, epistemically responsible guy, who is true to his own standards and words, who can own up to things, and who won't discourage you from holding him accountable using the standard that he created for himself  (perfectly describes a guy, who cares a lot about not creating or contributing to cult-like dynamics, right?).

Quote

My biggest problem at the moment is that I have not been able to find any camera that can record my face transform into a colorful Alien God.

When I do, I will post it, and zero words will be necessary. Until then you will not understand.

Quote

How about you guys chill and just trust me on this?

I will show you Alien Awakening that will absolutely blow your mind. When I finally post it on Youtube, people's jaws will drop. My Awakening will contradict 5000 years of spiritual teaching. And it won't just be words, you will visually see me morph into an Alien Intelligence. And if I don't, then you can call out my bullshit.

Until then, sit tight.

 

 

On 2026. 07. 07. at 9:09 AM, aurum said:

And you are closed-minded, so I'm not going to fault him for hitting you over the head about that

Aurum -  I dont see you holding Leo accountable , but I see you a lot throwing around the label of "closed-mindedness" towards people who do want to hold Leo accountable.

Your only way out this is to claim that you didnt know that Leo claimed these things about the alien transformation thing - but in that case , that just shows your very low level engagement with the arguments here (where you come in  here with big wide shoulders and throw the "closed-mindedness" label and implication around without having any fucking clue about the relevant context some of the Leo critiques target).

And this is just one of the points you failed to engage with, I gave you a lot more than just this, and I left other effort posts here with a lot of links and - but it is very clear at this point that you only highly selectively want to engage with things and you are disinterested in actually reading through the posts and the links in detail before you chime in with your quick uninformed emotionally baiting comments on things.

On 2026. 07. 07. at 9:09 AM, aurum said:

He obviously thinks extremely highly of his awakening, but it's not unwarranted.

Maybe there are people alive with a better understanding than him on God, but I don't know any.

Let's correct that. He doesn't just think highly of his awakening; he thinks the highest of himself while degrading everyone else. To this day, he still makes childlike comparative judgments like "I'm stronger than you, and you guys are weak as shit compared to me," about every other being in the universe.

And yes, that claim is extremely unwarranted on his part. He is pretentiously using extremely weak inferential judgments, and that's supposed to be his "justification" for claiming that he is the most awake. He has no fucking data or direct access to who has what level of awakening. And even if he had direct access to the content of the awakenings of every other being in the universe (and to the awakenings of every being who has ever lived), he would still need to presuppose his own circularly justified notion and norm of what "being the most awake" even means.

So:

1) Let's not pretend that he has any substantive reply to any of these problems, and lets not pretend that his claim has any serious leg to stand on, or that he carefully and rigorously worked through all of this before vomited out his pretentious statements.

2) Let's also not pretend that you would ever entertain this kind of reasoning from any teacher other than Leo.

 

You conceded that it is an inferential comparative judgment, so it is subject to being wrong. Yet I haven't seen you once press Leo on his credence with respect to that claim. I haven't seen you once press him on why he makes comparative judgments in the first place, and I haven't seen you once question what purpose those explicit comparative and degrading judgments serve.

I guess all of this is also included in your "trust" in Leo, along with his infinitely delayed alien transformation-on-camera claim and his healing claims.

(Before you make your usual thought-terminating "you're closed-minded" move again, I'll qualify my position once more: the argument does not rest on the premise that these things must be impossible. The argument is about adjusting credence based on evidence and owning up to failure—and failing should obviously lower your credence in such claims.)

On 2026. 07. 07. at 9:09 AM, aurum said:

It has nothing to do with ethics.

It's more like I'm sometimes willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he might know something I don't.

For example, I don't know about Alien Awakening. But I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt there might be something there and will test it.

This is just called trust.

My original example had a lot to do with ethics, but you couldn't engage with that, so you went with your own modified version instead.

You also had a very hard time entertaining the idea that there is no contradiction in someone agreeing with Leo on all of his spiritual takes while also having issues with some of Leo's teaching methods and behavior.

But in any case, the argument that "I have seen him make awakening claims, and I managed to verify some of those claims. Therefore, the more I manage to verify, the more I'm going to trust that his other awakening claims (that I haven't yet verified) are true as well" could work. But your special privileging of Leo and your dead silence about his failures and  about some of his behavior go beyond any reasonable notion of trust you can appeal to.

Leo hasn't demonstrated a single empirically verifiable miracle yet, so you have zero reason to trust him on miracle claims. And yet, you have been dead silent about his failure to produce the alien transformation on camera and about his healing claims. It doesn't matter how many of his awakening claims you managed to verify, because there is no straightforward bridge from that to his empirical claims. It would be like taking some verifiable facts from the Bible (for example, that Jesus existed) and then pretending that it is therefore reasonable to infer and trust that every other fantastical claim presented in the Bible is likely true as well (such as the miracle claims surrounding Jesus or the claim that Jesus is the Son of God).

Given your trust standard, the exact same "I'm just trusting my teacher" argument can be made by many other people whom you would negatively label as "blindly putting their teacher on a pedestal and taking certain claims to be true from their teacher without verifying them first." Buddhist and nondual students can use the exact same argument: "Im going to trust my teacher's  w,z claims, because I managed to verify that his x,y claims were true." So I guess, all of the students who managed to verify some of the things their teacher told them are justified (by your standards) in giving special privilege to their teachers as well. And I'm sure you won't put any negative label on them for it, and I'm sure you won't reassure Leo about how these supposedly low-consciousness, cognitively undeveloped, conformist individuals are lost and not doing proper spiritual work.

 

On 2026. 07. 07. at 11:02 PM, aurum said:

How much are you going to try and understand these teachings if you assume it's just a bunch of hallucinated ramblings from a narcissist, wounded cult leader?

I thought this was supposed to be about "doing the work" (like using the suggested methods) and not about special-privileging your teacher's explicit propositions and dogmas, or about maintaining some kind of polished, special image of your teacher.

But again, this is nothing more than empty virtue-signaling on your part. You don't seriously care about these standards and norms, because you make your own judgments about other teachers, and you are perfectly fine with being closed off, labeling them with a bunch of negative labels, and special-privileging Leo - even though you haven't gone through their exact methods for their exact suggested timelines. (you havent done half a century worth of meditations or yoga work and yet you are perfectly okay with placing your bets and with judging those methods and the efficacy of those methods and the efficacy of other teachers).

And the exact same shit applies to Leo as well, but you will never, ever publicly assert to have an issue with Leo being 100% confident in his stance and with him being 100% closed off to all other teachers, despite the fact that he has only directly practiced a fraction of a fraction of other teachers' methods (for a fraction of a fraction of their suggested timelines)

On 2026. 07. 07. at 8:53 PM, aurum said:

On 2026. 07. 07. at 8:26 PM, UnbornTao said:

If I say that what I've personally verified is different from your own system of beliefs relative to this body of work, what are we really doing?

Yes, that's why debate won't resolve this.

One of us is just going to be mistaken.

On 2026. 07. 07. at 9:09 AM, aurum said:

Sure, as long as you don't expect me to think Relativity means you get to gaslight me with your nonsense and I have to consider it "equally valid".

Turns out understanding things is possible.

"One of you is going to be mistaken," but the moment I present you with similar epistemic challenges, you suddenly categorize them as "me trying to gaslight you with nonsense," even though it's clear that you have no substantive reply to those epistemic challenges. Yet you are still perfectly confident that you are right and that Leo is right, and you talk down to everyone who disagrees with you from your pretentious high horse, even though the exact same "I've personally verified claims x, y, and z relative to a different body of work" argument is equally applicable to many other people.

Neither you nor Leo has any substantive response to underdetermination issues, and neither of you arrived at your position by carefully and exhaustively ruling out all alternative options. Yet both of you pretentiously act as though you have some kind of high horse to ride and some kind of special epistemic leg to stand on. You and Leo both refuse to acknowledge your epistemic limitations, and instead you play the "I'm absolutely certain in my position" game. Then, whenever someone challenges that certainty, both of you dismiss it as "gaslighting."

Edited yesterday at 01:09 PM by zurew

[UnbornTao]

The debate exists for a reason. 

Notice how your exhaustive analyses tend to go in one ear and out the other for most people here (particularly Leo). There's no serious interest in those among the acolytes. @zurew It is what it is. We were just too unconscious, corrupt, self-deceived, conformist, subservient, and epistemically irresponsible to realize we were wrong.

I'll do the master move of recommending Actualized videos to undermine the very dynamics people unknowingly engage in here. Fighting fire with fire:

 

 

Edited 3 hours ago by UnbornTao

[UnbornTao]

Oops, @zurew got permabanned. This is rough.

If someone like that gets banned, you have to ask what kind of place would do that, and why. (Setting aside the usual spiritually performative justifications that have already been raised before.)

It seems to me, among other things, that Leo wants people to believe him - not as an evil conspiracy, just as a simple tacit request or desire.

@Leo Gura All this just so you don't have to admit you were wrong on the alien recording - and don't have to face the implications of that failure, including the people who blindly followed you on it?

The Dictator has nothing to envy you:

Edited 2 hours ago by UnbornTao

[Sugarcoat]

@UnbornTao Where you dethroned voluntarily or Leo did it? I’m curious. 
 

The green username used to match the lizard picture, but now the black name matches the default picture, yeaa..

Edited 2 hours ago by Sugarcoat

[Sugarcoat]

19 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

Oops, @zurew got permabanned. This is rough.

If someone like that gets banned, you have to ask what kind of place would do that, and why. (Setting aside the usual spiritually performative justifications that have already been raised before.)

It seems to me, among other things, that Leo wants people to believe him - not as an evil conspiracy, just as a simple tacit request or desire.

@Leo Gura All this just so you don't have to admit you were wrong on the alien recording - and don't have to face the implications of that failure, including the people who blindly followed you on it?

The Dictator has nothing to envy you:

Ok I can chime in too, because I feel the need to 

That @Zurew guy was really good, very intellectually skilled guy with valuable contributions, that’s not fair to ban him imo. 
 

I have supported Leo gura, but ofc I don’t agree with it all. Maybe somewhere I have sounded like I am contradicting myself but it can happen to anyone 
 

Yea I just wanted to say that in support of your response 

 

Edited 1 hour ago by Sugarcoat

[Someone here]

14 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

Oops, @zurew got permabanned. This is rough.

If someone like that gets banned, you have to ask what kind of place would do that, and why. (Setting aside the usual spiritually performative justifications that have already been raised before.)

Yeah ? What is he doing anyways instead of showing his acrobatic genuineness of how to do a professional devil’s advocate ?

all he’s doing is bitching about Leo not keeping up his words about the alien thing . How many times is he going to say this in the most devious manner possible?

Edited 1 hour ago by Someone here

[Sugarcoat]

6 minutes ago, Someone here said:

Yeah ? What is he doing anyways instead of showing his acrobatic genuineness of how to do a professional devil’s advocate ?

I dont get it, didnt you post somewhere about your severe anger issues and aggression and judgments of "average poeple" aka very strong sign of having human ego? But you talk as if youre enlightened ???? And people believe it?

I dont know how to transfer quote to another thread so ima just copy:

I searched and found quickly, you said 31 March:

"I have anger issues and I am losing tolerance for dealing with people especially toxic people with toxic traits..I immediately scream and insult and get into fights."

Yea very enlightened guy right there...."someone here" yea I can tell...

 

 

Edited 1 hour ago by Sugarcoat

[Someone here]

10 minutes ago, Sugarcoat said:

I dont get it, didnt you post somewhere about your severe anger issues and aggression and judgments of "average poeple" aka very strong sign of having human ego? But you talk as if youre enlightened ???? And people believe it?

The human body and brain is going through its own karma . I have no relationship to that whatsoever.The body still gets angry . The body still craves food and a good couple of boobs .

“Enlightenment “ just means I’m not that person. I’m not that body and brain . It’s none of my business what the body is going through . I’m watching my life like it’s an interesting movie .

im not enlightened. Not because I’m not good enough but because enlightenment itself means there is no one who is enlightened.

Edited 1 hour ago by Someone here

[Sugarcoat]

Just now, Someone here said:

The human body and brain is going through its own karma . I have no relationship to that whatever. The body still get angry . The body still crave tasty food and a good couple of boobs .

“Enlightenment “ just means I’m not that person. I’m not that body and brain . It’s none of my business what the body is going through . I’m watching my life like it’s an interesting movie .

im not enlightened. Not because I’m not good enough but because enlightenment itself means there is no one who is enlightened.

if youre enlightened then everyone should just stop meditating or whatever because then its not worth it...

[Someone here]

1 minute ago, Sugarcoat said:

if youre enlightened

But I just said I’m not .

[UnbornTao]

14 minutes ago, Sugarcoat said:

@UnbornTao Where you dethroned voluntarily or Leo did it? I’m curious. 
 

The green username used to match the lizard picture, but now the black name matches the default picture, yeaa..

I woke up as a member of the peasantry - dethroned by Leo, my archnemesis.

I didn't know it.

 

[Sugarcoat]

1 minute ago, Someone here said:

But I just said I’m not .

“I have no relationship to that whatsoever”  (your body and brain)

Youre implying it, in your responses I’ve seen

[Someone here]

Just now, Sugarcoat said:

Youre implying it, in your responses I’ve seen

No I’m not . in truth there is no one who can claim he’s enlightened enough and speaks as an authority. Because enlightenment is the very seeing through the illusion of the separate self which is seeking to attain enlightenment.  
The one you’re talking to you right now and trying to expose or decipher whether he’s enlightened or not isn’t even real .  So who’s enlightened ? 
everything i express is 100% sincere and off the cuff . If I have anger issues I say it . If I have smoking addiction I say it . If I have a spiritual understanding of some topic I say it .

[Wilhelm44]

30 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

so you don't have to admit you were wrong on the alien recording - and don't have to face the implications of that failure, including the people who blindly followed you on it?

I'm sorry to see Zurew go, but was he ever going to be able to let this go ?

Or was he just going to throw mud on the classroom walls for all eternity.

Making claims about having an alien intelligence awakening doesn't mean it's a cult.

(Where are these victims who blindly followed Leo on that)

As I said earlier, Leo never claimed to be the perfect embodyment of all his teachings.

Yet this justice panel seemed to want to hold him to some standard of perfection.

 

 

[Elliott]

8 minutes ago, Wilhelm44 said:

I'm sorry to see Zurew go, but was he ever going to be able to let this go ?

Or was he just going to throw mud on the classroom walls for all eternity.

Making claims about having an alien intelligence awakening doesn't mean it's a cult.

(Where are these victims who blindly followed Leo on that)

As I said earlier, Leo never claimed to be the perfect embodyment of all his teachings.

Yet this justice panel seemed to want to hold him to some standard of perfection.

 

 

I think @zurew and Leo have argued on a lot of other things and they have an ego thing against each other.

[Someone here]

@Sugarcoat 

You’re overlooking something pretty obvious: people grow. That’s the whole point of doing the work.

Leo is the perfect example. Years ago he was saying there was no God because he was an atheist and his view of enlightenment was basically standard Buddhist “no-self.”   Fast forward to today and he’s shiting on those  positions and  talking about God and claiming there are endlessly deeper levels of awakening.

So why would anyone expect me to be the same person I was ten years ago?

Life doesn’t ask for your permission to change you. Life forces you into growth . If you don’t grow and stagnate then you’re as good as dead .

Edited 1 hour ago by Someone here

[Natasha Tori Maru]

Using spirituality to avoid responsibility is some mental gymnastics, indeed.

[Someone here]

Don’t even get me started . I can be rough . Keep your illusions to yourself if you don’t want them shattered . lol . But you are a good person overall . 😂

[Sugarcoat]

51 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

I woke up as a member of the peasantry - dethroned by Leo, my archnemesis.

I didn't know it.

 

At least your bills don't rely on it (I assume) so thats good you're fine..

Edited 52 minutes ago by Sugarcoat