Islam vs actualized.org

[kavaris]

52 minutes ago, NewKidOnTheBlock said:

Because I think both empires had still enough resources and manpower to beat muslims easily, on paper; even despite that one last long war that utterly drained them and devastated them both. They just got outskilled and beaten by desert dwellers lol, while often outnumbering them significantly. Khalid Ibn al-Wallid was a legendary muslim general from that time period and participated in most of the campaigns, and was literaly undefeated in like over a 100 battles

I just find the description odd, per the description of *badass, As on one hand people are so worried about the war over in Israel v pales., And on the other, we are saying how badass the wars of (...) are...

p.s. im not sure which historic wars we are speaking to... ... i mean i could create a list, Like... Late Antiquity — to 1900s theres just too many, even still, its just confusing me, the ratio of badassery v. the ratio of real worry about todays wars in the middle east. Everyones gotta make up their mind, whether their sentiment on war is overall passive, or if it IS a real worry, cause now im seein alot less overall worry.

Edited Friday at 07:30 AM by kavaris

[kavaris]

(cont.) There is like a real disconnection happening right now. Like, i cant follow everyone if you all keep changing-it-up on me, cause im here thinkin wars are B.A.D., like BÆD Bad ...  And then some else says "Badass". That's demonstrating staggeringly different attitudes towards the same subject matter.

[NewKidOnTheBlock]

21 minutes ago, kavaris said:

I just find the description odd, per the description of *badass, As on one hand people are so worried about the war over in Israel v pales., And on the other, we are saying how badass the wars of (...) are...

p.s. im not sure which historic wars we are speaking to... ... i mean i could create a list, Like... Late Antiquity — to 1900s theres just too many, even still, its just confusing me, the ratio of badassery v. the ratio of real worry about todays wars in the middle east. Everyones gotta make up their mind, whether their sentiment on war is overall passive, or if it IS a real worry, cause now im seein alot less overall worry.

I meant earliest muslim invasions from aproximately 632 to 752 ad, I don't mean modern wars in any way, shape or form. I assumed everyone would be able to derive this from my post since we were mentioning Mohammed, and yeah obviously I am completely emotionally disconected from that era

[kavaris]

46 minutes ago, NewKidOnTheBlock said:

I meant earliest muslim invasions from aproximately 632 to 752 ad, I don't mean modern wars in any way, shape or form. I assumed everyone would be able to derive this from my post since we were mentioning Mohammed, and yeah obviously I am completely emotionally disconected from that era

That counts as late antiquity, atleast in Peter Brown's work. The details of what you were on about werent what i was interested in anyway, it was the larger sentiment on war (see also, other threadz, to understand it)

Edited Friday at 08:40 AM by kavaris

[Ash55]

On 8/13/2026 at 8:32 AM, TheEnigma said:

That's true ignorance is bliss!

"Ignorance is not bliss. Ignorance is poverty. Ignorance is devastation. Ignorance is tragedy. And ignorance is illness." Jim Rohn

You guys are armchair speculating how happy people here in the Muslim world, some people are happy but most people are living a miserable life, poverty misery health issues,  some people in Egypt are living life more hellish than the hell description in the Islamic literature
the happy people are he one that has very stable family and very successful and stable marriages and a great health most people here are too foolish to have all of that at the same time lol
 

[kavaris]

@NewKidOnTheBlock

p.s. the name muhammed isnt unique to that bespoke late antiquity era, see also,

Muhmed II "the Conqueror" — led the Ottoman conquest of Constantinople in 1453, ending the Byzantine Empire.
Muhmed IV — Ottoman sultan during the failed 1683 Siege of Vienna and the long Great Turkish War that followed.
Muhammad bin Tughluq — 14th-century Delhi Sultanate ruler, constant wars across India.
Muhammad Shah — Mughal emperor during Nadir Shah's invasion of India (1739) and the sack of Delhi.
Muhammad Ali of Egypt — 19th-century Ottoman-Egyptian wars, including campaigns in Arabia, Sudan, Greece, and Syria (1820s–40s).
Muhammad Ahmad ("the Mahdi") — led the Mahdist War against Anglo-Egyptian forces in Sudan (1881–99), including the famous Siege of Khartoum.
Askia Muhammad I — Songhai Empire wars of expansion in West Africa (late 1400s–early 1500s).

And thats just some from 1400 to 1900, theres even more.

Edited Friday at 09:08 AM by kavaris

[kavaris]

Just so we all know the names of the eras in that range of periods, it is, considered as, roughly speaking,

Late Antiquity — c. 3rd–7th/8th c. AD
Migration Period — c. 375–568 AD (overlaps Late Antiquity)
Early Medieval — c. 500/600–1000 AD
Merovingian (Early Medieval, Frankish) — c. 481–751 AD
Carolingian (Early Medieval) — c. 751–887 AD ... p.s. Carolingian minuscule was the standardized script developed under Charlemagne's reign (late 8th c.)
Ottonian (Early Medieval) — c. 919–1024 AD
High Medieval — c. 1000–1300 AD
Romanesque (High Medieval) — c. 1000–1150 AD
Gothic (High/Late Medieval) — c. 1150–1400 AD
Scholastic (High/Late Medieval) — c. 1100–1400 AD
Later or/Most-late Medieval — c. 1300–1500 AD
Trecento (Late Medieval, Italy) — 1300s
Renaissance — c. 1400–1600 AD
Quattrocento — 1400s
Cinquecento — 1500s
Northern Renaissance — c. 1450–1580 AD

.. et caetera.

Edited Friday at 09:21 AM by kavaris

[kavaris]

We often get confused cause its like, once we focus in on one particular era or time, we miss the cultures, wars or events happening around the rest of the world, or in the rest of the age of man, etc., cause, to begin, you have humanity developing in Africa (i think its agreed that most humans started in Africa, and slowly evolved / branched out north/westward...) especially given the flood / coastal regions changing their shape...

note: we're startin waaaay back now... and jumping ahead...

That then leads to humans progressively moving west, but some return east, and back and forth, such that you get this larger spiral shape, smaller when we go back far enough, and it progressively spreads, such that you have Proto-Celtic / Scandanavian people cork screwing in, in what they call a corded ware culture(s) (among other more specific names)

Which is just to say, i focus mostly on Ancient European places now, which is lesser known, compared to the middle east, which is well documented w/ artifacts for dating and such... I just like that mysterious Berber-Phoenician wave, and the subsequent A, B, C's Phone-a-bet, like the earliest mysteries of that .... Which i bring up to share something interesting that isnt "24-7 war..." And having to constantly think thats what its about.

That would be terrifying.

p.s., im also doin alot of language research, ive just taken a commercial break/hiatus, while... Although i feel its cool, its prolly not as important as communicating w/ real ppl to make sure that theres essential / real emotional content shared + passed down.

Edited Friday at 09:46 AM by kavaris

[Thought Art]

@LordFall I listened to an audiobook today which did not describe him as such and I looked it up during our previous conversation and found he wasn’t a warlord. I hear your opinion but it’s not being verified by other sources. 
 

Fighting some wars doesn’t make you a warlord…

Edited Friday at 10:24 AM by Thought Art

[LordFall]

6 hours ago, Thought Art said:

@LordFall I listened to an audiobook today which did not describe him as such and I looked it up during our previous conversation and found he wasn’t a warlord. I hear your opinion but it’s not being verified by other sources. 
 

Fighting some wars doesn’t make you a warlord…

Plenty of good and bad audiobooks that have varying degrees of accuracy in the opinions they put forth. 

A warlord is a political leader who derives his authority from his military forces as opposed to other institutional powers also known as a military dictatorship depending on how wide of a region he controls.

Mohammad's actions of imperial expansion into the Arabian Peninsula and the Maghreb make him both a military dictator and a warlord by definition. 

I think your enjoyment of Sufism is giving you massive bias into understanding history and the story of Islam and the reason it's still around today. Not solely due to wisdom but due to its cult properties and their viking like rhetoric in promising a glorious afterlife to their followers that then violently impose their ideology on outsiders they conquer. 

Leo himself has been known to be quite bloodthirsty in how he tears down ideas he doesn't agree with but I think the infidels are physically safe for the time being! 

Edited Friday at 05:02 PM by LordFall

[Thought Art]

@LordFall Yeah, you can make that argument if you want. I’m not saying he was perfect or didn’t have things people may not like about him. I’m looking at some of the brutality that may have come along with this too don’t you worry. 
 

He meets a broad definition of warlord, but when you paint that broad brush you are missing out on a lot of nuance. He was a military commander, yes. State builder yes. 
 

It’s far more nuanced then him simply ruling by the sword. Though, it is said that you must rule by sword and pen. 
 

Mohammad used diplomacy and war. Not just war. 
 

I am more moved by Islam as a whole than solely Sufism, though Sufism is great. The audiobook I am listening to speaks of the heart of Islam and allah. I like that. 

Edited Friday at 08:49 PM by Thought Art

[abc123]

On 12/08/2026 at 9:27 AM, Leo Gura said:

Because they are zombies.

 

If for example an Islamic top athlete finds his peace in his faith, and joy in his sport and family. Don't you consider this as happy? Probably more happy than many people on this forum. And with a bit of a 'surrender' mindset they may have some spiritual depth as well, along with decent (non hypocritical) morals. Then live a happy content life, then they die and become infinity. So no problem. I am giving a very rare example, but I'm just wondering why you would consider consciousness work as the only way to be truly happy.

 

Edited Saturday at 01:53 PM by abc123

[Leo Gura]

How fucking dare you even compare Actualized.org to Islam.

Islam is idiocy compared to what I teach you.

[Thought Art]

@Leo Gura Hey Leo, that’s a trigger man. 
 

Ive listened to you. I’ve listened to the wisdom in this audio book. I’m reasonably intelligent and can see similarities in your work, religion, human nature etc. From this I can see deep wisdom. I can also feel my hearts intelligence as I listen to the wisdom coming from Islam. 
 

I am not you. I don’t see actualized the way you do. Though, I’ve watched all your videos some many time. The body of work is only an aspect of something. 
 

I personally see something is Islam in this moment which is profound and brings a sense of deep love and understanding. 
 

You can be mad, and I will continue to form my own understanding and work through recontextualizations as I make sense of Truth, God and the Universe. 
 

I do not bow to your model of reality!!!!

But, I respectfully engage in with you. Now, if you  would also respect me like you expect me to giving me 3 warnings points. 
 

We are speaking of deep and profound matter. This is no place for ego trips. 
 

I am interested in all of reality. If you yourself know it takes decades to grasp and work with all this. Give me grace. 
 

My heart feels a deep grace with Islam. This is true for me. 
 

I am in a path of the heart. This is important for me right now. I am more interested in God, the Heart, and Divine Love than just, bowing to actualized. 
 

I am of course full of deep love and appreciation for actualized. But I cannot easily communicate my relationship to you and your work right now. It’s complicated. 

Edited Saturday at 02:39 PM by Thought Art

[AerisVahnEphelia]

Islam built nothing; it’s a parasitic mindset hoarded by parasitic people. Not a single cathedral or powerful life has been built on Islam.

Don’t make us laugh

[abc123]

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

How fucking dare you even compare Actualized.org to Islam.

Islam is idiocy compared to what I teach you.

I am not sure if you responded to me or someone else. This thread is is called "Islam vs Actualized" and my comment was about you saying Islamic people unable to be happy.

[Thought Art]

1 hour ago, AerisVahnEphelia said:

Islam built nothing; it’s a parasitic mindset hoarded by parasitic people. Not a single cathedral or powerful life has been built on Islam.

Don’t make us laugh

Why do you think this?

[LordFall]

@Thought Art @Majed

Have you guys watched the video on Islam? 

I think he's too nice and poetic about it if anything and he doesn't go in depth into the origins of Islam and how it was birthed out of the bloodshed of thousands and immediately lead to many civil wars in the middle east called the Fitnas and the caliphates that grew out of it like the Umayyad Caliphate were not any more peaceful than the ones that came before the time of Muhammad. 

Edited Saturday at 05:03 PM by LordFall

[Nemra]

Actualized.org is much more intelligently structured than religions.

From my understanding, Actualized.org's purpose isn't about making you believe things or providing a moral system to conform to.

Religions have a baked-in epistemology, which is faith- and belief-based. That epistemology, ironically, is taken for granted and assumed to be absolute, which makes them less intelligent.

Edited 18 hours ago by Nemra

[zazen]

On 07/11/2025 at 9:02 PM, zazen said:

I think we need to separate awakening from understanding. For example - all kinds of people from different backgrounds and religions have had awakenings or are awakened - yet that doesn’t mean they understand it at the same level as say how Leo Gura does.

This is where I appreciate the West’s approach to spirituality. We could say it’s a scientific one and that it using a technical / neutral language is what allows it to be a sort of lingua franca of spirituality for everyone. Eckhart Tolle did this really well by using words that purposely had no historic baggage or conflations ie presence instead of God. But that doesn’t and shouldn’t erase the localised expression of the spiritual through various cultures, traditions and religions. Those are like local dialects and accents that bring richness to life and allow people to engage with the spiritual in their own way, in their own tongue. We could say that’s the art of religion.

I’ve seen some videos on meta-modernism that goes into meta-modern religion. There could be a world where both scientific (neutral) and artful (culturally colourful religious) spirituality co-exist as complementary to each other.

Let’s say we all got enlightened one day - what would we do anyway? Before enlightenment chop wood carry water, after enlightenment chop wood carry water. People will still live and want to express and share awakening in various forms, traditions and religions. But it will be done at a different level “from above”. Then the next generations slowly become less enlightened and make the same mistakes of the religions of old - introducing dogmatism and fundamentalism - and the cycle begins again where later generations mock the old religions for being “untrue” lol

 

On 09/11/2025 at 11:13 AM, zazen said:

A good way to look at it is container (structure, construct) vs consciousness. Religions and government structures (democracy vs monarchy) are containers - that the peoples conciousness within them is distinct from. Although there is a relationship between the two also. So it’s not about the doctrine alone but about the development of those engaging with it.

Some containers are perhaps better than others at elevating our conciousness - because some containers have more trappings than others. This is why non-duality and actualized (Leo’s body of work) is better at elevating conciousness - it just has way less trappings than religion does.

For example in Islam the idea of jihad (struggle) or in Judaism - the chosen people. Both of these can be approached form a lower or higher place. A lower conciousness turns jihad into ISIS and the notion of chosen people into candy for the ego. A higher conciousness turns jihad into struggle against ego/impulses and chosen people into a burden or responsibility to embody good virtues. These trappings are higher risk than a neutralised scientific approach to spirituality which has less baggage, words or ideas that can be conflated or confused.

Osho actually did this and said it was his intention - he spoke from a higher place on all the world religions. He drew in people of all walks by doing this, and then he went onto the next step and said to even drop those containers (religions) and approach spirituality without them ie more scientifically.

But like I said to breakingthewall - there is a place for both the scientific approach to spirituality, and the art of spirituality which is more colourful and localised to where people are from. We don’t necessarily have to drop our identity - otherwise how do we culturally “belong” with everyone around us without feeling alien. We need to synthesise the two approaches and view the scientific approach like a formal universal language and the artful approach like a local cultural language.

In other words transcend the container but live within it - the same way we’re told to be in the world but not of it.

 

On 13/08/2026 at 10:11 AM, Thought Art said:

The audiobook I am listening to is called: Secrets of Divine Love, A spiritual Journey into the Heart of Islam by A. Helwa.

It’s a beautiful book. 

Great book man - love how it ties in to wisdom from other traditions too. I think a helpful way of squaring non-duality / spiral dynamics etc with religion is the above shared comments.

Islam in particular integrates the horizontal (dunya, worldly affairs) with the vertical (God, whats beyond). Its not just “pure religion” in the sense of only being about awakening to the truth.

Prophet Muhammad was deeply involved in worldly affairs - bro came down from the cave and had shit to do 😂

Islam also doesn’t have the notion of original sin (from Christianity) which tilts the psyche towards feeling guilty of human desires etc or that human nature is somehow “wrong”.

The orientation is different and because it doesn’t shy away from this world for the “other world”, or our nature - it essentially developed into a religion that seemed to have concluded  “we’re bound by form even if seeking the formless, so might aswell regulate human activities in the world of form and systemise it the best we can, including domains of warfare, marriage, economics etc”

The world isn’t all there is but we can’t escape it, human nature isn’t evil but it’s also not the ultimate either. Glimpse the formless, don’t forget the formless (pray) but homie we still gotta deal with forms lol

Edited Saturday at 09:45 PM by zazen