All Criticism Is Untenable

• Non-Duality and Consciousness Role in Criticism: Becoming conscious of non-duality results in the understanding that criticism is a delusion. The mind uses criticism to avoid self-reflection by projecting internal issues externally and denying responsibility. For criticism to exist, the mind tricks itself into believing that the subject of criticism is separate from oneself. However, in reality everything is interconnected and understanding this leads to the conclusion that criticism is ultimately criticizing oneself.
• Understanding Criticism: Undertaking an act of criticism requires judgment, which is, in turn, a rejection of reality that assumes alternative scenarios could have played out. What exists in the present moment is a result of physical laws that have been in effect since the Big Bang and could not have happened differently. The rejection of this truth can lead to constant criticism and ultimately result in dissatisfaction.
• Addiction to Criticism: Modern Western society has developed an addiction to criticism which is evident in news, politics, and social media. The refusal to accept responsibility and undertake self-reflection leads to criticism and blame games. This behavior has negative implications, creating and furthering a cycle of endless criticism.
• Criticizing Criticism: Conventional criticism, often voiced unconsciously, assumes that the person being criticized is in the wrong. On the other hand, a more conscious form of criticism understands that the act of criticizing is ultimately untenable and self-defeating. This conscious perspective embraces the understanding that criticized individuals, like all people and things, are products of their conditions and circumstances and cannot be otherwise.
• Trump as an Example: Using Donald Trump as an example, two types of criticism can be observed: conventional criticism which sees him as a "fool," and conscious criticism which accepts his behavior as a product of his experiences, genetics, education, and the culture he is immersed in. Understanding his behavior in this light reveals the inability of standard criticism to grasp the totality and interconnectedness of reality.
• Transitioning from Unconscious to Conscious Criticism: As one transitions from unconscious to conscious criticism, it becomes clear that imparting judgment does not fix or change the subject. Rather, it ties one into a self-defeating cycle. Understanding this dynamic, despite its counterintuitive nature, promotes a more compassionate and holistic outlook on life.
• Addiction to criticizing others: Leo Gura discusses society's tendency to externalize problems and criticize others, including himself. He notes that although it can be tempting to criticize figures like Donald Trump, it's crucial to recognize that these individuals are products of our culture. The ability for someone like Trump to change their behavior would require a shift in consciousness and increased self-reflection, a difficult transition for deeply unconscious individuals. He stresses the importance of understanding this instead of just deriving guilty pleasure from criticism.
• Trump as a product of American culture: Gura elaborates that Trump is an exaggerated representation of America's materialistic culture. Despite criticisms that allege Trump's potential to lead America to its downfall, he maintains they're untenable because any intricate system's greatest internal threat is itself. Leo criticizes the common, overly-simplistic approach to thinking Trump could change if he just adjusted his behavior in minor ways, asserting such a superficial view denies deeper truths about the state of society and the individual's role in contributing to societal conditions.
• Role of individuals contributing to societal issues: Gura argues that people often criticize societal problems, like corporate greed, without acknowledging their own role in perpetuating them. He highlights the interconnectedness within society, indicating that everyone, directly or indirectly, contributes to the dynamics of the system. He urges individuals to adopt a holistic and non-dual understanding of this interconnectedness to gain an authentic perspective.
• Criticism of terrorism: Gura criticizes the general perception of terrorism being solely the problem of radical Islam, arguing it's instead the consequence of policies and cultures of developed, first-world countries. These countries manipulate geopolitics, exploit third-world countries for resources, creating deep inequality and resentment which can birth terrorism. He concludes that this understanding sheds light on the criticism's untenability, underscoring the responsibility of developed nations in terrorism generation.
• Criticism of Terrorism and International Relations: Leo Gura highlights how terrorism is often blamed on "backward" cultures and societies when, in reality, it is a result of complex international relations in which prosperous nations exploit poorer ones for their resources. Instead of taking responsibilities for their actions, these wealthy countries point fingers and criticize these 'backward' societies.
• Reflection on Society and Culture: Gura emphasizes the importance of self-reflection at both individual and societal levels. He criticizes the habit of shifting blame onto others and avoiding the need for introspection. Similarly, he urges for a re-evaluation of western materialistic culture and calls for understanding and compassion towards other cultures.
• Participation in Politics and Government Criticisms: Leo discusses the role of citizens in political matters, arguing that blaming the government for various issues without participating actively in politics is hypocritical. He suggests the culture of criticism contributes more to the problem than to the solution.
• Criticism of Science: He criticizes science for its dogmatism, narrow perspectives, and limitations in addressing phenomena like spirituality and non-duality. He elaborates that his criticism stems from his love for science, and his desire for it to be non-dogmatic and inclusive.
• Discussion on Non-duality: He mentions that debates on non-duality are a waste of time and can be a hindrance to personal growth. He asserts that understanding non-duality involves accepting that duality and non-duality are the same. This acceptance discourages unnecessary criticisms of others and their beliefs, leading to a more conscious and accepting way of life.
• Attitude towards Criticism: Leo suggests that criticism serves as a distraction from self-improvement and true spirituality. He argues that non-duality isn't about criticising or debating, but about being conscious, accepting, and understanding.
• Criticism and Productivity: He also suggests that criticism is inherently unproductive and is more about maintaining the ego than seeking change or improvement. By focusing on criticism, one avoids addressing and fixing their own problems.
• Interconnectedness of Issues: Leo discusses the interconnectedness of global issues, urging people to see beyond simplified narratives presented by the media, and to understand their complicity in these problems.
• Criticization of Science: Leo criticizes science for its perceived narrowness and dogma, while acknowledging that its limitations are inherent. Additionally, he criticizes those who believe that science holds all the answers and does not leave room for spirituality and other areas of human experience. He illuminates the need for paradigm shifts within science, and remarks on the nature of science, explaining that its rigorous standards both help and harm it.
• Consciousness and Non-duality Teaching: Gura suggests that non-duality teachings and debates can be distractions from true consciousness and spirituality. He explains that true understanding of non-duality involves refraining from criticism and judgement of others, accepting realities, and acknowledging that even seemingly misguided ideas have a place in the grand scheme of things.
• Understanding criticism through two different perspectives: Leo Gura explains two different perspectives on criticism, personifying them as Person A and Person B. While Person A is "righteously critical" and is personally disturbed by the object of their criticism, Person B adopts a more pragmatic approach. Person B sees criticism as a strategic tool, used sparingly and is not emotionally affected by the subject they are criticizing. This kind of criticism is born out of a deeper awareness and understanding of complexity and interconnectedness of the world and circumstances of people's actions.
• Differences between critical perspectives: The key differences between Person A and Person B are drawn out. Person A tends to be more critical overall and is more likely to voice criticisms publicly. This approach often leads to stress, anger, and lack of peace. They may be unproductive, spending their time complaining rather than taking productive action, and miss out on the beauty of different aspects of life. On the other hand, Person B, while still critical, does so in a less intense, less judgmental way. They have a holistic understanding of situations, and are aligned with the diversity of reality. This understanding leads to more peace in their life and results in being more productive and constructive.
• The paradox of criticism: Gura discusses the paradox of criticism - simultaneously, all criticism is untenable and tenable. Recognising and comprehending this paradox is said to lead to a "silencing of the mind", a greater understanding of and ability to rise above the game of criticism. The understanding of this paradox has a practical application in life and influences how one navigates the world and its myriad situations and dilemmas.
• Role of criticism in improvement: The video challenges the notion that criticism in itself leads to improvement. Instead, Gura suggests that self-reflection, both on a personal and a societal level, contributes significantly more to progress and change than criticism does. Taking the example of public intellectual Sam Harris's criticism of Islam, he points out how it hasn't necessarily led to improvement but instead resulted in significant personal threats to Harris.
• Freedom to critique: Despite making an argument against criticism, Leo acknowledges the individual's freedom to criticize. He suggests that instead of seeing criticism as inherently bad or good, we should strive for an understanding of it from a wider perspective and use it as a strategic tool when necessary, without using it for personal righteousness or ego escape.
• The suggested approach to criticism: Gura encourages a mindset where one does not become too involved or lost in criticism. He suggests a "meta" perspective where one understands the limitations and paradoxes of criticism and uses it sparingly and strategically, without getting emotionally attached to the objects of criticism. This understanding and approach to criticism is a significant aspect of personal growth and consciousness.
• The limitations of criticism in creating change: A point made is that excessive criticism disguised as a way to "improve the world" may actually have an adverse effect and might not lead to the significant change desired. Instead, radical ownership of our own lives, deeper self-reflection and promoting self-reflection amongst others are seen as more effective ways to instigate improvement and change.
• Understanding the Impact of Criticism: Leo Gura contrasts two personas based on their response to criticism - Person A and Person B. Person A is more angry and less at peace because they take criticism seriously, feel justified in being aggressive and lack compassion and understanding towards the subject of their criticism. They lay barriers between themselves and the ones they criticize, creating a division and leaving no room for seeing from the other person's perspective. This renders them unproductive and disconnected from the all-embracing diversity of reality.
• Realization of Unity and Flow with Reality: Gura emphasizes that this division is artificial and, given the same circumstances, a critic could become the person they criticize. A critical person is often out of sync with the constant flux of reality because their ego resists change. In comparison, Person B aligns with the flow of life, appreciating its diversity and beauty, even when it threatens his ego or life.
• Choosing Consciousness over Criticism: He adds the key to navigating criticism isn't in eliminating it but being conscious during the process, and considering whether indulging in criticism aligns with one's desired quality of life. Gura stresses the necessity of rising above the proverbial 'mudslinging contest,' thus avoiding the loss that comes from engaging with it.
• Legitimate vs Illegitimate Criticism: Leo points out the distinction made by the ego between 'legitimate' and 'illegitimate' criticism. However, he insists that holding onto criticisms, even those deemed important, could limit potential personal growth towards higher consciousness levels.
• Interaction of Criticism and Careers: Gura recognizes that several careers, such as news anchors, radio hosts, academics, and authors, rely heavily on criticism. However, he invites his audience to question whether being constantly critical is the best way to lead their lives.
• Personal Evolution from a Critical Stance: Gura acknowledges his past critical stance and points out the gradual change in his approach due to growth and higher consciousness experiences. He chooses to rise above being judgmental, understanding that embracing a critical attitude would place a ceiling on his consciousness level.
• The Speaker’s Transformation: He states that he isn't entirely satisfied when partaking in criticism and prefers to use that energy being consciously aware of his circumstances, aligning more with Person B. His audiences can expect to see a softening in his stance in future discussions, highlighting the significant shifts in his understanding of criticism.
• Hyenas and Manta Rays: Leo Gura uses the metaphor of hyenas fighting over a piece of meat and a manta ray gliding peacefully through the ocean to analogize critics who perpetually criticize one another and those who rise above the cycle of criticism. He encourages viewers to strive to be manta rays, not hyenas, and to refrain from criticizing even the hyenas.
• Shifting from Hyena to Manta Ray: In order to shift from being a hyena (critic) to a manta ray (non-critic), Gura suggests asking oneself six questions whenever the urge to criticize arises: is the criticism a red herring, what is not being accepted about reality, is the criticism productive, how can energy and time be used more constructively, does criticizing make one happy, and what positive lesson can be learned instead of criticizing.
• 30 Day No Criticism Challenge: Gura introduces a 30-day no criticism challenge where one refrains from criticizing for a month. By wearing a reminder wristband and asking oneself the above six questions whenever the urge to criticize arises, participants will gradually shift from being hyenas to manta rays.
• Avoiding the Trap of Criticising: Finally, Gura warns viewers to avoid the trap of criticizing others who are criticizing, as this is also a form of being a hyena. Instead, he advises using the principles shared in the video to overcome one's own ego, keeping criticism inwardly directed.
• Future Content from Actualized.org: Leo assures the audience that while he has been focusing on existential and abstract topics recently, he plans to return to more practical topics. He believes that the existential work builds a strong foundation that deepens understanding and insight on practical matters. He assures his audience to stick around for more practical insights grounded in existential understanding in the future.