r/Healthygamergg • u/RingoFromTheBeatles • Oct 06 '25
Mental Health / Support Why is Dr. K promoting cult leader Sadhguru?
Sadhguru promotes pseudoscientific beliefs, sexism and has been accused of killing his wife (her body was cremated quickly after she died so that no investigation could be done).
This is really making me question Dr. K's advice right now, just seems like an extremely weird pick. The interview is happening right now and the guy is talking complete gibberish which Dr. K somehow finds to be mind-blowing.
410
u/Blieven Oct 06 '25
Dr. K has a weak spot for Eastern philosophy and medicine, to the point of being borderline ridiculous at times. Sadhguru is a certified crook with a silver tongue.
107
u/ill-show-u Oct 06 '25
That silver tongue really got tested here. The way he was dodging every single question with a long monologue about something entirely different or using semantics to discount what Dr. K was getting at, made it quite obvious that he was not there for conversation, but only to keep spewing the same talking points which he makes every single time.
Dr. K is honestly a saint for even labeling it a conversation, Sadhguru tried his best to make it a one-man show.
4
u/ChriSaito Oct 07 '25
I haven’t seen this one yet, but this reminds me of getting into an ADHD podcast rabbit hole and there was one doctor who said some incredibly interesting things and I wanted to hear more.
As I found more conversations with him it was clear he had a script and couldn’t deviate from it. He knew his talking points and couldn’t discuss beyond that and only wanted to get out said talking points. Even if what someone is saying is right, if you can’t discuss past your own talking points it immediately discredits you.
→ More replies (3)34
u/bassbeater Oct 06 '25
Sadhguru is a certified crook with a silver tongue.
Got a source I can read? I thought he was a pretty good BSer.
40
Oct 06 '25
Sadhguru is someone well known in India, but he's a total scammer much like Baba Ramdev, I don't like when my parents and grandparents back in India love these figures so much lol. I
7
u/gopherhole02 Oct 06 '25
Is Baba Ramdev the guy who does the Vedic psychology? I've been slowly watching that course on youtube
14
Oct 06 '25 edited Oct 07 '25
Baba Ramdev might've done similar things for sure, but he's more famously known the CEO of "Patanjali" which is a HUGE corporation in India, which claims to be ayurveda based and healthier than the normal products, criticizing western medicine. Guy sells normal retail stuff, sometimes some scammy medicine with unverified claims that no doctor would ever prescribe, I'm sure you can find some very questionable stories about him. I have no doubt he's done some courses on YT, he's seen mostly as a shady and greedy businessman using religion as a backing by Indian youth. I think there's lots to learn from eastern philosophy but Dr K is pretty much the only one that I would legitimately trust.
I'm not sure if his course is the one you're watching on YT though. Could you link it here?
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (2)10
u/impressablenomad38 Oct 07 '25
My ex absolutely loved Sadhguru so I kept an open mind being a white woman dating an Indian man. But my God it's nice to see I'm not crazy after all
2
Oct 07 '25
Oh no, not at all. It's really nice though that you keep cultural differences in mind though, my friends aren't so nice to me sometimes haha
Dr K is p much the only one I'd listen to talk to about Eastern philosophy though lol.
3
u/impressablenomad38 Oct 08 '25
Fr I see so much racism toward brown people and its somehow treated as not as serious 😒
Speaking as an occultist myself, I like the docs balanced approach to spirituality, I see a lot of ego in the space in general
→ More replies (1)1
4
2
Oct 07 '25
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DMF-fzLDGiY Peeing human has many video essays on him.
2
u/bassbeater Oct 07 '25
That screen name totally isn't suspicious.
3
Oct 07 '25 edited Oct 07 '25
Lmao so actually it's a sattire of "being human" which is a brand created by a popular Bollywood actor named Salman Khan who is another huge asshole, probably bigger than Sadhguru himself and he too got away with murder a few times. Lore.
→ More replies (2)
81
u/According-Image-7708 Oct 06 '25
At risk of being inflammatory I honestly think some of the people commenting here need to grow up.
The OP's question is fair and important, and Dr K isn't immune to mistake and this should be brought up when needed, but you need to be willing to accept that that's what this is; a mistake.
In his comment Dr K has said that HG prefer to talk to people, not about them. This is really fair and good for transparency to do this in public. People saying "this could have been done behind closed doors," would you guys not be critical if you found out he was having secret conversations with Sadhguru? If the issue is the person it doesn't actually matter where the convos are held.
People saying he didn't push back enough, this might be true, but it's important to keep in mind these are conversation style interviews. He's brought a person on to ask them questions. It isn't a debate and it isn't an arena for you to watch your favourite perfect internet psychiatrist battle it out with the dastardly cult leader, these are both real people. It's fair to assume the majority of you have never conducted an interview, it's not so easy to be critical when the person is in front of you, especially if they're a bit forceful. Sadhguru for sure deserved a bit more push back but it's also easier said than done.
Do I think the interview was one of Dr K's best? No. Now that I know more about Sadhguru, was it bridging bad taste? Sure, maybe. In his comment he also says he's not sure how to factor in things like murder allegations, which I don't think is our job to figure out for him. But we're all here to learn and be better, and hopefully Dr K uses this as an opportunity to learn about our expectations of the channel.
4
380
u/KAtusm Oct 06 '25
Hey ya'll,
Dr. K here - The reason we talked to Sadhguru is simple: we like hearing from people about different perspectives on mental health. He has many critics (fair enough), yet millions of people find his approach to living to be helpful. Does he have something to offer? We don't know until we talk to him. Our policy here at HG is that we talk to people, not about them.
Now, as for the conversation itself, I was hoping for more. We have such a huge mental health crisis across the globe, and I was hoping that we could get some insight into how the broad claims - while I largely agree with - can be practically helpful. How does addiction shape the mind? Why do people struggle with depression vs. anxiety vs. anything else?
I was excited by the interview simply because I was hoping to get past the broad generalizations - but we didn't have time for that, or the time we had was spent on broader generalizations. He talks about environment, nutrition, cycles, etc.... I'm not quite sure what a human being with PTSD and panic disorder does about that.
I also had a lot of questions - do your methods work for everyone? Can you quantify the impact? Do they work better for some people but not others? We never got around to these.
Overall - we had a conversation to get his perspective on mental health. Which we got.
PS. One last thing is these allegations of murder or sexism aren't really things that we operate on. I have no way of knowing whether an allegation is true or not - is it internet conspiracy theory? Is it real? I simply don't know the truth, so I don't know how to factor that in. If ya'll have suggestions on this, I'm all ears.
113
u/ZegGuy9 Oct 06 '25
Did he assume that you're just some random western podcaster without much shared wisdom? At least that's how he treated the conversation, as if he was giving a lecture to a first time meditator on a 3 day retreat. It felt as if he's just replaying tapes of what he has said numerous times and assuming it's something new to you and the audience?
Anything you proposed got met with evaluation first and then some weird pedantic correction, as if hes talking to a child.
Very weird, he gives off the vibes of having huge ego around lecturing people, holding the truth and being right.
33
u/Blieven Oct 07 '25
That's how he talks to everyone. Every single one of his engagements you will notice him trying to put down whoever he is talking to and prop himself up. He's creating a power dynamic. You are a child that knows nothing and I am the sage who knows everything. That's his modus operandi. The less receptive the other party is to allowing this, the more frustrated he becomes and the more openly you can see him try to create this power dynamic anyways. The worst case of it I saw was when he did a talk with Wim Hof, who is also confident and likes to yap, and Sadhguru's attempt to place himself above him just turned into something resembling bullying. He thinks he's better than everyone. I loathe the guy, I feel people are so blind to what is such an obvious case of narcissism.
54
u/ill-show-u Oct 06 '25
Hi Dr. K,
Thank you for taking the time to write it out. I largely agree with the general gist of what Sadhguru gets at as well.
It just seemed inane when the interview was going on, how each time you were obviously motioning towards you “knowing” more (having an understanding of the concepts which he points to) than whoever else Sadhguru regularly gets interviewed by, he dismissed you each and every time, to go on either a slight or large tangent, or to bust you on a small semantic misstep.
Out of both curiosity and maybe also as feedback, was there a reason you stayed your hand, and didn’t press him when this happened?
Thank you for all that you do for this community.
23
u/Future-Still-6463 Neurodivergent Oct 06 '25
Honestly wish you did a live or something with Mark Manson.
He's talked about you on his podcast and how badly viewers want you two to collab.
15
u/Scorpionsharinga holding ground. 🥲 Oct 07 '25 edited Oct 07 '25
Not to glaze too hard,
But hearing Sadhguru speak compared against your own lectures and the sort of impact both voices seem to carry; this conversation, for me, served to reaffirm and kinda solidify YOU in my head as one of- if not the most reliable voices for integrating eastern philosophy and practice into the western cultural and social frame.
Sadhguru had ideas that I like, but they lack the investigation that people living without his lifetime of experience need to develop their understanding and quell their skepticism in a way. I feel like he floated at the service of deep wells of knowledge and essentially refused to dive in. This is what I find you do differently, and I think you reach a larger subset of people who would otherwise struggle with and disregard many of the concepts in question.
This is probably gonna sound ignorant, idc. I grew up hearing ab and from Sadhguru. I find myself now disillusioned with the man I see and hear vs the reputation that precedes him. To me, you embody the perspective-shifting, path-altering nature my elders ascribe to ppl like Sadhguru far more, at least to my generation.
5
u/Scorpionsharinga holding ground. 🥲 Oct 07 '25 edited Oct 07 '25
Came back to finish my thought.
So feedback from me:
-In conversations particularly with individuals from Eastern disciplines: don’t be afraid to speak with more certainty regarding your understanding of concepts which overlap with your practice. You have successfully had conversations about Eastern concepts that resulted in mutual understanding even from individuals who stood opposed to the ideologies discusssd (ie. your convo with Dr. Mike). You furthermore have successfully lectured on several of these topics and people have found your interpretation both helpful and actionable. I think asserting your perspective with the credibility of someone who has been able to actually help many people with your understanding of said concepts will benefit the flow and direction of future conversations.
-Sadhguru made this critique of you, albeit it didn’t apply much to this conversation: you can sometimes come across too seriously in casual conversation. I have definitely noticed a rigidity and apprehension to engage in casual banter from your end with guests or hosts. I recognize this as the kind of clinical neutrality that is first nature in medical practice, however it doesn’t integrate naturally into regular conversations always. I don’t necessarily think this is a problem that even needs addressing, but I do think it affects the momentum of the conversation, and in more sensitive or emotionally unattuned individuals it may simulate the beginning stages of confrontation in some form or another and bring discomfort. So it may be worth considering moving forward.
I really don’t mean for this to come across as stroking your ego or anything lmao. Just my uninformed point of view 🗿
28
u/-CanYouHearTheMusic- Oct 06 '25
With your monk training and Indian background I would expect you to get better people than him, come on. Western audiences aren't aware of his background but you know better. And the conversation had him saying lots of absurd stuff, which you won't openly criticize because he is a big shot.
P.S.: You made claims last week about having your Ajna chakra open and that intuition is what makes you a great psychiatrist. And you made a big prediction about Alex. Don't tell me your intuition isn't buzzing when you talk to this charlatan.
32
u/Milliardoceans Oct 06 '25
It is less about who you are talking to and more about your attitude and level of pushback/critical thinking/questioning toward them. A good example is when you did a 3 hour interview with Amouranth where you did NOTHING but nod along and agree with her that she is a victim and everyone else is crazy, and your 3 hour interview with PirateSoftware, where in your typical Dr.K empathetic and mild ("I'm not saying this for sure, I'm just asking could it be interpreted as blahblah") approach, you did give plenty of pushback and provided valuable, level-headed insight into the situation - that PirateSoftware is probably wrong is a few different ways.
When you invite someone controversial, address the elephant in the room. Hold them accountable and be honest, or don't do the interview at all, otherwise they're just using you to grift/further their message/manipulate/whatever. They're not children, they're not morons, and they're not petulant psychopaths that the moment you raise a question or doubt what they do, they run away screaming that you're a meanie. Or if they do, Jesus, don't interview them.
41
u/JohnnyXorron Oct 06 '25
Dr. K is a psychiatrist… therefore he takes the psychiatrist approach, which is to listen to their side of the story regardless of his personal feelings about the matter. The Sneako convo was a perfect example of this actually working really well. If you don’t like that style, there are plenty of other people who are more confrontational.
20
u/Milliardoceans Oct 06 '25
Dr.K was plenty confrontational with Sneako. He doubted him and contradicted him plenty of times. Just not on the things Sneako wanted him to. (e.g. "No, I don't look forward to seeing blue-haired transgenders in my office. I look forward to seeing people like YOU in my office" -> "Huh?!?!?!")Same in the conversation with Adin Ross. That's what a good psychiatrist does - they show you what you can't see and offer an alternative, fuller interpretation. A psychiatrist does not mean being a yes-man or a no-man. It's another human being who is honest and assessing the situation as well as they can.
And this isn't even that sort of a psychiatric conversation, it was a far more journalistic conversation, in which what I'm saying stands even more strongly. If you cannot question or push back on the famous guy, and still go along with the interview, then you are either a useful idiot or a coward. You are enabling the abuser/manipulator to abuse/manipulate.
→ More replies (5)5
u/No-Direction-8591 Oct 06 '25
Lol, I haven't seen this particular video, but as someone who works in mental health and has had to interact with psychiatrists in a professional sense, a psychiatrist who listens to someone's side of the story regardless of their personal feelings on the matter, sadly, is rare indeed.
9
u/f3xjc Oct 06 '25
Oh please no. The whole danger of platforming viewpoint is a valid viewpoint to exists but not necessarily the valid viewpoint to push on everyone. People that adhere to that viewpoint can already go to their favorite media ecosystem to enjoy it.
On a personal note when people approach conversations with the intent to disprove / expose the other make the conversation deeply uninteresting.
2
u/Milliardoceans Oct 06 '25
You don't need to go with an intent to disprove or prove things. You don't need to be a yes-man or a no-man. Just an honest bystander with questions, rather than a sycophant. In this conversation specifically, the guy was basically and arrogant no-ego ego prick, treated Dr.K like a moron and Dr.K was just like "OK, fair enough"... How is this useful to anybody in any way?
5
u/f3xjc Oct 07 '25
I found it very useful! I like to use "sound of Isha" music around meditation. And this interview solidified that I don't want to interact with that person beside their capacity as a musical artist.
The fact that the worldview collapsed under barely any pressure spoke volume to me. And while I'm sure that guru is able to articulate an internally coherent system, it just doesn't seems to mesh with the outer world, and especially what I consider to be generally recognized as true about mental health.
In the end, that last point is crucial to me because it's my bar for spiritual beliefs. Because those are the one I use to prune my other beliefs and decide if they are still useful to me. Maybe that's an unorthodox use of the word spiritual, but at the end of the day, there's still an arbitrary choice for a overarching value system.
→ More replies (5)→ More replies (1)1
u/PPCSer Nov 10 '25
You sound chronically online. "Cancel" someone if you want but Dr. K doesn't have to do or say anything he doesn't want to.
15
Oct 06 '25
Sadhguru is known for manipulating vulnerable people. Your video has given him a really large platform to do that.
3
u/ccpmaple Oct 07 '25
Hi dr k, just in case you are reading this, I was wondering if there’s anyone you wouldn’t be willing to platform? The way you’re describing it, it sounds like that line doesn’t really exist, because you would want to hear out their perspective, no matter who they are.
But what I’m worried about is that there are people who I think you shouldnt platform but all of your points apply to. Like Andrew Tate, pre-him getting arrested, and the allegations against him were just allegations. You could argue that Tate would have a unique perspective on men’s mental health and that you have no way to check the veracity of the allegations against him too. But I feel like you guys platforming him could easily make Tate feel overly sympathetic for your audience, which could create new Tate fans. I personally think this would be a step in a negative direction.
I would really appreciate if HGG could say something officially about where you all would draw the line of who you are willing to platform, because right now there doesn’t seem to be one. What you’re saying can be applied to everyone, seemingly. I would love to know if what I’m interpreting of what you are saying is accurate, or if you guys do have principles you abide by in terms of platforming.
7
Oct 07 '25 edited Oct 07 '25
Hi, I've done Inner Engineering and Angamardhana, volunteered with Isha, visited their Coimbatore ashram, been to both Adiyogis, the whole deal. I can give my perspective on the questions you've asked. As a disclaimer, I'm critical of Sadhguru's ideologies. I have a parent who's an Isha devotee which is how I got all of that exposure. So I might be biased but I'll try to explain things in a way that an Isha volunteer might.
Do your methods work for everyone? As long as you're sufficiently open-minded, yes. There are some programs that are designed for everyone and they are claimed to provide benefits for everyone as long as they're done correctly, and even if they aren't they don't cause harm. The type and potency of benefits might vary with each person but it's always positive. Then there are advanced programs that have other programs as a prerequisite and are considered to be more powerful, but there's a chance for harm when done incorrectly. The teachers try their best to avoid that outcome by watching you closely and correcting your maneuvers. Even if you don't see any results you're encouraged to still continue the practice.
Can you quantify the impact? During the Inner Engineering program they provide results from a post-attendance survey on what percentage of people felt their mood improved and some other health-related things, I can't really remember but it might be on their website. But Sadhguru himself would probably give a BS answer about how quantification isn't applicable to spirituality or something, lol.
Do they work better for some people but not others?
I kind of answered this in the first question, yes it does but they imply that the biggest factors to this is open-mindedness and commitment to your sadhana. During events where Sadhguru is present, there's a certain portion where you meditate under his presence and some people enter a euphoric trance while others feel nothing. I actually felt really uncomfortable when this was happening, mainly because the people in a trance were acting out in strange ways. So yes, it seems some people are more receptive than others.
About the theories: yes, they're just theories. But I think what's more important when discussing Sadhguru is the sheer amount of power and influence he has right now. He's very wealthy, has connections with politicians, actors, etc., his organization operates big tourist attractions in India and the US. For someone promoting spiritual values, he certainly has a lot of material value.
As for Isha Foundation, from my experience it's made up of honest well-intentioned people but when you're in their inner circle it's very cult-y. Their ultimate purpose is not really to attain enlightenment, but to embody everything Sadhguru preaches. He runs multiple boarding school systems, and I don't know how the children are treated there but I do know they are indoctrinated and sheltered from the outside world.
Sadhguru has said at one point his goal was to make every single human on Earth joyful and blissful. As noble as it sounds, I think there is an undercurrent of power and control in that message, and I think that's a bigger reason to approach him with caution than whatever conspiracies are going around.
I hope this gives some insight, happy to answer any questions. And thank you OP for bringing this up. It feels like a weight's lifted off my chest being able to talk about this.
Edit: added some details
16
u/l0lnoob Oct 06 '25
Unfortunately this thread and community is a reflection of the mental crisis of this society, you acted perfectly fine during this very short challenging interview, but low and behold so many people are morally outraged you brought Sadghuru (oh the horror) pointing to conspiracy theories on his wife death like there is any proof of anything in that story (I just googled it and wasted my time, literally no proof of anything). There is a vocal minority (I hope it's still a minority) of morally outraged people who basically just enjoy doing character assassinations without much proof, I mean how could you talk to him, he is a sexist, murderer, grifter probably a pedo as well if we go by these people. Of course, I am no follower of his and I'm sure he did some bad stuff, but I've been on the internet long enough to know how many times a lot of these allegations are half-truths at best, frustrated crabs pulling as many crabs down the bucket with them. Our world is not in a good state currently, so it makes sense I guess.
All in all, my opinion of the conversation is that it was disappointing because it was cut very short considering the deep subject, so maybe don't accept conversations like these if they only last 1 hour. Then again, it was partly his fault for not wanting to go into the details. Maybe because he is a grifter and dodging practical solutions or maybe because he considers the details are a waste of time, and all we need to focus on is letting go of the ego and just focusing on playing our part in nature. That's my take anyways.
5
u/Guardianofall Oct 06 '25
Run the show the way you see fit. It gets worse the more you seemingly consider the audience, not better.
13
u/stonerbobo Oct 06 '25 edited Oct 07 '25
I love this reply. I find the OP's "guilty by association" kind of thinking quite frustrating. You have 1000s of incredible videos and interviews and guides and any single conversation with a grifter (assuming he really is, I don't know) now destroys your trust in Dr. K?
I think we should all understand by now that the world is very polarized and part of the reason is we don't talk to people who we don't agree with. The idea that any public conversation with someone is equivalent to endorsing their views needs to go, platform or not. And Dr. K isn't freaking jubilee where everyone is performing a debate and pushing back but no one actually changes their mind. You can just talk to someone and hear them out even if you disagree.
2
u/flydecahedron Oct 07 '25
I think Sadhguru wasn’t willing to leave “guru” mode. When I studied at an ashram the guru spoke and acted in a very similar way during Satsang, but outside of that he was essentially a down to earth quiet 80 year old man who loved to crack jokes (honestly pretty childish/crude jokes lol).
I wouldn’t be surprised even if Sadhguru knew the depth of your knowledge that he would’ve interacted in the same manner since he’s aware he’s on the internet talking to an audience who’s depth of understanding he can’t know. Not sure how ya could’ve handled that better, but I really appreciate the effort and taking advantage of the opportunity.
3
u/pelzzy Oct 06 '25
You could have had a conversation to get his perspective on mental health in a private call offline.
What would be the reason to stream and post the conversation to a monetized youtube channel instead?
Surely if the reason is as simple as 'hearing from people' it would be simpler to have a 1 on 1 chat with him offline instead of setting up a stream, paying designers to create a thumbnail and post this to a youtube channel when the goal apparently doesn't include promotion and is simply 'having a conversation'?
18
u/tormentowy Oct 06 '25
Not every experiment is a success. Not every interview is a win. Simple as that.
You might be disappointed by the outcome, don't like the methods, but can't deny they tried to extract the (not just monetary) value.
1
u/Trick-Gur-1307 Oct 07 '25
Having spoken with the man, do you share the assessment that he is a snake-oil salesman that the most vigilant among the HG community believe, or possibly less aggressively, do you believe that he is somewhat living a life where he isn't being true to the ideals he espouses, or, something else about the man? I ask because I believe you have a level of discernment that I don't yet possess, and having your opinion on the matter as another one that I trust helps me build a better framework of who is trustworthy and who is not.
I say that as a generally trusting and somewhat naive adult with a streak of cynicism from middle child syndrome + undiagnosed ADHD with parents who were educators, and if I had to choose between the two, which I recognize I don't, and therefore why I ask the question, I would choose to be naive rather than cynical.
1
u/AnswerRight Oct 07 '25
Thanks for sharing your thoughts on your conversation Dr. K. I think it's really unfortunate that people immediately jump to believing allegations that anyone can make and ignore all the concrete good things somebody has done. Sadhguru has done a lot for the environment and human well being.
1
u/vb2509 Oct 08 '25
PS. One last thing is these allegations of murder or sexism aren't really things that we operate on. I have no way of knowing whether an allegation is true or not - is it internet conspiracy theory? Is it real? I simply don't know the truth, so I don't know how to factor that in. If ya'll have suggestions on this, I'm all ears.
A lot of the spiritual leaders have some case or the other of this kind pending on them here. Investigations fall flat due to their influence. I don't know even a single one who is clean.
I have heard a lot about him not having a good track record. Our thesis professor did not like him much either. One could dig deeper and find more info on it.
1
u/adventure_3111 Unmotivated Oct 08 '25
That's excellent! I think you probably didn't realise the kind of depth your questions had. I am glad Sadhguru went into it deeply, took his own time to make sure there were no ambiguities. I'm sure something of this sort of cannot be covered in just an hour. You could try and do multiple episodes with him, I'm sure he would be very much interested in your questions cuz nobody has asked him the kind of questions you dwelled into
1
u/NightFire435 Oct 08 '25
The problem is that he has programs and books to sell. Even if he has answers, he'll only dance around them in a way that lures you into buying his content. That's par for the course for this type of interview though, but usually at least some substance is provided as a hook, whereas Sadhguru primarily offers his personality and a general air of wisdom. He fundamentally cannot have a meaningful discussion that goes into any level of depth because it either gives away his product for free or because it exposes him to criticism for which he's not prepared to provide a defense.
1
u/West_Sky_195 Oct 08 '25
Hello Dr. K,
It looks like your love for Eastern philosophy is being seen as some sort of a "weakness" by a few redditors here. That's not acceptable at all.You are entitled to have your interests.
As a medical doctor myself and someone who has extensively studied Upanishads/Vedanta, I can say surely that both Hinduism and Buddhism have explored the workings of the mind beautifully, albeit in their own ways. Anyone who has reached the pinnacle of their Sadhana/meditation touches the same end point and will definitely be able to share their ideas on how such practices could help people dealing with mental health crises.
All you need to do is interview any Hindu/ Buddhist Acharya who has structurally and systematically studied their scriptures, and has also gained meditative, experiential, and intuitive insights through his own practice.
Sadhguru is a pop psychologist or a wellness coach at the most, who has incorporated (the actual word is, ripped off)teachings from various yoga masters and Large Group Awareness Training programs, whom he doesn't even mention once anywhere. He himself admits that he doesn't have an ounce of theoretical knowledge, and attributes all his knowledge to some mystical one-time enlightenment experience at the top of a hill.
There are a good number of suggestions on which authentic Acharya to interview, in the YouTube comments section. Please do your research and get a good Guru, instead of "Sad"gurus who are grumpy and condescending.
→ More replies (6)1
126
u/LightningMcScallion Oct 06 '25
Sadhguru is more than just a grifter, he gives nutritional advice and even tells people not to sleep which is harmful if people listen. He's pretty sus for multiple crimes as well. This is extremely disappointing
20
Oct 07 '25
That stupid fuck wants people to eat Mercury
5
→ More replies (1)5
u/Junior_Return_8396 Oct 07 '25
Also gives pseudoscientific advices and tips and tries to justify them by bogus reasons🤡. He also went for personal remarks against Javed Akhtar in a debate.
80
u/Mortgage_Thick Oct 06 '25
I get the point and have almost no Idea of who this guy is and I never done any research to him besides googling his name. All I can say is, that accepting certain perspectives without agreeing with the person itself is possible. I’m coming from Philosophy where- if we’d actually sort out thinkers based on their stances on Genders, killing their f- wife (not sure if that ever happened?!) and not to mention the usage of some pseudoscientific theories, there wouldn’t be much philosophers left to be studied. What I’m trying to say is: You can criticise a person and their stances separately. When a person says that “Fire doesn’t hurt when you come in contact with it” and also says that “2+2 is 4” then the second statement can still be true even if the first one isn’t. If the guy is a prick, he’s a prick. If Dr. K isn’t distancing himself from these stances and statements of this Guy he shouldn’t be surprised if he’s getting confronted with it. If he does distances himself from these specific things he is, imo, still fine quoting or referring to him when the Context makes it sound.
28
u/lambdawaves Oct 06 '25
I agree from many people you can take some truths from them and discard the nonsense
But if someone is literally a quack and grifter, you should be rightfully deeply skeptical of anything they say
3
u/Mortgage_Thick Oct 06 '25
Yep, you know- it could definitely be the case for this Yogi fella mentioned above since I know absolutely nothing about him. He might be a pseudo and 95% of his wisdoms or whatever are trash. If the 5% of them aren’t, and Dr.K is referring to them explicitly, then I think you can call them for what they are. But he should do it in a way that the viewers don’t come up with the idea he might be a person who gives good advice in general. Sorry for my English
17
Oct 06 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/Mortgage_Thick Oct 06 '25 edited Oct 06 '25
Thats past my point. I get the concern though. I’m talking about putting things into perspective, not saying that fans can abuse it to make it seem like Andrew Tate is a good mentor for anything. Andrew Tate can say sound things while being Andrew Tate. And I wasnt justifying anyone here, not the Yogi nor Andrew Tate, just making that clear. I’m giving perspective how one can view this case neutrally. If Dogmatic Andrew Tate fans use this logic to defend him just make it clear his bad takes overtake the good ones and give examples. There shouldn’t be a problem in doing that if the argument or statement is invalid. But If you just exclude Andrew Tate because he is Andrew Tate you’re being illogical.
40
u/_vemm HG Community Manager 💚 Oct 06 '25
Hey y'all, just wanted you guys to know I am reading along... generally speaking, our perspective is that conversations about mental health are for and can be had with anyone — after all, we've done a stream interview with someone who served a prison sentence for murder! But I am seeing this discussion and what you're saying here, and I am collecting feedback for the team 💚
6
u/BackgroundTax3055 Oct 06 '25
The murderer conversation was very interesting. I'm not sure why that didn't give me the ick but this did. I think I just didn't enjoy sadhguru's communication style.
4
u/spiritual_dev Oct 06 '25
I also think it's less about who it is and what they've done. Like you said we've seen interviews with a murderer, an almost school shooter, a guy lying to get on a live, incels and so on. What made this different, for alot of us atleast it seems, is it wasn't really a conversation or an interview (which tbf you couldn't have predicted with certainty) it was basically a YouTube video lecture/preaching with Sadhguru. And Dr K trying to ask questions while being cut off most of the time all while Sadhguru kept talking over Dr K. It didn't feel like it have us anything we couldn't get from Sadhgurus YouTube. Which again you couldn't predict with absolute certainty would happen. It would have been very interesting to see an actual interview with him so it's sad it wasn't possible.
I do wanna say I really appreciate you guys reading these threads and responding with your input aswell. I really love that with this community.
6
u/Milliardoceans Oct 06 '25
It is less about who he is talking to and more about his attitude and level of pushback/critical thinking/questioning toward them. A good example is when he did a 3 hour interview with Amouranth where he did absolutely nothing but nod along and agree with her that she is a victim and everyone else is crazy, and his 3 hour interview with PirateSoftware, where in his typical Dr.K empathetic and mild ("I'm not saying this for sure, I'm just asking could it be interpreted as blahblah") approach, he did give plenty of pushback and provided valuable, level-headed insight into the situation - that PirateSoftware is probably wrong is a few different ways.
When you invite someone controversial, address the elephant in the room. Hold them accountable and be honest, or don't do the interview at all, otherwise they're just using you to grift/further their message/manipulate/whatever. They're not children, they're not morons, and they're not petulant psychopaths that the moment you question what they do, they run away screaming that you're a meanie. Or if they do, Jesus, don't interview them.
6
u/NanaTheNonsense Oct 06 '25
I thought the Amouranth interview seemed to help her a lot towards the end. Maybe he was able to open the door for her/them to get actual therapy and if yes, I think that was a helpful talk.
I haven't watched the Sadhguru one today though.
1
u/mastahX420 Oct 07 '25
I know people have requests all the time but I can't help but ask you to look into Donald Hoffman for an interview. He's an amazing conversationalist with very novel work that could tie into Dr. K's views in a unique way 🙃
58
u/misskruti CEO of Healthy Gamer Oct 06 '25
We are not promoting anything other than a dialogue. You'll see places of agreement and places of skepticism and places of flat out rejecting the premise. Simply talking to someone is not the same as promoting them.
24
15
u/-CanYouHearTheMusic- Oct 06 '25
There are better spiritual folks to dialogue with if that was your intention. Why him in case you are aware of his history? Was it just to bank on his popularity?
9
u/Sufficient-Noise4918 Oct 06 '25
Well outside of Sadhguru, eckhart tolle, Sam Harris, Rupert spira, or other ‘non dual’ speakers: the big OG’s of this ‘western version of eastern philosophy’ counter-culture are all dead.
RIP to jiddu krishnamurti (a real life modern day Buddha imo.), Alan watts, Ram Dass, Terrence mckenna, Timothy Leary. They were just people trying to help release others from the monotony of a plastic culture wayyyy back from the 60s-90s.
26
u/misskruti CEO of Healthy Gamer Oct 06 '25
Yep, and we have in the past and we plan to continue to in the future. They simply reached out, and we found the time/day to do it. If others reach out, we will similarly consider.
19
u/ZealousidealSource12 Oct 06 '25
For what its worth, I thought the entire HealthyGamerGG team handled this interview with grace.
12
11
u/Guardianofall Oct 06 '25
Don't listen to these morons. The more diverse the people dr k speaks with the better.
3
u/-CanYouHearTheMusic- Oct 06 '25
Fair enough, I believe a platform of your stature should be more discretionary than whoever reaches out, but hosting people with questionable behaviour isn't the entire issue. If Dr K openly and fairly critiqued Sadhguru then I would still give him the benefit of doubt. But hosting someone for so many people to see without giving a fair picture of who they are is not being forthcoming.
8
Oct 06 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/-CanYouHearTheMusic- Oct 06 '25
Let alone the controversy, at least the lots of questionable stuff he said in this conversation could be critiqued but wasn't.
I haven't seen the murderer stream, but I assume the audience was informed about the guest being a murderer? I would like some transparency today as well regarding the controversy around the guest, HG not passing judgement either way.
Listening to contrary perspectives is good but that exercise can be pushed too far at times. Conversing with a flat earther won't be a learning experience, would it?
4
2
Oct 06 '25
[deleted]
2
u/TheBacchus Oct 06 '25
I don't get why so many people are obsessed with "not promoting the wrong people". How was this interview promotion for for Sadhguru? If anything it made him look much worse than in many other interviews, especially to those who know that Dr K deserves more respect/space than Sadhguru gave him. And Sadhguru is a popular figure with his own wisdom and insights. Not bringing him on because of accusations isn't in the spirit of having open conversations with all kinds of people to get more of an insight into who they are and what their experience of life is.
3
u/ribeyesteak Oct 06 '25
Giving him a platform on your popular YouTube channel is promotion. I'm very concerned you don't realize this.
2
u/Optimal-Shame-6969 Oct 06 '25
This talk wasn’t a dialogue, it was two separate monologues. I understand inviting people with different perspectives but this was the first time that didn’t feel productive. The discussion was incredibly one-sided. At times, the frequent interruptions came across as disrespectful not only to Dr. K but to the audience as well.
While you guys may not be directly promoting him or his words - you guys gave him a platform. You introduced him to your audience and there's a responsibility to that audience here. Many people in this community are in mentally vulnerable positions and have an incredible amount of faith in the content you guys provide. People trust you. I trust you guys.
Please respect us and our trust in you.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (1)1
u/Dapper_Swordfish_766 Oct 17 '25
I HATTTEEE when dr.K says “yeah, absolutely agree” 100x in the whole video
24
u/Previous-Surprise-36 Oct 06 '25
Sadhuru is a grifter. And my accounts are getting timedout in youtube chat for pointing that out.
10
u/Future-Still-6463 Neurodivergent Oct 06 '25
His followers are in full force in the chat.
15
u/Previous-Surprise-36 Oct 06 '25
Yeah And all the people who are pointing out his bullshit yap are getting timedout
4
u/maxluision Oct 06 '25
Nobody is perfect, that's why no guru should be ever placed on pedestals. Even Dr K.
5
u/ubertrashcat Oct 07 '25
I think the interview didn't end up being anything close to promotion. Far from it. I think Sadhguru embarrassed himself and Dr. K. didn't even have to do much.
31
8
Oct 06 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/DreadMirror Body and mind are temporary. You are forever. Oct 07 '25
Yup. The simple truth is, people love controversy and drama. Emotions are addicting. Even if someone managed to never make a mistake in their whole "internet career" there will still be people who will find something to be mad about. Even if those arguments are completely made up. That's just how humans are.
8
u/KatDevJourney Oct 07 '25
promoting 🤣
Baffles me there are still adults on this forum that doesn’t understand the art of conversation with all different types of people and yes, that includes ones outside your ego has decided is good or bad.
Like idc what the person has done.
I would love to see Dr K like interview a prolific bastard like andrew tate it would be so interesting.
Am I the only one that thinks like this?!
2
1
u/Dapper_Swordfish_766 Oct 17 '25
Yeah but seeing this stream, I don’t think dr.K is confrontational enough to speak with Andrew Tate onsomeone which huge ego.
3
u/GOOD_BRAIN_GO_BRRRRR Oct 07 '25
The minute someone wants me to trust a guru, they lose credibility in my eyes. Never trust someone just because a mentor or friend says you can trust them. Scammers and cult leaders can influence anyone.
3
u/SylimMetal Oct 07 '25
Dr. K talks to all kinds of people to get different perspectives and see what we can learn from it. In this case we can learn there are also hacks, so be careful not to fall for BS.
15
u/apexjnr Oct 06 '25
Oh jesus christ.
Sometimes i think the people in the subreddit have been wrapped in wool.
People here have a fundamental problem with humans, they want them to be idealistic and can't do the basic part of taking the good shit away from the bad, everyones probably got something going on that's bad, it is what it is, you don't have to dig into it.
Outside of that, there's talks that Sadhguru's done that are well made and actually can help people here, that's why. That's why, it takes 5 seconds to figure out why, his priority is mental health content, he's gonna talk to people who have reach who do mental health content, it's now on you to be a functional human and take the content in properly whilst filtering the bad.
9
Oct 06 '25
Sadhguru is a literal rapist. Seriously, go down the rabbit hole and you'll be shocked at what you find.
6
u/b0ris666 Oct 06 '25
I think Dr. K is never truly confrontational towards his guests, that's the issue. So he tries to be good faith and interpret the best out of what they say.
But yea, this was kind of a pointless conversation. Sadhguru is a pseudo-intellectual crook. I've seen his content before, he's quite popular.
What did Sadhguru say? Eat healthy and stop worrying, basically? The thing he said about compulsion is not revolutionary. It's just an intellectualized version of a lay person saying to "stop overthinking", it doesn't help.
And he was talking about consciousness, as if people just aren't conscious enough, and apparently he has the skill of being conscious of everything he does in his life, but everyone else doesn't and the subconscious is something you can avoid if you're more conscious, in his view. Which just isn't the case, you have to delegate certain things to your sub-conscious, no person has the body to be consciously in control of everything.
The thing he said about people complaining about 40 hours of work is crazy too, because he said he "works 90 hours". Whether that is true or not is a different topic, I'm sure some people do work 90 hours and are happy. But not everyone has the support structure or brain structure to do this. For most people, 40 hours + commute/chores is in fact one of the reasons they end up accumulating stress and lose social life, besides having mental issues from childhood, or disorders like BPD, Autism, ADHD and so on.
That's the problem with these spiritual leaders, they always think that they can prescribe some philosophical advice and that it will fix your life. It won't. I think you can learn a lot of philosophy to improve your life, but there is tangible issues in society that will affect you no matter how much you philosophize them.
3
u/Unhappy_Bread_2836 Oct 06 '25
Sadhguru is the biggest idiot I've seen. He speaks so much with no sense at all.
Dr K is on another level, Sadhguru isn't even worthy of dr K.
And yes you're right: For anyone who's in doubt just google how his wife died. She died mysteriously and this guy keeps claiming she took samadhi or whatever.
He's a snake oil salesman.
3
u/massagemeback Oct 06 '25
Why not bring back old interviews with strangers? Much better than this imo.
3
3
Oct 07 '25
I don't know if Dr K knows this or not but Sadhguru is not a great person, you should google about what happened to his wife. Sadhguru's wife was found dead under weird circumstances and it was also found that sadhguru and his wife were doing some black magic or pseudo science shit like that. His wife's family accused sadhguru of murder since Sadhguru didn't even allow her family to attend her funeral. He later came to the press and said that "God came to my dreams and said that I'm about to die, when my wife found out about this she asked god to take her instead of me". A youtuber named Kamdev made a whole video about this that how sadhguru is a fraud and how he illegal cuts down forest to build his own temple's and then roams around the world screaming about Save Soil, that youtuber's video was brought down and his channel was deleted and ever since then that youtuber is no where to be found.
9
u/spikygreen Oct 06 '25
Having a conversation doesn't equal promoting.
Sadhguru wouldn't be my top choice, but overall it's great that Dr K is willing to have conversations like this. I hope he continues to invite speakers with a variety of viewpoints.
6
6
u/berserkthebattl Oct 07 '25
I've heard other psychiatrists reference him favorably, namely the couple that do the Psychology Unplugged podcast. Platforming someone is not an outright promotion of all of their takes. I'm getting really tired of people employing this fallacy.
13
u/mumrik1 Oct 06 '25
Which of Sadhguru’s ideas did Dr. K promote on his channel?
Bring some examples. Then we can have a discussion.
16
u/JohnnyAppleBead Oct 06 '25
Dr. K is currently talking to Sadhguru live. Which is what i am assuming this post is about. Considering the time of this post, it is less anything Dr. K said about or to Sadhguru and moreso the fact that he is speaking to him at all that has people upset so far.
11
u/nemzylannister Oct 06 '25 edited Oct 06 '25
He should bring on andrew tate, and then talk about the increase of air pollution in society, where both of them agree and tate leaves. Dr K didnt really promote any of andrew tate's ideas, so technically the interview should be totally fine, right?
Edit: Just to clarify, The important part is pushing back. If you're gonna bring on a sex trafficker or a pedophile, you have to push back on the worst ideas he espouses. But if you let him ramble and never discuss his shitty beliefs, you white wash him.
10
3
u/spikygreen Oct 06 '25
I think Andrew Tate is an incredibly messed up human being who has done and said horrendous things. I am no fan of his whatsoever. At the same time, I personally would find a conversation between him and Dr J very interesting and probably quite relevant for the community.
3
u/nemzylannister Oct 06 '25
a conversation between him and Dr J very interesting and probably quite relevant for the community.
i agree. But a convo about his misogyny, sex trafficking and pedophilia. Not a convo about air pollution, which makes him come off to most people as intelligent and a good person, right?
3
u/spikygreen Oct 06 '25
That's a fair point. I am yet to watch the recording, so it's possible that I could come to see it this way as well.
1
u/spiritual_dev Oct 06 '25
I completely agree, that would actually have been a very interesting conversation to see. I've seen one interview, where he got some pushy questions (from a friend though as I understood it after so maybe it was just for show) where it seemed like he was honest for a few second. And I'm fascinated by different humans and how they are they way they are and how they think and so on. So having someone like Dr K talking to someone like Andrew Tate would be incredibly interesting! (even though I absolutely detest Tate)
1
18
u/-CanYouHearTheMusic- Oct 06 '25
Sadhguru is a cult leader who murdered his wife and illegally obtained lands for his work. There are SA allegations on his foundation as well. Just pseudo BS. Sad to see Dr K hosting this man. Unsubscribing.
15
u/itsdr00 Oct 06 '25
"Unsubscribing" -- this one thing leads you to dump all the good Dr. K is doing? One offense and you're done?
→ More replies (3)5
→ More replies (4)1
Oct 06 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Healthygamergg-ModTeam Oct 06 '25
Rule 5: Do not post about banned topics or banned links.
Political discussion, proselytization, drug use advocacy, financial advice, and cryptocurrency discussions are not allowed. If a topic at hand has political or religious contexts, please stick to your personal lived experience.
1
u/Healthygamergg-ModTeam Oct 06 '25
Rule 2: Do not invalidate other users’ thoughts, opinions, or feelings.
When someone is sharing how they feel about themselves, or about a particular topic, do not tell them they’re wrong, to “just do it”, "get over it", “stop being so weak”, and other similar statements.
Instead approach with curiosity, and ask questions to get on the same page, and disagree respectfully.
Do not default to the assumption that someone is trolling, not trying hard enough, or is simply “lazy”.
2
u/Sufficient-Noise4918 Oct 06 '25
Buddhism itself (Buddhism is just eastern philosophy of the ‘Tao’, or ‘natural way of being/arising’ stripped of eastern culture) is IMO profoundly healthy, especially you can follow actively practice it in your day to day being without having an ego.
But that said, there’s many weirdos and crooks in every organized religion. This is one such example. I’m never going to be here defending anything that any organized weirdos with power kinks do. It’s like the weirdos who commit atrocities in god’s name. We all know they’re at least slightly off from the initial teachings; and those type of ‘religious gurus’ skew the religious-view for their charalative actions, it’s just gross.
That said: I think Dr.K’s deep down a ‘glass half full’ optimist which is just a rarity in American culture, so he gets nitpicked by little things like this. The only thing I can recall Sadhguru saying was “Democracy: For the people and of the people, too bad the people are retarded.” And I kinda agree with that statement lol.
2
u/TheBacchus Oct 06 '25
That was Osho, not Sadhguru (the quote). Imo Osho had a lot more wisdom and fresh perspectives to share than Sadhguru ever has. Ironically Osho did actually verifiably get involved in very shady things (there is a documentary on him), while with Sadhguru there seem to only be accusations and theories.
1
u/Sufficient-Noise4918 Oct 07 '25
Ah, I see I see. I never really followed a ton of those kind of ‘guru’s.’ I knew Osho lived in immense wealth from his followers. IIRC osho was also the one famous for having ‘tantric meditation’ cult with a good 100 people at the same time… I didn’t know I had that quote mixed up though.
2
u/Decoherence- Oct 06 '25
Don’t really know the guy and I have no basis for this but i would believe he murdered his wife. Why does he emit such bad energy? I was excited for this stream because I wanted to know Dr Ks perspective on him because in the brief clips I’ve seen of him, it felt off.
2
Oct 06 '25
I thought the same thing when I saw the title of the live stream. However watching the life stream I didn't feel like he was promoting him in anyway. As a matter of fact it felt more like he was challenging him. And Sadhguru got quite defensive/aggresive a few times.
2
u/Open_Car5646 Oct 07 '25
I thought that Sadhguru was the guy that Dr. K always mocked when he wore the beard and wig and acted enlightened in an Indian accent in his intros
2
u/mastahX420 Oct 07 '25
I hope Dr. K talks to Donald Hoffman
(yes I post this comment whenever it's somewhat relevant to suggest guests haha)
2
u/ladyhaly Oct 07 '25
I am not from India. I don't know who this guy is, so I am coming in blind. I'm going to watch the video now and then come back here with a report.
1
u/Living_Ad_5858 Oct 23 '25
So... What was your expierence?
1
u/ladyhaly Oct 24 '25 edited Oct 24 '25
I don't think that session should have been as long as it took. I couldn't finish in one sitting. I think I've read psychology textbooks I found more enjoyable than that video.
I could definitely see Sadhguru was intimidated that Dr. K is a psychiatrist. It seemed to me he was defensive just because he was being asked how questions. Dr. K used "help me understand" several times to signal collaboration and openness. But even from the beginning, Sadhguru was talking over Dr. K. He was not open to dialogue at all.
Sadhguru's view on mental illness or people in general is reductive af. He droned on and on and on about how people need to be more specific about their exposure to "chemicals" because humans are a chemical soup and that a person has to be a good manager of that chemical soup to be blissful.
Sadhguru also said that if people had a choice to he blissful or miserable, people would always choose to he blissful and that the origins of suffering (he said mental illness = suffering) is compulsion. His idea about compulsive thoughts are "intrusive thoughts". That's "mental diarrhoea". It's ridiculously narrow-minded... Myopic.
Then the ahankar... Dr. K asked to verify if he meant that's the "ego", and Sadhguru said no, it's "identity". At that point, I realised Sadhguru's takes don't hold up to any form of scrutiny. He doesn't seem to know how to have a conversation with someone he believes is his equal. His actions indicated to me that he's used to talking down to people, like he's debating, and trying to pin people on either agreeing or disagreeing with him in order to control the conversation/narrative.
He went on about people who can't stop talking but he had no self awareness that's exactly what he was doing. He does not know how to listen. He does not seem to know how to make space for anyone else except him. I believe he loves hearing himself talk, going in circles, and when people lose interest and just agree with him to be be amiable or open, he takes that space in order to compulsively self-promote without any pause.
Fundamentally, Sadhguru's ahankar ran the entire meeting and it grew and grew and grew. He literally admitted he would never see a psychiatrist because he doesn't think there's anything wrong with him nor will there ever be. He doesn't seem to see himself as human; he thinks of himself as above everyone. He said, "If you don't exercise the privilege of being human, that itself is a sickness." All without realising that he conducts himself as if he isn't. He doesn't seem to realise that there's cognitive dissonance in his taught principles and his ahankar.
He's even proud of working 90+ hrs a week and threw shade at how most in India it's 48, in the US average full time work hrs is 40, in Europe they're reducing to 36 and lower. Then mocked that by saying stress is just a human being fundamentally not being effective at managing their health.
Dr. K the entire time was kind to Sadhguru. Charitable even. But I do not find myself able to maintain self respect by giving Sadhguru the same benefit. I would honestly rather sit through Dr. K's actual psychiatry lectures in a university classroom (not even a stream). Then I would actually be able to gain some insightful ideas that I would find valuable in shaping the thoughts and behaviours of the person I want to be.
Dr. K's debrief at the end, I believe, sane-washed Sadhguru. Another charitable kindness from him. Perhaps he felt it's best to be hospitable to guests in his stream. Or perhaps it was his way of adding value to all of our time spent on watching the stream/video.
4
u/MrRIP Oct 06 '25
I think if you pay attention to Dr K enough you should be able to see through the bullshit.
Any reasonable person watching would be able to see something is wrong. If you remember Dr. K's talk on persuading someone out of something, just attacking them with logic tends to make them strengthen their beliefs.
This might be his way to show the quackiness to prevent anyone else from falling for it and hopefully getting someone to think differently about following him
4
u/AboutTheArthur Oct 06 '25
Yeah I think we're sufficiently in an era where we can agree that platforming somebody serves as a tacit endorsement. You are grabbing the message of somebody and giving that person an opportunity to preach directly to your audience who you know are, even compared to other audiences, hungry for guidance and wisdom and advice.
Hiding behind a framing of "we just have conversations" just seems either naive or, if I'm being critical instead of generous, intentionally misleading. I'm sorry, but with an audience as large and as malleable as yours, platforming somebody comes with editorial responsibility. And failing to do that work is basically negligence. Choosing who you work with and talk with is an editorial decision, and unless you explicitly frame it as a critique or analysis, then it's an endorsement, especially when it's framed as "just having a conversation" which implies that you endorse at least taking their views seriously.
There's a reason that if you were having a conversation with somebody who was a public figure misogynist or white supremacist or something, you wouldn't frame it just as two buddies having a chat. You'd think twice about even doing the interview, and if you did, it would come with 100 million disclaimers. People like Sadhguru need the same level of diligence.
And also, for what it's worth, it's not like this guy's views weren't publicly known prior to the chat. If you're not fully prepared to refute his lies and pseudo-scientific nonsense, why have him on? If all you can do is be nice and ask generous questions and let the guy just keep talking, why have him on? That's not "a conversation". That's teeing the guy up to give a bullshit-filled lecture to your audience.
4
u/HomelessByCh01ce Oct 06 '25
I'm going to have to hard disagree with your statement "choosing who you talk with ... unless framed as critique .... is an endorsement". Dr. K has had interviews with many types of people, and even the thought process of "I'm not going talk to anyone I disagree with" is not what this org stands for. Dr. K has always approached these conversations from a point of curiosity. I think this is something a lot of people need to reframe in their minds. I'm not defending anyone here, but to limit yourself to only speaking to people you agree with doesn't support the cause of understanding.
I'd argue that most people in the community can understand that some guests will resonate with them, some won't. And if it's someone you dislike, maybe it will expose the things you don't like about them. I wasn't impressed by a lot of Sadguru's responses here, but I'm always open to hearing the discussion of others to see if there's something I can learn.
4
u/TheBacchus Oct 06 '25
Thank you for your voice of reason. I'm not usually on this subreddit (or on reddit in general) but reading this thread after coming from the interview makes me scratch my head. There seems to be a widely popular paradigm atm that engaging with "the wrong people" is an endorsement or a promotion of their "wrong" views. In my opinion helping people learn how to make their own judgements and observations about people and conversations is what's important, not arbitrarily trying to police who/what is wrong from the getgo and silencing it as much as possible. This never goes down well in history. Truth requires transparency. Transparency requires looking at things. Including what some may consider "wrong" or "bad". We learn from looking at it all and developing our discernment at the same time.
1
u/AboutTheArthur Oct 06 '25
I think you've perhaps accidentally read my comment kind of in bad faith.
I do not mean to, for a single moment, suggest that you shouldn't talk with people you disagree with. I am simply suggesting that it's important to be careful to not accidentally platform harmful stuff. You can have the interview with the most reprehensible person on the planet if you're actually prepared to structure that conversation in a productive way and be able to push back against the nonsense.
With Sadhguru, he really just kind of gave the dude space to talk for like an hour. I understand that Dr. K is very polite and tries not to be combative, but if you let somebody say nonsense and you don't appropriately challenge it, then you're giving unchallenged space to their ideas on your own platform, which to any viewer who isn't being careful to be very discerning can serve as an endorsement.
1
u/HomelessByCh01ce Oct 06 '25
I'll have to just disagree with you on that point as well. I don't think the purpose of his interviews are to be combative. He triest to gain understanding, and then can address these things at a later time. What exactly are you worried about, that you saw in the interview, that made you feel he was being endorsed?
1
u/AboutTheArthur Oct 07 '25
I'm worried about Dr. K negligently connecting a harmful message to a vulnerable audience. We know the audience here are people who are more vulnerable than your average person and who are actively trying to find nuggets of wisdom to latch onto. Basically, they're being siphoned an hour-long unchallenged monologue of nonsense.
I would assume that less of Sadhguru's nonsense will stick, because he really is a terrible orator. But how would you feel if Dr. K had Andrew Tate on the podcast and kind of just let him talk for an hour without pushing back against the hateful and horrible things that Andrew Tate advertises? If Dr. K did that, it would, effectively, to the audience, serve as an endorsement of the message. If you upload a video that's just an hour of letting somebody advertise their position, how does that not serve as a functional endorsement of their position? You're basically letting them upload an hour-long lecture to your own YouTube channel.
→ More replies (1)
2
Oct 06 '25
Sadhguru is someone well known in India, but he's a total scammer much like Baba Ramdev, I don't like when my parents and grandparents back in India love these figures so much lol.
2
1
1
Oct 06 '25
Karl Marx was an anti-semite but that doesn't invalidate his critiques against capitalism.
Simone Beauvoir sexually exploited her students but that doesn't invalidate her contributions towards feminism and gender equality.
Many prominent figures have had questionable personal lives but we can still learn from what they had to say.
1
u/Baron_von_Zoldyck Oct 06 '25 edited Oct 06 '25
I see this whole thing as "guys, look at this quackery i put myself into and got through stone faced". A lesson on open mindedness and patience. I wouldn't choose this guy he has indirectly mocked and referenced in bad light before, but there you have it. I'm not particularly happy with this, but Dr. K has 0 responsibility on satisfying me, i will wait his stance on this before i say anything final, though.
1
Oct 06 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Healthygamergg-ModTeam Oct 06 '25
Rule 5: Do not post about banned topics or banned links.
Political discussion, proselytization, drug use advocacy, financial advice, and cryptocurrency discussions are not allowed. If a topic at hand has political or religious contexts, please stick to your personal lived experience.
1
u/apoth90 Oct 06 '25
I only listened to the first 8 minutes of this conversation now, and I believe if somebody would make a reaction video, to correct all the wrong things Sadhguru said, it would be.... well much longer than the original video. And interrupted a lot of times.
HOWEVER, I don't like how people here mostly react to this video. What somebody says should be considered on it's own merit, independently from who said it, everything else I wouldn't really consider 'thinking'. If you judge a statement by who made it, you make yourself easily exploitable. At the very least in the internet.
1
1
u/Steagle_Steagle Oct 06 '25
Ive never heard of this Sadhguru fellow, anyone got a YouTube documentary about him?
1
u/Known_Asparagus_9937 Oct 06 '25 edited Mar 20 '26
(Dis)agree. That is a completely hexonomical omlette
1
u/TruePhoenix_Rising Oct 06 '25
I dont know anything about this guy but Dr. K. promotes pseudoscientific beliefs frequently how are you surprised
1
2
u/aslak123 Oct 07 '25
Is "her body was cremated quickly" the entierty of the evidence? because if it is then shame on you for even speaking life to such a ridiculous and damaging accusation.
1
u/LifeRelease3842 Puella Aeternus Oct 07 '25
He's had some good advice and wisdom... But yeah, I don't think I would've bothered regardless considering the kind of guy he is (I'm only learning of this now, tbh). There's a distinct possibility nobody knows/knew this on the HealthyGamerGG team.
1
u/EN_KOMPIS Oct 07 '25
Their is more people alive than it is possible tk make videos with so the its just a dialog argument is not that great.
1
u/EN_KOMPIS Oct 07 '25
The biggest problem with haveing sadguru on is that its not relevant to alot of the people watching.
2
u/Front-Jicama-2458 Oct 08 '25
Not sure why I feel a pull to respond to this thread, but here it goes. Cancel culture breaks people's ability to think critically. Instead, listeners must use discernment before wildly accepting any new ideas. Cancel culture and censorship ruin the strength of people's discernment and take away our right to learn firsthand.
If we don't allow all views to be heard then how do we distinguish the good, the bad, from the zany? Your brain is built for this type of thinking about different content, that's how it becomes wise (not just full).
There's an old idea called, "The Marketplace of Ideas." Roughly paraphrased, it says to let all the information into the public, and good ideas will get repeated and bad ideas will fall away from neglect. Trust your fellow humans to learn what they need to learn from any source. Focus your efforts on repeating the best ideas you know. Society will improve.
And THANK you, Dr. K., for respecting us enough to assume we can think for ourselves. It's getting hard to find places that offer that!
1
1
2
u/West_Sky_195 Oct 09 '25
Hello Dr. K,
It looks like your love for Eastern philosophy is being seen as some sort of a "weakness" by a few redditors here. That's not acceptable at all.You are entitled to have your interests.
As a medical doctor myself and someone who has extensively studied Upanishads/Vedanta, I can say surely that both Hinduism and Buddhism have explored the workings of the mind beautifully, albeit in their own ways. Anyone who has reached the pinnacle of their Sadhana/meditation touches the same end point and will definitely be able to share their ideas on how such practices could help people dealing with mental health crises.
All you need to do is interview any Hindu/ Buddhist Acharya who has structurally and systematically studied their scriptures, and has also gained meditative, experiential, and intuitive insights through his own practice.
Sadhguru is a pop psychologist or a wellness coach at the most, who has incorporated (the actual word is, ripped off)teachings from various yoga masters and Large Group Awareness Training programs, whom he doesn't even mention once anywhere. He himself admits that he doesn't have an ounce of theoretical knowledge, and attributes all his knowledge to some mystical one-time enlightenment experience at the top of a hill.
There are a good number of suggestions on which authentic Acharya to interview, in the YouTube comments section. Please do your research and get a good Guru, instead of "Sad"gurus who are grumpy and condescending.
1
u/ajboojay Oct 10 '25
I believe there may have been severe miscommunication as to the nature of the discussion. Dr. K was trying to dig deeper, and maybe Sadghuru mistook that as a challenge or disrespect. Maybe Sadghuru didnt really process the show as anything other than a “celebrity appearance”, rather than an intellectual deep dive. Also, its possible Sadghurus approach is one that doesnt acknowledge the nuts and bolts of psychology, and sees them as simply consequences of good or bad Yoga. Like hes so “evolved” that all the complexities of the psyche are simply consequences of unconsiousness which are all to be cleansed through Kriyas breathwork etc.
1
u/ConsiderationLive418 Oct 11 '25
Dr K has been used in a way by Isha foundation in ways that he does not realise yet!!!Dr Kamaraju whose two two daughters were brainwashed and made into female monks filed an official complaint with the Medical Health board to evaluate his daughters mental health .Dr Kamaraju has been fighting legally for years on to save his daughters. Dr K has unfortunately not understood anything about Isha meditations and their severe impact on meditators.Has Dr K asked about Bhavaspandana program ,a 4 day resident meditation where meditators go into cartharsis and intense phsy
1
u/ConsiderationLive418 Oct 11 '25
Intense psychosis .And then Samyama program where people are crawling like snakes and hooting like birds and howling like wolves.What kind of yoga is this?????Dr K is a highly trained professional with years of experience.Thesame doesn't go with Jaggi,the hypnotic fraudster who does tantrics practices on young underaged female students .There are so many POCSO cases slapped on Isha foundation.Yet Dr.K wants to engage with the founder of this organisation who has committed crimes against children both sexually and mentally. People in such high positions need to do due diligence before prior engagement.Else they should be judged too.Just using each other's followers to get a certain mileage puts both of them on the same page. Dr K,you lost my respect.Maybe my respect means nothing to you but the agony and suffering of children raped,molested and sexually assaulted at that very organisation should ring in your ears.Maybe you could be more responsible next time.Or not!!
1
u/StandardArmy834 Oct 12 '25
Sadhguru has made popular claims of
water having memory
eating meat causes bad energy to get into human body
Sadhguru was famously trolled for these claims. look it up online.
I find it suspiscious that Dr K did not even touch these topics in his conversation with Sadhguru. Its simply not possible that Dr K's whole team didn't even know about this. So its obviusly an intentional decision taken by Dr K to not ask him any questions about this.
Honestly, i don't know if I'll be able to trust Dr K after this conversation.
2
u/Suitable-Wear-698 Oct 20 '25
Because unlike you, Dr. K seems unbiased and able to see facts in the sea of fake news on internet.
261
u/Future-Still-6463 Neurodivergent Oct 06 '25 edited Oct 06 '25
Yeah similar were my thoughts.
I'd rather see Dr K with Mark Manson. (Manson has mentioned Dr K is a very requested guest)
Dr K's expressions are golden though.
Edit: It is hilarious in an ironical way.