How Is It Possible To Be Wrong If Reality Is Relative?

[Terell Kirby]

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

In practice you are imagining that other people are dreaming in parallel to you.

“Other people dreaming” is never the case, only I can dream!

[GLORY]

27 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

The amount of God is always 100%. 
You are describing formlessness, which is also God.

But then God is not synonymous to Consciousness, and Being not synonymous to Consciousness 
Consciousness is only the less formless part, and the more formless it gets the less consciousness 
Consciousness is an aspect of God then, and the other aspect of Being cant be conscious of 
That means the more formlesness or nothingness the less it can be experienced or known 

Edited June 5 by GLORY

[Dazgwny]

3 hours ago, GLORY said:

And when Conscious drops to 0 (if thats possible?) does it mean that God disappears existing? 
Because if God=Consciousness and Consciouss lowers to 0, then God sceases to exist

That 0 is identical to infinity. And God is infinity. From my experiences, or whatever it is you want to call it, but that’s the way I’m framing it here anyway, it’s not like a line that starts at zero and goes up and up type thing, it’s more like a circle where whatever point you want to start the zero, is also infinity. It circles back round. But even then that’s all a crock of shit because I’m using lines and circles and that’s just not it. At the end of the day you just have to awaken at some point to realise, and then you’ll understand why it can’t be described to you. Not even Leo with his tremendous delivery through his videos can truly describe it. That’s why he teaches to help lead people to it themselves, because that is the only way

[Breakingthewall]

1 hour ago, GLORY said:

But then God is not synonymous to Consciousness, and Being not synonymous to Consciousness 
Consciousness is only the less formless part, and the more formless it gets the less consciousness 
Consciousness is an aspect of God then, and the other aspect of Being cant be conscious of 
That means the more formlesness or nothingness the less it can be experienced or known 

I think God is a wrong idea in the sense that god is not doing or creating anything, god is the infinity, and it is. It's absolutely intelligent and absolutely perfect, but it's not imagining things, imagining implies duality, subject and object, there is not that, the reality unfolds infinitely inevitably, and is ordered infinitely inevitably. You are not creating your experience, the reality is. there is no previous step, there is no creation. There cannot be because reality cannot not be. What you are is a possibility among infinite possibilities that can't not happen because the perfection of the cosmos makes it. It's absolute freedom, no purpose, not intention, just perfect movement that happens due the absence of limits in infinite dimensions. 

[Leo Gura]

2 hours ago, GLORY said:

But then God is not synonymous to Consciousness, and Being not synonymous to Consciousness 
Consciousness is only the less formless part, and the more formless it gets the less consciousness 
Consciousness is an aspect of God then, and the other aspect of Being cant be conscious of 
That means the more formlesness or nothingness the less it can be experienced or known 

Look, God encompasses all dualities you can think of, even the conscious and unconscious duality. It's all One, but this One unfolds in many tricky ways. I don't have a full grasp of the nuances of its unfoldment. It's too tricky to grasp it.

If you say there is God and then some even more fundamental void prior to God, then you have created a duality.

Edited June 5 by Leo Gura

[Moutushi]

25 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Look, God encompasses all dualities you can think of, even the conscious and unconscious duality. It's all One, but this One unfolds in many tricky ways. I don't have a full grasp of the nuances of its unfoldment. It's too tricky to grasp it.

If you say there is God and then some even more fundamental void prior to God, then you have created a duality.

@Leo Gura  I'm curious what have you found are the most trickiest facets of this One unfolding?

[Leo Gura]

28 minutes ago, Moutushi said:

@Leo Gura  I'm curious what have you found are the most trickiest facets of this One unfolding?

The biggeat trick is that God can hide stuff from itself. Consciousness has the capacity to forget and to remember.

So imagine that therr is a goblin living in your closet, but you just forgot about it. That's really the power that God has over itself. There are literal goblins that God is hiding from you. This is an aspect of God/Consciousness that no nondual chimp understands or talks about. Because they brainwashed themselves with the idea that now is all there is. But there exist goblins which you don't now see. But you could see them if only your consciousness was higher. And no amount of nondual chimpery will do it.

Edited June 5 by Leo Gura

[integral]

5 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

The biggeat trick is that God can hide stuff from itself.

Direct experience is not a facet of the absolute if there is something hidden beyond it. I think you need to clarify a lot of your teachings if there’s something hidden while you’ve made many videos saying the exact opposite that there is nothing hidden.

[Leo Gura]

6 minutes ago, integral said:

Direct experience is not a facet of the absolute if there is something hidden beyond it.

Your experience is still absolute and could not be otherwise.

However, absoluteness is a very tricky thing. Just because your experience is absolute does not mean stuff can't also be hidden.

Quote

I think you need to clarify a lot of your teachings if there’s something hidden while you’ve made many videos saying the exact opposite that there is nothing hidden.

In a sense everything is hidden from you except those few things you experience.

The reason my teachings are not clear is because I've been busy discovering crazy shit that no one understands or talks about. And I don't have a good way of talking about it.

I reached levels of consciousness I cannot make sense of or talk about. Utterly alien shit. And I don't know what to do with it. Meanwhile nondualists and Buddists gaslight me at every step.

Edited June 5 by Leo Gura

[JStar]

Sticking with Leo's dream analogy: We give names to describe our degree of self-awareness in any given dream scenario. Vivid dreams, lucid dreams, normal dreams, nightmares, out of body experiences. The greater degree of self-awareness that one is dreaming (do whatever they want because this is a dream and I control it), the greater agency and influence over your dream body's actions and thoughts and even the dream scape itself.

On rare occasions (even when with low degree of awareness) one can awaken from an intense dream in which you experienced an extreme physical sensation only to find your body experiencing 'echoes' of that experience as if something like that happened in the material/relative world.

Such as it is with material (aka relative) existence overall, to put in terms our relative minds can conceive. Plus, as far as I'm aware when we incarnate, there's a sort of 'agreement' that's made to play the game by the 'rules' we've set in order to have the experiences we are seeking to have. Many many beings seek to have the 'whatever just throw me in there' experience, and these folks are ignorant as fuck as to the nature of reality and will figure it out as they go.

Others will have a greater degree of "remembrance" about the material/relative dream and be able to have different experiences within the relative game.

[MsNobody]

@Leo Gura I am so ready to hear you attempting to describe those experiences. 

Reminded me of the quote: 

The composer Stravinsky had written a new piece with a difficult violin passage. After it had been in rehearsal for several weeks, the solo violinist came to Stravinsky and said he was sorry, he had tried his best, the passage was too difficult, no violinist could play it. Stravinsky said, 'I understand that. What I am after is the sound of someone trying to play it.' 

 

[r0ckyreed]

13 hours ago, zurew said:

And there you have the exact same problem  - how do you know that your consciousness is high enough so that you can't be mistaken?

By raising your consciousness. Look, if you want to know whether the earth is round or flat or whatever, you would have to go meta and travel where you cannot normally navigate, which is upwards. Once you see that the earth is round, you can no longer hold your previous view that it was flat. The same holds with whatever truth you find. If you think Christianity is true, then go and question it to death honestly and you will discover more truths. A person who doesn't care about truth and just wants to believe will find all the evidence that supports their beliefs. You will know you are not mistaken when you have raised your consciousness higher than your previous state.

 

13 hours ago, zurew said:

If your introspection is depended on your level of consciousness, then first of all how do you know whether you can correctly assess/judge how high your consciousness is right now

That is the first step. You have to admit that you do not know and get into a genuine state of not-knowing. From that state of not-knowing, you will raise your consciousness and get to true knowing. Admit that right now you do not know if you can assess your consciousness right now and you may find that your level of introspection has raised just from admitting that simple truth. 

13 hours ago, zurew said:

and second of all, if there is always a higher level to consciouness, then that means that all your judgements about yourself and about the world will always be limited to the level of consciousness you have at that particular moment, so you can never prospectively know which foundational conviction/belief of yours will be undermined about yourself or about the world, as you gain more consciousness.

That is one of the reasons why I state that complete enlightenment/awakening is an illusion because there will always be a high level of understanding. The idea that you will completely understand reality is a fantasy because reality is infinite and being human comes with inherent limits in understanding. 

Not so fast. Your level of consciousness as a human will always be limited and there will always be higher states because consciousness is infinite. That isn't a glitch but a feature of infinity. You will know which belief will be undermined as you gain more consciousness. Like I said, you will not get to Absolute Truth if you don't value and practice honesty and openness. You have to deal with the limits at hand and strive to do your best each day to kill what is false. As a spiritual practice, just practice writing down what you think is absolutely true and then see how what you wrote is false.

13 hours ago, zurew said:

So what do you think, at level you can stop and say "okay this level of consciousness is high enough to make the the following claim with 100% certainty (without it being undermined as you gain more consciousness later), that x really cant be doubted"?

Your getting lost in this "levels of consciousness" paradigm. It is a useful way of looking at consciousness, but this model also has its limits. No state of consciousness is particularly better than any other. Some states will be more efficient than others depending on the situation. A drunken state may help you will confidence but not with intelligence for instance. A meditative state may help you attain peace of mind, and a contemplative state could lead to existential understanding. Each state has its own perks and cons. 

You seem to be asking this question backwards. The question is not what state of consciousness I need to make the following claim, but rather what do I genuinely know or rather not-know from my state of consciousness in this very moment. You are only dealing with your current state of consciousness and you making claims isn't going to raise it. It is genuine contemplation that will raise your state, and genuine contemplation involves questioning hidden assumptions and blindspots which could take years and decades of disciplined work.

13 hours ago, zurew said:

Of course it can be doubted, because that claim is an introspective claim (making a claim about your experience) and you 100%  rely on introspection to make that claim. How do you know that your introspection is accurate, without using your introspection to assess your introspection and making it circular?

It cannot be doubted. The fact that you are reading these words and are able to type cannot be doubted. That is like saying that your hand doesn't exist when you are typing right now. You cannot doubt that experience is happening right now.

Haven't you noticed that reality itself is circular? How does God exist? God invented itself. What methods does God use to know itself without using a circular process like introspection? To even answer this question requires introspection. Introspection is the heart of all understanding. How do you know logic is logical without using logic? How do you know your senses are accurate without using your senses? You have to bite the bullet and accept that introspection is circular because it is the foundation of understanding. You can only know whether your introspection is accurate or not through introspection.  

13 hours ago, zurew said:

Its like how do you know that something cannot be doubted ? "Well, it is based on my introspection". Okay how do you know that your introspection is correct ? "Well, I cant doubt it" - sounds very circular.

If that is true, then you go with that. You need to verify it all with your direct experience. If your direct experience says it is true and if Leo says it is false, you consider Leo's perspective and try to test it out in your direct experience. If your direct experience states otherwise, then you go with your own insights from your direct experience because that is what is true at this given time for you. If you ask me if the earth is flat or round, I am going to give you the truth and that is that I do not know. I am going to go with my direct experience and test your claim that it is round through my direct experience. If I go out into space and the earth is flat, then that will be what is true. If I just take your word that it is round or make claims that it is round, then that will be false.

[r0ckyreed]

5 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

In a sense everything is hidden from you except those few things you experience.

So does this mean that there is "stuff behind the scene"? That there is an external world, meaning that there is stuff outside of what I perceive? It sounds like your toilet still exists even when I am not looking at it.

[r0ckyreed]

13 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Just because something is conceptual does not make it false. Falsehood is the relationship between your concepts of the dream you're in and the actual dream.

Yes, but existence/actuality is more fundamental than concepts. Concepts are a second-order phenomenon. Christianity is an idea. Jesus is an ego. The idea of a son of God and 10 commandments are all conceptual. Existence doesn't have the 10 commandments attached to it. This is something that is imagined by the Universe. What the Universe imagines isn't the "mechanism" or source of the Universe. I could have a dream about Christianity and cutting up my skull and seeing a brain. But that does not mean that the brain in my dream is the source of my dream or that the Christianity that I am dreaming to be real is what is producing the dream.

Science and religion can point to patterns, but they are all occurring within the Absolute. They depend on the Absolute. The Absolute doesn't depend on them. This is why I think that it is impossible for such as dream where Christianity actually equals the Absolute Truth. I am not sure if this makes sense, but this is how my mind right now is making sense of it.

[r0ckyreed]

@Leo Gura If we can prove that Christianity is false in one possible world/dream, then Christianity can’t be absolutely true.

[Leo Gura]

2 hours ago, r0ckyreed said:

So does this mean that there is "stuff behind the scene"? That there is an external world, meaning that there is stuff outside of what I perceive?

Not an external world, but an infinite possibility space of imagination.

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, r0ckyreed said:

@Leo Gura If we can prove that Christianity is false in one possible world/dream, then Christianity can’t be absolutely true.

Christanity can be true within some dream.

Contemplate this: If God cannot dream up Christianity as true, then God isn't really Infinite.

[Twentyfirst]

15 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Christanity can be true within some dream.

Contemplate this: If God cannot dream up Christianity as true, then God isn't really Infinite.

It has to be true for some people (pastor) so they can help facilitate the dream for other dreamers who it may or may not be true for 

[Leo Gura]

11 minutes ago, Twentyfirst said:

It has to be true for some people (pastor) so they can help facilitate the dream for other dreamers who it may or may not be true for 

No, I mean something far more radical. Imagine a reality where Christianity is literally true for everyone. And that is the only reality. A 100% Christian reality.

That would be a real test of God's dreaming skills.

So my question to you is: How good of a dreamer do you wager God is?

Edited June 6 by Leo Gura

[bazera]

58 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

No, I mean something far more radical. Imagine a reality where Christianity is literally true for everyone. And that is the only reality. A 100% Christian reality.

That would be a real test of God's dreaming skills.

So my question to you is: How good of a dreamer do you wager God is?

Even in that dream, God could awaken to itself, right? And if it could, then it would realize that it's dreaming, so Christianity becomes relative again, isnt it?

Edited June 6 by bazera