Confusion “conceptual” vs. “Physical” limitation consciousness

[Identity]

In the latest video (min16-18) Leo says reality is an infinite field of consiousness. You create your self by carving out a part of this consciousness and calling it yourself. At least, thats how I understood it.

This confuses me. It feels like “my perceptual field” is limited not only in a conceptual way, but also in a fysical way. I can only look from my eyes right? There is a limit to how far I can look, feel, think, etc. 

I understand that the fact that I call this “my” field of perception is ego. But, if I stop believing its “mine” it doesn’t mean I can now somehow see things that I couldnt before, right? Wouldnt these limitations still be in place?

the mindfuck probably goes a lot deeper, eh? 

[Leo Gura]

The duality between physical and conceptual must of course collapse.

You are not looking through your eyes. That you doesn't exist at all. Emptiness imagines there is a you who is looking through some eyes.

There is a limit to how far you can look, feel, think only given your present state of consciousness. In higher states of consciousness (like on a psychedelic) it is possible to see, feel, and think unlimited and "impossible" things.

For example, it's possible to become the entire universe or see aliens from another universe and talk with them telepathically. These occurances are more real, not less real, than your current physical reality.

[Preetom]

41 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

 

For example, it's possible to become the entire universe or see aliens from another universe and talk with them telepathically. These occurances are more real, not less real, than your current physical reality.

But Leo?! You can't be serious! This sounds like a crazy New Age hippy conspiracy!

[Norbert Lennartz]

I find it pointless to talk about such supernatural phenomena if one has not made the direct experience oneself. Reading about it is too little.

I don't want to claim that it doesn't exist, but it's as crazy as if you function on one level as your program and your admin or programmer intervenes in the program, giving you additional insights, or staining the Virgin Mary, etc.

It is conceivable. But...

[Identity]

@Leo Gura But if you are enlightened, totally seen through the illusion of self, enlightened gurus such as Sadguru, Peter Ralston, Eckard Tole, etc. You still aren’t aware of everything in the universe right? Like you dont know stuff like symply the order of a deck of cards laying on the table.

Isnt it more like you realize that you are part of the whole, but still remain the part? Like a page within the book is part of the book, yet doesnt hold all the information of the book?

Im still assuming there is a you to begin with, right?

im confused lol.

 

[Preetom]

2 minutes ago, Identity said:

@Leo Gura But if you are enlightened, totally seen through the illusion of self, enlightened gurus such as Sadguru, Peter Ralston, Eckard Tole, etc. You still aren’t aware of everything in the universe right? Like you dont know stuff like symply the order of a deck of cards laying on the table.

Isnt it more like you realize that you are part of the whole, but still remain the part? Like a page within the book is part of the book, yet doesnt hold all the information of the book?

Im still assuming there is a you to begin with, right?

im confused lol.

 

post enlightenment cannot be conceptualized and it's often misleading to do so.

The only way to find out is to go there yourself. Then lets see how you define it

 

[Leo Gura]

39 minutes ago, Identity said:

@Leo Gura But if you are enlightened, totally seen through the illusion of self, enlightened gurus such as Sadguru, Peter Ralston, Eckard Tole, etc. You still aren’t aware of everything in the universe right? Like you dont know stuff like symply the order of a deck of cards laying on the table.

Isnt it more like you realize that you are part of the whole, but still remain the part? Like a page within the book is part of the book, yet doesnt hold all the information of the book?

This is where it gets really mindfucky.

You can be fully awake, but your consciousness will still not be total in the sense that there will many aspects of the physical world which you aren't accessing.

You can be fully conscious of infinity, yet still not know what your neighbor had for lunch.

To be human is to have certain limitations. Once your body dies, then I assume those limits will be released.

It's a bit a mathematician can know what a prime number is, but still not know what the one millionth prime number is. To understand primes does not mean you have to know every single prime individually.

For example I can know that I am you without even knowing what you look like.

[Preetom]

1 minute ago, Leo Gura said:

This is where it gets really mindfucky.

You can be fully awake, but your consciousness will still not be total in the sense that there will many aspects of the physical world which you aren't accessing.

You can be fully conscious of infinity, yet still not know what your neighbor had for lunch.

But Leo?! Is there really a neighbor if I am not looking?

Your message seems to imply there is a hard brute physical world equally real, outside or independent of full awakening or absolute consciousness.

[Leo Gura]

4 minutes ago, Preetom said:

But Leo?! Is there really a neighbor if I am not looking?

Your message seems to imply there is a hard brute physical world equally real, outside or independent of full awakening or absolute consciousness.

Like I said, this is where it gets mindfucky: there both is and isn't, depending on how you look at it.

Even the deepest awakening is still not total. I don't think that's possible in human form. Human form is designed to be limited. We are lucky that being conscious of infinity is even possible for such chimps as us. If you were born a donkey you would have no such luxury.

[Identity]

@Leo Gura Thank you. I really appreciate the time you take to answer questions. 

Thanking you is really crucial to my survival. Just like pointing this out is needed to preserve my self-image. Just as pointing this out. I will stop now.

[joeyi99]

@Leo Gura Why are human the only ones that can awaken and not animals?

[Norbert Lennartz]

5 hours ago, joeyi99 said:

@Leo Gura Why are human the only ones that can awaken and not animals?

"Awakening" is a recursive, creatively open process into the "shallows" of all structural levels.
This is all mental. Many levels are just emerging mentally. If these mental levels are not present, as with lower animals, then they do not need awakening. In this respect their primitiveness is the highest level of awakening.