Reference to Leo Gura and Psychedelic States

[Enlightenment]

8 minutes ago, Meta-Man said:

Then that’s another cheap conception of enlightenment

Keep in mind they are very rare, 99% of enlightened people know that they are.

I'm just against putting absolute rules as Frank mentioned. You can be fucking neo-nazi psychopath who masturbate to child's porn and get that shift in consciousness. Enlightenment in that sense is really beyond personality because it doesn't change it in any fundamental sense, all the personality quirks stay with you after enlightenment

Edited September 5, 2020 by Enlightenment

[Leo Gura]

13 minutes ago, Tim R said:

@Leo Gura This is the one thing I've seen you say in this forum more than once and I feel I haven't understood it yet, perhaps you might explain it to me.

How could an ant not be as conscious as I am?

I mean, I get it, it doesn't perceive as "much" as I do, but that's not the point, consciousness is not perception in the ordinary sense. 

It is all one consciousness, the great all-pervasive, all-inclusive empty awareness, it is Nothingness, how could there possibly be "a different Nothingness" ? An ant has (is) the same consciousness, the same Nothingness as I am. 

Having realized that you are that awareness (independent of whether you've realized it or not) , what is the point in pursuing "more"? What "more" is there supposed to be? (besides strengthening one's non-dual awareness in everyday life)

Consciousness is an infinite field which is capable of being more or less conscious of itself, more or less transparent or opaque to itself. Similar to the light in empty space. You can have very little light or you can have our sun, or something that's 1 million times brighter than our sun. All of that is the same light, but many degrees of brightness.

An ant is definitely not conscious that it is God.

Children are definitely not conscious that they are God.

99.9% of adults have no consciousness of what God is.

But you could become God-conscious. This takes some doing. It isn't your natural state. Your natural state is a state of humanness.

This infinite field of consciousness, because it is unlimited, is capable of dialing itself down from infinity to some finite consciousness, like that of a rock. When God is dialed down to a rock, God isn't aware that it is God.

[Tim R]

5 minutes ago, Enlightenment said:

all the personality quirks stay with you after enlightenment

No, not necessarily. Certain quirks were bound to your persona and to the past which your persona thought it had... They can and will disappear with the disappearing of the person you thought you were.

Edited September 5, 2020 by Tim R

[Johnny5]

7 minutes ago, Tim R said:

Gotta be honest with you, I don't understand what you mean Could you give a concrete example? You mean things like Siddhis?

Not siddhis. Can't really explain unless you're at least somewhat familiar with altered states.

Actually any emotional state is also an altered state. But, that may not be very helpful right now for understanding what that means, sorry.

 

3 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Consciousness is an infinite field which is capable of being more or less conscious of itself, more or less transparent or opaque to itself. Similar to the light in empty space. You have very little light or you can have our sun, or something that's 1 million times brighter than our sun. All of that is the same light, but many degrees of brightness.

What is aware of the difference in transparency......

Edited September 5, 2020 by Johnny5

[Leo Gura]

3 minutes ago, Johnny5 said:

What is aware of the difference in transparency......

Nothing.

There is no difference between the field and the I.

You are the field.

[Enlightenment]

4 minutes ago, Tim R said:

No, not all of them. Certain quirks were bound to your persona and to the past which your persona thought it had... They can and will disappear with the disappearing of the person you thought you were.

Well, ok maybe like 95%, there is some stuff that changes but the fundamental "root" of your personality doesn't. From the outside perspective, you are still more or less the same person.

Quote

Despite an overwhelming change in how it felt to experience both themselves and the world after the onset of PNSE, the outward appearance of the participants changed very little. Generally speaking they retained their previous mannerisms, hobbies, political ideology, food and clothing preferences, and so forth. If someone were an environmentalist prior to PNSE, typically they remained so after it. If they weren’t, they still are not.

Many participants discussed the thought, just after their transition to PNSE, that they would have to go to work and explain the difference in themselves to co-workers. They went on to describe a puzzled drive home after a full day of work when no one seemed to notice anything different about them. Quite a few chose to never discuss the change that had occurred in them with their families and friends and stated that no one seemed to notice much of a difference. In short, although they had experienced radical internal transformation, externally people didn’t seem to take much notice of it, if any. Many of the participants did not have friends and family who were interested in PNSE. Participants who tried to discuss the change they were experiencing with those closest to them often encountered immense worry and concern. The most common reaction was for the participant to never bring it up again.

There seemed to be a clear distinction between a PNSE participant’s personality and their underlying sense of having an individualized sense of self. When the latter is absent, the former seems to be able to continue to function relatively unabated. There are exceptions. For example, the change in well-being in participants who were depressed prior to the onset of PNSE was obviously spotted by those around them. Generally, however, the external changes were not significant enough to be detected, even by those closest to the participant.

 

Edited September 5, 2020 by Enlightenment

[Johnny5]

Quote

YES. That's what I meant. The awareness of different degrees of awareness, that must always and in every being be Nothingness!

@Tim R That's it  ? 

 

EDIT: Alas Leo "accidentally" deleted your post.... 

Edited September 5, 2020 by Johnny5

[Tim R]

6 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Consciousness is an infinite field which is capable of being more or less conscious of itself, more or less transparent or opaque to itself.

@Leo Gura But that is a duality??!

[Leo Gura]

@Tim R Sorry, I accidentally deleted one of your last posts because it was a duplicate on my screen.

Try re-posting it.

[Leo Gura]

3 minutes ago, Tim R said:

@Leo Gura But that is a duality??!

No it isn't. It's still all one consciousness.

Light is not turned into two substances by increase or decrease of intensity.

If you want to be a stickler and insist on pure, absolute, unmitigated nonduality, then you can become the Godhead itself, which is just formless infinite consciousness which increases in intensity forever without end. But at this point your human life will be gone, as will the entire material universe.

[Tim R]

Then I sincerely don't understand how Nothing could be to more or lesser degrees Nothing.

It can't be, only an illusory form could be "more or less".

 

[Johnny5]

4 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Nothing.

There is no difference between the field and the I.

You are the field.

I am the field, and yet I am aware of the field....

Field = Self.

Brahman = No-self.

 

Field can be opaque or transparent.

As observed by Brahman which is always infinitely conscious.

[Leo Gura]

6 minutes ago, Johnny5 said:

I am the field, and yet I am aware of the field....

Field = Self.

Brahman = No-self.

Field can be opaque or transparent.

As observed by Brahman which is always infinitely conscious.

You can frame it that way if you want. There are various ways of framing it.

I make no distinction between the field and Brahman, Self and no-self.

In the end there is only ONENESS. Slice it up however you want. People will naturally slice it up in different ways, which will cause disagreements.

But I sometimes notice that people dismiss the important of the transparency or opaqueness of the field. Which I think is a big disservice to students. The transparency/opaqueness matters a lot in practical terms. The point of all spiritual work is to increase transparency.

[Johnny5]

1 minute ago, Leo Gura said:

You can frame it that way if you want. There are various ways of framing it.

Huge difference, Leo...

Difference between actual enlightenment and chasing super duper states.

[Enlightenment]

1 minute ago, Meta-Man said:

100% of enlightenment claimants on this forum are not enlightened.

I would be willing to go prove my enlightenment through an fMRI scan, seriously

What type of enlightenment do you mean? Leo's version or PNSE version?

[Tim R]

6 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Light is not turned into two substances by increase or decrease of intensity.

If you want to be a stickler and insist on pure, absolute, unmitigated nonduality, then you can become the Godhead itself, which is just formless infinite consciousness which increases in intensity forever without end. But at this point your human life will be gone, as will the entire material universe.

2 substances is a word game, "increase and decrease" is a dual conception however.

I hope not to come across as a stickler, if that's the way some folks around here perceive me, I'm fine with that. I just sincerely would like to understand. 

@Leo Gura And quite frankly I have no idea what you mean with "the universe will be gone". This 100%, pure non-dual state is right here right now and the "material universe" never existed in the first place so once again, I don't understand you, but that's alright.

[Johnny5]

8 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

The point of all spiritual work is to increase transparency.

If you want, sure why not. But that in itself is not enlightenment. Let alone that increased transparency is more/better/higher enlightenment or something. That's just not true. And enlightenment is about what's true.

[Leo Gura]

10 minutes ago, Johnny5 said:

Huge difference, Leo...

Difference between actual enlightenment and chasing super duper states.

Switching your identity to that of Nothingness to the exclusion of states and fields becomes its own subtle duality.

If you identify with being an observer of the field, that is a subtle duality still. There is 1) YOU, and 2) the field.

YOU = FIELD

ONENESS

Nothing more can be said.

[Johnny5]

Just now, Leo Gura said:

Switching your identity to that of Nothingness to the exclusion of states and fields becomes its own subtle duality.

I never said anything about switching identity.

Identity is appearance. It only matters when believed.

[Leo Gura]

Just now, Johnny5 said:

I never said anything about switching identity.

But it sounds like you identify with being the observer of the field.