Solipsism and Leo

[wildflower]

I've watched more of Leos videos and maybe he or someone else could help me understand his position, as it seems he switches constantly between the relative and absolute domain, almost conflating them to a point.

Does he think that Leo is God or is a finite incarnation of God, a character in God's dream, or he literally thinks he is Infinite God and we are all imaginary in relation to himself?

Is he trying to say the finite incarnation or ego can be come conscious of it's full encapsulating whole, or that he is making a taulogical proposition such that Finite Leo = Infinite God

The way he uses both relative and absolute terminology in one sentence seems conflating and confusing to understand what he believes. Or maybe just for me at least, can someone help? 

I'm not disagreeing with the utility of a solipsistic way of relating to the physical world etc etc, just wanting to understand as Im confused

Edited August 6, 2021 by wildflower

[impulse9]

Truth is not consistent, therefore any description of truth isn't consistent either. Paradoxes arise naturally and spontaneously when serious metaphysical investigation is underway.

[wildflower]

4 minutes ago, impulse9 said:

Truth is not consistent, therefore any description of truth isn't consistent either. Paradoxes arise naturally and spontaneously when serious metaphysical investigation is underway.

 

I appreciate that, and appreciate the inherent limitations of language or any relative construct. But I don't think this is the case here, for example Martin ball is someone who is extremely easy to follow his views on things, who is also into 5 MEO DMT and absolute truth and God

Leo almost insinuates that he thinks none of us are really here in this plane, as though he is alone as infinite God incarnated in his own dream, and none of us actually exist.

The other view is that we are all the sum totality or constituents of infinite God in their or our dream. But this view recognizes that I exist as much as Leo and you exist, in the same volition and same sovereignty with the same relationship to Infinite God, I don't take any more precedent over you or Leo in relationship to God. But this doesn't seem to be Leo's position 

[impulse9]

Let me offer a third perspective which says that no one knows what's going on, and we're all f**** idiots.

[Kykeon]

Keep in mind that language is inherently dualistic and only describes conceptual frameworks of non-dual, non-conceptual “qualities” of reality.

The description is a finger and it’s pointing to the moon.  Don’t get too hung up on how the finger is pointing and try to figure out what it’s pointing at.  In other words, don’t seek to learn from teachers without seeking what they sought.  In many ways, you are completely alone in this journey and it is inescapably DiY.

[RendHeaven]

10 minutes ago, wildflower said:

Leo almost insinuates that he thinks none of us are really here in this plane, as though he is alone as infinite God incarnated in his own dream, and none of us actually exist.

Yes and he's right. God is alone.

10 minutes ago, wildflower said:

The other view is that we are all the sum totality or constituents of infinite God in their or our dream. But this view recognizes that I exist as much as Leo and you exist, in the same volition and same sovereignty with the same relationship to Infinite God, I don't take any more precedent over you or Leo in relationship to God. But this doesn't seem to be Leo's position 

"with the same relationship to infinite God" LMAO my guy you literally ARE God, there is no such thing as a "relationship to God" other than by falsely believing so.

28 minutes ago, wildflower said:

almost conflating them to a point.

This is inevitable, because Reality is Absolute while communication and interpretation are necessarily relative.

It's your job to see past the relativity and pierce straight to the Absolute.

16 minutes ago, wildflower said:

Martin ball is someone who is extremely easy to follow his views

I don't know much about him, but if what you're saying is true, he most likely boils down his teachings to make them more mainstream while ignoring the radical implications of nonduality in doing so.

[wildflower]

2 minutes ago, RendHeaven said:

Yes and he's right. God is alone.

"with the same relationship to infinite God" LMAO my guy you literally ARE God, there is no such thing as a "relationship to God" other than by falsely believing so.

This is inevitable, because Reality is Absolute while communication and interpretation are necessarily relative.

It's your job to see past the relativity and pierce straight to the Absolute.

I don't know much about him, but if what you're saying is true, he most likely boils down his teachings to make them more mainstream while ignoring the radical implications of nonduality in doing so.

 

See this is where I'm trying to clarify things, so please slow down and follow me:

On the absolute level God is alone, but relatively in his fragmented state (me and you and every other sentient thing in the universe) we are relatively not alone, can you see the distinction and importance of this? 

Me and you both exist right now to communicate to each other, even if we are instantiations of God. But an instantiation of God doesnt equate the totality of God, do you see the difference? You are a relative incarnation of God right now, not the absolute total incarnation of God.

You might be able to 'kill' your relative perspective/incarnation and become the infinite God, but that isn't the same as the thing that is replying to this post which is a relative incarnation of God

 

[Leo Gura]

The reason it's confusing is because it depends on what level of consciousness you look at it from. If you are inside the dream to you it seems other people exist. When you are fully conscious you will realize you imagined everyone.

It's not about Leo. It's about you imagining Leo.

[wildflower]

19 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

The reason it's confusing it because it depends on what level of consciousness you look at it from. If you are inside the dream to you it seems other people exist. When you are fully conscious you will realize you imagined everyone.

It's not about Leo. It's about you imagining Leo.

Okay makes sense I guess, but do you agree that any time we are communicating to each other by definition we cannot be Absolutely Conscious? Individual/relative communication would drop at the absolute level?

The reason it's confusing me is because in the videos you seem to switch context all the time with no warning, you reference all different levels of consciousness but implicitly, so it's not clear at all what level your referencing in dialogue, and it seems to change

Like even now I have no idea what you think. You say 'you' are imagining Leo, are you talking at the relative level, absolute level, both or neither lol. Who are you referencing when you say 'you', the relative wildflower incarnation or Absolute Conciousness?

Also you just ignored the request the stance on solipsism (you actually vaguely mentioned the term in a video)

Edited August 6, 2021 by wildflower

[Kykeon]

@wildflower The cosmic joke is that you are the totality experiencing itself.  There is no room for separation, only an appearance that can be incorrectly interpreted as one of fragmentation, as you say.  So you are the totality, experiencing its totality, which is currently being expressed as a series of sensations and appearances that are interpreting themselves to be not it, but they are ignorant, and wrong.  You are what is watching God watching the human body-mind appear to be confused and “unenlightened”.  It’s putting on a pretty convincing show, isn’t it?

[Breakingthewall]

@wildflower Maybe I'm wrong, but I think the thing is: from the perspective we are talking about now, there are millions of different selves communicating. If you go up a step and change your perspective, you realize that you are all those I's. It's like an incomprehensible trick, because right now you are you, not me, we are separate. But if you go up, you are me, we are exactly the same with a kind of mask that we use to walk around the world. you take off the masks and there is only one left. One that is nothing. Another thing that reason can't grasp

Edited August 6, 2021 by Breakingthewall

[wildflower]

10 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

@wildflower Maybe I'm wrong, but I think the thing is: from the perspective we are talking about now, there are millions of different selves communicating. If you go up a step and change your perspective, you realize that you are all those I's. It's like an incomprehensible trick, because right now you are you, not me, we are separate. But if you go up, you are me, we are exactly the same with a kind of mask that we use to walk around the world. you take off the masks and there is only one left. One that is nothing. Another Thing that reason can't grasp

No no, none of that is hard to grasp, it's just the clarity on Leo so I can understand his videos, I find them hard to follow as I dont understand his epistemology, furthermore he implicitly switches without explicitly stating his stance

Edited August 6, 2021 by wildflower

[wildflower]

19 minutes ago, Kykeon said:

@wildflower The cosmic joke is that you are the totality experiencing itself.  There is no room for separation, only an appearance that can be incorrectly interpreted as one of fragmentation, as you say.  So you are the totality, experiencing its totality, which is currently being expressed as a series of sensations and appearances that are interpreting themselves to be not it, but they are ignorant, and wrong.  You are what is watching God watching the human body-mind appear to be confused and “unenlightened”.  It’s putting on a pretty convincing show, isn’t it?

I appreciate the reply, that's not what Im asking. Im speaking specifically about clarity on Leo's epistemic views as it's not clear from his videos

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, wildflower said:

Okay makes sense I guess, but do you agree that any time we are communicating to each other by definition we cannot be Absolutely Conscious? Individual/relative communication would drop at the absolute level?

There are many degrees of the absolute level, so depends on how absolute.

At the highest levels you realize all communication is you talking to yourself.

Quote

Like even now I have no idea what you think.

You are dreaming everyone up. The end.

Quote

You say 'you' are imagining Leo, are you talking at the relative level, absolute level, both or neither lol. Who are you referencing when you say 'you', the relative wildflower incarnation or Absolute Conciousness?

It's confusing because you are in denial that you are dreaming everything up. You are playing games. You are not an honest actor.

[wildflower]

14 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

There are many degrees of the absolute level, so depends on how absolute.

At the highest levels you realize all communication is you talking to yourself.

You are dreaming everyone up. The end.

It's confusing because you are in denial that you are dreaming everything up. You are playing games. You are not an honest actor.

There's no denial, there's no doubt consciousness is dreaming this up, depending on your definitions of dreaming, and what level of conciousness is doing what level of dreaming

But it's still confusing, your communication is vague borderline purposeful equivocation and it's impossible to know what your meaning with your language.

In the relative domain their are relative laws and rules? I think I've even heard you say this in other videos, can you see how this is confusing to follow? You the Leo who is reading this message, do you belief Leo can dream up anything he wants and impose it in 'reality'?

 

 

Edited August 6, 2021 by wildflower

[Leo Gura]

13 minutes ago, wildflower said:

There's no denial

Yeah, that's the denial I was talking about

Quote

there's no doubt consciousness is dreaming this up, depending on your definitions of dreaming, and what level of conciousness is doing what level of dreaming

You say those words, but you are not actually conscious that you are dreaming everything up. Your mind is fooling you into thinking you understand you're dreaming. This is just an intellectual game for you. It is not your actually consciousness. So watch out. This is very tricky stuff. You are not yet prepared to accept that I am your dream.

Quote

But it's still confusing, your communication is vague borderline purposeful equivocation and it's impossible to know what your meaning with your language.

It's confusing because if you realized what I'm saying you'd be dead.

Quote

In the relative domain their are relative laws and rules?

There are laws and rules within your dream, yes. You can't shoot fire from your butthole in this dream of yours.

Quote

You the Leo who is reading this message, do you belief Leo can dream up anything he wants and impose it in 'reality'?

You are dreaming up Leo

[HereToLearn]

6 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Yeah, that's the denial I was talking about

You say those words, but you are not actually conscious that you are dreaming everything up. Your mind is fooling you into thinking you understand you're dreaming. This is just an intellectual game for you. It is not your actually consciousness. So watch out. This is very tricky stuff. You are not yet prepared to accept that I am your dream.

It's confusing because if you realized what I'm saying you'd be dead.

There are laws and rules within your dream, yes. You can't shoot fire from your butthole in this dream of yours.

You are dreaming up Leo

Leo you are literally wasting your time and effort trying yo explain to a non existent dream character that they are in a dream.  

Its all about you, forget others man.

[wildflower]

9 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Yeah, that's the denial I was talking about

You say those words, but you are not actually conscious that you are dreaming everything up. Your mind is fooling you into thinking you understand you're dreaming. This is just an intellectual game for you. It is not your actually consciousness. So watch out. This is very tricky stuff. You are not yet prepared to accept that I am your dream.

It's confusing because if you realized what I'm saying you'd be dead.

There are laws and rules within your dream, yes. You can't shoot fire from your butthole in this dream of yours.

You are dreaming up Leo

It's not just an intellectual game for me, I don't understand why you think that, I've done psychedelics honestly maybe 2-300 times, and I've spent months in silent retreats

I just don't understand the way you communicate in this relative world, and I can't tell if it's purposeful equivocation or just maybe our minds communicate language differently

For example: 'It's confusing because if you realized what I'm saying you'd be dead.' <---- If wildflower finite conciousness realized Absolute Conciousness fully, wildflower would no longer exist, sure I get that, it's easy to follow if thats what your saying? 

Can you answer this question: why are you not dead? Or do you not understand what you are saying yourself? (you see how hard it is to follow?)

Edited August 6, 2021 by wildflower

[mandyjw]

You are a thought. God is a thought. You love thinking but can you think love? In love there is no self or other. In thought there is self and other. You love thinking, but can you think love? 

[HereToLearn]

3 minutes ago, wildflower said:

It's not just an intellectual game for me, I don't understand why you think that, I've done psychedelics honestly maybe 2-300 times, and I've spent months in silent retreats

I just don't understand the way you communicate in this relative world, and I can't tell if it's purposeful equivocation or just maybe our minds communicate language differently

For example: 'It's confusing because if you realized what I'm saying you'd be dead.' <---- If wildflower finite conciousness realized Absolute Conciousness fully, wildflower would no longer exist, sure I get that, it's easy to follow if thats what your saying? 

Can you answer this question: why are you not dead? Or do you not understand what you are saying yourself? (you see how hard it is to follow?)

From Leo`s argument, Leo is the only Being that exist, so it is actually not wise from his POV that he is spending his time and effort explaining to others about this, I mean they dont exist consciously, so it is like proving to a dream character that they are not real. 

I think, if somebody really believed in solipsism, they wouldn't even discuss about it with others, because with the others are not there.