Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

Upper Limit problem exposed through dreams

4 posts in this topic

I had this dream that pointed out a fear that has been holding me back from my Zone of Genius (or from doing my own sort of creative work, its a concept from the book The Big Leap). 

The dream consisted of me working alongside Leo on to create new content for the channel or something close to that. It was going to be a big job to take on, and i was looking forward to it. Later on dream Leo called me on the phone and said something along the lines of "You wont be working for me anymore. You just think you arent smart enough, you havent broken that limiting belief yet."

Im sure ive noticed this problem before, but the dream helped me become more clear about it. Simply put i had been afraid of living in my Zone of Genius due to fearing not being intelligent enough for it. This is nice because I feel more aware and less gripped by the fear.

But what do you guys do about your Upper Limit problems? How does one work on them? 

I know part of finding what you want to do includes working on your own obstacles.

Any other tips on moving into the Zone of Genius/Life Purpose? Thanks

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting post.

I find that I tell myself I am too tired to work and then I stop trying or that I am not good enough to win the tennis match and so I stop trying or that I am too shy to be around the group of people and so I run away from them.

Yeah good point.  I would say noticing the upper limit problem is a first step and then seeing different ways to think about it and what you can do about it... and then make it so that it is not a limit anymore or that the limit is higher up and that you don't quit as easily - like making the limit further than where it currently is.  

Tips - keep trying or returning to the issue and ask why you are saying it is a limit; look at what you want to accomplish.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)


Its funny how some dreams contains messages so explicit you may end up more dumbfounded then before it simply contemplating how it essentially amounts to a dialogue with a living person that you don't even experience as yourself. What may steer you away from concluding it is a person in itself  is the integrity and necessity by which the truth within it strikes you.

For me at least i will immediately when i wake up understand the meaning of these dreams, this may even be circular in that i defined that set as explicit already. But i do without trying understand the meaning of some of these dreams in a way i can't when listening to some other person.


x) We have all limits, in so far as we experience anything at all. Thus to say we are without limits is to negate any meaning that infers the opposite.

Therefore to claim to have no limits is only epistemically grounded to the extent you know all limits to be illusory and consequently also each expression of the set idea as well. (as i read this myself it is almost like the expression is the only thing keeping what is true alive, and consequently how it fails at last)

In this sense there are no difference to what is real and what is limit, this is a big problem for it means either that there is an entity outside what is known which limits us or that what is known limits itself.

We can by necessity not know which of these is correct by the very nature of the problem, to the extent of course the nature is correctly diagnosed as i will maintain for now the logic is solid.


y) At the same time you can only understand limits from faculties of discernment between things, in this way a moment must be contrasted with another without identical properties, and because such moments can not be true for they are imagined you have literally created limits for yourself.

At this point it should be obvious how the very word 'limit' is amorphous with regards to the total of its application in this text, entailing a need to define at least its two divergent use cases.

And can you believe it? It amounts to idealism/realism. 

Run it backwards and one may analyse you as one or the other. (the latter), perhaps these limits can be transcended by the very awakening to the possibility of the other, i would claim the generality of Leos videos must help with that part)


The first clause of y will be understood by most academics as a reason to why one may mistake non-dual experiences as the infinity of existence. And likewise why it is so easy not to take spirituality any more seriously then they have done.


As to your specific limits be them of whatever nature: you can only have any grasp of them to the extent you have done your best, and you probably have not. At the same time you are not gonna be the new Magnus Carlson even if you have no reason to say that you have tried your best at chess. Thus i will deem the very problem as complex, in that only time will tell and that it is better you continue trying then regretting not to.

Edited by Reciprocality

“Reason is, and ought only to be the slave of the passions.”
― David Hume

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Reciprocality Going to have to contemplate and reread this. Ill see how this applies in my own experience. Big thanks for taking the time to write it!

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0