>Why is that distinction so hard to understand?

There are layers/hierarchies of abstraction built into our everyday life that we take for granted. The most dangerous of these abstractions is the belief that you are somehow different from the universe.

>It's like saying cars move, and cars are part of the city, so the city is moving.

As I said, there are hierarchies of abstraction we use in day to day life. So the next time you hear someone say "the traffic is easing", know that there's no single block called "traffic" that is easing, but rather the individual cars.

>No, despite the poetic value of that claim, it's simply absurd.

It's not absurd at all. If anything, it's the most rational thing you can say.

The identity you hold of being a conscious individual is just an illusion. In reality, there's just laws of the universe that drive all the biological entities that inhabit earth. And the agent that enables any individual activity at all is consciousness. This consciousness emerges in matter in specific configuration. So, consciousness is something that happens to matter.

My question to you is, if the universe is what we call the observable field of matter around us, is it incorrect to say that consciousness is universe observing itself?... Of course, you'll have objections to the freedom I've used in equating matter with the universe, but it is the exact perspective shift that is required for spiritual liberation.

Tat tvam asi! You're it.