Is Reality Made of Consciousness? - Dr Bernardo Kastrup, PhD

[@Musa-keys]

Bernardo is from Brazil, Bernardo uses Fútbol as example. We love Bernardo! (One can leave South America, but South America never leaves us ❤️ ⚽️)

[@muriloams]

Very proud of a brazlian scientist at the forefront of conciousness research.

[@teogee59]

Thank you, Bernardo. You just explained all that I had experienced through my entire life in a way that I can accept it. In 1963, at age 4, my "spiritual teacher" chocked my throat, as you pointed when mentioning the popular online game by the kids today. So, a moments later, I was watching my body from the center of the ceiling. My body was laying on the floor, facing down, and was subjected to a serious "spiritual" blows. However, my I, on the ceiling, felt no pain and could see and hear. That "spiritual ritual" was applied to my body more that 10 times within the next 3 years. The last two events I was able to shoot myself to the center of the ceiling using my will - that was the only way to escape the horror and the pain. I had no idea that leaving the body is called death and coming back is called resurrection. My life that followed and continues to unfold is just a series of miracles. However, I could not share those with anybody as that would send me to a mental institution, and I don't like that. On the other side, I realized that that event was a deal between me and my "teacher" and it had a purpose: to teach me how to leave and come back to the body. I was born in a country, where religion was forbidden and spirituality was not such a popular business as it is today. Finally, the science can lift the vail on that! Thank you, again. I can confirm that leaving the body is not at all emotional. Everyone can experience that right now: stand up from the chair and carefully monitor what are you feelings for that chair. :). Yes, Rupert Spira is correct in almost everything he says. I am not sure how one can follow him without any confirmation from the Life, though. I prefer the path that Bernardo recommends at the end of his brilliant presentation.

[@Vanshikatyagi08]

Can you please tell us what were those miracles...?

[@Enormous866]

I’m sorry for everything you went through ❤❤❤

[@grayire]

Bernardo is a gift. I don't always follow everything but always a pleasure to listen to him talk

[@mindfulkayaker7737]

Even when I was educated in a highly materialistic society (Communist Cuba) I was very reluctant to accept that the reality of the Universe is material. After knowing the works of Bernardo Kastrup I am very proud to define myself as a “Rational Idealist” This man as well as people of Rupert Spira, Francis Lucille and Swami Sarvapriyananda have totally changed my philosophical ideas about the Universe. God bless all of them.

[@sspunch9886]

Bernardo has beautifully vocabularized the advaita philosophy in English language to even explaining the dream analysis, wave as part of the ocean, eye of the eye subject witnessing the experiences etc.

[@albertloan396]

I have the same sense, but I'd say he is verbalizing in non-theological terms the ideas of Mary Baker Eddy, including her claims that there is only one Mind and that human experience is a dream.

[@surfism]

In response to a question at 59:05, Bernardo accidentally says that people should be "consequent", when he means "consistent". This is a false cognate', probably from the Danish "konsekvent", which means "consistent".

[@maartenv4611]

from Dutch. He is from the Netherlands.

[@samrowbotham8914]

I have interacted with Bernardo many times I have read all of his books the one to start with if you're new to Idealism is "Dreamed Up Reality.

[@armandstrauss1348]

Summary: The universe may have a brain-like network topology and nature may be mental, with physicality being a representation, and our perception of the world is not the world itself, but rather an encoded representation that conveys important information without overwhelming us with useless details. 🧠 The universe has a brain-like network topology, suggesting that nature is mental and physicality is just a representation. 00:00 🧠 Our perception of the world is not the world itself, but rather an encoded representation that conveys important information without overwhelming us with useless details. 09:18 🔬 The physical world is a result of measurement, while the real world is what is being observed and measured. 15:51 🧠 Psychedelics reduce brain activity and black swan events refute the theory that all experiences are generated by brain activity. 26:01 🧠 The universe may be mental and we cannot directly know the world as it actually is. 36:45 💀 Death is the end of dissociation and the reabsorption of our mental activity into the mind of nature. 42:49 🌿 Nature invests in the production of self-aware species, but humans pose a significant risk to it, and our self-awareness may be the only hope for change. 54:41 📚 Essential Foundations publishes scholarly work for an educated audience.

[@Sunyday936]

Thank you ! ❤

[@MrSridharMurthy]

What if consciousness is a ' field' just like electromagnetism or gravity. A field that exists in 3 states namely 1. Dormant ( matter), 2. Active ( Life ), 3. Transient ( moving from one state to another ).

[@standsguadalajara]

Sounds like "Morphic Reaonance" you should check Rupert Sheldrake

[@patbaptiste9510]

*FINALLY!* Someone with scientific credentials, who has identified the *ONENES* between *CONSCIOUSNESS* and materialism - a subject expressed by all true spiritual teachers over thousands of years but never fully understood by the materialistic mindset, even after Einstein gave the simple formula describing the secret of the so-called physical universe made of so-called solid matter... *E / c² = m*

[@bipolarbear9917]

One of the most richly fascinating presentation and interview I’ve ever seen. The perfect combination of science, psychology, quantum theory, physics, metaphysics, and philosophy. Absolutely mind blowing stuff. As for any purpose or reason for our intellect, Carl Sagan came close with his wonderfully eloquent statement that; “We are a way for the Cosmos to know itself”.

[@TheGuiltsOfUs]

Err, carl sagan probably didn't mean what you think that means lol.

[@peteraddison4371]

... this "IS" assention preparation 101 & HEAR, WE-GO-!!!

[@javadhashtroudian5740]

Thank you Bernardo. My background is pure science, software engineering a little AI. I was a radical materialist until 1967 whe. I first took LSD-25. The journey to radical monist with consciousness being the base of existence has been long. My personal experiences with psychedelics (less than 20 times in the last 60 years) tells me that the brain is a filter for experiences and psychedelics reduce that filter.

[@tr7b410]

For a brilliant breakdown of the different types of consciousness/samadhi see on utube Ramana Maharshi Be as You Are Chapter 12 Experience and Samadhi..Sahaja samadhi-the unified field of awareness or Born Again.

[@TheGuiltsOfUs]

lol lay off the hippe bs

[@ProfMoriarty]

Excellent lecture. If you have a strong/in-depth background in some of the concepts in Buddhism and give this a listen, then you immediately realize what he is trying to say! Some of the great eastern philosophies/religions has been saying the same thing for centuries (Of course a lot of deep knowledge has been lost due to organic decay of knowledge and due to being lost in translation)

[@hook-x6f]

Bernardo is describing concepts in the Vedic texts and he knows enough to say he is spiritually inept. True scientist.

[@gardelk]

Brahma dreams and we are sparks of his dreams, still dreams in nature. At the ultimate bottom, ask Dzogchen! 🌈

[@honkytonk4465]

where's the muslim claiming koran always knew?

[@FromPlanetZX]

@@honkytonk4465 but allah sits at the seventh sky on a sofa and comes down every night to answer the prayer.

[@FromPlanetZX]

@@gardelk Then it should be the Dzogchen people or Buddhist people saying sorry to Hindus. After 2500 years of saying there is no self, there are anything but Hindus. Only to end up saying the same thing.

[@honkytonk4465]

@@FromPlanetZX 😂😂🤣

[@manojchulki]

While it’s admirable that a scientist and philosopher of the stature of Me. Kastrup is coming to these conclusions, these conclusions were arrived at a few thousand years ago in a collection of texts called the Upanishads (which are part of the ancient texts called the Vedas). Even the terms he uses are verbatim from the Upanishads. He uses terms like consciousness, appearance, non-dualism which are all terms used in the Upanishads. For instance what he calls appearance is referred to as Maaya in the ancient texts. Non-dualism = Advaita . Consciousness = Chit. I applaud Mr. Kastrup for coming to these conclusions from a scientific perspective and taking a stance which is otherwise against popular scientific discourse.

[@frankjspencejr]

I realized long ago that the only thing that can be known to exist without question is first person subjective experience or consciousness. What I have been searching for ever since is a way to verify that anything else actually exists. So far, I haven’t found it. Saying that the world outside of our own mind obviously exists is similar to the argument that materialists use to suggest that a material world obviously exists. Since conscious experience is all basically input, made of thoughts, feelings, and perceptions, creating every experiential moment of our lives, even if other centers of experience actually exist, how could we ever know it? I’m hoping I will learn that from Dr. Kastrup. I very much want it to be true.

[@bradmodd7856]

My reality is, I have never accessed matter except as an experience and I don't think anyone else has either.

[@nbeezhao]

There is no time, there is no space, all is one, in your face.

[@randomdude7200]

Consciousness, light, whatever it is, doesn't understand itself! Physical matter diffracts and refracts consciousness through itself and reflects it back to the rest of the world. Physical matter, whether it be microscopic, a complex organism or an animal, may or may not recognize whether consciousness is separate or a part of itself. It's my opinion that the fight to live is the fight to understand our place in the world and try to have some control over our destinies. Dying and returning to the whims of the universe, in search of this great oneness, is the loss of that understanding and control. Enjoy life while you have it!❤

[@darksteeltorqueo4397]

Sub'd Bernardo. We got to really push this evidence before humanity collapses under their false assumptions. I'm really enjoying listening to this video while at work. Thank you for all that you do!

[@frankjspencejr]

1:00:15 Complete agreement that honestly following my intellect has led to a rejection of materialism and acceptance of an experience based reality. But it also leads me, if I am strictly logical and honest with myself, to be at a loss to justify the concept of other subjects or centers of consciousness interacting and communicating with “me”. As I see it, experience consists of “input” only: we HAVE thoughts, we HAVE perceptions, and we HAVE feelings. The impression of “output”, of doing, of communicating, of interacting is simply an illusion made of thoughts, perceptions, and feelings.

[@alananthony7053]

Thank you, Dr Kastrup, for a fascinating and extremely clear presentation. Four main thoughts occur to me after watching, listed here in no particular order: 1. The notion of a "reality-in-itself" beyond our powers of perception is integral to the ancient Buddhist theory known as the doctrine of the three truths, with the Truth of Temporary Existence (the aspect of existence accessible to perception) essentially corresponding to your ‘Markov blanket’ and the Truth of the Middle Way (the actual, but perceptually inaccessible, aspect of existence) to your ‘external state(s)’. 2. The evidence from the experiments to which you refer regarding reduced brain activity during LSD trips etc. seems to me to be pointing in the general direction of the somewhat counter-intuitive but (I believe) increasingly popular view among philosophers/neuroscientists that the primary function of the brain is to LIMIT, rather than to maximize, sensory input. This notion could also go some way toward accounting for the mystery of ‘attention’, since attention constitutes surely the most concentrated - and therefore the most limited - extreme of consciousness. 3. There seems to exist a mysterious correlation between, on the one hand, DEATH/UNITY /INORGANIC MATTER/UNCONSCIOUSNESS* and, on the other LIFE/SEPARATION/ORGANIC MATTER/CONSCIOUSNESS, and these conceptual sets seem to correspond respectively to (to return to the Buddhist doctrine of the 3 truths) the Truth of Non-substantiality and the Truth of Temporary Existence. (*or, expressed in panpsychist terms, the lowest level of consciousness) 4. I suppose that, to extend your metaphor of external states/reality-in-itself as the sky and conscious perception/the Markov blanket as pilot’s dashboard instrument panel, we might assert that, while most of us are like pilots whose windscreen is covered up and who navigate only by dint of information from their dashboard, some “enlightened”/spiritually awakened beings may additionally have a direct view through their windscreen of the actual sky!

[@slowdown7276]

My dissociated mental activity is blown to pieces and I'm now cosmos talking.

[@sophiashekinah9872]

What you're saying about dissociation raises a TON of questions! If consciousness exists beyond the body, then it seems that there are several consciousnesses sharing a single body in the case of dissociation. Like they are whole entities in their own right.

[@tr7b410]

For a brilliant breakdown of the different types of consciousness/ samadhi see on utube Ramana Maharshi Be as You Are Chapter 12 Experience and Samadhi..Sahaja samadhi-the unified field of awareness or Born Again.

[@Clarityandwisdom33]

Isn’t dissociation a quality of consciousness though or did I misunderstand what you are saying?

[@sophiashekinah9872]

@@Clarityandwisdom33 Trauma-induced dissociation and chemical-induced dissociation are two distinct types of dissociative experiences, differing in their underlying causes and triggers. Trauma-Induced Dissociation: Trauma-induced dissociation occurs as a result of experiencing severe psychological trauma or overwhelming stress. It is commonly associated with conditions such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and complex post-traumatic stress disorder (C-PTSD). When faced with traumatic events, some individuals may disconnect from their thoughts, feelings, and memories as a way to cope with the overwhelming emotional and physical distress. This dissociation can manifest as a feeling of detachment from oneself or one's surroundings, a loss of time or memory gaps, and a sense of being an outside observer of one's own experiences. Chemical-Induced Dissociation: Chemical-induced dissociation refers to dissociative experiences triggered by the ingestion or use of certain substances that affect brain functioning. These substances typically include hallucinogens, such as LSD, psilocybin mushrooms, or dissociative drugs like ketamine or phencyclidine (PCP). The dissociative effects caused by these substances can lead to alterations in perception, cognition, and a sense of detachment from reality. These experiences can vary widely depending on the substance used and the individual's unique response to it. While both trauma-induced and chemical-induced dissociation involve a sense of disconnection or detachment, their origins and mechanisms differ significantly. Trauma-induced dissociation arises from the psychological impact of traumatic events, while chemical-induced dissociation results from the direct influence of substances on brain chemistry and function. It's worth noting that dissociative experiences caused by substances are temporary and usually resolve once the effects of the drug wear off. In contrast, trauma-induced dissociation can be more persistent and require therapeutic interventions to address the underlying trauma and promote healing. From chatgpt Google search results

[@sophiashekinah9872]

@@Clarityandwisdom33 One of the objectives of satanic ritual abuse is to cause a virtual "village" of identities all with different functions and no knowledge of the existence of other identities. This is how monarch mind control slaves are "programmed", they are usually trained with a "specialty" such as warlord (general), delta (assassin) or masochistic sex slave (kitten) to name just a few.

[@simonsanchezkumrich8489]

It may imply different conscious agents or personalities, but there's only 1 nonlocal infinite consciousness. I don't know though, i believe in a soul, a localized point of the infinite consciousness that goes through different lives, does DID imply different souls living in the same field or localization of consciousness? Or does it merely say that personalities are not really the soul? Or idk

[@brainstain2904]

All our life we thought we knew it all to find out we knew nothing. The truth shall set you free if your smart enough to figure it out!😮

[@Orion225]

Don't rush to conclusion. Keep doing mental gymnastics

[@jigneshipatel007]

The same philosophy has been in vogue in ancient Indian culture and scriptures- called Adhwait Vedanta- where it says that only true existence Is the consciousness ( the awareness- Chetana) - everything else is just an illusion arising out of that pure consciousness

[@sophiashekinah9872]

Oh! I'm SO EXCITED to have found this. Ny break is pretty much over, but I can't wait to return to this just as soon as I'm off work!

[@ericjohnson6665]

This is one of those both/and kind of things. There is physical reality, and there is mind spread throughout the universe. My preferred text on this subject is The Urantia Book. Physical reality is the stage, conscious beings, the actors on that stage.

[@footballfactory8797]

When you delve into the word physical what do you get though?

[@TheGuiltsOfUs]

lmao! You do realize that book is a hoax?

[@TissaUnderscore]

What a profound talk. Absolutely incredible

[@X11bl]

What an amazing presentation Bernardo. Very informative and direct. Loved it. ❤❤❤

[@sumskind]

I see a similarity with our own advaita school of vedanta...what you just explained on consciousness as ever pervading goes along with the Advaitic thoughts and scriptures especially the upanishads

[@DawsonHillManor]

Hurrah Bernardo! Best easy to understand lecture of your work on consciousness yet; keeping science in proper humility. (Language in Thought and Action S. I. Hayakawa 1949 quoting Alfred Korzybski, “the map is not the territory”.)

[@Studio-pg4sq]

I read these writers years ago and this is why what Bernardo says resonates in my "brain" so melodically. Thank you for referencing these.

[@ErnestoCeccoDOrtona]

When you talked about mirroring the possible states of reality, I think I experienced it and I had to manage it a lot, it's true that messes with psychological and phisical integrity and functioning. I had a functional and incomprehensible digestion problem that got worse and worse in the years to the point I couldn't eat anymore and I risked dying in jan 2020 with 11 certified nutrient shortages, I've been in hell basically, but balance between a "normal" way of experiencing "existence" and removing the mind's boundaries while "riding it" it's possible (since years i have a kinda generative mind, I have to stop and limit ideas and making connections, some periods it was like my mind was spontaneously accelerating for no reason, but after long I understood the workings and now I'm very "free from it"). For me it required combined knowledge in several subjects, undiscriminate attention, care, control, living with sensibility and quietness, peacefulness, calm, clarity, simplicity and maybe most of all "knowing yourself" because each of us should see clearly who they are and what they really care about, to find their purpose and personal value.

[@amaratvak6998]

Shortest ever answer is: Yes.

[@N0v3LisT]

We need to allow ourselves the opportunity to dismantle institutions of thinking in order to progress, and perhaps quickly. Otherwise, I fear we may risk an ontological shock unlike anything our species has encountered to this point. We can start this transition now.

[@jorgegarciapla6880]

Perhaps one can begin by dismantling the universal standard of measurement called "person", and by extension, "human being". The whole of society is 100% based on it. What is the encounter like without such an unquestioned standard?😊

[@slowdown7276]

How does analytic idealism explain anesthestic effect on brain lowering awareness/consciousness?

[@GTN3]

Bernardo has a well thought out presentation. He's right, we can't see true reality - For our minds would dissolve into madness, it is so different from what we're accustomed to seeing.

[@noxaeventide8845]

We may be able to "see" glimpse of it but we might not be able to fully understand it, or "pin it down" into clear and concise conceptual understanding. Much less put it into words as it seems that "true reality" is non-linear while language and by extension most "ideas" are linear. You have to "see it for yourself" by introspection. Revelation cannot be communicated as intended, because it is likely to be misinterpreted or misunderstood ("false idol" in theology). But we shall keep trying as it lies in our nature to do so, and hopefully make it more than less clear over the course of history. (traditions)

[@Corteum]

Mind cannot perceive reality... it can only attempt a feeble interpretation of it. Hence why the traditions suggest getting behind the mind back to awareness....i.e. turya

[@TheGuiltsOfUs]

Drivel

[@goodquestion7915]

Today, Bernardo corrected my mistaken idea that cells crawl towards each other to assemble the fetus, and now I know the truth about cell differentiation. Bernardo is my preferred "Deepak Chopra" of philosophy ... "The woo must flow".

[@4k-os]

Love the "dashboard" analogy!

[@JanSandahl]

Just blurting it out casually in the middle of a sentence: "Life is the appearance of dissociated mentation in the mind of nature." 💥

[@connectingupthedots]

Lol does that mean anything? Sounds like nonsense.

[@JanSandahl]

Well, yeah (it means something). 🙂 It's just a descriptor though.

[@mosborne5719]

Could you rephrase that because I don’t follow?

[@MagdiNonDuality]

Excellent. Very stimulating.

[@whynottalklikeapirat]

“The hard problem makes it look like consciousness is impossible to solve. It doesn’t give you any out. Every bit of evidence we have is that the mysteries of the universe have been gradually solved by science. I don’t see why consciousness should be any different. I think what engenders this possibility of us being conscious right now, of my knowing that I’m talking to you and seeing your faces on the screen and vice versa, is fundamentally linked to affect. It is a feeling, through and through, a feeling of the continuity of life in my organism. We also have reasons to believe that this core feeling is largely being produced below the level of the cerebral cortex. It is then made available to our cerebral cortex by certain subcortical structures, such as those in the thalamus and in the hippocampus. The essence of the consciousness process is actually simpler than what people want to make it. There’s no hard problem, really”. - Antonio Damasio

[@daxross2930]

I love Bernardo’s work. Thank you for this

[@pertsonvelts1699]

To be honest I do not understand why opening of a topic like this doesn't begin with proper definitions i.e. what do you mean by "reality" and what do you mean by "consciousness". Without this kind of introduction it is very difficult, if not impossible to comprehend from the start what could you possibly mean by asking/answering if one is possibly made of another.

[@rustybolts8953]

They may be made of each other but appear to be the same. So far I find no limits as t how to think of "Reality/Actuality" and that's only me. So we may be trying to consciously define that which is undefinable. On the other hand nothing is stopping us from trying. Persistence can pay off sometimes.

[@NondescriptMammal]

I agree, you can't call your theory rigorous without complete and exact definitions. What do "universal consciousness" and "dissociated alter" mean, exactly?

[@goldwhitedragon]

@@NondescriptMammal if you try to.nail the definition down through a construct like Englush, it won't be what it is.

[@NondescriptMammal]

@@goldwhitedragon Those are terms he uses, through the construct of English, to explain his ideas. If they can't be defined using English, how am I supposed to know what he means when he uses those terms?

[@goldwhitedragon]

@@NondescriptMammal Know through other people using more suitable languages.

[@sophiashekinah9872]

40:49 "As above so below, as within so without". Fractals

[@SotocandoAlquimiaSonora]

Great analogy around 22:00 to explain the physics nobel of 22 and the root of the quantum realm. The real world is a football match, and what we know within a lab research is what we watch through a television

[@canisronis2753]

What is difficult here is how unintuitive it is to conceive of a physical world experienced through touch as mental. A useful technique is the process of negation. Instead of trying to understand what something IS, start with identifying what it is not. The book The Tao of Physics I think is a useful place to enter the rabbit hole.

[@rooruffneck]

Great point. Also, if you've ever had a dream that involves intense physical interactions, that can help get an idea of how mentality can create concrete environments.

[@waynehilbornTSS]

"Physics" tells us time is simultaneous and the past "could" ostensibly change which we notice prevalent when manifesting. Your FIRST KISS is an event that will occur simultaneously to a million years from now. Your MEMORY is a telepathic attuning to those first kisses.. Your WORM-FOOD simulated brain doesn't matter for beans. Your first kiss will NOT just be a vivid memory in a million years.. but your first kiss will actually be OCCURRING in a million years. Your PERSONALITY is EGO which is MEMORY... Your memory doesn't contain every license plate number you and your brother have ever seen... No... You merely attune to the (einstein/wheeler) simultaneous (absence of) time event. Easy Peezy. There is no "touch".. there is no "physical". Space-time is a dead dog now. You are a THOUGHT... an immortal changling... I understand all of "reality" and to simplify we are living the dream.. Simultaneous time also means you live forever by default. Wayne Hilborn (author of "Theory of everything mind" & "the savvy sorcerer")

[@АндрейДенькевич]

​@@waynehilbornTSS i consider myself to be not THOUGHT but REALITY. THOUGHT became REALITY if and only if BEGIN happens as had been said in video body BEGINS from one point, also our universe BEGINS from one point. BEGIN means separation by means of self-closure. Closure is equivalent to appearing of SHAPE. Faces of SHAPE is NUMBERS. "no distinction between numbers and shape. Numbers couldn't exist without shape" Pythagoras (reincarnation of Euphorbos).

[@waynehilbornTSS]

@@АндрейДенькевич - Reality is a compendium of thoughts.. we share a dream to simplify

[@АндрейДенькевич]

@@waynehilbornTSS i do not believe some dream wich is fake untill BEGIN happens. If I dream to have million dollars it doesn't mean it come true without something to BEGIN to do. Yes, REALITY is a part of compendium of THOUGHTS and BEGIN is channel to it and END is channel out of it. So we share part of dream,. "life is a dream about one day wich we spend as quests" Pascal

[@realcygnus]

BK is on point as always.

[@RighteousMonk-m1m]

This video is outstanding!

[@helmutgensen4738]

Thank you so very much Bernardo! Surprising new scientific way of looking at the world and understanding quantum physics - I'll be sharing with my colleagues. And great questions on death and dissociation from the host Neil. Perfect

[@theomnisthour6400]

Not only that, but consciousness is a quantum phenomenon, one that creates new consciousness quanta every time a soul answers the first question God dealt with - "What am I, and what am I not?". Narrowing the answer to this question through successive incarnations in various soul vehicles in an expanding selection of physical and spiritual universes is how all creative evolution occurs for all souls, oversouls, and soul collectives. The multiverse is a grand virtual reality machine that let's every soul define who they are in the shifting context of the souls within their sphere of influence

[@noxaeventide8845]

Or, there is only one "soul" living all lives simultaneously.

[@FromPlanetZX]

That would be Samkhya Philosophy. Multiple Purusha.

[@theomnisthour6400]

@noxaeventide8845 That's irrational and unscientific nonsense. Anyone who has ever created anything of significance knows that divide and conquer is a prerequisite pattern for all serious complex creations. Philosophies of unity are the masturbation fantasies of lazy, plagiaristic, low consciousness minds, IMHO

[@Walklikeaduck111]

Interesting that this understanding was present in the sages of ancient india as given in the vedanta.

[@hansgouda8593]

Yes, I have read and put into practice many teachings of spiritual teachers from Plato to Ramana and beyond and experienced what it is to 'be'. A lot is said and written about awareness, about consciousness, but I hadn't heard the best yet. At least until now. Another great lecture from Dr. Tony Nader eight years ago is also in line with what Bernardo Kastrup knows how to put into words so well. (I'm also surprised that I can follow it so well, while my English is not very good :) )

[@bigfletch8]

On the basis of his wonderful presentation , consider this. Light itself (together with all other sensual experiences) is PURELY subjective. It does not exist anywhere outside a sentient being with a visual cortex. Plants convert the same source energy via their ability for photosynthesis. We actually create the light and then project it, where each projection interacts forming what we refer to a holograms (hence the holographic universe hypothesis). This also explains metaphysical realities such as telepathy and many other examples, where people at particular stage of awareness project at a common " frequency", forming different levels of group consciousness. This applies as much to a bunch of chimps as it does to a group of scientists. " Nothing more predictable than a group of classic phycisists". The time traveller is not from a different time, but from a different level of consciousness. Great example with daVinci, Tezla and many other visionaries. This also explains the UFO phenomenon..(not the NWO version to push their agenda..also predictable ). Epictetus told us , reality is where you are looking from, not what you are looking at. The different perspectives appear in one word, seen differently. Image-in-nation (group consciousness) and I-Magi-Nation (individual awareness/creativity). The creator created creators !!! Take care..Really? Who takes care of what, and for what reason ...hehehe...we are all subject to trivialities .....

[@James-ll3jb]

Superb. I always had asuspicion favorable toward Idealism.

[@kevinrhodes4325]

@43:30 "I think what we call life, biology, is what a dissociative process in the fugue of subjectivity underlying all nature looks like. In other words, a living breathing metabolizing body is what dissociative mentation looks like. That's what life is, life is the appearance of the dissociative mentation in the mind of nature. So what is that, the end of life? Well, it is the end of dissociation. If life is what dissociation looks like then life is the end of dissociation. It's the reabsorption of our seemingly private mental activity into the broader mind of nature, into Mind at large."

[@peterbroderson6080]

The moment a particle is a wave; it has to be a conscious wave! Gravity is the conscious attraction among waves to create the illusion of particles, and our experience-able Universe. Max Planck states: "Consciousness is fundamental and matter is derived from Consciousness". Life is the Infinite Consciousness, experiencing the Infinite Possibilities, Infinitely. We are "It", experiencing our infinite possibilities in our finite moment. Our job is to make it interesting!

[@seenathpanchowrie1767]

I find this lecture to be very informative. Mr. Bernardo is a very knowledgable person.

[@marycollins8215]

Thank you.

[@gwgwgwgw1854]

Very interesting explanation. Makes a lot of sense.

[@gireeshneroth7127]

So called reality is a mental construct and mental experience.

[@sophiashekinah9872]

So, I just saw that death is the separation of consciousness from matter due to an increase in "complexity"; like how Cymatics changes matter from one form to another using increasing harmonic sound vibration. I guess with the subtle level the energy would be in the form of light rather than sound.

[@shwetangacharya]

After 45:00 , he speaks the language of Shri Bhagvad Gita, Upnishad , i.e., indian philosophy when question of death asked.

[@sleeperino3054]

The whole thing sounds like Vedanta tbh

[@carminefragione4710]

Helen Keller was a Jewish girl born blind, deaf dumb and mute, all she had was the ability to feel, and yet she had a victory in life to appreciate the meaning of what all our senses try to tell us, it is not what you think, it is really what you feel. Se had feelings for life, for people and for God. She had no deficits she understood all we gained by our senses but she never could see or hear or speak, this is a revelation. If you have feelings, you are a human being, made in the image of God.

[@scooble]

Perhaps the reduced regional brain activity whilst using psychedelic substances is the equivalent of 'down clocking' the brains GPU and producing a less rendered and less filtered perception.

[@ernie429]

Bernardo, you were not born with language so you were born enlightened.

[@daves2520]

"The world is not physical..." - this quote seems to jive with what is written in the Bible. The Bible states, "What is seen is made from that which is not seen."

[@FRANCCO32]

Given everything is mental and not physical. There still must somehow exist strict laws of perceived physicality? Otherwise we could manipulate the physical like having the ability to walk through walls etc.? Or would these laws just be necessary for the observational suite we are currently residing in?

[@sophiashekinah9872]

The most Ecstatic states of consciousness (it would appear) are experienced either as a result of or only when brain activity is decreased significantly or ceased entirely. I was just watching an interview with a guy who has been studying near death experiences for over 20 years; meditation (as we all know) serves to slow the brainwaves into a coherent pattern, I wonder what kind of brainwaves are produced by Sacred Sexuality. I know that ecstasy is the most effective state for Magickal intention.

[@shawnpalmer6715]

the lines on palm are similar in view of the microscopic view of atomic activity

[@freethinker4402]

It would be nice to know the belief system dr bernardo was influenced by from childhood to early manhood. I would also like to know if there is records of a blind person using psychedelics and describing their experience with colors something there brains dont have experience with.

[@bipolarbear9917]

Bernardo obviously doesn’t believe in orthodox religious beliefs (he was probably raised Catholic). He mentioned being a ‘naturalist’, so I’d assume according to his description of conscious reality that ‘Scientific Pantheism’ (also called ‘Naturalistic Pantheism’ would be consistent and coherent with his scientific and philosophical ‘worldview’.

[@studiojake5253]

Google: "What happens when a blind person takes psychedelics"

[@julioreija8052]

25:07 errata corrige: the Greek letter the doctor says is «phi», Φ φ, is “in reality” 😅 «psi», Ψ ψ. Is it just him, or is it common amongst physicists not to properly know the Greek alphabet?

[@djelalhassan7631]

Scientifically and philosophically this is the best I have seen on the real nature of nature, beautiful, peace and love.

[@JohnMartim-sy9yf]

No matter how well we know this reality, including consciousness, it will tell us nothing about the ultimate reality. And this is what will last for eternity.

[@robertdabob8939]

Depends what you mean by ultimate reality. We already know that we're interacting directly with transcendent phenomena though human instincts, and that's changing how we relate to the world and the psyche.

[@SunnyDayTeaFactory]

How do we know that the world we think we see is not base reality? How are we so sure that what we see out there is not as it seems to be?

[@mrnibelheim]

Your second question answers your first question...the world always "seems", does it not?

[@goran586]

Different types of sense illusions are an indication that what we "see" is a filtered and processed information that has evolved - not to see reality as it is - but in the way most conducive to our survival.

[@b.g.5869]

I find Kastrup's views extremely interesting and much of it is compelling, but some of his arguments are considerably less convincing than others. I don't see his work as something properly described as "theory" in the scientific sense so much as an _interpretive_ framework, much as the many worlds _interpretation_ of quantum mechanics is just that, an _interpretation_ of quantum theory, not a theory itself. I don't think Kastrup would disagree with this description of his work. As far as what he presented here, which was a very concise summation of his views, there are some claims he made that I did not find convincing. For example, the facts that the psychedelic experience is a rich experience and psychedelics decrease brain activity does not entail that brain activity does not give rise to consciousness. There's no reason for supposing that the 'richness' of an experience should be proportional to the amount of brain activity, and it's not particularly surprising that a marked decrease in brain activity could give rise to a very interesting and unusual (aka 'rich') subjective experience. Being as obviously well informed as he is about psychedelic research in recent years I can't imagine he's not aware that research suggests that regardless of the decrease in brain activity, part of the 'richness' of the psychedelic experience (i.e. what makes it such a strange and extraordinary subjective experience) appears to be due to the fact that while ordinary brain activity is reduced, psychedelics cause parts of the brain to interact that ordinarily do not. In any event, it is quite a stretch to claim that reduced overall brain activity during a psychedelic experience suggests that consciousness isn't caused by brain activity. It seems to me that if anything, the fact that the ingestion of a chemical that radically alters brain activity would correlate with a radically altered state of consciousness is consistent with the idea that consciousness is dependent upon brain activity. At another point in his presentation he seems to be suggesting that since physical particles such as photons and electrons don't actually exist but rather are perturbations of fields, there is no physical world. But the fact that particles are really just a convenient representation of perturbations of fields doesn't mean the fields aren't physical. As for myself, I'm not committed to a materialistic or physicalist ontology, but whether we think matter is fundamental or mind the processes we observe in nature are the same; in the final analysis how they appear to us and what they're made up of versus what they might actually be like as 'things in themselves' that we can't directly observe doesn't really change anything we're observing or theorizing about. We wouldn't be able to distinguish a scientist acting under the presumption of a materialist ontology and a scientist acting under the presumption of the ontology of idealism by observing them in the laboratory; they're both limited to observing and making predictions about the same observations regardless of whether they think matter is fundamental or mind is fundamental. So while materialism might be meaningless as an ontological framework it's a very useful epistemological framework and indeed the only one available to us so far as scientific methodology is concerned.

[@stephenfosker6066]

Is his use of "mentality" and "mental" synonymous with "conscious" and "consciousness" ?

[@Blonde111]

A new fan!! Thank you.🙏

[@shreeveda]

All answers exist in India's ancient texts & scriptures. It's a civilization that's over 15,000 years old. It's a treasure trove for modern day philosophers, scientists from any field, psychologists, psychiatrists, counsellors, consultants, leaders, students, adults, et al. Ancient sages have experimented on their own bodies, minds, intellect and experienced the super consciousness that runs the creation. Anyone, who's sincere, can experience this. No wonder India is the spiritual source for the World. West is beginning to understand this recently. We are from one, thinking & acting different, going back to one.😀

[@goldwhitedragon]

A younger cousin of China

[@georgedovas]

Thank you for the discussion - mind blowing! (or should I say “mind disassociating!!!”) The analogies (cockpit instruments, soccer match on two television screens) were very useful. 😊 thank you for sharing this information / knowledge.

[@sophiashekinah9872]

So, the act of observing is the measurement?

[@sophiashekinah9872]

I wish I had the scientific vocabulary for what I see. Is it increased amplitude that is the difference between sound and light? Or does that only measure sound?

[@bjarterundereim3038]

What if Reality is not made up of conscousness, but of organic cells that are conscious? Nick Lanes observation of amoeba and stentors made me really think that way. A cell is really the smallest meaningful part of the human body. All cells that die (except hair and teeth) are expelled from the body, and return to the dust of the cosmos. A particle's smallest meaningful part is probably the proton, or even less. Change a proton in a molecule, and you have another object. Not so with human cells.

[@theseedoflife3057]

The Universe is God dancing in extacy. I've personally experienced that. There's no thought or a plan except for the nature of the Universe. The Universe is just being it's happy self. The pain and suffering, and life itself is one season of the seasons, which cancel themselves out, so all the pain is paid off by the opposite season. Just like the heat of the summer is countered by the cold of the winter.

[@batfink274]

I've had 4 DMT experiences and none of them involved moving pictures. After many years I've come to believe that taking DMT is like looking at the world through an electron microscope. The geometric pattern I saw before blacking out wasn't moving and it was all pervasive. My hearing became hypersensitive aswell, multiplying my tinnitus by 10 making it deafening. So what I get how the research says there was very little brain function, it was impossible to think because everything was so intense.

[@billbradleymusic]

Sort of, but not literally. You cannot reach out and touch ideas but you can objects from which ideas were spawned.

[@itswagon]

The more complex the target of perception, the less the perception is purely objective.

[@filamcouple_teamalleiah8479]

The original claim is quite audacious. The Universe does seem to have a structure on the large scale that consists of voids and clusters of galaxies in a string like formation. But how do the galaxies interact

[@suncat9]

Metabolism doesn't stop instantly after death, suggesting that death has a fuzzy boundry. Men's beards, men and women's fingernails, for example, keep growing for a while after death has formally been declared by other humans. Other cells in the human body keep metabolizing (living) for various amounts of time after the declaration of death.

[@RyuuRider]

I don't believe it's an instant process, but the ongoing effort of the system to persist and maintain itself ceases. Once it no longer maintains itself, it decomposes. Skin shrinks as it dehydrates after death, which exposes more of the root of the hair which gives the illusion of growth. More hair/fingernail is visible from the surface level up, but none was produced after death. The cells still require oxygen and other materials and fuel for operation, but a dead body doesn't pump blood anymore. Once the electrical signals stop flowing, the body is no longer alive and no longer fights against the degradation of its form - thus it decomposes. Death has a fuzzy boundary, but only shortly before and after the transition from living to dead - the two states themselves are very different. We can come back from the brink of death, but was it really death if we didn't die?

[@sophiashekinah9872]

35:07 I wonder if the decrease in brain activity correlates at all with an increase in "coherence".

[@amphimrca]

Is our brain physical or not???

[@AndrewWutke]

Please define entropy and its relevance to the subject.

[@Mevlinous]

I’d like to think of a field as a substrate of the universe

[@sophiashekinah9872]

How does a "naturalist" account for synchronicities?

[@GrimRealen]

Why is it necessary for existence to disassociate from reality? Why does existence disassociate from non-existence? Would you say that non-existence is our natural state of being? That living or life, is an abnormality. As existence exists between two states of non-existence.

[@andreiadetavora8471]

Thank you, thank you for this presentation!!!

[@marcobiagini1878]

I am a physicist and I will explain why our scientific knowledge refutes the idea that consciousness is generated by the brain and that the origin of our mental experiences is physical/biological (in my youtube channel you can find a video with more detailed explanations). My arguments prove the existence in us of an indivisible unphysical element, which is usually called soul or spirit. Physicalism/naturalism is based on the belief that consciousness is an emergent property of the brain, but I will discuss two arguments that prove that this hypothesis implies logical contradictions and is disproved by our scientific knowledge of the microscopic physical processes that take place in the brain. (With the word consciousness I do not refer to self-awareness, but to the property of being conscious= having a mental experiences such as sensations, emotions, thoughts, memories and even dreams). 1) All the alleged emergent properties are just simplified and approximate descriptions or subjective/arbitrary classifications of underlying physical processes or properties, which are described DIRECTLY by the fundamental laws of physics alone, without involving any emergent properties (arbitrariness/subjectivity is involved when more than one option is possible; in this case, more than one possible description). An approximate description is only an abstract idea, and no actual entity exists per se corresponding to that approximate description, simply because an actual entity is exactly what it is and not an approximation of itself. What physically exists are the underlying physical processes and not the emergent properties (=subjective classifications or approximate descriptions). This means that emergent properties do not refer to reality itself but to an arbitrary abstract concept (the approximate conceptual model of reality). Since consciousness is the precondition for the existence of concepts, approximations and arbitrariness/subjectivity, consciousness is a precondition for the existence of emergent properties. Therefore, consciousness cannot itself be an emergent property. The logical fallacy of materialists is that they try to explain the existence of consciousness by comparing consciousness to a concept that, if consciousness existed, a conscious mind could use to describe approximately a set of physical elements. Obviously this is a circular reasoning, since the existence of consciousness is implicitly assumed in an attempt to explain its existence. 2) An emergent property is defined as a property that is possessed by a set of elements that its individual components do not possess. The point is that the concept of set refers to something that has an intrinsically conceptual and subjective nature and implies the arbitrary choice of determining which elements are to be included in the set; what exists objectively are only the single elements (where one person sees a set of elements, another person can only see elements that are not related to each other in their individuality). In fact, when we define a set, it is like drawing an imaginary line that separates some elements from all the other elements; obviously this imaginary line does not exist physically, independently of our mind, and therefore any set is just an abstract idea, and not a physical entity and so are all its properties. Since consciousness is a precondition for the existence of subjectivity/arbitrariness and abstractions, consciousness is the precondition for the existence of any emergent property, and cannot itself be an emergent property. Both arguments 1 and 2 are sufficient to prove that every emergent property requires a consciousness from which to be conceived. Therefore, that conceiving consciousness cannot be the emergent property itself. Conclusion: consciousness cannot be an emergent property; this is true for any property attributed to the neuron, the brain and any other system that can be broken down into smaller elements. On a fundamental material level, there is no brain, or heart, or any higher level groups or sets, but just fundamental particles interacting. Emergence itself is just a category imposed by a mind and used to establish arbitrary classifications, so the mind can't itself be explained as an emergent phenomenon. Obviously we must distinguish the concept of "something" from the "something" to which the concept refers. For example, the concept of consciousness is not the actual consciousness; the actual consciousness exists independently of the concept of consciousness since the actual consciousness is the precondition for the existence of the concept of consciousness itself. However, not all concepts refer to an actual entity and the question is whether a concept refers to an actual entity that can exist independently of consciousness or not. If a concept refers to "something" whose existence presupposes the existence of arbitrariness/subjectivity or is a property of an abstract object, such "something" is by its very nature abstract and cannot exist independently of a conscious mind, but it can only exist as an idea in a conscious mind. For example, consider the property of "beauty": beauty has an intrinsically subjective and conceptual nature and implies arbitrariness; therefore, beauty cannot exist independently of a conscious mind. My arguments prove that emergent properties, as well as complexity, are of the same nature as beauty; they refer to something that is intrinsically subjective, abstract and arbitrary, which is sufficient to prove that consciousness cannot be an emergent property because consciousness is the precondition for the existence of any emergent property. The "brain" doesn't objectively and physically exist as a single entity and the entity “brain” is only a conceptual model. We create the concept of the brain by arbitrarily "separating" it from everything else and by arbitrarily considering a bunch of quantum particles altogether as a whole; this separation is not done on the basis of the laws of physics, but using addictional arbitrary criteria, independent of the laws of physics. The property of being a brain, just like for example the property of being beautiiful, is just something you arbitrarily add in your mind to a bunch of quantum particles. Any set of elements is an arbitrary abstraction therefore any property attributed to the brain is an abstract idea that refers to another arbitrary abstract idea (the concept of brain). Furthermore, brain processes consist of many parallel sequences of ordinary elementary physical processes. There is no direct connection between the separate points in the brain and such connections are just a conceptual model used to approximately describe sequences of many distinct physical processes; interpreting these sequences as a unitary process or connection is an arbitrary act and such connections exist only in our imagination and not in physical reality. Indeed, considering consciousness as a property of an entire sequence of elementary processes implies the arbitrary definition of the entire sequence; the entire sequence as a whole is an arbitrary abstract idea , and not to an actual physical entity. For consciousness to be physical, first of all the brain as a whole (and brain processes as a whole) would have to physically exist, which means the laws of physics themselves would have to imply that the brain exists as a unitary entity and brain processes occur as a unitary process. However, this is false because according to the laws of physics, the brain is not a unitary entity but only an arbitrarily (and approximately) defined set of quantum particles involved in billions of parallel sequences of elementary physical processes occurring at separate points. This is sufficient to prove that consciousness is not physical since it is not reducible to the laws of physics, whereas brain processes are. According to the laws of physics, brain processes do not even have the prerequisites to be a possible cause of consciousness. As discussed above, an emergent property is a concept that refers to an arbitrary abstract idea (the set) and not to an actual entity; this rule out the possibility that the emergent property can exist independently of consciousness. Conversely, if a concept refers to “something” whose existence does not imply the existence of arbitrariness or abstract ideas, then such “something” might exist independently of consciousness. An example of such a concept is the concept of “indivisible entity”. Contrary to emergent properties, the concept of indivisible entity refers to something that might exist independently of the concept itself and independently of our consciousness. My arguments prove that the hypothesis that consciousness is an emergent property implies a logical fallacy and an hypothesis that contains a logical contradiction is certainly wrong. Consciousness cannot be an emergent property whatsoever because any set of elements is a subjective abstraction; since only indivisible elements may exist objectively and independently of consciousness, consciousness can exist only as a property of an indivisible element. Furthermore, this indivisible entity must interact globally with brain processes because we know that there is a correlation between brain processes and consciousness. This indivisible entity is not physical, since according to the laws of physics, there is no physical entity with such properties; therefore this indivisible entity corresponds to what is traditionally called soul or spirit. The soul is the missing element that interprets globally the distinct elementary physical processes occurring at separate points in the brain as a unified mental experience. Marco Biagini

[@nicknijman2500]

We don't see the world as it is, according to Bernardo, and therefore the world we see is not real. If you reason like this: You are not wearing the jacket, you are wearing the material from which the jacket is made. So, the jacket is an illusion and the material is the only reality. If you reason like that, you're bound to get stuck. Both the jacket and the material are reality. So, both the dashboard and what the dashboard displays are reality, but they are different realities. The dashboard is the only reality we can perceive with the naked senses and that is why we have to take that reality very seriously.

[@ionagibbons9906]

I can see some of the ideas to a point but when it was said To be is just to be I think To be always sits within the context of Not to be even if you don’t believe in a higher sporula existence. There is the. mechanism of mortality. We don’t live life without recognising that death is part of life. How this is dealt with as a specie or culturally or individually is very complex in society operating on both conscious levels and unconscious levels all the time. The issue we are until we are not is not that linear. It is we are because we are not. To be is to not be This is a deep duality that does hold mystery and to unlock some of that mystery does not translate through a realm of forms. This means exploring elements of worlds not known that with no tangible way to explain that exploration can appear that without tangable properties does not exist. But we also no not existing is part of reality. Finally cats do chose what they eat when they are offered choice so don’t eat simply because a form of food is in front of them. Their instinct to smell if something is edible will be there but as to whether the food stuff is considered the best thing to eat will be another decision. Those decisions can sometimes defy logic.