Bernardo thank you. Understanding this in a way that my mind understands in addition to my experiential and introspective realisations is so utterly helpful
Love Bernardo sharing the ego is which mouth to bring the fork.. lol When eating from the Tree of Knowledge .. hunger.. then I am hunger ... not mourning the dream.. absence of unrequited hunger. When listening to Mooji I was always puzzeled when the devotee would go up to the mike and say to Mooji "I am ready for you to eat me! " Thank you andrewwholeck.. and Bernardo Kastrup it take two to get to One!!!
I was a physicalist without even knowing or questioning it until ive had satori experience two years ago, and what these two cats are saying is completley true and experiential, you can FEEL it for yourself. There is a mind at large, and all the living beings are in the oneness of mind at large. When your body dies, you will go to oneness with all the minds/souls that were once alive and still are (theres no time in mind at large, so everybody is already there) you will have the best time of your life. All the beings including trees, plants, fungai, animals, humans, every living being that has any level of consiousness will just shower you with love like youve never felt before and they wont stop it, its just infinity of love 😂 Its like they wanna try to kill you with so much love, but you cant die ofcourse ❤😂 And they will make fun of you for taking life to seriously and even call you an idiot like they did me. 😂 I remember it like it was yesterday, ive connected with mind at large, with oneness and ask the following: "is there a one god on top of this?" And couple of TREES laughed and said to me "Youre it, you idiot" 😂😂 and then i said "but so is everybody else here, and i love you all!" Then we laughed like morons and went on through tunnels of unimaginable beautiful art and history of living beings. This is what awaits you when you die - infinity of love in oneness. ❤ Reality/existance is made for pure fun and excietment. 🎉 The fastest way to have this experience is meditation on psychedelics. Go for it, dont be a pu**y and dont call mushroom a drug, its a living being that just wants to be eaten and show you the truth about reality and yourself. LSD can also induce mystical experiences. 🫡 Psychedelics are consciousness expanders, and meditation actually has some results when youre tripping, not om om ive done it thousand times and nothing is happening. 😂 Sat cit ananda!! 🎉❤
A discussion well worth the mental effort to understand for those of us less gifted than the guest and host. This material is/feels so fundamentally important to explore. Particularly interested in BK's mention of the rooms of mind that we may have to explore even if successful at the process of ego dissolution upon "death". I'd find comfort in accepting that there will remain a large element of mystery in the ongoing process, take a deep breath and just welcome the experience. Otherwise one may go through additional unnecessary suffering while still here, in morbid anticipation.
After watching the 2 parts, I think Bernado made the most of what you can do with rationality alone. He's brilliant and his insights are fascinating. But he seems not to get the full potential of practice, which he probably dismisses too quickly and the full implications of his findings. As Bernado pointed out, rationality is not your entire mind, it is just one mode of experience among others and it has limits. That's why in many Indian philosophical traditions, practitioners are expected to use their rationality AND experience through meditation, karma yoga and so on. Which he did to a certain extent with his psychedelics. Insights from various modes of experience come together and transform one's into a more spontaneous 'child/natural' self as Bernardo says. Going back to the freshness of childhood is simple but it is not an easy thing to do for a conditioned adult (the old gradual vs instant path debate) and I believe that such training is key to stabilizing this type of 'consciousness', as opposed to getting an unstable glimpse through psychedelics. Bernardo seems not to understand that. He seems to assume that people are stuck into a fairly small range of states of consciousness and that all you can do is understand intellectually that we live in social construction and just let it go, because we can barely do anything with our monkey minds. That is obvious when he speaks about vertigo and assumes people cannot handle infinity and should mostly stay clear of it. The thing is many people train their minds to actually handle this subtle level of reality, which is indeed scary for an untrained mind, and much more. While his insights are brilliant, this approach does not allow him to make much out of them beyond the ‘I don’t give a shit’ attitude, which is not bad, but not super helpful either. Vajrayana reached pretty much the same conclusions as Bernado, but explored the full implications of these insights. Their lessons were about the fundamental interdependence of everything and the need for compassion to create healthy conditions for quantum fields get excited and produce a healthier kind of reality, to use modern terminology. Cris Bache, a philosopher who has insights similar to those of Bernardo, is a great example of this. He really embodies kindness and compassion despite his 20 years spent in pure emptiness. Likewise, that’s not very wise of him to dismiss the experience of absolute love (a consistent experience across time and space in deep meditation experiences and NDEs) because violence exists. Based, on his reasoning, one could argue that 'love' is a concept we put on the fundamental coherence (or glue) of whatever fundamental reality one contacts during these experiences - that's his point about symbolism. Anyone who focused enough on love should know that love is fundamentally a cohesive force that dissolves boundaries and integrates. At a more mundane level, love, as a positive feeling towards a separate metabolic entity, is really the social glue that generates social groups among animals - that is one aspect of the fundamental relational nature of life and we can’t live without love or social groups. So yeah, if the ultimate reality is a self-conscious quantum field, it may not care about human-made morality (people experiencing NDEs would disagree on that though), but it does not mean that love, perhaps an experience of its cohesive nature, should be dismissed. All in all, Bernardo's rational insights are deep but I think he underestimates the power of the mind and the importance of training. I also think that he did not explore the full implications of his findings, unlike the practitioners of some Indian traditions. I think that he represents the best the Western tradition has to offer but illustrates its limits as well, by not taking seriously enough the experiential aspect of knowledge and the role of ethics. Ethics may sound like moralistic blabla to some, but after witnessing so much pain, discrimination and violence of any sort in this life, I have come to appreciate pragmatic ethics and people who embody it. It is not for nothing if ethics is the ground of any spiritual path. Keep up the good work!
Yes I used to be terrified of eternity, as a child crying and screaming at night as an adult like a panic attack. This has completely dissolved as I realised ‘I’ am not a separate self
The Tibetan Buddhists confirm the hypothesis. Nirmanakaya = the dissociated mind. Dharmakaya is the Original Ground of Mind. Samboghakaya is the quality of mind capable of creating, dreaming, reflecting, and dissociating
What a great interview, such eloquence from both. I love how the interviewer looks for how we can embody Bernardo’s beautiful case that we are a divine dissociations of an alive and evolving consciousness. I too would love a place to collectively digest this vision.
What an interesting interview - to see how Buddhism meets Analytic Idealism. Part 1 ends on a cliffhanger - as Evil is about to be discussed. We have a disconnect between “Nature wants to act through us spontaneously when we inhabit our 'natural selves' and “Nature wants us to be metacognitive and inhabit our adaptive selves so it can gain our insights”. William Blake seemed to have the answer here: the process of Innocence in childhood to Experience (the Fall into metacognition) then on to Organised Innocence. I’m not sure how we will ever get to Organised Innocence. Maybe Part 2 will help!
Superficially, Bernardo Kastrup SEEMS to be promulgating the most ancient spiritual teaching of Advaita Vedanta (as found in the Upanishadic texts of India) but due to reasons I won't go into at length here, his understanding is rather flawed. If one carefully listens to any of his monologues or interview videos, it is obvious (at least it is obvious to those who are truly enlightened) that he regularly confuses and conflates discrete consciousness (as emerging from the neural networks of animals) and UNIVERSAL Consciousness (which is the all-pervasive, eternal ground of all being, more appositely termed "The Tao", "Brahman" or "Infinite Awareness"). He also believes in (limited) freedom of volition, which is, of course, ludicrous, and his understanding of suffering is truly infantile, which is unfortunate, since the eradication of suffering is the goal of life. In order to PROPERLY understand the distinction between the two aforementioned categories of consciousness, you are welcome to email me for a copy of "A Final Instruction Sheet for Humanity", which are the most authoritative and accurate precepts extant. My address is on my UA-cam homepage. However, my main criticism of Kastrup is not with his metaphysics, it is, rather, his METAETHICS. He is, objectively speaking, afflicted with a demonic mentality, as demonstrated with his support of all things contrary to Dharma (the law, and societal duties), such as egalitarianism, feminism, homosexuality, and socialism. In a recent interview, for example, he displayed abject ignorance when discussing the topic of animal consumption. Hopefully, he will one day realize how incredibly hypocritical he is in this regards, and become a compassionate VEGAN. 🌱 After all, to criticize Bernardo for his teachings being only, let's say, ninety percent accurate, would be silly, since, compared with almost every other person who has ever lived, his philosophical understanding is fairly sound. Yet, what is the point of being even TOTALLY correct about metaphysics, when one's metaethics and normative ethics is fundamentally flawed? Furthermore, Bernardo has admitted that he has struggled with mental health issues for several decades. I would suggest he flee to the loving arms of an ACTUAL spiritual master in order to learn Dharma (as well, of course, correct his flawed metaphysics). Peace!
@@TheVeganVicar Oh and by the way his metaphysical stance refutes the emergence of what you call discreet consciousness...his whole point rests on demonstrating that emergent consciousness from physical matter is nonsense.
@@TheVeganVicar I don't think that the "Tao" refers to a Universal Consciousness. And inconsequentially, personally I don't think that the belief or knowledge of a Universal Consciousness is a symptom of enlightenment, but of ignorance. But I am not the one being interviewed here. I support your stance on veganism though as I support anybody being vegan no matter what the reasons.
@@thehiddenyogi8557, well, Slave, we all have our own particular BELIEFS, but ultimately, there exists objective truth, which is not subject to our misconceptions and misunderstandings. One who has transcended mundane relative truth is said to be an ENLIGHTENED soul. 😇 Incidentally, Slave, are you VEGAN? 🌱
Love this type of thinking. I love hearing Bernardo talk. And love hearing him interviewed in such a way. I can sort of understand a lot of this conversation. But it still leaves me wondering about my individual purpose. And why do I feel like things aren't going right for me and so on. When I stop and think about it it seems like the meaning of life is just to exist. And nothing is really good or bad. But it's so easy to fall into standard mode of thinking which leads to feelings of depression and so on.
I believe that when you are on a path of enlightenment...meaning self inquiry... you are more apt to recognize the world and life as wonderful...more likely to change your own behavior for the better....automatically without really trying... You go on living as before, but with a whole new perspective... as the proverb says..."Before enlightenment..chop wood, carry water.....After enlightenment...chop wood, carry water"
27:40 - Ok, so when someone has a lucid dream, who do they think they are? I've never really had a lucid dream (I've tried, but no luck so far). So, let's say I have a lucid dream. What will I feel like THEN? Will I still feel the same way I did in a non-lucid dream, but simply have new knowledge overt in my mind? Or do I somehow feel a higher level of innate "sense" that I'm NOT just that dream avatar? Will I UNDERSTAND that "this dream will end and I will wake up?" I've never heard anyone talk about it in this level of detail.
When re-association with reality occurs at death, will we remember the dissociation? A slow death, flickering between worlds, the end of dissociation, shows maybe we can’t have it both ways. Can we remember what it was like to be dead. Would we know what life was had we never been dead, or what death was had we never been born?
I have never heard anyone making the point that it is reassuring to think of death as final rather than contend with the possibility that our terrors continue beyond the limits of birth and death.
I know many people who have admitted they prefer a single, final life precisely because if reincarnation / rebirth is the case, it *is* absolutely horrifying.
My guess is that Bernardo has had some bad trips and has some deep trauma, and is projecting this upon his rationalisations of death. I'm going to defer to the sages on this one - since the ego is an illusion, and cannot survive the death of the body, they would say "who is there to experience terrors". Are you terrified in deep sleep?
@@andrewroddy3278 my own personal experience, is that I have been on this path for about 10 years now, studying both the intellectual side and practicing meditation, and the only thing I have ever experienced as I've loosened the identification with ego, is a deepening sense of peace, joy and contentment. Conversely, most of what I have hard from users of strong psychedelics like DMT is these awful experiences of demons and suffering. It's like they're sending themselves to hell. Weighing my own experiences with the body of 1000s of years of spiritual literature and the words of sages, it seems rather unlikely we're destined for any "meat grinder" upon death of the ego. Hell as understood esoterically from religion is being locked into the ego, fully identified with it, closed off to God, and experiencing the suffering that entails
Trance ending, realising it is not your dream you are having, but an illusion of a dream what someone else put together, and when you were young, inculcated you into a system where everyone else is in the same programme and you are at the whim and pleasure as to where absurdity rules, what an experience to become aware of, and that all of it doesnt matter so much, just my little part, and even that, barely. And now, the end is near, and so i face, the final curtain. I bear witness there is no god but cause and effect and i create the cause for the recognisation of effect so help me, me. :)
I loved Bernardo's description of what vertigo actually is. I would put it this way: at that moment, part of you pulls into the void -- wants to connect, to dissolve, to self-sacrifice -- and part of you pulls back in self-preservation. That tension, which reaches its peak at that moment, we call vertigo. It's a tension of oneself pulling itself apart and resisting it.
... HardStop-THINKING... theres your abstract... No Mind No Matter... ... Consciousness is the only frontier ... ... Addictions are the only reality ... ... Enlightenment is the only game ... ... IGNORANCE IS THE ONLY IMPEDIMENT ...
34:30 - Isn't the combination problem part of what Donald Hoffman has worked on? I thought he had this little math process he runs through where he takes representations of simple conscious agents and combines them to get a higher complexity conscious agent. But Dr. Kastrup is saying such "combination" is problematic and the need for it should be avoided.
Regarding Bernardos fear of entering rooms of the mind after death :.This implies there will be an experiencer after death.I question that.In a body there is a notion that a separate self exist that has experiences happpening to him or her..While Mind at large is just experiencing.There is no experiencer from mind at large.After the death of a body,there will be no concept of an individual mind to create the experiencer experiencing other rooms of an individual mind.There maybe a big Aha moment from mind at large like waking up from a dream.The point being there is no individual to experience anything after the death of a body.
Bernardo at other places admits this may not be an either or 'thing'.....There may be finer grades of separation, maybe some sort of nested subtle bodies? I don't know these are just ideas that seem possible? Who knows?
@@fineasfrog Of course no one knows,however one can realize during living that there is no individual ,that experiences happen only through the hypnosis that an individual exists.Buddha among many shared this information.There is no soul and no one to reincarnate.Action happens,deeds are done,there is no doer thereof.
Have you ever looked in the mirror from behind your eyes and asked the universe "why am I stuck in this body?" This thing looking back at me from the mirror is not me... Then you regain your senses and get ready to go to work.
I really enjoy your perspective and intelligent articulation of what awareness and consciousness is. I also 90% agree with you. But i hope you will talk about ideas, words like love, kindness, truth, selflessness. I hope you don't think these qualities are material, egoic or manufactured by some human invention. I believe love (divine love) is the supreme synonym for consciousness. I hope you might give credit to the source or consciousness not as a human trait, but that indeed the sole source of Consciousness is not created by mankind but for mankind. In other words, a source greater than our collective self - God. Why can't you say Spirit, God, a Divine source Bernardo? Is there a better explanation for pure consciousness but being wholey spiritual. I hope you grow to be more accepting to that word spiritual, not in terms of religious but meaning spiritual meaning beyond mortal, matter, physical.
PLEASE! Who's the guest here? Bernardo or YOU? If it's Bernardo, PLEASE "elevator pitch" your questions and get out of his way. If you want to impress, HUSH UP and let Bernardo speak!!
Bernardo a modern-day Nagarjuna? What a JOKE! Bernardo Mind-only non-dualism is utterly contrary to Nagarjuna's Madhyamaka, which in no way identifies a universal, transcendental Mind, as Bernardo does. But Bernardo's metaphysical idealism is also unimpressive to the cognoscenti, who subscribe to a superior form of metaphysical idealism.
Andrew, please listen to yourself again and how much YOU talk. You talk far too much . You have a brilliant guest, listen to him,ask short questions and talk less about Yourself. Please.
Bernardo thank you.
Understanding this in a way that my mind understands in addition to my experiential and introspective realisations is so utterly helpful
Can’t wait for part II
Me too! So into the discussion and it just ends! 😆Really looking forward to part 2
Love Bernardo sharing the ego is which mouth to bring the fork.. lol When eating from the Tree of Knowledge .. hunger.. then I am hunger ... not mourning the dream.. absence of unrequited hunger. When listening to Mooji I was always puzzeled when the devotee would go up to the mike and say to Mooji "I am ready for you to eat me! " Thank you andrewwholeck.. and Bernardo Kastrup it take two to get to One!!!
... fork that. Eat yourself. Go hungry. See ...
I was a physicalist without even knowing or questioning it until ive had satori experience two years ago, and what these two cats are saying is completley true and experiential, you can FEEL it for yourself. There is a mind at large, and all the living beings are in the oneness of mind at large. When your body dies, you will go to oneness with all the minds/souls that were once alive and still are (theres no time in mind at large, so everybody is already there) you will have the best time of your life. All the beings including trees, plants, fungai, animals, humans, every living being that has any level of consiousness will just shower you with love like youve never felt before and they wont stop it, its just infinity of love 😂 Its like they wanna try to kill you with so much love, but you cant die ofcourse ❤😂 And they will make fun of you for taking life to seriously and even call you an idiot like they did me. 😂 I remember it like it was yesterday, ive connected with mind at large, with oneness and ask the following: "is there a one god on top of this?" And couple of TREES laughed and said to me "Youre it, you idiot" 😂😂 and then i said "but so is everybody else here, and i love you all!" Then we laughed like morons and went on through tunnels of unimaginable beautiful art and history of living beings. This is what awaits you when you die - infinity of love in oneness. ❤ Reality/existance is made for pure fun and excietment. 🎉
The fastest way to have this experience is meditation on psychedelics. Go for it, dont be a pu**y and dont call mushroom a drug, its a living being that just wants to be eaten and show you the truth about reality and yourself. LSD can also induce mystical experiences. 🫡 Psychedelics are consciousness expanders, and meditation actually has some results when youre tripping, not om om ive done it thousand times and nothing is happening. 😂
Sat cit ananda!! 🎉❤
Keep em coming bernado
Would love to hear Bernardo discuss all this with Prof. Iain Mcgilchrist and with Bishop Barron to see if greater clarity could be achieved for all.
A discussion well worth the mental effort to understand for those of us less gifted than the guest and host. This material is/feels so fundamentally important to explore. Particularly interested in BK's mention of the rooms of mind that we may have to explore even if successful at the process of ego dissolution upon "death". I'd find comfort in accepting that there will remain a large element of mystery in the ongoing process, take a deep breath and just welcome the experience. Otherwise one may go through additional unnecessary suffering while still here, in morbid anticipation.
After watching the 2 parts, I think Bernado made the most of what you can do with rationality alone. He's brilliant and his insights are fascinating. But he seems not to get the full potential of practice, which he probably dismisses too quickly and the full implications of his findings.
As Bernado pointed out, rationality is not your entire mind, it is just one mode of experience among others and it has limits. That's why in many Indian philosophical traditions, practitioners are expected to use their rationality AND experience through meditation, karma yoga and so on. Which he did to a certain extent with his psychedelics.
Insights from various modes of experience come together and transform one's into a more spontaneous 'child/natural' self as Bernardo says. Going back to the freshness of childhood is simple but it is not an easy thing to do for a conditioned adult (the old gradual vs instant path debate) and I believe that such training is key to stabilizing this type of 'consciousness', as opposed to getting an unstable glimpse through psychedelics.
Bernardo seems not to understand that. He seems to assume that people are stuck into a fairly small range of states of consciousness and that all you can do is understand intellectually that we live in social construction and just let it go, because we can barely do anything with our monkey minds.
That is obvious when he speaks about vertigo and assumes people cannot handle infinity and should mostly stay clear of it. The thing is many people train their minds to actually handle this subtle level of reality, which is indeed scary for an untrained mind, and much more.
While his insights are brilliant, this approach does not allow him to make much out of them beyond the ‘I don’t give a shit’ attitude, which is not bad, but not super helpful either. Vajrayana reached pretty much the same conclusions as Bernado, but explored the full implications of these insights. Their lessons were about the fundamental interdependence of everything and the need for compassion to create healthy conditions for quantum fields get excited and produce a healthier kind of reality, to use modern terminology. Cris Bache, a philosopher who has insights similar to those of Bernardo, is a great example of this. He really embodies kindness and compassion despite his 20 years spent in pure emptiness.
Likewise, that’s not very wise of him to dismiss the experience of absolute love (a consistent experience across time and space in deep meditation experiences and NDEs) because violence exists. Based, on his reasoning, one could argue that 'love' is a concept we put on the fundamental coherence (or glue) of whatever fundamental reality one contacts during these experiences - that's his point about symbolism.
Anyone who focused enough on love should know that love is fundamentally a cohesive force that dissolves boundaries and integrates. At a more mundane level, love, as a positive feeling towards a separate metabolic entity, is really the social glue that generates social groups among animals - that is one aspect of the fundamental relational nature of life and we can’t live without love or social groups. So yeah, if the ultimate reality is a self-conscious quantum field, it may not care about human-made morality (people experiencing NDEs would disagree on that though), but it does not mean that love, perhaps an experience of its cohesive nature, should be dismissed.
All in all, Bernardo's rational insights are deep but I think he underestimates the power of the mind and the importance of training. I also think that he did not explore the full implications of his findings, unlike the practitioners of some Indian traditions. I think that he represents the best the Western tradition has to offer but illustrates its limits as well, by not taking seriously enough the experiential aspect of knowledge and the role of ethics. Ethics may sound like moralistic blabla to some, but after witnessing so much pain, discrimination and violence of any sort in this life, I have come to appreciate pragmatic ethics and people who embody it. It is not for nothing if ethics is the ground of any spiritual path.
Keep up the good work!
Is there anything about this Cris Brache you can point me to please? I'm curious, web searches aren't turning anything up though
I can't think of anything more terrifying than eternity.
LOL..I understand.Though when the concept of time and space dissolve so does the concept of eternity.
@@daviddeida That's a great point dude. I didn't think of it like that but you're surely right on there. That's reassuring ha!
Yes I used to be terrified of eternity, as a child crying and screaming at night as an adult like a panic attack.
This has completely dissolved as I realised ‘I’ am not a separate self
Great guest- Thank you for sharing such profound paradigm shifts.
Wonderful interview with Bernardo 😊
Great discussion. Where is part 2?
amazing as always
Really great - helpful and mindblowing at the same time
Great and lowly are RELATIVE. 😉
why is this video age restricted video ? its such profound lecture ?
The Tibetan Buddhists confirm the hypothesis. Nirmanakaya = the dissociated mind. Dharmakaya is the Original Ground of Mind. Samboghakaya is the quality of mind capable of creating, dreaming, reflecting, and dissociating
Good one ! Cut short though
What a great interview, such eloquence from both. I love how the interviewer looks for how we can embody Bernardo’s beautiful case that we are a divine dissociations of an alive and evolving consciousness. I too would love a place to collectively digest this vision.
What an interesting interview - to see how Buddhism meets Analytic Idealism. Part 1 ends on a cliffhanger - as Evil is about to be discussed. We have a disconnect between “Nature wants to act through us spontaneously when we inhabit our 'natural selves' and “Nature wants us to be metacognitive and inhabit our adaptive selves so it can gain our insights”. William Blake seemed to have the answer here: the process of Innocence in childhood to Experience (the Fall into metacognition) then on to Organised Innocence. I’m not sure how we will ever get to Organised Innocence. Maybe Part 2 will help!
Superficially, Bernardo Kastrup SEEMS to be promulgating the most ancient spiritual teaching of Advaita Vedanta (as found in the Upanishadic texts of India) but due to reasons I won't go into at length here, his understanding is rather flawed.
If one carefully listens to any of his monologues or interview videos, it is obvious (at least it is obvious to those who are truly enlightened) that he regularly confuses and conflates discrete consciousness (as emerging from the neural networks of animals) and UNIVERSAL Consciousness (which is the all-pervasive, eternal ground of all being, more appositely termed "The Tao", "Brahman" or "Infinite Awareness").
He also believes in (limited) freedom of volition, which is, of course, ludicrous, and his understanding of suffering is truly infantile, which is unfortunate, since the eradication of suffering is the goal of life.
In order to PROPERLY understand the distinction between the two aforementioned categories of consciousness, you are welcome to email me for a copy of "A Final Instruction Sheet for Humanity", which are the most authoritative and accurate precepts extant. My address is on my UA-cam homepage.
However, my main criticism of Kastrup is not with his metaphysics, it is, rather, his METAETHICS. He is, objectively speaking, afflicted with a demonic mentality, as demonstrated with his support of all things contrary to Dharma (the law, and societal duties), such as egalitarianism, feminism, homosexuality, and socialism.
In a recent interview, for example, he displayed abject ignorance when discussing the topic of animal consumption. Hopefully, he will one day realize how incredibly hypocritical he is in this regards, and become a compassionate VEGAN. 🌱
After all, to criticize Bernardo for his teachings being only, let's say, ninety percent accurate, would be silly, since, compared with almost every other person who has ever lived, his philosophical understanding is fairly sound. Yet, what is the point of being even TOTALLY correct about metaphysics, when one's metaethics and normative ethics is fundamentally flawed?
Furthermore, Bernardo has admitted that he has struggled with mental health issues for several decades. I would suggest he flee to the loving arms of an ACTUAL spiritual master in order to learn Dharma (as well, of course, correct his flawed metaphysics).
Peace!
@@TheVeganVicar Never heard anyone claim enlightenment in such a contemptuous manner
@@TheVeganVicar Oh and by the way his metaphysical stance refutes the emergence of what you call discreet consciousness...his whole point rests on demonstrating that emergent consciousness from physical matter is nonsense.
@@TheVeganVicar I don't think that the "Tao" refers to a Universal Consciousness. And inconsequentially, personally I don't think that the belief or knowledge of a Universal Consciousness is a symptom of enlightenment, but of ignorance. But I am not the one being interviewed here. I support your stance on veganism though as I support anybody being vegan no matter what the reasons.
@@thehiddenyogi8557, well, Slave, we all have our own particular BELIEFS, but ultimately, there exists objective truth, which is not subject to our misconceptions and misunderstandings.
One who has transcended mundane relative truth is said to be an ENLIGHTENED soul. 😇
Incidentally, Slave, are you VEGAN? 🌱
Love this type of thinking. I love hearing Bernardo talk. And love hearing him interviewed in such a way.
I can sort of understand a lot of this conversation. But it still leaves me wondering about my individual purpose. And why do I feel like things aren't going right for me and so on.
When I stop and think about it it seems like the meaning of life is just to exist. And nothing is really good or bad. But it's so easy to fall into standard mode of thinking which leads to feelings of depression and so on.
I believe that when you are on a path of enlightenment...meaning self inquiry... you are more apt to recognize the world and life as wonderful...more likely to change your own behavior for the better....automatically without really trying... You go on living as before, but with a whole new perspective... as the proverb says..."Before enlightenment..chop wood, carry water.....After enlightenment...chop wood, carry water"
27:40 - Ok, so when someone has a lucid dream, who do they think they are? I've never really had a lucid dream (I've tried, but no luck so far). So, let's say I have a lucid dream. What will I feel like THEN? Will I still feel the same way I did in a non-lucid dream, but simply have new knowledge overt in my mind? Or do I somehow feel a higher level of innate "sense" that I'm NOT just that dream avatar? Will I UNDERSTAND that "this dream will end and I will wake up?" I've never heard anyone talk about it in this level of detail.
I love his disillusion explanation/concept
When re-association with reality occurs at death, will we remember the dissociation? A slow death, flickering between worlds, the end of dissociation, shows maybe we can’t have it both ways. Can we remember what it was like to be dead. Would we know what life was had we never been dead, or what death was had we never been born?
I have never heard anyone making the point that it is reassuring to think of death as final rather than contend with the possibility that our terrors continue beyond the limits of birth and death.
I know many people who have admitted they prefer a single, final life precisely because if reincarnation / rebirth is the case, it *is* absolutely horrifying.
@@paimon1250 yes immortality is terrifying and so, alas, is the threat of extinction.
My guess is that Bernardo has had some bad trips and has some deep trauma, and is projecting this upon his rationalisations of death.
I'm going to defer to the sages on this one - since the ego is an illusion, and cannot survive the death of the body, they would say "who is there to experience terrors". Are you terrified in deep sleep?
@@simonwood2448 that's your guess. What's your own feeling?
@@andrewroddy3278 my own personal experience, is that I have been on this path for about 10 years now, studying both the intellectual side and practicing meditation, and the only thing I have ever experienced as I've loosened the identification with ego, is a deepening sense of peace, joy and contentment. Conversely, most of what I have hard from users of strong psychedelics like DMT is these awful experiences of demons and suffering. It's like they're sending themselves to hell. Weighing my own experiences with the body of 1000s of years of spiritual literature and the words of sages, it seems rather unlikely we're destined for any "meat grinder" upon death of the ego. Hell as understood esoterically from religion is being locked into the ego, fully identified with it, closed off to God, and experiencing the suffering that entails
Trance ending, realising it is not your dream you are having, but an illusion of a dream what someone else put together, and when you were young, inculcated you into a system where everyone else is in the same programme and you are at the whim and pleasure as to where absurdity rules, what an experience to become aware of, and that all of it doesnt matter so much, just my little part, and even that, barely. And now, the end is near, and so i face, the final curtain. I bear witness there is no god but cause and effect and i create the cause for the recognisation of effect so help me, me. :)
part2?
I loved Bernardo's description of what vertigo actually is. I would put it this way: at that moment, part of you pulls into the void -- wants to connect, to dissolve, to self-sacrifice -- and part of you pulls back in self-preservation. That tension, which reaches its peak at that moment, we call vertigo. It's a tension of oneself pulling itself apart and resisting it.
... HardStop-THINKING... theres your abstract... No Mind No Matter...
... Consciousness is the only frontier ...
... Addictions are the only reality ...
... Enlightenment is the only game ...
... IGNORANCE IS THE ONLY IMPEDIMENT ...
Part II is up now: ua-cam.com/video/PgpsM8GTa4A/v-deo.html
Papaji used say that what gets in the way of finding is seeking. Just another turn of phrase.
34:30 - Isn't the combination problem part of what Donald Hoffman has worked on? I thought he had this little math process he runs through where he takes representations of simple conscious agents and combines them to get a higher complexity conscious agent. But Dr. Kastrup is saying such "combination" is problematic and the need for it should be avoided.
Regarding Bernardos fear of entering rooms of the mind after death :.This implies there will be an experiencer after death.I question that.In a body there is a notion that a separate self exist that has experiences happpening to him or her..While Mind at large is just experiencing.There is no experiencer from mind at large.After the death of a body,there will be no concept of an individual mind to create the experiencer experiencing other rooms of an individual mind.There maybe a big Aha moment from mind at large like waking up from a dream.The point being there is no individual to experience anything after the death of a body.
Bernardo at other places admits this may not be an either or 'thing'.....There may be finer grades of separation, maybe some sort of nested subtle bodies? I don't know these are just ideas that seem possible? Who knows?
@@fineasfrog Of course no one knows,however one can realize during living that there is no individual ,that experiences happen only through the hypnosis that an individual exists.Buddha among many shared this information.There is no soul and no one to reincarnate.Action happens,deeds are done,there is no doer thereof.
Have you ever looked in the mirror from behind your eyes and asked the universe "why am I stuck in this body?" This thing looking back at me from the mirror is not me... Then you regain your senses and get ready to go to work.
Oh my, I have vertigo, that is exactly how it feels.
Would've been nice to ask about NDEs when discussing buddhahood and nirvana. Great discussion!
I really enjoy your perspective and intelligent articulation of what awareness and consciousness is. I also 90% agree with you. But i hope you will talk about ideas, words like love, kindness, truth, selflessness. I hope you don't think these qualities are material, egoic or manufactured by some human invention. I believe love (divine love) is the supreme synonym for consciousness. I hope you might give credit to the source or consciousness not as a human trait, but that indeed the sole source of Consciousness is not created by mankind but for mankind. In other words, a source greater than our collective self - God. Why can't you say Spirit, God, a Divine source Bernardo? Is there a better explanation for pure consciousness but being wholey spiritual. I hope you grow to be more accepting to that word spiritual, not in terms of religious but meaning spiritual meaning beyond mortal, matter, physical.
but i am myself in my dreams, i don't have an avatar
Buddah mind is still mind 🤯
No, it is not.
This dude lost me at 44 minutes, Bernardo flawless as usual.
PLEASE! Who's the guest here? Bernardo or YOU? If it's Bernardo, PLEASE "elevator pitch" your questions and get out of his way. If you want to impress, HUSH UP and let Bernardo speak!!
Bernardo a modern-day Nagarjuna? What a JOKE! Bernardo Mind-only non-dualism is utterly contrary to Nagarjuna's Madhyamaka, which in no way identifies a universal, transcendental Mind, as Bernardo does. But Bernardo's metaphysical idealism is also unimpressive to the cognoscenti, who subscribe to a superior form of metaphysical idealism.
Andrew, please listen to yourself again and how much YOU talk. You talk far too much . You have a brilliant guest, listen to him,ask short questions and talk less about Yourself. Please.