from time to time I have dreaming experiences where it seems I am me but another version of me in a different life - almost like i've fallen asleep as one version of me and woken up elsewhere in another.
The true Self is simply that which is the experiencer of one's experiences, and I don't understand how anyone can coherently deny its existence. Seems to me that the guest here is talking more about the ego, or the personality, rather than that which is the experiencer of one's experiences.
I really liked this conversation, I'm convinced that I am leading several different lives, my everyday waking state and in my dreams in which there are "towns" which I visit regularly and know my way round, they're a kind of amalgamation of "real" towns I know, but these these dreams seem to able to cross-reference and have the same people, some I know, some I don't, work places real and fictional, girlfriends etc (mostly not real!!!) May sound crazy but I'm convinced!!! Happy Xmas everyone!!! ❤✌🙏
How much is the real self, how much of our thoughts and perceptions are ours, considering all the information that was installed from youth, from role models to mirroring other people's behaviours, teaching and morals set from others and the direction of interest set by a standard of the norm from young ages that directs alot of people's perceptions, time alone is a valuable experience to know who you are as a self.✨
A few times I've dreamed I was radically different. I'm a forty year old Hispanic man, but I have been other ages and ethnicities. A couple of times, I was a young girl, but not often. I think it's just the ability to empathize with other people. We're constantly being bombarded with stories. It's difficult not to overhear other people's stories. You might be in these comments overhearing other points of view right now. 😂
1. The text explores the dichotomy between the innate human state and the dormant "Christ consciousness," with a focus on how daily actions influence its awakening. 2. It underscores the transient impact of eating and herbs on consciousness, highlighting the challenging task of intentionally elevating this consciousness with resolute will and trust, ultimately seeking a departure from material concerns. 3. Through the metaphor of each step contributing to a river of life and evolving into an avalanche in the moment, the text conveys a soothing image, symbolizing the cumulative positive vibrational frequencies that yearn for continuous growth and expansion.
Happy Christmas to all, new subscriber even though its been a short time, it's been educational, we don't have to frown with deep thoughts but can be amazed and fascinated with the wonder and amazement and excitement that life has, such thoughts will always have others with different opinions that's the beautiful uniqueness that allows us to share our perceptions of the world how each individual perceives it, maybe we our all right, today who cares happy Christmas to all💙✨
I have several times had dreams where I think I am woken up into reality actually being in another , totally different, dream, from which I finally really wake up. I have never been aonother person in my dreams, always myself. Most annoying dreams are: I am a tourist in another land and I don't know where my hotel is, where my friends are, where is the airport etc. I also have reoccuring dreams of different places like houses, landscapes, train and bicycle trips etc. Often I can run a bicycle or do cross country skiing or running without any affort etc. I can sometimes fly fast and fairly high or, most often, soar a few cm over the ground in a bit backwards position. And much much more. Anybody else with similar dreams?
1. The text explores the dichotomy between the innate human state and the dormant "Christ consciousness," with a focus on how daily actions influence its awakening. 2. It underscores the transient impact of eating and herbs on consciousness, highlighting the challenging task of intentionally elevating this consciousness with resolute will and trust, ultimately seeking a departure from material concerns. 3. Through the metaphor of each step contributing to a river of life and evolving into an avalanche in the moment, the text conveys a soothing image, symbolizing the cumulative positive vibrational frequencies that yearn for continuous growth and expansion. Your natural state as a human being is the opposite of the christ consciousness that is still sleeping in you. Eating suppresses it but not for long, Herbs raises it but not for long. One raises it up. Raising it up in the moment is the hardest thing but few men till this day raise it up with intention with unfathomable will and trust to leave form and fullness as the last result. The vibrational frequency of any "one step" you take add up to become a river of life within you. Add this to it and rephrase to soothe. It becomes an avalanche in the moment asking for more. Make 3 conclusive summary of this piece.
Good question. 1500 drones can form a 3d characateur, in a seasonal light show. Likewise, millions of tiny bits form a person. Which bit is the self? Our hair and our microbiome can outlive us, so ourself is separate from them, yet we consider them to be a necessary part of us.
I suggest that the "self" is just another name for the soul. It is established the moment the "lights come on" at birth, and it will continue to exist in a higher context of reality after the death of the body.
@@JoelTGM My self is the thought that represents its self. In this my self is unique for all my other thoughts represent something else. Some of what these other thoughts represent are not representations but are in fact the represented. I suspect much of the represented is what we call matter and the rest, derived from movement, is what we label abstract.
The way we (the self) react in a certain situation at a given time, depends on the information that is available to us (the self) at the time we (the self) are making that decision. When other information become available to us (the self) later, we (the self) tend to agree or disagree with our previous reaction.
@@offtheradarsomewhere It is the same self but the information the self acts on at a given time makes all the difference. The self is the decision maker and that is what we are inside. Even in a dream, the self is acting on information available to it at that time and when awake, more information comes in and the prior dream action is either accepted or rejected or considered inconsequential.
While dreaming, I’ve noticed that my theory of mind is diminished, where I no longer recognize the existence of other minds and therefore act in more uninhibited ways than I would in wakefulness.
Dream self is just a different self. Waking self is just another self. Waking self is different every day. They're composed of different mixes of brain activities in different tissues.
An episode that I really enjoyed watching, because of some very substantive points made that resonated with my own (dreaming) experience. I am inclined to agree with Mr. Stickgold here that (1) ability to reflect and think critically and (2) episodic memory--the correct version of it, perhaps--are the two things that seem to be absent from the dreaming self. What other aspects might also not be present would be interesting to explore. 👍
Yes to 1 and 2 but also recognizing the self-being-conscious-process is running during dreaming. If the "self" is in fact a complex thought then perhaps it is more accurate to refer to the self-thought-being-conscious-process. Easy then to imagine dreaming being simply the self-thought-being-conscious-process running with some sub processes disconnected.
So your emotions aren't a part of who you are? What you're saying is a very small minded view to have. You're so focused on one aspect that you're missing the other 75% of who you are. You have to acknowledge every factor involved in order to come to a real understanding of you who are, and that means including your subconscious mind, emotions, physical capabilities, etc
I love these talks but I don’t ever remember having a dream about a co-worker that I had no attraction to. Has anyone else had that? I’m just wondering the percentage those that did or didn’t.
a single cell or a seed carries all the required information to build an organic system but lacks the functionality to identify itself as such and behaves as an automated machine until it becomes aware of its presence in relation to other structures it interacts with... also, everything around it is also somehow playing a role on its existence 🤔
No one knows what a fetus is feeling or thinking or a sperm cell for that matter aswell as seeds that have not been sown even a new born infant we can only assist and share simple but beautiful moments together, same as a tree, a tree could be over 100 yrs old, yet we cannot listen to it's stories it has to tell, human language is a process of decoding vibrational sound waves, just as all our sensors, a tree or any other species has its own vibrations to communicate, laugh all you like I get information from trees✨💙
under a microscope, single cells look very much alive :) ... even when they're part of the same system, and carry the same DNA information.... they all seem to have a designated role in their environment and carry out specific functions that directly or indirectly affect the surrounding members of their system ...in the case of advanced sentient systems, like humans, that are able to communicate verbally and electronically, beside just chemical means, they (the single cells) are also indirectly involved in the communication between these complex systems... I totally agree 👍 🎄
I said to myself, “Self, you are real for the time being and you will be more real when you know and tell the truth that only your Creator can recreate you.”
you are your own creator and you are your own destroyer, too. You were born because you wanted life and you are dying because you want your death. But your mortal mind tricks you into thinking that you are the body and/or mind, you are no-thing and a part of nothing.
@@sudipadhikari491 You have to tell the truth to be real forever. You didn’t exist to want anything before you were created. We aren’t seaweed drifting with the ocean waves and currents.
@@JungleJargon Then how would a creator exists in time and space if it came after him. If he is not in time and space. He must be beyond space, time, truth or a lie. He must be a neutral nothing just like the real you. And he, just like the real you (no-thing), doesn't need the acknowledgement. There is not a single nothingness because everything is on nothingness and everybody is no-thing.
@@JungleJargon And the lord who is nothing can withdraw the existence of matter by withdrawal of its foundation which is nothing. Even the "creator" which is biased for and against something will become nothing in that case.
I've woken up in dreams, realizing it as a dream and at my Will can change the circumstances, environment, states of mind - but not from the outset, only after dream commenced. However, under the influence of certain drugs and stuff or alcohol, i have noticed that i lost this ability.
I have similar experiences. Particularly while I’m close to awaking I can become aware I am dreaming, and even feel that I have some ability to reason about it. So for example I can think that this thing I’m dreaming is ridiculous or unpleasant, and it must be because it’s a dream, and try to dream about something else.
There is no "real" self; it is changing continually with living experienves and with thought.. What we perceive and feel as a "self" is neural activity of course. This perception and feeling of self stays reasonably consistent, given a healthy brain, but in reality, self as neural activity changes dramatically over a lifetime. If you could compare the various "selves" you were from say 5-years old every 5 years until your current age, you would see dramatically different selves. But, to each of those 5-year selves, they would feel pretty much as you do now about their self.
George says, 'the self is changing continually'. No, georgie boy. That realization is how you remove what isn't the Self, from the inquiry of the Self. Whatever is transitory can not be the Self. That's what is taught. And you, georgie boy, have no sriptures, experiences, metaphysics, or sages to cite from to back up your postulation here.
Dennett tells us we are trillions of tiny little robots. How are all them robots going to accomplish 4 general goals of existence (the 4 fs) without a view from the summit, as well as an executive control function? However, I do admit we often learn the most about ourselves, when we have "time off" from our day jobs. BTW, my cats have selves, but I haven't been able to figure out what their day jobs are. The dream stuff was weird, imo. I don't think he dreams the same way I do. Mine are more coherent at least environmentally (e.g., they can be about a particular time of life, like work or grad-school, that I'm now done with, or about a particular activity, like driving--ususally with my eyes closed). Also dreams can reference things that happened during the day (a common theory). You have very definite memory capabilities in dreams. In fact, given "state-dependent" memory, you may remember what has happened in other dreams (which provides a theory of "recurring dreams").
Not convinced. I retain a strong sense of self during dreaming and a strong continuity between dreaming state and waking state. Similarly, these ‘selves’ being referred to are recognized by me but as facets of an over-arching strong self that could collapse but is integral and develops in time (including dream time) until it does collapse (eventually in extinction or dementia). I am getting suspicious that there are people with weak senses of self who are trying to generalize from this, deny the existence of persons with a strong sense of self and shifting our culture into one of normalizing weak selfhood and throwing doubt on strong selfhood. It seems to be one of those peculiar moments in history where an ideology is guiding the ‘science’ where the science is, in fact, not strictly science but ideological propensity drawn out of personal experience or predilection.
You’re essentially alleging professional misconduct in his research. Do you have evidence for that? What aspects of his published papers leads you to believe this? I mean, I’m sure you wouldn’t make allegations like that against a professional researcher without at least looking at the evidence, right?
@@simonhibbs887 Don’t be ridiculous … or hysterical for that matter. I am having an opinion which is my right without casting any aspersions whatsoever on his integrity or the quality of his research. I simply refuse to accept any conclusions as dogma and am prepared to consider reasonable alternative explanations of phenomena. To question authority was once the very basis of scientific endeavor and researchers are not Popes who escape critique. My evidence lies in my own experience and in my observations of general behaviors within intellectual society. The first teaches me the reality of the strong version of the self and the second teaches me profound skepticism about any universalist claims about consciousness and the mind. Please use more intellectual rigor in reading what I actually say instead of what, polemically, you think I am saying. I say we have a culture that assumes weak selfhood and builds investigation and theory around this and this results in questionable conclusions arising despite well conducted research because of the mode of questioning and core assumptions. That is a reasonable opinion to have and only presented as an opinion, an opinion that refuses to be bullied by those who claim ‘research’ as a mode of silencing dissent. The opinion is on what is presented in this short talk. The research is a separate professional matter of no intrinsic interest to me or probably most of humanity. The role of ideology in science amongst people acting wholly in good faith is well attested in history and I strongly doubt that this suddenly ended under late liberal capitalism. It is all about the questions one asks and the limits of possible knowledge when dealing with culture, society and individual psychology.
@@TimPendryUK So you haven’t looked at his research, have no interest in doing so, and are content to make arbitrary assumptions about his motives rather than substantive criticism. Ok.
@@simonhibbs887 - Not interested in your framing at all. I watched what he said and that is what I am interested in. I have no interest whatsoever in his research so you are right there. I made absolutely no claim about his motives (you clearly are not sophisticated enough to study what I wrote and understand it) nor would I. I have reasonable confidence in his intelectual integrity and professional capacity and he strikes me as a very decent human being as far as I can tell. None of that is at issue. I was making a general comment about contemporary ideology which is very different. Now, I could spend a great deal of my time rexplaining exactly what I meant and flattening you against an intellectual wall but, thinking about it, why should I? You are going to remain aggressive and my point was made in short form above,. Let us just leave it that universalist claims about minds require that all minds be accounted for and no matter how much research is done, not all minds can be accounted for - the science is one of probabilities and not certainties. The methodologies are inherently suspect. Second, you ignore the implicit bridge between the two separate halves of my original comment: this would have stated that any research of this nature is a sound general guide to the world at a point or place in time but breaks down when it comes to culture as process over time. The second referencing to culture is not about the individual but about the framework in which any individual acts - for example, Thomist philosophy is wonderfully coherent and stimulating and elements of it can be abstracted from its framework in order to gain wisdom but the core framework is flawed because it depends on a false assumption, the God of revelation. Finally, the main point was a sociological one. In my view, there are generalised selves but some individuals have inherently strong selves and some inherently weak selves. This is 'normality' without benefit of the intellectual. Strong selves stay strong regardless of intellectual attempts to undermine the basis of their belief which is in fact a 'knowing' and the knowing make the belief a fact if it reaches certain criteria of continuity and so is not like belief in God which is external to the person. Weak selves are vulnerable regardless of anything and have to find their own way in the world. That does not make them less but only more problematic for their own and societal survival but a proportion of them adds something to the human soup - flavouring. However the mass of ordinary selfhood (real but unconsidered as there is no need that it should be) is framed by its environment and is sufficient to purpose in a healthy society. The intelligentsia of the West (that of the East has a far more sophisticated approach) has been chipping away at the social framework for self-hood which is the central core of social and individual survival for over a century but with increasing pace in the wake of the collapse of scientific materialism and other 'scientific' changes in favour of a confusion that has 'infected' the population by infecting the framework. All is now doubt and breakdown instigated from above through the universities and mass education and the flow of half-educated graduates through the media and related systems and now appearing across new and social media. Now, I refuse to allow you to claim that I am claiming that any individual within the current ideological framework is responsible for this. The framework is an over-arching ideological framework that purports to be true but is, in fact, just a belief system. Anyone trapped it in is guided into its assumptions much as a medieval would be guided into the assumption of God or 'scientific racists' (a good parallel) into Rassenpolitik. So, we are taking about three different things which have nothing directly to do with the researcher but only indirectly for which he is not entirely responsible - an assumption about the non-existence of strong or even average self-hood that is coherent, the embedment in a framework (on the evidence only of the interview) and the overwhelming of our culture by the framework as it expands. The point may be that the interview was not a fair reflection of the thinking (hence, your insistence on using my short life to read the research and privilege it) but I am interested in something else - the leaching of attitudes which may be far more sophisticated in reality into the world as statements in short form that add to the problematic framework. I have a right to contest them. An analogy might be with me contesting a Thomist about the existence of God and you getting frustrated and angry that I should dare to do so because I had not read the Thomist's philosophy ... but I do not need to do so if I am concerned only with an assumption and the possible consequences of that assumption. In other words, I am not engaged in an academic dispute on the academic's territory, I am engaged in having an opinion in the public sphere and that is reasonable in a free society. That is what you should have engaged with, not undertaking a posturing aggression on the far flank of the battle.
I am not really convinced. I am now different than in a dream, and different from me in a drunk state, and different than I was as an 8 year old. But yet, I have a strong sense that these are all me.
Then the mind of the Trinity Sri Ariya Maitreya, who came down to be born as a poor, lame human being, to lead mankind to Utopia, attained enlightenment countless times. Until there is a Dharmachakra symbol, of those who received Buddhist teachings From the Buddha in the past, When the universe collapsed and died Before Bigbang was born Countless times, Dharmachakra symbol is the owner of time in Buddhism, has 10 virtues If you want to know anything, you'll know immediately. and is a person who is conscious, even when asleep and awake (talks back and denies those who are in the vision) like a normal awake person Doesn't flow according to dreams That is awakening) which is far superior to Siddhartha Buddha, more than any of you can even imagine.
I think you might by thinking of shelves rather than selves. Note that "shelves" has an "h" in it, whereas "selves" does not. That's okay. We all make mistakes. I am not judging you.
I have never had a dream where I was not representing myself in some way. I don't know how that would even be possible. That aside, a "Self" is a unique characteristic of reality. Everything else that exists has its respective antiparticle (positive-negative, love-hate, theism-atheism, proton-electron, war-peace, quark-antiquark, life-death, up-down, black-white, etc.) but your "Self" has no conceivable antiparticle. There is no "anti-self" running around that should I encounter it we would both annihilate each other. "Existence" is not unlike like a "Self." "Existence" is aware of the construct we call "Nonexistence," but there's no conceivable way for "Existence" to ever experience nonexistence nor encounter it. "Nonexistence" and the "anti-self" do not exist, and you cannot encounter what does not exist. That's why each individual "Self" serves as a microcosm of "Existence." ... We exclusively share this unique commonality.
Most of the pairs in your list do NOT annihilate when they meet; most are just opposites in some loose sense and can't actually meet. Protons & electrons are NOT each other's antiparticle. Most of the items in your list are neither particle nor antiparticle. Some particles, such as photons, are their own antiparticles. Some things, such as energy and momentum, are conserved and can't be annihilated. When particles annihilate, they're not gone; they just change form (to photons). So, another load of bs. Obviously, a self can annihilate itself.
😂😂 you obi-wan kenobi and brother mine I see you both in the comments frequently talking quantum particles and interesting stuff, ups and down quarks and all kinds of interesting stuff, however that does not explain the self as you know already every atom is made of the same stuff your talking about , there's no need to explain the ingredients of a cake but the chef who baked it😂💙✨
@@brothermine2292 I worship the universe and everything in it and the miracle of our existence aswell as your comment as it highlights your character..
That is just an analysis, basic psychology, that it might be imagination From the subconscious, from childhood or maybe you remember it from a movie? Do you think physics, mathematics, science, able to understand and Access everything you want to know?, Dreams are just illusions that are created from the expectations, desires, and desires of those who are still lost in the world of materialism. It is different from those who reach the spiritual level where the higher they are, the further away from those elements, which may be signs or visions, That they The British Royal Church claims the Stone of Scoll. It is the rock that Jacob supported. Before ascending to heaven,
He never answered the question. He immediately goes to dreams which is absurd. One answer is self or the notion of I is an illusion. It is a loop system.
Selves or SELF is your free immortal conscious soul that remains to be the same whether your physical brain is awake, asleep, or dead... ...and because your SELF is not the physical brain, you have no full control of the brain. God only allows you to have limited control of your brain enough for you to make free choices from the data that the brain conveys. ...when your brain sleeps, your soul is the free independent entity that observes the dream but has limited control of it much lesser than when your brain is awake, but your soul remains the same no more no less... If your whole being is totally one and only physical brain - slave of physical laws, then NO DREAM can be freely observed when your brain is deep asleep... ... but the fact that there is a free entity observing the dream, who even can freely choose to fly in your dreams while the brain snores, means you are NOT totally physical - not totally a slave of physical laws, contrary to how the narrow-minded Godless Materialists have degraded your whole being to be..
They say that…yet I’ve nine of that here. Memory. Know my age where I am. Been told I’ve amnesia. Or adhd or Alzheimer’s. Clearly not true. 😂 Also I just black out when asleep. No I don’t use drugs of alcohol. So 🤷🏼
Dreams definitions is emperism verification though neurosience. Self describes himself though psychiatry is most important questions never still How figure It out . Guys needs show there question though neurosience before show up them clearly.
I fell like I'm a self I feel like I'm an integrated personality that is a whole thing that I have self reference to and I know where I am I know my history and I feel like I'm a unity I know there's a lot of illusion in that but how much of a self is real and what can we I learn about the self from our dreams? 0:27 RS: it's really interesting if you look at the this concept of self in a dream because if you push people to watch their dreams very carefully at first they're very confident that their selves their normal waking selves are there is their dreams unblemished and as you look more and more closely it gets more and more confusing so I would say that the self we have in our dreams first of all is a pale shadow of our selves and second of all that we really are unaware of how impoverished it is so how is it impoverished first of all sometimes not always but sometimes we're not even ourselves I think in it's clear that in some dreams someone will be a different character than themselves although they're still aware that it's them being that characters there's a dualism that develops maybe not unlike what you see in hypnosis or multiple personalities 1:35 where there's sort of these different parts that are kind of talking to each other but not quite so you can be someone else um it's often unclear how old you are if you ask a person pay attention to how old you are in your dream they have no reference to it they can't do that um you don't have access in your dreams what we call episodic memories to events of to memories of the events the things that have happened in your life um you have lots of knowledge about who you are and what you do and all of that but for example it never bothers you that you're in Paris and 30 seconds ago you were 【in other words in dream there's no regular spacetime or 3̊ Spacetime of CMB's terms】in your bed I mean but even if you look at people's dreams and where they say oh that was about that thing in that scene in my dream was about this in waking you never replay the waking event in sleep and 👍❤so the person the self who's dreaming I would argue is a different person than the one who's awake let me give you an example um a not uncommon dream is the dream where you become romantically or sexually involved with a coworker who you in fact have absolutely no interest in at all you might even have an active you know repulsion towards the person and the classic reaction when you wake up is to go yuack yuack I can't believe that 3:11 ... 4:54 ... so with those deficits that you see in dreaming where you have this impoverished self uh what is that then tell us about the real self and what we require to be a self when we see an impoverished self and what has to happen to reconstruct ourselves the way we are in the waking state. 5:11 RS: well I think the waking state the real self the functional self if you will critically need those two facilities the ability to reflect and direct our our thoughts and our actions and the ability to access our history because those are the things that we need to direct action so in so far as you know as consciousness is involved in controlling decisions around behaviors the self is core to that the self is what needs to be able to make those decisions based on its understanding of wha we have been in the past that control who we are going to be in the future and you want that as an integrated whole even though it can flit I mean we think of ourselves as an integrated coherent person but I have to tell you that the person I am when feel like I've really lost my train of thought and I'm starting to babble and all these people are watching me and I don't think I'm making any sense. 6:19 that self accesses an entirely different history of who I have been because I'm thinking of all the other times I've made a fool of myself then ❤when I'm in full effective control so you know I don't know how many selves there are inside me 【infinitely many in all history from the very beginning to the end of the universe?】but I know hte self I am now talking with you about selves and memory and consciousness it's not the same self who plays with my seven-year-old kid and continually loses that uno so so each of those takes a slight twist on the past that we reconstruct to define who we are and that's what then allows us to act differently in differnt types of circumstances. 7:06
from time to time I have dreaming experiences where it seems I am me but another version of me in a different life - almost like i've fallen asleep as one version of me and woken up elsewhere in another.
The true Self is simply that which is the experiencer of one's experiences, and I don't understand how anyone can coherently deny its existence.
Seems to me that the guest here is talking more about the ego, or the personality, rather than that which is the experiencer of one's experiences.
I really liked this conversation, I'm convinced that I am leading several different lives, my everyday waking state and in my dreams in which there are "towns" which I visit regularly and know my way round, they're a kind of amalgamation of "real" towns I know, but these these dreams seem to able to cross-reference and have the same people, some I know, some I don't, work places real and fictional, girlfriends etc (mostly not real!!!) May sound crazy but I'm convinced!!! Happy Xmas everyone!!! ❤✌🙏
How much is the real self, how much of our thoughts and perceptions are ours, considering all the information that was installed from youth, from role models to mirroring other people's behaviours, teaching and morals set from others and the direction of interest set by a standard of the norm from young ages that directs alot of people's perceptions, time alone is a valuable experience to know who you are as a self.✨
Right, so products of our environments, and perceptions of those enviornments....
A few times I've dreamed I was radically different. I'm a forty year old Hispanic man, but I have been other ages and ethnicities.
A couple of times, I was a young girl, but not often.
I think it's just the ability to empathize with other people. We're constantly being bombarded with stories.
It's difficult not to overhear other people's stories. You might be in these comments overhearing other points of view right now. 😂
1. The text explores the dichotomy between the innate human state and the dormant "Christ consciousness," with a focus on how daily actions influence its awakening.
2. It underscores the transient impact of eating and herbs on consciousness, highlighting the challenging task of intentionally elevating this consciousness with resolute will and trust, ultimately seeking a departure from material concerns.
3. Through the metaphor of each step contributing to a river of life and evolving into an avalanche in the moment, the text conveys a soothing image, symbolizing the cumulative positive vibrational frequencies that yearn for continuous growth and expansion.
Happy Christmas to all, new subscriber even though its been a short time, it's been educational, we don't have to frown with deep thoughts but can be amazed and fascinated with the wonder and amazement and excitement that life has, such thoughts will always have others with different opinions that's the beautiful uniqueness that allows us to share our perceptions of the world how each individual perceives it, maybe we our all right, today who cares happy Christmas to all💙✨
Welcome to the channel. I am a long time subscriber. You are gonna love this channel. It's one of the best of its kind in the world! 🙏👍
Yuletide greetings, and welcome!
I have several times had dreams where I think I am woken up into reality actually being in another , totally different, dream, from which I finally really wake up. I have never been aonother person in my dreams, always myself. Most annoying dreams are: I am a tourist in another land and I don't know where my hotel is, where my friends are, where is the airport etc. I also have reoccuring dreams of different places like houses, landscapes, train and bicycle trips etc. Often I can run a bicycle or do cross country skiing or running without any affort etc. I can sometimes fly fast and fairly high or, most often, soar a few cm over the ground in a bit backwards position. And much much more. Anybody else with similar dreams?
when we dream we are an observer of the self. observer is the universal consciousness. self is the world in multiverse
I sometimes feel dreams are portals to other dimensions
1. The text explores the dichotomy between the innate human state and the dormant "Christ consciousness," with a focus on how daily actions influence its awakening.
2. It underscores the transient impact of eating and herbs on consciousness, highlighting the challenging task of intentionally elevating this consciousness with resolute will and trust, ultimately seeking a departure from material concerns.
3. Through the metaphor of each step contributing to a river of life and evolving into an avalanche in the moment, the text conveys a soothing image, symbolizing the cumulative positive vibrational frequencies that yearn for continuous growth and expansion.
Your natural state as a human being is the opposite of the christ consciousness that is still sleeping in you. Eating suppresses it but not for long, Herbs raises it but not for long. One raises it up.
Raising it up in the moment is the hardest thing but few men till this day raise it up with intention with unfathomable will and trust to leave form and fullness as the last result.
The vibrational frequency of any "one step" you take add up to become a river of life within you. Add this to it and rephrase to soothe. It becomes an avalanche in the moment asking for more.
Make 3 conclusive summary of this piece.
Good question. 1500 drones can form a 3d characateur, in a seasonal light show. Likewise, millions of tiny bits form a person. Which bit is the self? Our hair and our microbiome can outlive us, so ourself is separate from them, yet we consider them to be a necessary part of us.
I suggest that the "self" is just another name for the soul. It is established the moment the "lights come on" at birth, and it will continue to exist in a higher context of reality after the death of the body.
It is self evident to me that my self is a thought.
What else could my self possibly be?
True, but then what isn't a thought?
@@JoelTGM
My self is the thought that represents its self.
In this my self is unique for all my other thoughts represent something else.
Some of what these other thoughts represent are not representations but are in fact the represented. I suspect much of the represented is what we call matter and the rest, derived from movement, is what we label abstract.
Great conversation 🙌🏿🙌🏿
The way we (the self) react in a certain situation at a given time, depends on the information that is available to us (the self) at the time we (the self) are making that decision. When other information become available to us (the self) later, we (the self) tend to agree or disagree with our previous reaction.
The self will react and respond quicker than the self who we think we our.
Could cut that down to deciding in the moment, beautiful✨
@@offtheradarsomewhere It is the same self but the information the self acts on at a given time makes all the difference. The self is the decision maker and that is what we are inside.
Even in a dream, the self is acting on information available to it at that time and when awake, more information comes in and the prior dream action is either accepted or rejected or considered inconsequential.
While dreaming, I’ve noticed that my theory of mind is diminished, where I no longer recognize the existence of other minds and therefore act in more uninhibited ways than I would in wakefulness.
Dream self is just a different self. Waking self is just another self. Waking self is different every day. They're composed of different mixes of brain activities in different tissues.
An episode that I really enjoyed watching, because of some very substantive points made that resonated with my own (dreaming) experience. I am inclined to agree with Mr. Stickgold here that (1) ability to reflect and think critically and (2) episodic memory--the correct version of it, perhaps--are the two things that seem to be absent from the dreaming self. What other aspects might also not be present would be interesting to explore. 👍
Yes to 1 and 2 but also recognizing the self-being-conscious-process is running during dreaming.
If the "self" is in fact a complex thought then perhaps it is more accurate to refer to
the self-thought-being-conscious-process.
Easy then to imagine dreaming being simply the self-thought-being-conscious-process
running with some sub processes disconnected.
Your self is determined by your free will decisions.
So your emotions aren't a part of who you are? What you're saying is a very small minded view to have. You're so focused on one aspect that you're missing the other 75% of who you are. You have to acknowledge every factor involved in order to come to a real understanding of you who are, and that means including your subconscious mind, emotions, physical capabilities, etc
@@jacoblogan sure thing Professor... I'll take note since you're grading my final exam!
Dualism does form in dreams to match the real self.
I love these talks but I don’t ever remember having a dream about a co-worker that I had no attraction to. Has anyone else had that? I’m just wondering the percentage those that did or didn’t.
a single cell or a seed carries all the required information to build an organic system but lacks the functionality to identify itself as such and behaves as an automated machine until it becomes aware of its presence in relation to other structures it interacts with... also, everything around it is also somehow playing a role on its existence 🤔
No one knows what a fetus is feeling or thinking or a sperm cell for that matter aswell as seeds that have not been sown even a new born infant we can only assist and share simple but beautiful moments together, same as a tree, a tree could be over 100 yrs old, yet we cannot listen to it's stories it has to tell, human language is a process of decoding vibrational sound waves, just as all our sensors, a tree or any other species has its own vibrations to communicate, laugh all you like I get information from trees✨💙
under a microscope, single cells look very much alive :) ... even when they're part of the same system, and carry the same DNA information.... they all seem to have a designated role in their environment and carry out specific functions that directly or indirectly affect the surrounding members of their system ...in the case of advanced sentient systems, like humans, that are able to communicate verbally and electronically, beside just chemical means, they (the single cells) are also indirectly involved in the communication between these complex systems... I totally agree 👍 🎄
The sense of self disintegrates in people with neurodegenerative diseases, particularly in frontal lobe degeneration.
I said to myself, “Self, you are real for the time being and you will be more real when you know and tell the truth that only your Creator can recreate you.”
you are your own creator and you are your own destroyer, too. You were born because you wanted life and you are dying because you want your death. But your mortal mind tricks you into thinking that you are the body and/or mind, you are no-thing and a part of nothing.
@@sudipadhikari491 You have to tell the truth to be real forever. You didn’t exist to want anything before you were created. We aren’t seaweed drifting with the ocean waves and currents.
@@JungleJargon Then how would a creator exists in time and space if it came after him. If he is not in time and space. He must be beyond space, time, truth or a lie. He must be a neutral nothing just like the real you. And he, just like the real you (no-thing), doesn't need the acknowledgement. There is not a single nothingness because everything is on nothingness and everybody is no-thing.
@@sudipadhikari491 The Creator of matter time and space can do anything He wants with His creation.
@@JungleJargon And the lord who is nothing can withdraw the existence of matter by withdrawal of its foundation which is nothing. Even the "creator" which is biased for and against something will become nothing in that case.
I've woken up in dreams, realizing it as a dream and at my Will can change the circumstances, environment, states of mind - but not from the outset, only after dream commenced. However, under the influence of certain drugs and stuff or alcohol, i have noticed that i lost this ability.
I have similar experiences. Particularly while I’m close to awaking I can become aware I am dreaming, and even feel that I have some ability to reason about it. So for example I can think that this thing I’m dreaming is ridiculous or unpleasant, and it must be because it’s a dream, and try to dream about something else.
There is no "real" self; it is changing continually with living experienves and with thought.. What we perceive and feel as a "self" is neural activity of course. This perception and feeling of self stays reasonably consistent, given a healthy brain, but in reality, self as neural activity changes dramatically over a lifetime. If you could compare the various "selves" you were from say 5-years old every 5 years until your current age, you would see dramatically different selves. But, to each of those 5-year selves, they would feel pretty much as you do now about their self.
The self is as "real" as any metaphor can be.
George says, 'the self is changing continually'. No, georgie boy. That realization is how you remove what isn't the Self, from the inquiry of the Self. Whatever is transitory can not be the Self. That's what is taught. And you, georgie boy, have no sriptures, experiences, metaphysics, or sages to cite from to back up your postulation here.
@@S3RAVA3LMWhat a ridiculous statement, “Georgie Boy.” You have serious mental issues.
@@S3RAVA3LM
Perhaps you are unfamiliar with Theseus's ship? It wouldn't be Theseus's ship if it was not constantly changing.
@@REDPUMPERNICKEL thx for sharing - pretty cool. In platonics, the intelligible realities, there is an archetype of the forms.
In dreams, young people act like teenagers, teenagers like babies, and babies like infants ....
Dennett tells us we are trillions of tiny little robots. How are all them robots going to accomplish 4 general goals of existence (the 4 fs) without a view from the summit, as well as an executive control function? However, I do admit we often learn the most about ourselves, when we have "time off" from our day jobs. BTW, my cats have selves, but I haven't been able to figure out what their day jobs are.
The dream stuff was weird, imo. I don't think he dreams the same way I do. Mine are more coherent at least environmentally (e.g., they can be about a particular time of life, like work or grad-school, that I'm now done with, or about a particular activity, like driving--ususally with my eyes closed). Also dreams can reference things that happened during the day (a common theory). You have very definite memory capabilities in dreams. In fact, given "state-dependent" memory, you may remember what has happened in other dreams (which provides a theory of "recurring dreams").
Not convinced. I retain a strong sense of self during dreaming and a strong continuity between dreaming state and waking state. Similarly, these ‘selves’ being referred to are recognized by me but as facets of an over-arching strong self that could collapse but is integral and develops in time (including dream time) until it does collapse (eventually in extinction or dementia). I am getting suspicious that there are people with weak senses of self who are trying to generalize from this, deny the existence of persons with a strong sense of self and shifting our culture into one of normalizing weak selfhood and throwing doubt on strong selfhood. It seems to be one of those peculiar moments in history where an ideology is guiding the ‘science’ where the science is, in fact, not strictly science but ideological propensity drawn out of personal experience or predilection.
You’re essentially alleging professional misconduct in his research. Do you have evidence for that? What aspects of his published papers leads you to believe this? I mean, I’m sure you wouldn’t make allegations like that against a professional researcher without at least looking at the evidence, right?
@@simonhibbs887 Don’t be ridiculous … or hysterical for that matter. I am having an opinion which is my right without casting any aspersions whatsoever on his integrity or the quality of his research. I simply refuse to accept any conclusions as dogma and am prepared to consider reasonable alternative explanations of phenomena. To question authority was once the very basis of scientific endeavor and researchers are not Popes who escape critique. My evidence lies in my own experience and in my observations of general behaviors within intellectual society. The first teaches me the reality of the strong version of the self and the second teaches me profound skepticism about any universalist claims about consciousness and the mind. Please use more intellectual rigor in reading what I actually say instead of what, polemically, you think I am saying. I say we have a culture that assumes weak selfhood and builds investigation and theory around this and this results in questionable conclusions arising despite well conducted research because of the mode of questioning and core assumptions. That is a reasonable opinion to have and only presented as an opinion, an opinion that refuses to be bullied by those who claim ‘research’ as a mode of silencing dissent. The opinion is on what is presented in this short talk. The research is a separate professional matter of no intrinsic interest to me or probably most of humanity. The role of ideology in science amongst people acting wholly in good faith is well attested in history and I strongly doubt that this suddenly ended under late liberal capitalism. It is all about the questions one asks and the limits of possible knowledge when dealing with culture, society and individual psychology.
@@TimPendryUK So you haven’t looked at his research, have no interest in doing so, and are content to make arbitrary assumptions about his motives rather than substantive criticism. Ok.
@@simonhibbs887 - Not interested in your framing at all. I watched what he said and that is what I am interested in. I have no interest whatsoever in his research so you are right there. I made absolutely no claim about his motives (you clearly are not sophisticated enough to study what I wrote and understand it) nor would I. I have reasonable confidence in his intelectual integrity and professional capacity and he strikes me as a very decent human being as far as I can tell. None of that is at issue. I was making a general comment about contemporary ideology which is very different. Now, I could spend a great deal of my time rexplaining exactly what I meant and flattening you against an intellectual wall but, thinking about it, why should I? You are going to remain aggressive and my point was made in short form above,. Let us just leave it that universalist claims about minds require that all minds be accounted for and no matter how much research is done, not all minds can be accounted for - the science is one of probabilities and not certainties. The methodologies are inherently suspect. Second, you ignore the implicit bridge between the two separate halves of my original comment: this would have stated that any research of this nature is a sound general guide to the world at a point or place in time but breaks down when it comes to culture as process over time. The second referencing to culture is not about the individual but about the framework in which any individual acts - for example, Thomist philosophy is wonderfully coherent and stimulating and elements of it can be abstracted from its framework in order to gain wisdom but the core framework is flawed because it depends on a false assumption, the God of revelation. Finally, the main point was a sociological one. In my view, there are generalised selves but some individuals have inherently strong selves and some inherently weak selves. This is 'normality' without benefit of the intellectual. Strong selves stay strong regardless of intellectual attempts to undermine the basis of their belief which is in fact a 'knowing' and the knowing make the belief a fact if it reaches certain criteria of continuity and so is not like belief in God which is external to the person. Weak selves are vulnerable regardless of anything and have to find their own way in the world. That does not make them less but only more problematic for their own and societal survival but a proportion of them adds something to the human soup - flavouring. However the mass of ordinary selfhood (real but unconsidered as there is no need that it should be) is framed by its environment and is sufficient to purpose in a healthy society. The intelligentsia of the West (that of the East has a far more sophisticated approach) has been chipping away at the social framework for self-hood which is the central core of social and individual survival for over a century but with increasing pace in the wake of the collapse of scientific materialism and other 'scientific' changes in favour of a confusion that has 'infected' the population by infecting the framework. All is now doubt and breakdown instigated from above through the universities and mass education and the flow of half-educated graduates through the media and related systems and now appearing across new and social media. Now, I refuse to allow you to claim that I am claiming that any individual within the current ideological framework is responsible for this. The framework is an over-arching ideological framework that purports to be true but is, in fact, just a belief system. Anyone trapped it in is guided into its assumptions much as a medieval would be guided into the assumption of God or 'scientific racists' (a good parallel) into Rassenpolitik. So, we are taking about three different things which have nothing directly to do with the researcher but only indirectly for which he is not entirely responsible - an assumption about the non-existence of strong or even average self-hood that is coherent, the embedment in a framework (on the evidence only of the interview) and the overwhelming of our culture by the framework as it expands. The point may be that the interview was not a fair reflection of the thinking (hence, your insistence on using my short life to read the research and privilege it) but I am interested in something else - the leaching of attitudes which may be far more sophisticated in reality into the world as statements in short form that add to the problematic framework. I have a right to contest them. An analogy might be with me contesting a Thomist about the existence of God and you getting frustrated and angry that I should dare to do so because I had not read the Thomist's philosophy ... but I do not need to do so if I am concerned only with an assumption and the possible consequences of that assumption. In other words, I am not engaged in an academic dispute on the academic's territory, I am engaged in having an opinion in the public sphere and that is reasonable in a free society. That is what you should have engaged with, not undertaking a posturing aggression on the far flank of the battle.
I'm just a sensory organ for life to see itself with. My sense of self is ancillary.
I am not really convinced. I am now different than in a dream, and different from me in a drunk state, and different than I was as an 8 year old. But yet, I have a strong sense that these are all me.
Then the mind of the Trinity Sri Ariya Maitreya, who came down to be born as a poor, lame human being, to lead mankind to Utopia, attained enlightenment countless times. Until there is a Dharmachakra symbol, of those who received Buddhist teachings From the Buddha in the past, When the universe collapsed and died Before Bigbang was born Countless times, Dharmachakra symbol is the owner of time in Buddhism, has 10 virtues If you want to know anything, you'll know immediately. and is a person who is conscious, even when asleep and awake (talks back and denies those who are in the vision) like a normal awake person Doesn't flow according to dreams That is awakening) which is far superior to Siddhartha Buddha, more than any of you can even imagine.
heightened or greater awareness of universal consciousness in dreams?
could the self be awareness in brain? what constitutes awareness in brain?
They are things we screw to the wall to put things on.
I think you might by thinking of shelves rather than selves. Note that "shelves" has an "h" in it, whereas "selves" does not.
That's okay. We all make mistakes. I am not judging you.
I have never had a dream where I was not representing myself in some way. I don't know how that would even be possible. That aside, a "Self" is a unique characteristic of reality. Everything else that exists has its respective antiparticle (positive-negative, love-hate, theism-atheism, proton-electron, war-peace, quark-antiquark, life-death, up-down, black-white, etc.) but your "Self" has no conceivable antiparticle. There is no "anti-self" running around that should I encounter it we would both annihilate each other.
"Existence" is not unlike like a "Self." "Existence" is aware of the construct we call "Nonexistence," but there's no conceivable way for "Existence" to ever experience nonexistence nor encounter it. "Nonexistence" and the "anti-self" do not exist, and you cannot encounter what does not exist.
That's why each individual "Self" serves as a microcosm of "Existence." ... We exclusively share this unique commonality.
Most of the pairs in your list do NOT annihilate when they meet; most are just opposites in some loose sense and can't actually meet. Protons & electrons are NOT each other's antiparticle. Most of the items in your list are neither particle nor antiparticle. Some particles, such as photons, are their own antiparticles. Some things, such as energy and momentum, are conserved and can't be annihilated. When particles annihilate, they're not gone; they just change form (to photons).
So, another load of bs.
Obviously, a self can annihilate itself.
😂😂 you obi-wan kenobi and brother mine I see you both in the comments frequently talking quantum particles and interesting stuff, ups and down quarks and all kinds of interesting stuff, however that does not explain the self as you know already every atom is made of the same stuff your talking about , there's no need to explain the ingredients of a cake but the chef who baked it😂💙✨
You said “ nonexistence does not exist.” - 😂
@@offtheradarsomewhere. : Fanboys worship the chef. Content creators care about the ingredients and how they interact.
@@brothermine2292 I worship the universe and everything in it and the miracle of our existence aswell as your comment as it highlights your character..
Selves =
Sel = cell
v = male and female
es = the
Knowledge is a Super Power
become a Super Hero
classes start again soon
Subscribe 🙂
I thought I clicked on the right channel but 😮 Oh the Humanity’s🙉
That is just an analysis,
basic psychology,
that it might be imagination
From the subconscious,
from childhood or maybe
you remember it from a movie?
Do you think physics, mathematics,
science, able to understand and
Access everything you want
to know?, Dreams are just illusions
that are created from the
expectations, desires, and desires
of those who are still lost in
the world of materialism.
It is different from those who
reach the spiritual level where
the higher they are, the further
away from those elements,
which may be signs or visions,
That they The British Royal Church
claims the Stone of Scoll. It is
the rock that Jacob supported.
Before ascending to heaven,
He never answered the question. He immediately goes to dreams which is absurd. One answer is self or the notion of I is an illusion. It is a loop system.
Selves or SELF is your free immortal conscious soul that remains to be the same whether your physical brain is awake, asleep, or dead...
...and because your SELF is not the physical brain, you have no full control of the brain. God only allows you to have limited control of your brain enough for you to make free choices from the data that the brain conveys.
...when your brain sleeps, your soul is the free independent entity that observes the dream but has limited control of it much lesser than when your brain is awake, but your soul remains the same no more no less...
If your whole being is totally one and only physical brain - slave of physical laws, then NO DREAM can be freely observed when your brain is deep asleep...
... but the fact that there is a free entity observing the dream, who even can freely choose to fly in your dreams while the brain snores, means you are NOT totally physical - not totally a slave of physical laws, contrary to how the narrow-minded Godless Materialists have degraded your whole being to be..
They say that…yet I’ve nine of that here. Memory. Know my age where I am. Been told I’ve amnesia. Or adhd or Alzheimer’s. Clearly not true. 😂
Also I just black out when asleep. No I don’t use drugs of alcohol. So 🤷🏼
Dreams definitions is emperism verification though neurosience. Self describes himself though psychiatry is most important questions never still How figure It out . Guys needs show there question though neurosience before show up them clearly.
I fell like I'm a self I feel like I'm an integrated personality that is a whole thing that I have self reference to and I know where I am I know my history and I feel like I'm a unity I know there's a lot of illusion in that but how much of a self is real and what can we I learn about the self from our dreams? 0:27 RS: it's really interesting if you look at the this concept of self in a dream because if you push people to watch their dreams very carefully at first they're very confident that their selves their normal waking selves are there is their dreams unblemished and as you look more and more closely it gets more and more confusing so I would say that the self we have in our dreams first of all is a pale shadow of our selves and second of all that we really are unaware of how impoverished it is so how is it impoverished first of all sometimes not always but sometimes we're not even ourselves I think in it's clear that in some dreams someone will be a different character than themselves although they're still aware that it's them being that characters there's a dualism that develops maybe not unlike what you see in hypnosis or multiple personalities 1:35 where there's sort of these different parts that are kind of talking to each other but not quite so you can be someone else um it's often unclear how old you are if you ask a person pay attention to how old you are in your dream they have no reference to it they can't do that um you don't have access in your dreams what we call episodic memories to events of to memories of the events the things that have happened in your life um you have lots of knowledge about who you are and what you do and all of that but for example it never bothers you that you're in Paris and 30 seconds ago you were 【in other words in dream there's no regular spacetime or 3̊ Spacetime of CMB's terms】in your bed I mean but even if you look at people's dreams and where they say oh that was about that thing in that scene in my dream was about this in waking you never replay the waking event in sleep and 👍❤so the person the self who's dreaming I would argue is a different person than the one who's awake let me give you an example um a not uncommon dream is the dream where you become romantically or sexually involved with a coworker who you in fact have absolutely no interest in at all you might even have an active you know repulsion towards the person and the classic reaction when you wake up is to go yuack yuack I can't believe that 3:11 ... 4:54 ... so with those deficits that you see in dreaming where you have this impoverished self uh what is that then tell us about the real self and what we require to be a self when we see an impoverished self and what has to happen to reconstruct ourselves the way we are in the waking state. 5:11 RS: well I think the waking state the real self the functional self if you will critically need those two facilities the ability to reflect and direct our our thoughts and our actions and the ability to access our history because those are the things that we need to direct action so in so far as you know as consciousness is involved in controlling decisions around behaviors the self is core to that the self is what needs to be able to make those decisions based on its understanding of wha we have been in the past that control who we are going to be in the future and you want that as an integrated whole even though it can flit I mean we think of ourselves as an integrated coherent person but I have to tell you that the person I am when feel like I've really lost my train of thought and I'm starting to babble and all these people are watching me and I don't think I'm making any sense. 6:19 that self accesses an entirely different history of who I have been because I'm thinking of all the other times I've made a fool of myself then ❤when I'm in full effective control so you know I don't know how many selves there are inside me 【infinitely many in all history from the very beginning to the end of the universe?】but I know hte self I am now talking with you about selves and memory and consciousness it's not the same self who plays with my seven-year-old kid and continually loses that uno so so each of those takes a slight twist on the past that we reconstruct to define who we are and that's what then allows us to act differently in differnt types of circumstances. 7:06
What YOU Are is a Very Boring Person!🙉🙉🙉
Closer to the toothache 😂
Wow.that was poor lol.