By far my favorite interview on BATGAP so far. Peter is a clear, intelligent, and unpretentious teacher at the leading edge of science and non-duality. I hope you will have more interviews with Peter and others of his caliber.
I really enjoyed this interview; even if I dont quite agree with some aspects of Peter's theory about consciousness, I always learn from him and appreciate his work. Thank you Rick and Peter.
One thing that concerns me is the oft repeated :"You cannot control your mind" which Peter repeats here with his concern about people wearing a t-shirt that said "restrain the mind". Quite frankly we CAN and MUST control our minds if we are to realize deeper Truth(s). Ramana Maharishi, the darling of this forum, said so himself so I don't know why this keeps on getting repeated that one cannot do it. If we give up on this quest we just stay we are and either keep worshipping someone else who we deem "greater" than us, or we just keep chasing our own illusions. Of course it's difficult and has to approached with gentleness, but to say it cannot be done is copping out before we started. With love, David
Actually we can't control the THOUGHTS or FEELINGS associated with the mind; the task then is to dis-identify with those contents in order not to keep chasing the illusions.
kwixotic Hi there. Thanks for sharing. If I may respond from my experience it seems to me, as a meditator of many years, as you no doubt are too, that we learn about these things as we go along . The view that you express is a very common one which is very often expressed. Yet according to both the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali, Buddhist Jhana practice, and teachers such as Ramana Maharshi, the mind can be controlled . It is stated in these teachings that it can. So there are two approaches : witnessing and concentrating. Witnessing would be just watching thoughts and feelings arise and pass and as you say learning more and more to see that they are not who we are since they come and go. Concentrating is gradually learning that one can learn to focus the mind on say the breathing sensations at the nostrils to the point where thought is no longer present. This leads to Samadhi or absorption. Now this seems to be difficult for most - or so it is said (what is said can the become a self-fulfilling prophecy). But some can do it - (unless one believes they are lying or deluding themselves). The problem is that this requires dedication and much practice usually which is not something we are inclined to do unless we really believe it is worthwhile. The pleasure and bliss of concentration (not forced but gradually developed) is beyond imagining. The pleasure of a say a violin virtuoso playing a piece of music may not reach this kind of bliss (not to diminish how incredibly worthwhile I believe music is to us, so in fact this statement should be seen more as just a kind of idea which can then be discarded as I have heard meditation teachers dissing music -even classical music - and I believe this to be neither accurate nor worthwhile as music I believe is an invaluable part of our human experience). I am very interested in current neuroscience research which is showing how the brains of musicians and meditators greatly differ from those who don't engage in such activities. ( google "Meditation and Neuroplasticity,: Five key articles - Peter Malinowsi" if you are interested) No doubt when one learns to concentrate more and more certain neural pathways in the brain are being forged making it easier and easier to do such. We all know that with time we can learn to focus more on a task and it becomes easier. The same goes with concentrated meditation. Or such is my experience and belief. But whatever one does - witnessing or concentrating or neither I think having a positive loving attitude is what is most important. My two cents worth!
David Watermeyer Great comments there! I'd just like to add that there are also some interesting studies worth noting that correlate gamma brainwave activity (30-100+hz) to focused attention type meditations (google: *attention meditation gamma eeg*). Armed with this relatively new infromation, one could simply purchase a suitable EEG system (such as the Mindmedia Nexus, or Neuroelectrics Enobio, perhaps even the Interaxon Muse) and use it as a means to gauge their progress in applying focused attention meditations (or any other meditation technique) over time. This would enable anyone to chart their brainwave activity in response to their application of xyz technique, which would provide useful insights by allowing them to cross-reference their subjective experience with objective data/feedback, thereby giving confidence that they are in fact making progress in the right area. Cheers!
Peter is right and David Watermeyer so wrong. What would you use to control the mind? Only the mind wants to control the mind.It has never been done. Nor did Ramana ever advocate it. When you rise to a higher level you then disidentify from the mind; you transcend it. You cannot control the personality: It is innate. You simply allow it to be the way it is while resting in your true nature, the Self. In that lies contentment, in control lies misery. Ramana taught an awfully hard way to meditate. Few ever got anywhere with it. I speak as one who spent almost 60 years on the quest and as one sitting in the state of liberation.
All of their questions about the working of this reality are explained when approached in the context of Tom Campbells "My Big Toe" Consciousness is fundamental . Reality is data.... be skeptical and have an open mind.... Thanks for the interview Rick.....
The thing that makes us "separate" is saying that we are "conscious". The reason? Because to say we are "conscious" would have to mean everyone is conscious... but there are those who are NOT conscious. That is why we are ONE Consciousness, not just individuals who are conscious.
Consciousness in the Universe, defined in Buddhism, is a very structured and well defined and there is a strict architecture to follow. The architecture is the same as the structure of our brain. 1651218.org/
Peter Rusell's ideas are not outside of the _Lankavatara Sutra_ in fact he is well within it along with the neuroscientist Donald Hoffman. But the bulk of mankind is not ready to be turned right side up. They still prefer to walk on their hands.
"Spiritualists" look within to discover the unadulterated self. Scientists look outside to discover the natural world that is our universe . Theists probe both the mind and the external world and discover the transcendent.
I have to agree with Rick in that if you can see the intelligence behind something as complicated as the the human brain, then you must also see it in something as simple as a rock. 'God' is either in everything or nothing at all.
It's obvious you guys known nothing about climatology. To bring this subject matter into a talk about consciousness is over the top and suspect of an agenda and outside the contemplation of consciousness . You diminish yourself mixing the topics.
your statement sounds a little conspiratorial, as if there was collusion on these speakers part to push forth an "agenda". I do not fully understand climate change's causes. But let's say its not caused by human activities, does that mean its ok to pollute the planet? I would say no. I feel what these men are saying is that there are many human activities playing out by unenlightened social powers that are destroying the planet. They feel a mass change in social consciousness would help change our collective destructive behavior patterns.
Great, but laughable, that the whole interview went without mentioning non-dualism or Advaita Vedanta (known to mankind for thousands of years), but skirting around it, giving the illusion of presenting something new!
BuddhaAtTheGasPump and all, I'd like to share a book with you. It is the core book of Falun Dafa entitled 'Zhuan Falun'. It talks about spiritual things from a scientific perspective. It talks about other dimensions, the soul, the cosmos in the microcosm and the macrocosm, supernatural abilities, karma, healing, the true history of mankind, transcending the 5 elements and leaving the 3 realms and many many other fascinating things. It is a spiritual science of the highest order. I'll give you a copy and you can take a look if you like, totally up to you ofcourse: www.falundafa.org/eng/eng/pdf/zfl_new.pdf
*Roughly a 0.5 on the -4 to +4 scale* _(for explanation and disclaimers please see the end of the comment)_ No serious contribution about Russell's own spiritual insights or transformations if there are any. This is just philosophizing a little bit and doesn't really fit into the by Rick stated purpose of the channel. A popular star like Russell is probably attracting listeners, but those who know Russell's contributions just a little bit will hear nothing new here. It's fine to philosophize somewhat, but if you want to do philosophy, Rick (like Alex Tsakiris too) doesn't have sufficient training in that field to really make that worth while. Apart from that and apart from the usual naivety regarding Al Gore, no harm done, but pretty useless too. I like Peter, but he needs a serious counterpart to get anything worth while going. I guess he's getting old and a bit tired too. _About the rating: anything below and including +1 means by and large a waste of time, and anything below 0 is not only worthless but damaging to the world. For comparison, on that scale, Francis Bennett would be a +3 or more and Harri Aalto would be roughly a tentative +3-3.5. Not coming up with original, independent cosmological insights bans any interviewee from > 3.0 ratings as a matter of principle._ *General Disclaimer:* the rating _pertains to an interview, not to the interviewee_. If the rating is high it means merely and exclusively that I consider the interview to be of high value relative to the stated purpose of the channel, and that it is therefore no waste of time to listen to the interview. It would _not_ imply that whatever the interviewee speaks is the truth (as if I was the arbiter over that) or that you should follow him/her or accept whatever that person offers. _That is particularly in need of emphasis if that would be an expensive enterprise_ !
***** First of all, please respect the disclaimers to the ratings. If afterwards there are any questions left, please return with specific questions with (!) the associated reasons why you think I have to answer them in order to justify what I am doing here. Thank you.
If you don't know or understand something, the answer is not necessarily god created it, you simply don't know the answer. The interviewer is using the old argument from design to prove god's existence. We understand that it actually answer nothing; it is a lazy and easy answer.
By far my favorite interview on BATGAP so far. Peter is a clear, intelligent, and unpretentious teacher at the leading edge of science and non-duality. I hope you will have more interviews with Peter and others of his caliber.
Pure enjoyment . Thank you both . Smiles
A lucid and fascinating interview. Thanks guys.
I really enjoyed this interview; even if I dont quite agree with some aspects of Peter's theory about consciousness, I always learn from him and appreciate his work.
Thank you Rick and Peter.
We ARE Consciousness expressing itself...
Fantastic interview.
Judi Grace StoryCorps.
there's so much more that you can imagine,concsiouness is being in harmony discovering your experiences as you express the past with your perceptions
What a delight
One thing that concerns me is the oft repeated :"You cannot control your mind" which Peter repeats here with his concern about people wearing a t-shirt that said "restrain the mind". Quite frankly we CAN and MUST control our minds if we are to realize deeper Truth(s). Ramana Maharishi, the darling of this forum, said so himself so I don't know why this keeps on getting repeated that one cannot do it. If we give up on this quest we just stay we are and either keep worshipping someone else who we deem "greater" than us, or we just keep chasing our own illusions. Of course it's difficult and has to approached with gentleness, but to say it cannot be done is copping out before we started. With love, David
Reverend Eslam “People with opinions just go around bothering each other.”
-Gotama
Actually we can't control the THOUGHTS or FEELINGS associated with the mind; the task then is to dis-identify with those contents in order not to keep chasing the illusions.
kwixotic Hi there. Thanks for sharing. If I may respond from my experience it seems to me, as a meditator of many years, as you no doubt are too, that we learn about these things as we go along . The view that you express is a very common one which is very often expressed. Yet according to both the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali, Buddhist Jhana practice, and teachers such as Ramana Maharshi, the mind can be controlled . It is stated in these teachings that it can. So there are two approaches : witnessing and concentrating. Witnessing would be just watching thoughts and feelings arise and pass and as you say learning more and more to see that they are not who we are since they come and go. Concentrating is gradually learning that one can learn to focus the mind on say the breathing sensations at the nostrils to the point where thought is no longer present. This leads to Samadhi or absorption. Now this seems to be difficult for most - or so it is said (what is said can the become a self-fulfilling prophecy). But some can do it - (unless one believes they are lying or deluding themselves). The problem is that this requires dedication and much practice usually which is not something we are inclined to do unless we really believe it is worthwhile. The pleasure and bliss of concentration (not forced but gradually developed) is beyond imagining. The pleasure of a say a violin virtuoso playing a piece of music may not reach this kind of bliss (not to diminish how incredibly worthwhile I believe music is to us, so in fact this statement should be seen more as just a kind of idea which can then be discarded as I have heard meditation teachers dissing music -even classical music - and I believe this to be neither accurate nor worthwhile as music I believe is an invaluable part of our human experience). I am very interested in current neuroscience research which is showing how the brains of musicians and meditators greatly differ from those who don't engage in such activities. ( google "Meditation and Neuroplasticity,: Five key articles - Peter Malinowsi" if you are interested) No doubt when one learns to concentrate more and more certain neural pathways in the brain are being forged making it easier and easier to do such. We all know that with time we can learn to focus more on a task and it becomes easier. The same goes with concentrated meditation. Or such is my experience and belief. But whatever one does - witnessing or concentrating or neither I think having a positive loving attitude is what is most important. My two cents worth!
David Watermeyer
Great comments there!
I'd just like to add that there are also some interesting studies worth noting that correlate gamma brainwave activity (30-100+hz) to focused attention type meditations (google: *attention meditation gamma eeg*). Armed with this relatively new infromation, one could simply purchase a suitable EEG system (such as the Mindmedia Nexus, or Neuroelectrics Enobio, perhaps even the Interaxon Muse) and use it as a means to gauge their progress in applying focused attention meditations (or any other meditation technique) over time. This would enable anyone to chart their brainwave activity in response to their application of xyz technique, which would provide useful insights by allowing them to cross-reference their subjective experience with objective data/feedback, thereby giving confidence that they are in fact making progress in the right area. Cheers!
Peter is right and David Watermeyer so wrong. What would you use to control the mind? Only the mind wants to control the mind.It has never been done. Nor did Ramana ever advocate it. When you rise to a higher level you then disidentify from the mind; you transcend it. You cannot control the personality: It is innate. You simply allow it to be the way it is while resting in your true nature, the Self. In that lies contentment, in control lies misery. Ramana taught an awfully hard way to meditate. Few ever got anywhere with it. I speak as one who spent almost 60 years on the quest and as one sitting in the state of liberation.
All of their questions about the working of this reality are explained when approached in the context of Tom Campbells "My Big Toe" Consciousness is fundamental . Reality is data.... be skeptical and have an open mind....
Thanks for the interview Rick.....
The thing that makes us "separate" is saying that we are "conscious". The reason? Because to say we are "conscious" would have to mean everyone is conscious... but there are those who are NOT conscious. That is why we are ONE Consciousness, not just individuals who are conscious.
anyone else notice that the syntho-tar intro is Reveille...?
what is climatology if not conciousness.......?
vica verca
research the middle path
perhaps dark energy is conciousness
I had the same thought as you☺
Consciousness in the Universe, defined in Buddhism, is a very structured and well defined and there is a strict architecture to follow. The architecture is the same as the structure of our brain. 1651218.org/
Peter Rusell's ideas are not outside of the _Lankavatara Sutra_ in fact he is well within it along with the neuroscientist Donald Hoffman. But the bulk of mankind is not ready to be turned right side up. They still prefer to walk on their hands.
"Spiritualists" look within to discover the unadulterated self. Scientists look outside to discover the natural world that is our universe . Theists probe both the mind and the external world and discover the transcendent.
I have to agree with Rick in that if you can see the intelligence behind something as complicated as the the human brain, then you must also see it in something as simple as a rock. 'God' is either in everything or nothing at all.
zecheru.com/trovant-rocks-romania-rocks-grow/?v=79cba1185463 Related to the rocks and maybe their functioning. :) Read the second paragraph.
Peter..give me a call...love to give you a
It's obvious you guys known nothing about climatology. To bring this subject matter into a talk about consciousness is over the top and suspect of an agenda and outside the contemplation of consciousness . You diminish yourself mixing the topics.
your statement sounds a little conspiratorial, as if there was collusion on these speakers part to push forth an "agenda". I do not fully understand climate change's causes. But let's say its not caused by human activities, does that mean its ok to pollute the planet? I would say no. I feel what these men are saying is that there are many human activities playing out by unenlightened social powers that are destroying the planet. They feel a mass change in social consciousness would help change our collective destructive behavior patterns.
It is what it is. Watch the video. If it walks like a duck................
I didn't see any ducks in the video. I'm not sure what you're talking about???
I didn't see any ducks in the video. I'm not sure what you're talking about???
Great, but laughable, that the whole interview went without mentioning non-dualism or Advaita Vedanta (known to mankind for thousands of years), but skirting around it, giving the illusion of presenting something new!
I am surprised you are unable to see through the process of digestion of original ideas as one's own!
VERY GOOD COMMENT CONGRATULATIONS FOR YOU.
BuddhaAtTheGasPump and all, I'd like to share a book with you.
It is the core book of Falun Dafa entitled 'Zhuan Falun'. It talks about spiritual things from a scientific perspective. It talks about other dimensions, the soul, the cosmos in the microcosm and the macrocosm, supernatural abilities, karma, healing, the true history of mankind, transcending the 5 elements and leaving the 3 realms and many many other fascinating things.
It is a spiritual science of the highest order. I'll give you a copy and you can take a look if you like, totally up to you ofcourse:
www.falundafa.org/eng/eng/pdf/zfl_new.pdf
*Roughly a 0.5 on the -4 to +4 scale* _(for explanation and disclaimers please see the end of the comment)_
No serious contribution about Russell's own spiritual insights or transformations if there are any. This is just philosophizing a little bit and doesn't really fit into the by Rick stated purpose of the channel. A popular star like Russell is probably attracting listeners, but those who know Russell's contributions just a little bit will hear nothing new here.
It's fine to philosophize somewhat, but if you want to do philosophy, Rick (like Alex Tsakiris too) doesn't have sufficient training in that field to really make that worth while.
Apart from that and apart from the usual naivety regarding Al Gore, no harm done, but pretty useless too.
I like Peter, but he needs a serious counterpart to get anything worth while going. I guess he's getting old and a bit tired too.
_About the rating: anything below and including +1 means by and large a waste of time, and anything below 0 is not only worthless but damaging to the world. For comparison, on that scale, Francis Bennett would be a +3 or more and Harri Aalto would be roughly a tentative +3-3.5. Not coming up with original, independent cosmological insights bans any interviewee from > 3.0 ratings as a matter of principle._
*General Disclaimer:* the rating _pertains to an interview, not to the interviewee_. If the rating is high it means merely and exclusively that I consider the interview to be of high value relative to the stated purpose of the channel, and that it is therefore no waste of time to listen to the interview. It would _not_ imply that whatever the interviewee speaks is the truth (as if I was the arbiter over that) or that you should follow him/her or accept whatever that person offers. _That is particularly in need of emphasis if that would be an expensive enterprise_ !
***** First of all, please respect the disclaimers to the ratings. If afterwards there are any questions left, please return with specific questions with (!) the associated reasons why you think I have to answer them in order to justify what I am doing here. Thank you.
If you don't know or understand something, the answer is not necessarily god created it, you simply don't know the answer. The interviewer is using the old argument from design to prove god's existence. We understand that it actually answer nothing; it is a lazy and easy answer.
the interviewer, we, along with many of us commenters,
are so pretentious, self important and full of hubris. heheeeeeee!
its flat