We have a thirst to learn about the nature of consciousness, with a scant couple of centuries of modern science, but we ignore a several thousand year school of thought in the East that has dedicated itself exclusively to the study of mind and consciousness. I'm not saying it's not possible to use current science to create theories and hypotheses about consciousness, but maybe it's worth considering the techniques and, much more importantly, the methods to study these fields in other cultures.
"Thank you for being a reliable source of information in a world filled with misconceptions. Your dedication to scientific accuracy is truly commendable. "
The last person I know said the same thing was left burnt inside her apartment because, as the fire was crawling towards her, she did nothing believing the house on fire wasn't real. There then came clear to me that being DELUSIONAL is highly dangerous, more dangerous than a literal daydreaming.
An excellent lecture. The hard problem > the easy problem > the real problem of consciousness is really going down the right path - what is it about our consciousness that we need to get to the bottom of? The universe is as it is, we are as we are, the gap lies is in how we experience the universe.
What do you think about consciousness interacting with itself in a non-reversing, aka True Mirror? I'm seeing some astounding differences as compared to traditional reversing mirrors. What and how can we learn more about consciousness when it's actively engaged with itself through active eye contact?
1:09:00 it would be very interesting to see the study replicated using music. People often report that the use of Music along with video can alter the perception of the duration of the video itself.
I've noticed that my brain sees and processes things in my field of view that I never looked directly at. Like words or objects that appear briefly in the bottom corner of a screen when I've only looked at the middle, and after trying I could not make out anything in that region without looking in that area. Example: Look in the middle of your phones screen, you can't make out what's on the very top, the time ect, but(I suspect) your brain "sees" it.
Yes, that would fall into what Jung calls the 'personal unconscious'. Basically the experiences you've had of which you're not currently aware of (some other stuff is also included in the definition, like recallable memory and repressed ones).
Under general anesthesia I have had wonderful dreams. Also when I was much younger, I had several conversations while sound asleep. I actually sat up and talked to people. Makes me wonder if that is how I got through days at very dull jobs.
excellent lecture, it covered a lot of material, and one topic fascinated me. I recently have experienced a change in my perception of certain objects that are comfortable, familiar, or attractive to me. I began to notice a sparkle to them, as if I could see the detailed texture of the surfaces. It appears almost as a pixelation, but with a bit of warmth and aura about it, similar to the digital camo used in the test Anil used, but for some reason I see green and brown tones in this pattern. In that form it makes them almost pop from the background, likely as my attention is much more focused on these desirable objects. I was wondering why it happened, and I've been in a contemplative mood lately, and it does make sense that I would be analyzing these objects closely and what I'm seeing is the real time result of my mind "seeing" these things more clearly.
Since as young as three years old (but probably since birth), I have “seen the air,” as well as seen things less as solid and physical and more as little dots pulsating and vibrating. People thought I was weird, so I learned to keep it to myself. Now that I am further along on my path and have spent many years meditating, I understand I simply see things as they are-as energy. Does this sound like what you’re experiencing at all? Here’s an easy test: next time you’re watching an IRL event with a speaker-like a class or even a street performer-focus on the aura around his/her body. Since the audience will be focused on them, they will have a larger, more easily detectable energy field around them.
@@Staceypotterphotography I have seen energy fields or what I presume to be low level infrared. One person I noticed had a rising, rolling, dark cloud above them, but they were sitting in a corner and I presume it was their rising heat perturbing smoke filled air in the room. I have also briefly seen pulses in the air emanating from a cell phone, I found out afterwards those pulses matched the 4G wavelength. Some people might claim its the result of an overactive imagination, but there's so much our eyes can see that our brain has to filter out for practical daily useage or we'd be overwhelmed with sensory information. Do you have astigmatism by chance?
@@Js-rq9uj Yes, I have astigmatism! What does that mean? I don’t see radio and cell phone waves but I can feel them in my head. I carry a special rock on my lap in traffic to filter out all the negative energy and radio frequencies. The only way to make it better is by doing tonglon, which is a compassion practice. I see the underlying energy field that is present in all things. I see my guides energetically, too. I see light coming out of my fingers when I move them with love and I see auras of things and people. But not as color, more as light I can somehow read. Not as a specific form. But we all sense it differently. Your understanding sounds cool af. You should harness that ability. ❤️🌟👌
I love this theory of consciousness in part. I do agree that we need a better definition of consciousness, so we can stop attributing the machinations of a complex mind to the intrinsic needs for consciousness.
Hi Jeff Mara: just to warn you and your audience before I start watching that someone seems to have scanned your picture and is sending scams with it via a Whatsapp number which appears under comments. And now...a new video to enjoy❤ Thanking you both in advance!
Thing about out of body, with the headset you are actively receiving information about the physical world through your eyes. It's just from a different perspective. Whereas ndes see themselves and detailed settings without anything coming into their bodily eyes. Big difference. Could argue the brain is creating, but the details of the experiences are too accurate to be firm in that conclusion. But, like u say, you will see what you expect.
First off, keep in mind [npi] that there is not the merest shred of evidence that consciousness is an emergent property of space-time or that matter and energy can somehow develop a sense of "I" or start behaving with intention. And although there are ways of distorting our sense of self/I with VR headsets, going to parties, etc., it is always our singular sense of I that recognizes and responds to those distortions.
The world needs to better understand perception and what it is, how it works, and how malleable it is, by them or others. People have little understanding and control over their own perception, which causes so much ignorance, hate, manipulation, detrimental beliefs, damage.
When we question our existence we "suffer" from amnesia - so that won't be as we sleep and dream. We suffer from amnesia when we are so-called awake, in other words when the illusion of the ego grabs our attention. NB - I would like to add (a lot, and I guess I'm not the only one who considers conscience/ous -ness a thrilling dimension) something about what Anil Seth states at [32:22] ... that "every experience that you have rules out an enormous number of alternate possible experiences" ... I suggest that with every experience you have you rule out the loss of alternate possible experiences exponentially, in other words with every experience you have you grow the "database" of the yet already infinite possibilities. Another point of contradiction is not only found here in Prof Seth's descriptive explanation but in a lot of, especially theoretical scientific disciplines ; everything is information. I argue that everything is experience. Why ? - We, living beings, are more than machines whereas the latter can only "function" (transforming input into output is not even homeostasis) when given information. We living beings are what we are not (only) because we are conscious - we ARE conscience. This is what the subject is about : consciousness. Or how Anil Seth put it at the beginning : the spark of life. To point out the general misconception by or due to Descartes and offspring. Although René Descartes is far from being an example of delicate thinkers to me, it would be unfair to hold him solely accountable for the century censor on (the research of) consciousness. In fact, if at all, he gave humanity the possibility to finally start to investigate this very attribute (...) that doesn't only describe us, define(s) us - we are it* because it* is us. Pioneers like Anil Seth (his contemporaries needn't introduction) risked quite something around their (under)graduate when they followed their vocation. Was that intuition ? And which part of the brain is responsible for a hunch ? I'm sure they weren't informed about an experience but they experienced information. Didn't I say something about "a thrilling dimension" ? Thank you, Anil Seth and of course The Weekend University for a Sunday brunch pleasant amble. * I think therefore I am ( 'I think I am, therefore I am, I think" ~ The Moody Blues )
The presenter starts by reporting that nothing wort reading has been written about conciosness in the last thirty years, maybe. So we need to go back a few centuries and study the Upanishads which is pure scientific description of consciousness. Scientists have to go beyond materialism and reductionism Conciousness comes first matter is a product. Science changes everyday , first the easy problem (which is not easy at all) needs to be solved .The hard problem will then be addressed , that's the final frontier for science!
About prediction and perception. Made me remember eating a piece of candy I once blindly took from a bag, and which at first tasted odd. After a few seconds I identified the taste. Turned out it was a strayed piece of candy that belonged in a other type of bag.
There are two factors in consciousness, these are thought and physical sensation. When combined at the same time you experiance a feeling/emotion. Feeling/emotion requires the physical sensation aspect necessarily. But consciousness itself does not require physical sensation.
@@ginaiosef The brain is composed of neurons and these neurons contain memory of physical sensation and thought, they also store new ones. Each brain has a unique make up, but in... say.. humans, it has a common makeup which is different from other animals with brains. Think of it like hardware (common make up) and software (unique make up). The activation of each individual neuron and interaction of several neurons with each other is what causes us to experiance the sensation of consciousness. And, since we only perceive our thoughts, physical body, and our environment (through our senses), the environment of which our brain can't control, the brain produces thought and physical sensations. Think of anger... do you experiance a physical sensation when angry? Is this anger initiated and some times sustained by thoughts? For me, yes. When I stop and observe my thoughts and physical sensations it becomes clear that they are linked, becoming what is known as a feeling or emotion. I have never observed myself experiancing an emotional state without a physical sensation, so my assumption is that an emotion is defined by both. Thoughts and physical sensation are not necessarily paired though. So, I can have a thought and no sensation, or a sensation and no thought and neither of the are emotions. When you asked what a thought is... to me it's a memory neuron firing or a combination of neurons firing to result in a complex thought or a completely new one. When new combinations fire, that causes creativity which is necessary for sentiant beings to not be robots incapable of performing non-programed action or thought. My long winded answer.
I did not clearly hear the question and people are unconscious, maybe a waking unconscious state of mind. I like the concept of tranquilized obviousness. It is akin to the elephant in the room but that is a bit of not wishing to see what is right in front of of you. There is the brain’s way of not seeing the nose on it’s face. Tranquilized obviousness is more of a trance where the observer operates as if he already knows all to know and will not see pertinent information right in front of him. Maybe the mind’s prediction is turned off in certain perspectives. But the point is about be unconscious to your experience, numbed by saturation of the senses.
At 2 minutes is a collection of symbols inside a mind; a naked woman in a supine pose facing away, a gun pointed at her and she is apparently about to be mauled by tigers. I just spent 30 years as a woman in a heavily male-dominated academic research science profession. The hostility I felt coming from many men towards women was pervasive and at times profound. The speaker seems sublimely unaware of the symbolic contents of this picture and I am wondering why he chose it. But it is eerily accurate of my felt experience; the woman isn’t even a person as her face is hidden… so many bad memories were brought to mind by this picture that I was unable to sit through much more of the lecture.
Our Sole = Soul point = Zero Point = Balance point of our positive and negative energy emotions as ONE Energy = No Emotion = Fully Conscious = Whole = Wholey = Holy = One with THE ONE = Source
I'm dubious regarding the PCI measure of consciousness. Arguably, some of the most conscious people are master meditators. From what I understand (and I'm no expert), highly concentrated meditative states are associated with LESS brain activity, and not only less, but spatially restricted activity as well. Although I don't understand how a measure of PCI is derived, based on what you've said in the lecture, it seems like a measure of PCI for a person in a meditative state would be low, implying that they are less conscious. My guess is that although your measure is associated with everyday "monkey mind" consciousness, it's still far from enough. I'm also a little confused about your ideas about time. We know, for instance, that the perception of time dramatically changes in states of flow, which doesn't really map very well onto "rates of change in the scene", since you can be in a state of flow when lots of things are changing (downhill biking), or almost nothing is changing (meditating in a silent room). I also wonder what you would make of this story: I suffer from chronic back pain, and I've engaged in a substantial amount of meditation in an effort to cope with it. There was a time when I would set a timer and try to sit for an hour and 20 minutes cross-legged. This was a difficult experience for me, especially the last 10 minutes or so, during which I was very conscious of my pain and had a strong urge to give up meditating. However, I would hold out as long as I could, and very often I would be overcome and give up my meditation less than 3 seconds before my alarm would go off. If this happened only once I wouldn't mention it at all, but it happened far too many times to be merely a coincidence. How was I able to subconsciously keep track of the time so accurately over such a long period? Something similar happens to people who set the alarms for the same time every morning. I've considered that this perception is merely an illusion caused by the fact that I simply ignore those occasions on which it didn't happen, but that explanation really doesn't seem to fit the case. This occurred at a rate between 30% +/-10% of the time-far often to be merely chance or simply a case of biased recall.
i don't remember from which video, but i have heard him talk about PCI in regards to meditation and psychedelics. Don't remember what he said though :P
Making predictions to track targets, goals & objectives is a syntropic process -- teleological. "We predict ourselves into existence" -- Anil Seth. The Einstein reality criterion:- "If, without in any way disturbing a system, we can predict with certainty (i.e., with probability equal to unity) the value of a physical quantity, then there exists an element of reality corresponding to that quantity." (Einstein, Podolsky, Rosen 1935, p. 777) Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy:- www.iep.utm.edu/epr/ According to Einstein we predict reality into existence, predicting reality into existence is a syntropic process! Syntropy (making predictions or projections) is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law of thermodynamics! Certainty (predictability) is dual to uncertainty (unpredictability) -- the Heisenberg certainty/uncertainty principle. Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant. Transcendental logic (concepts) is dual to transcendental aesthetic (sensory perception) -- Immanuel Kant. Perceptions or measurements are converted into conceptions (ideas, notions) or rational, analytic thinking -- deductive inference. Deductive inference (mathematics) is dual to inductive inference (science, empirical) -- Immanuel Kant. Inferences or making predictions is a dual process. The intellectual mind/soul (concepts) is dual to the sensory mind/soul (percepts) -- the mind duality of Thomas Aquinas. Mind (the internal soul, syntropy) is dual to matter (the external soul, entropy) -- Descartes. Noumenal (rational, analytic) is dual to phenomenal (empirical, synthetic) -- Immanuel Kant. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. Duality (energy) creates or synthesizes reality!
@@jasonspades5628 no, it isnt. The idea that there is an on-and-off switch for consiousness is even more ridicolous. Do you remember how it feels to wake up slowly? You are awake, but the brain is not fully in "gear", it's harder and slower to think, and even basic functions like reading the time on the clock can be challenging. I feel ALOT less consiouss in those moments than i do when i'm fully aware and alert. Why wouldn't conscioussness be a spectrum? Basically everything is. Dichotomies are rare in the natural world. Do you believe that X amounts of years ago there were no consioussness then someday 1 individual organism was born that had consiousness? It was fully consiouss, nothing before it was, nothing currently is (only it's future kids and their descendants)? That seems very nonsensical. Evolution works with slow and gradual steps, nothing that evolves works like a on-and-off switch. Nothing in nature does.
@@KevinUchihaOG in the evolution timeline before there were organisms, there was no consciousness by rocks, molecules, etc. Life brought forth consciousness (the off to on analogy). And there are conscious levels, i.e. being Conscious of being conscious.
Gah, *please* stop saying "special source".... my brain goes straight to the horrible Macdonald's advertising for one of their products "special" sauce"., the catchy earworm jingle they used in the 80's! The horrible power that advertising has to hijack the brain years after you heard a phrase! I hate MacDonalds and *everything* it represents!! Yet my brain is still captured by the blummin phrase even when I'm trying to listen to a profound and beautiful lecture. Does this guy have shares in the company??? Please use a different epithet for special... argh
This is all very interesting but misses the point. Halfway through he says this is not a theory of consciousness! The question that must be answered is why do I seem to exist as an individual in the first place. That’s the question I’ve always had. The Physicalist argument is that a specific body/ brain configuration is creating my personal existence. Why? There were billions of body/brains around before this one and billions showed up after this one. Billions more will show up. So what’s so special about this specific material configuration that I exist? I can easily imagine this body running around without “ME” being associated with it at all just like all those billions of other bodies. It’s obvious that any Physicalist attempt to explain anyone’s personal existence quickly devolves into incoherence and nonsense. The only thing that works is Idealism. There is One Consciousness and that one Consciousness shows up pretending to be each individual.
Exactly, I agree with you. Idealism gives the best explanation of almost all the fundamental questions. There is only one consciousness and we are all different aspects of that great consciousness.
I'm not sure how or why idealism is supposed to be a more sufficient or coherent explanation, even more so when it's interpreted the way you are interpreting it. If there is only "one consciousness" as you suggest, why is it that billions of new conscious beings, each with a distinct, private and separate experience, are always arising without any prior conscious experience of existing? How does this explain why billions of neurons and glial cells give rise to this experience, or are you suggesting that they don't? And if not, why are there such strong correlations between neural systems and mental processes? If there is "one consciousness", does this "consciousness" supposedly span across the entire universe, all 90 billion light years of it? That sounds more like a radically complex solution that generates an infinite number of problems itself than a legitimate answer. If we assume this is true, we now have to explain why the configuration of the universe created this "one consciousness" and why every bit of logic and common sense seems to suggest that our own conscious experience is just one private and distinct instantiation, after all, only I have access to my private thoughts and experience, no one else's, but if there were "one consciousness", it wouldn't leave room for separate conscious beings. This idea, to me defies logic more than any materialist or physicalist explanation I know of.
@@chetanpatil1654 what is that supposed to mean, that the universe is one huge living organism and we are all like its body parts? How does that resolve anything? It seems like it creates more problems to me. Does this mean that the Earth itself is also "conscious", as well as Mars and the rock in my driveway? Why are some parts of the universe more "conscious" than others? Is this "One Consciousness" infinite in time, or did it arise when the universe came into existence? Why is there not any evidence that the universe acts as a single conscious entity? Surely if the universe is "One Consciousness", its intellect would extend beyond our own and it would express its conscious experience in some way, i.e., its emotions, pain and thoughts. I'm not understanding how this resolves much of anything, rather it seems to create problems where they don't yet exist, all in an attempt at resolving another complex issue
I would think Collective Consciousness is nearer reality than One Consciousness. CC is not uniform, therefore all the different life experiences by all the different personalities accumulate this unpredictable (not totally accurate) human destiny.
Lol A hallucination is an uncontrolled controlled uncontrolled perception ? Or, A hallucination is an uncontrolled controlled uncontrolled controlled hallucination ? Or, is perception a controlled uncontrolled controlled uncontrolled perception ? Or, is perception controlled, and hallucination uncontrolled Isn't a hallucination controlled if your hallucinating and isn't that perception Why is perception controlled if your hallucinating . Perception is an understanding, and a hallucination is a perception by deception . Perception may be the wrong word to use .Perception is a conclusion based on what inputs you receive. Conclusions constantly update and are interdependent . If I can not think I can not perceive, if I can not perceive I can not act. I am because I think. Eureka ! lol
There is no such claim, you are wrong to say that. Gravity is discovered, not invented. Consciousness is emergent, also in no possible way be invented.
Don't bite into others personal level of understanding of our world. Look for yourself within one's own consciousness and or Spiritual knowledge of the Creator of ALL.
Consciousness is just what a brain that needs to track decisions and time does. Any claims beyond that is like a pickpocket trying to sell you your watch.
हमारा शरीर या सभी जीवों का शरीर ही, भगवान द्वारा बनाया गया मंदिर होता है। इस शरीर रूपी मंदिर के गर्भगृह में, अपना भगवान ही हमेशा मौजूद होते है। तुमसब जिस प्रकार भगवान की मंदिर, बहुत सारे सामग्री से बनाते हो, फिर उस मंदिर के भीतर यानि गर्भगृह में भगवान की मूर्ति बनाकर बैठा देते हो, ठीक उसी प्रकार भगवान भी, पांच तत्वों रूपी सामग्री से, सभी जीवों के शरीर को बनाते है। फिर इस शरीर रूपी मंदिर के भीतर, अपना भगवान ही हमेशा बैठकर, हरपल सांसें लेते है। हमारा बनाया हुआ सभी मंदिर, मस्जिद, चर्च, गुरूद्वारा इत्यादि मृत पदार्थों से बने होते है, इसलिए ये सब मृत होते है। हमसबो का शरीर भी मृत ही होता है, क्योंकि सभी शरीर की मृत्यु होती है, लेकिन जो भगवान इस शरीर रूपी मंदिर के अंदर रहते है, उनकी मौत कभी नहीं होती है। तुमसब अपनी ही ज्ञान से या किसी सच्चे सदगुरु की ज्ञान से ही, अपने शरीर रूपी मंदिर के भीतर प्रवेश करके, अपने भगवान से मिल सकते हो। तुम सबों का पूरा जीवन, शरीर रूपी मंदिर के बाहर ही व्यतीत हो जाता है, और तुमसब अपनी ही शरीर रूपी मंदिर के भीतर, प्रवेश नहीं करने के कारण, अपने भगवान से नहीं मिल पाते हो, और बिना मरे ही सबके सब, सदियों से मरते जाते हो। तुमसब सिर्फ सेक्स करने के लिए ही, एक ही भगवान की शरीर रूपी मंदिर को कभी पत्नी, कभी बेटी, तो कभी बहू, तो कभी मां बना देते हो। और तुमसब खुद एक ही शरीर रूपी मंदिर को, कभी पति, तो कभी बेटा, तों कभी बाप बना देते हो। तुमसब अपनी शरीर रूपी मंदिर को ही सच्चा मान लेते हो, जिसकारण, शरीर रूपी रिश्तों में ही उलझकर रह जाते हो। तुमसब कभी भी अपनी ज्ञान से या किसी सदगुरु की ज्ञान से, अपने भीतर प्रवेश ही नहीं कर पाते हो जिस कारण तुमसब मर जाते हो। इस धरती पर सभी शरीरों के भीतर एक ही परमात्मा, हमेशा विराजमान रहते है, लेकिन तुमसब सेक्स करने में इतने अंधे हो गए हो, कि उस परमात्मा को भी सभी रूपों में नहीं देख पाते हो। इस धरती पर जब सभी शरीर की मौत तय है, तो तुमसब, वैज्ञानिक बनकर क्यों रसायनिक, जैविक, परमाणुविक, इत्यादि हथियार बनाते हो। सत्य सभी जीवों के शरीर रूपी रूप में ही हमेशा होता है, इसलिए सत्य या भगवान को पाने के लिए कोइ रास्ता नहीं होता है। सत्य या भगवान को जब भी तुमसब पाओगे, अपनी ही ज्ञान से या किसी सच्चे सदगुरु की ज्ञान से, अपने रूप में ही पाओगे। तुमसब लाख मंदिर, मस्जिद, चर्च , गुरूद्वारा, इत्यादि बनाओ, उसमें भगवान को आकार या निराकार में बैठाओ, फिर भी कभी भी तुमसब भगवान को नहीं पा सकोगे। तुमसब कितना भी रामायण, गीता, कुरान, बाइबिल, या कोई भी ग्रन्थ पढों या किसी धर्मगुरु, पादरी, मौलाना, इत्यादि से इन ग्रंथों को सुनो, कभी भी अपनी सत्य या अपनी भगवान से नहीं मिल सकते हो, क्योंकि तुम सबों का भगवान, तेरे रूप के ही अंदर हमेशा, विराजमान रहते है। उनसे जब भी मुलाकात होगी, तेरी ही रूप में ही होगी। मेरे पास सब आओ, भगवान को अपनी रूप में देखो और सबलोग, अपनी मौत से हमेशा के लिए दूर हो जाओ।
@@reconeix anyone with a shred of intelligence , or indeed those whom have experienced an NDE (atheists included) can tell you their NDE was no hallucination. An hallucination has certain qualities different to NDEs. the NDE is described as more real and vivid than waking consciousness, and their is no distortion or confusion or seeing creatures etc, the NDE changes a person's life, and often people have met deceased relatives whom they never met in life..etc etc..the NDE research is vast, and a good book to start with is Consciousness Beyond Life by Dr Pim Van Lommel. He looks into Quantum Physics and NDEs. Fascinating. Good luck.
@@Dion_Mustard inside DMT also feels more real than here, when I broke though I was fully conscious, but minus my body ,I was scared and was told to take a look around you ,you have been here before and you will be here again,at that point I recognised the place it was chilling ,like the waiting room before rebirth
@@christopherhamilton3621 you need to do your own studies , beginning with a good book I recommend called consciousness beyond life by Dr pim van lommel. Good luck.
We have a thirst to learn about the nature of consciousness, with a scant couple of centuries of modern science, but we ignore a several thousand year school of thought in the East that has dedicated itself exclusively to the study of mind and consciousness. I'm not saying it's not possible to use current science to create theories and hypotheses about consciousness, but maybe it's worth considering the techniques and, much more importantly, the methods to study these fields in other cultures.
Should we encourage US importation of deep introspection prove wrong the mythos,"...
. To W
‼️EAST 👁️v❌s👁️ WEST‼️•never shall they meet ° rest" ?
Try islamic philosophy who transformed greece philosophy to modern afe.. take hume who got his causality fron al ghazali who took on avicena
Buddhism helps.
Hindu knew it too, read the vedas
P0
"Thank you for being a reliable source of information in a world filled with misconceptions. Your dedication to scientific accuracy is truly commendable.
"
"There is no reality, only perception." Therefore when you change your perception you change your reality.
The last person I know said the same thing was left burnt inside her apartment because, as the fire was crawling towards her, she did nothing believing the house on fire wasn't real.
There then came clear to me that being DELUSIONAL is highly dangerous, more dangerous than a literal daydreaming.
Creating a comment on a lecture about consciousness alone is a reality, indeed we have an objective reality.
Absolutely Brilliant. The Self realizing its self.
An excellent lecture.
The hard problem > the easy problem > the real problem of consciousness is really going down the right path - what is it about our consciousness that we need to get to the bottom of?
The universe is as it is, we are as we are, the gap lies is in how we experience the universe.
Particular region? Yes! He glossed over where consciousness begins.
Consciousness does not begin.
Consciousness / awareness precedes matter.
Evidence?
What do you think about consciousness interacting with itself in a non-reversing, aka True Mirror? I'm seeing some astounding differences as compared to traditional reversing mirrors. What and how can we learn more about consciousness when it's actively engaged with itself through active eye contact?
1:09:00 it would be very interesting to see the study replicated using music. People often report that the use of Music along with video can alter the perception of the duration of the video itself.
I've noticed that my brain sees and processes things in my field of view that I never looked directly at. Like words or objects that appear briefly in the bottom corner of a screen when I've only looked at the middle, and after trying I could not make out anything in that region without looking in that area. Example: Look in the middle of your phones screen, you can't make out what's on the very top, the time ect, but(I suspect) your brain "sees" it.
Yes, that would fall into what Jung calls the 'personal unconscious'. Basically the experiences you've had of which you're not currently aware of (some other stuff is also included in the definition, like recallable memory and repressed ones).
We've had the experience of expecting to drink one thing and it is actually another thing. Excellent information and presentation. Thank you, Anil.
2022: cleansed and reborn and delighted and in love, and so it is❣
I love this talk!!
Thank you!! We are all part of a living world and it's so amazing.
Moody Blues had it figured out: "I think. Therefore, I am. I think."
Under general anesthesia I have had wonderful dreams. Also when I was much younger, I had several conversations while sound asleep. I actually sat up and talked to people. Makes me wonder if that is how I got through days at very dull jobs.
They're dull because you are so conscious. Most people who do dull jobs focus on the job and not on the self at all.
excellent lecture, it covered a lot of material, and one topic fascinated me. I recently have experienced a change in my perception of certain objects that are comfortable, familiar, or attractive to me. I began to notice a sparkle to them, as if I could see the detailed texture of the surfaces. It appears almost as a pixelation, but with a bit of warmth and aura about it, similar to the digital camo used in the test Anil used, but for some reason I see green and brown tones in this pattern. In that form it makes them almost pop from the background, likely as my attention is much more focused on these desirable objects. I was wondering why it happened, and I've been in a contemplative mood lately, and it does make sense that I would be analyzing these objects closely and what I'm seeing is the real time result of my mind "seeing" these things more clearly.
Since as young as three years old (but probably since birth), I have “seen the air,” as well as seen things less as solid and physical and more as little dots pulsating and vibrating. People thought I was weird, so I learned to keep it to myself. Now that I am further along on my path and have spent many years meditating, I understand I simply see things as they are-as energy. Does this sound like what you’re experiencing at all? Here’s an easy test: next time you’re watching an IRL event with a speaker-like a class or even a street performer-focus on the aura around his/her body. Since the audience will be focused on them, they will have a larger, more easily detectable energy field around them.
@@Staceypotterphotography I have seen energy fields or what I presume to be low level infrared. One person I noticed had a rising, rolling, dark cloud above them, but they were sitting in a corner and I presume it was their rising heat perturbing smoke filled air in the room. I have also briefly seen pulses in the air emanating from a cell phone, I found out afterwards those pulses matched the 4G wavelength. Some people might claim its the result of an overactive imagination, but there's so much our eyes can see that our brain has to filter out for practical daily useage or we'd be overwhelmed with sensory information. Do you have astigmatism by chance?
Now try that with synithtizia!🤯🙃😎
@@Js-rq9uj Yes, I have astigmatism! What does that mean? I don’t see radio and cell phone waves but I can feel them in my head. I carry a special rock on my lap in traffic to filter out all the negative energy and radio frequencies. The only way to make it better is by doing tonglon, which is a compassion practice. I see the underlying energy field that is present in all things. I see my guides energetically, too. I see light coming out of my fingers when I move them with love and I see auras of things and people. But not as color, more as light I can somehow read. Not as a specific form. But we all sense it differently. Your understanding sounds cool af. You should harness that ability. ❤️🌟👌
Have you heard of neuroweapons and mind programs?
Thank you so much 😊
Nice talk, Thanks. You speak about perception and not about eperience! What a colour is "made of"? What a sound is "made of"?
I love this theory of consciousness in part.
I do agree that we need a better definition of consciousness, so we can stop attributing the machinations of a complex mind to the intrinsic needs for consciousness.
Hi Jeff Mara: just to warn you and your audience before I start watching that someone seems to have scanned your picture and is sending scams with it via a Whatsapp number which appears under comments.
And now...a new video to enjoy❤
Thanking you both in advance!
Thing about out of body, with the headset you are actively receiving information about the physical world through your eyes. It's just from a different perspective. Whereas ndes see themselves and detailed settings without anything coming into their bodily eyes. Big difference. Could argue the brain is creating, but the details of the experiences are too accurate to be firm in that conclusion. But, like u say, you will see what you expect.
First off, keep in mind [npi] that there is not the merest shred of evidence that consciousness is an emergent property of space-time or that matter and energy can somehow develop a sense of "I" or start behaving with intention. And although there are ways of distorting our sense of self/I with VR headsets, going to parties, etc., it is always our singular sense of I that recognizes and responds to those distortions.
Our singular sense of I is a creation of our brain or mind, we think it up creatively the same way we can make up any story.
This deserves star not simple like.
The world needs to better understand perception and what it is, how it works, and how malleable it is, by them or others. People have little understanding and control over their own perception, which causes so much ignorance, hate, manipulation, detrimental beliefs, damage.
I couldn't see the green disc 😢
When we question our existence we "suffer" from amnesia - so that won't be as we sleep and dream. We suffer from amnesia when we are so-called awake, in other words when the illusion of the ego grabs our attention.
NB - I would like to add (a lot, and I guess I'm not the only one who considers conscience/ous -ness a thrilling dimension) something about what Anil Seth states at [32:22] ... that "every experience that you have rules out an enormous number of alternate possible experiences" ... I suggest that with every experience you have you rule out the loss of alternate possible experiences exponentially, in other words with every experience you have you grow the "database" of the yet already infinite possibilities. Another point of contradiction is not only found here in Prof Seth's descriptive explanation but in a lot of, especially theoretical scientific disciplines ; everything is information. I argue that everything is experience. Why ? - We, living beings, are more than machines whereas the latter can only "function" (transforming input into output is not even homeostasis) when given information. We living beings are what we are not (only) because we are conscious - we ARE conscience. This is what the subject is about : consciousness. Or how Anil Seth put it at the beginning : the spark of life. To point out the general misconception by or due to Descartes and offspring. Although René Descartes is far from being an example of delicate thinkers to me, it would be unfair to hold him solely accountable for the century censor on (the research of) consciousness. In fact, if at all, he gave humanity the possibility to finally start to investigate this very attribute (...) that doesn't only describe us, define(s) us - we are it* because it* is us. Pioneers like Anil Seth (his contemporaries needn't introduction) risked quite something around their (under)graduate when they followed their vocation. Was that intuition ? And which part of the brain is responsible for a hunch ? I'm sure they weren't informed about an experience but they experienced information.
Didn't I say something about "a thrilling dimension" ? Thank you, Anil Seth and of course The Weekend University for a Sunday brunch pleasant amble.
* I think therefore I am
( 'I think I am, therefore I am, I think" ~ The Moody Blues )
My conscience is better than your conscience.😂
@@markwalty9012 Funny, after one year...
When you're German, don't say afterward that you didn't know.
Excellent initiation & selections. Blessings
Todos tentando não enlouquecer. É a meta
Despite all the explanation of the brain as a prediction machine, the lecturer was unable to predict how long their talk would take!
The presenter starts by reporting that nothing wort reading has been written about conciosness in the last thirty years, maybe.
So we need to go back a few centuries and study the Upanishads which is pure scientific description of consciousness. Scientists have to go beyond materialism and reductionism
Conciousness comes first matter is a product.
Science changes everyday , first the easy problem (which is not easy at all) needs to be solved .The hard problem will then be addressed , that's the final frontier for science!
Upanishads are scientific? Hmmmm.
About prediction and perception. Made me remember eating a piece of candy I once blindly took from a bag, and which at first tasted odd. After a few seconds I identified the taste. Turned out it was a strayed piece of candy that belonged in a other type of bag.
There are two factors in consciousness, these are thought and physical sensation. When combined at the same time you experiance a feeling/emotion. Feeling/emotion requires the physical sensation aspect necessarily. But consciousness itself does not require physical sensation.
No it doesn't. But you can recall emotions. Compassion, gratitude, peace... How do experience them with your physical body?
Sympathetic nervous system?
And how do you create thought then? Is a individual process. ..
@@simonmasters3295 I would say interactive because a thought can produce a physical sensation and vice versa, but sympathetic sounds good to.
@@ginaiosef The brain is composed of neurons and these neurons contain memory of physical sensation and thought, they also store new ones. Each brain has a unique make up, but in... say.. humans, it has a common makeup which is different from other animals with brains. Think of it like hardware (common make up) and software (unique make up).
The activation of each individual neuron and interaction of several neurons with each other is what causes us to experiance the sensation of consciousness. And, since we only perceive our thoughts, physical body, and our environment (through our senses), the environment of which our brain can't control, the brain produces thought and physical sensations.
Think of anger... do you experiance a physical sensation when angry? Is this anger initiated and some times sustained by thoughts? For me, yes. When I stop and observe my thoughts and physical sensations it becomes clear that they are linked, becoming what is known as a feeling or emotion. I have never observed myself experiancing an emotional state without a physical sensation, so my assumption is that an emotion is defined by both.
Thoughts and physical sensation are not necessarily paired though. So, I can have a thought and no sensation, or a sensation and no thought and neither of the are emotions.
When you asked what a thought is... to me it's a memory neuron firing or a combination of neurons firing to result in a complex thought or a completely new one. When new combinations fire, that causes creativity which is necessary for sentiant beings to not be robots incapable of performing non-programed action or thought.
My long winded answer.
Why all materialists hide behind complexity?
Yes - seriously so here too. Thanks.
😊
Let me wake up from surgery and find out my head is full of ping pong balls....
What if, with the purple dots, the purple ones didn't disappear?
Awesome!
I did not clearly hear the question and people are unconscious, maybe a waking unconscious state of mind.
I like the concept of tranquilized obviousness. It is akin to the elephant in the room but that is a bit of not wishing to see what is right in front of of you. There is the brain’s way of not seeing the nose on it’s face.
Tranquilized obviousness is more of a trance where the observer operates as if he already knows all to know and will not see pertinent information right in front of him. Maybe the mind’s prediction is turned off in certain perspectives.
But the point is about be unconscious to your experience, numbed by saturation of the senses.
At 2 minutes is a collection of symbols inside a mind; a naked woman in a supine pose facing away, a gun pointed at her and she is apparently about to be mauled by tigers. I just spent 30 years as a woman in a heavily male-dominated academic research science profession. The hostility I felt coming from many men towards women was pervasive and at times profound. The speaker seems sublimely unaware of the symbolic contents of this picture and I am wondering why he chose it. But it is eerily accurate of my felt experience; the woman isn’t even a person as her face is hidden… so many bad memories were brought to mind by this picture that I was unable to sit through much more of the lecture.
Our Sole = Soul point = Zero Point = Balance point of our positive and
negative energy emotions as ONE Energy = No Emotion = Fully Conscious =
Whole = Wholey = Holy = One with THE ONE = Source
I am in the middle of the presentation , and frankly this has nothing to do with consciousness. This is just about human perception...
i saw the dress blue and brown.
5:35 "The hard problem" of consciousness, as posed by David Chalmers.
I'm dubious regarding the PCI measure of consciousness. Arguably, some of the most conscious people are master meditators. From what I understand (and I'm no expert), highly concentrated meditative states are associated with LESS brain activity, and not only less, but spatially restricted activity as well. Although I don't understand how a measure of PCI is derived, based on what you've said in the lecture, it seems like a measure of PCI for a person in a meditative state would be low, implying that they are less conscious. My guess is that although your measure is associated with everyday "monkey mind" consciousness, it's still far from enough.
I'm also a little confused about your ideas about time. We know, for instance, that the perception of time dramatically changes in states of flow, which doesn't really map very well onto "rates of change in the scene", since you can be in a state of flow when lots of things are changing (downhill biking), or almost nothing is changing (meditating in a silent room). I also wonder what you would make of this story: I suffer from chronic back pain, and I've engaged in a substantial amount of meditation in an effort to cope with it. There was a time when I would set a timer and try to sit for an hour and 20 minutes cross-legged. This was a difficult experience for me, especially the last 10 minutes or so, during which I was very conscious of my pain and had a strong urge to give up meditating. However, I would hold out as long as I could, and very often I would be overcome and give up my meditation less than 3 seconds before my alarm would go off. If this happened only once I wouldn't mention it at all, but it happened far too many times to be merely a coincidence. How was I able to subconsciously keep track of the time so accurately over such a long period? Something similar happens to people who set the alarms for the same time every morning. I've considered that this perception is merely an illusion caused by the fact that I simply ignore those occasions on which it didn't happen, but that explanation really doesn't seem to fit the case. This occurred at a rate between 30% +/-10% of the time-far often to be merely chance or simply a case of biased recall.
i don't remember from which video, but i have heard him talk about PCI in regards to meditation and psychedelics. Don't remember what he said though :P
Making predictions to track targets, goals & objectives is a syntropic process -- teleological.
"We predict ourselves into existence" -- Anil Seth.
The Einstein reality criterion:-
"If, without in any way disturbing a system, we can predict with certainty (i.e., with probability equal to unity)
the value of a physical quantity, then there exists an element of reality corresponding to that quantity."
(Einstein, Podolsky, Rosen 1935, p. 777)
Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy:-
www.iep.utm.edu/epr/
According to Einstein we predict reality into existence, predicting reality into existence is a syntropic process!
Syntropy (making predictions or projections) is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law of thermodynamics!
Certainty (predictability) is dual to uncertainty (unpredictability) -- the Heisenberg certainty/uncertainty principle.
Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant.
Transcendental logic (concepts) is dual to transcendental aesthetic (sensory perception) -- Immanuel Kant.
Perceptions or measurements are converted into conceptions (ideas, notions) or rational, analytic thinking -- deductive inference.
Deductive inference (mathematics) is dual to inductive inference (science, empirical) -- Immanuel Kant.
Inferences or making predictions is a dual process.
The intellectual mind/soul (concepts) is dual to the sensory mind/soul (percepts) -- the mind duality of Thomas Aquinas.
Mind (the internal soul, syntropy) is dual to matter (the external soul, entropy) -- Descartes.
Noumenal (rational, analytic) is dual to phenomenal (empirical, synthetic) -- Immanuel Kant.
"Always two there are" -- Yoda.
Duality (energy) creates or synthesizes reality!
Consciousness is a dichotomy..lol..you are either Conscious or you are not. The idea of being more or less Conscious than someone else is nonsensical
@@jasonspades5628 no, it isnt. The idea that there is an on-and-off switch for consiousness is even more ridicolous. Do you remember how it feels to wake up slowly? You are awake, but the brain is not fully in "gear", it's harder and slower to think, and even basic functions like reading the time on the clock can be challenging. I feel ALOT less consiouss in those moments than i do when i'm fully aware and alert.
Why wouldn't conscioussness be a spectrum? Basically everything is. Dichotomies are rare in the natural world. Do you believe that X amounts of years ago there were no consioussness then someday 1 individual organism was born that had consiousness? It was fully consiouss, nothing before it was, nothing currently is (only it's future kids and their descendants)? That seems very nonsensical. Evolution works with slow and gradual steps, nothing that evolves works like a on-and-off switch. Nothing in nature does.
@@KevinUchihaOG in the evolution timeline before there were organisms, there was no consciousness by rocks, molecules, etc. Life brought forth consciousness (the off to on analogy).
And there are conscious levels, i.e. being Conscious of being conscious.
It was Paul Klee, not Cezanne.
For me the dress is blue and gold.
But isnt brain itself physical and therefore object of consciousness!!
Alternative shift
Just by looking your pic. You don’t lock to clear to me !!! M I wrong ? Hmm. Usually a doc gets worst than the patients. …
Garcia Gary Thompson Betty Martin Jose
Materialist. Materialism.
Ummmm, no… Reductionist with a bit of a lack of grounding & over-fitting.
Hey if u read this u should do dmt lsd and ayahuasca its life changing we're all the same consciousness creating reality through the mind🧠👁🕉
Please share my two brief videos with other people. Thanks!
Existence is the first problem. Procreation is the second.
🙏🏼❤️
Obsolete. See Hoffman.
Gah, *please* stop saying "special source".... my brain goes straight to the horrible Macdonald's advertising for one of their products "special" sauce"., the catchy earworm jingle they used in the 80's!
The horrible power that advertising has to hijack the brain years after you heard a phrase!
I hate MacDonalds and *everything* it represents!!
Yet my brain is still captured by the blummin phrase even when I'm trying to listen to a profound and beautiful lecture.
Does this guy have shares in the company???
Please use a different epithet for special... argh
...two beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun." went through my head every time he said that too.
all beef patty special sauce lettuce cheese pickled onions in a sesame seed bun
why start with Darwin..
Where would you suggest & why does this bother you?
This is all very interesting but misses the point. Halfway through he says this is not a theory of consciousness! The question that must be answered is why do I seem to exist as an individual in the first place. That’s the question I’ve always had. The Physicalist argument is that a specific body/ brain configuration is creating my personal existence. Why? There were billions of body/brains around before this one and billions showed up after this one. Billions more will show up. So what’s so special about this specific material configuration that I exist? I can easily imagine this body running around without “ME” being associated with it at all just like all those billions of other bodies.
It’s obvious that any Physicalist attempt to explain anyone’s personal existence quickly devolves into incoherence and nonsense.
The only thing that works is Idealism. There is One Consciousness and that one Consciousness shows up pretending to be each individual.
Exactly, I agree with you. Idealism gives the best explanation of almost all the fundamental questions. There is only one consciousness and we are all different aspects of that great consciousness.
I'm not sure how or why idealism is supposed to be a more sufficient or coherent explanation, even more so when it's interpreted the way you are interpreting it. If there is only "one consciousness" as you suggest, why is it that billions of new conscious beings, each with a distinct, private and separate experience, are always arising without any prior conscious experience of existing? How does this explain why billions of neurons and glial cells give rise to this experience, or are you suggesting that they don't? And if not, why are there such strong correlations between neural systems and mental processes? If there is "one consciousness", does this "consciousness" supposedly span across the entire universe, all 90 billion light years of it? That sounds more like a radically complex solution that generates an infinite number of problems itself than a legitimate answer. If we assume this is true, we now have to explain why the configuration of the universe created this "one consciousness" and why every bit of logic and common sense seems to suggest that our own conscious experience is just one private and distinct instantiation, after all, only I have access to my private thoughts and experience, no one else's, but if there were "one consciousness", it wouldn't leave room for separate conscious beings. This idea, to me defies logic more than any materialist or physicalist explanation I know of.
@@chetanpatil1654 what is that supposed to mean, that the universe is one huge living organism and we are all like its body parts? How does that resolve anything? It seems like it creates more problems to me. Does this mean that the Earth itself is also "conscious", as well as Mars and the rock in my driveway? Why are some parts of the universe more "conscious" than others? Is this "One Consciousness" infinite in time, or did it arise when the universe came into existence? Why is there not any evidence that the universe acts as a single conscious entity? Surely if the universe is "One Consciousness", its intellect would extend beyond our own and it would express its conscious experience in some way, i.e., its emotions, pain and thoughts. I'm not understanding how this resolves much of anything, rather it seems to create problems where they don't yet exist, all in an attempt at resolving another complex issue
I would think Collective Consciousness is nearer reality than One Consciousness. CC is not uniform, therefore all the different life experiences by all the different personalities accumulate this unpredictable (not totally accurate) human destiny.
@@steveflorida8699
Cool .I've long held the suspicion I'm a mere piano key !
Lol A hallucination is an uncontrolled controlled uncontrolled perception ? Or, A hallucination is an uncontrolled controlled uncontrolled controlled hallucination ? Or, is perception a controlled uncontrolled controlled uncontrolled perception ?
Or, is perception controlled, and hallucination uncontrolled
Isn't a hallucination controlled if your hallucinating and isn't that perception
Why is perception controlled if your hallucinating .
Perception is an understanding, and a hallucination is a perception by deception .
Perception may be the wrong word to use .Perception is a conclusion based on what inputs you receive. Conclusions constantly update and are interdependent .
If I can not think I can not perceive, if I can not perceive I can not act.
I am because I think.
Eureka ! lol
Hope you people will not claim that you invented consciousness like gravity.... 🤣😂
There is no such claim, you are wrong to say that.
Gravity is discovered, not invented. Consciousness is emergent, also in no possible way be invented.
what if consciousness is the soul given by God. that would make it impossible to find the answer.
Don't bite into others personal level of understanding of our world. Look for yourself within one's own consciousness and or Spiritual knowledge of the Creator of ALL.
completely intractable mysteries ?
certainly not
and even if it were, then why make this video
How did you manage to present wrongly the chess example ? Jesus...you lost all credibility right there...!!!
This guy doesn't know jack!
Consciousness is just what a brain that needs to track decisions and time does. Any claims beyond that is like a pickpocket trying to sell you your watch.
Time = Conscious Energy. Time is all that exists in artificial phonic binary CREATION.
I see the dress of lilac and skin🤭
हमारा शरीर या सभी जीवों का शरीर ही, भगवान द्वारा बनाया गया मंदिर होता है। इस शरीर रूपी मंदिर के गर्भगृह में, अपना भगवान ही हमेशा मौजूद होते है। तुमसब जिस प्रकार भगवान की मंदिर, बहुत सारे सामग्री से बनाते हो, फिर उस मंदिर के भीतर यानि गर्भगृह में भगवान की मूर्ति बनाकर बैठा देते हो, ठीक उसी प्रकार भगवान भी, पांच तत्वों रूपी सामग्री से, सभी जीवों के शरीर को बनाते है। फिर इस शरीर रूपी मंदिर के भीतर, अपना भगवान ही हमेशा बैठकर, हरपल सांसें लेते है। हमारा बनाया हुआ सभी मंदिर, मस्जिद, चर्च, गुरूद्वारा इत्यादि मृत पदार्थों से बने होते है, इसलिए ये सब मृत होते है। हमसबो का शरीर भी मृत ही होता है, क्योंकि सभी शरीर की मृत्यु होती है, लेकिन जो भगवान इस शरीर रूपी मंदिर के अंदर रहते है, उनकी मौत कभी नहीं होती है। तुमसब अपनी ही ज्ञान से या किसी सच्चे सदगुरु की ज्ञान से ही, अपने शरीर रूपी मंदिर के भीतर प्रवेश करके, अपने भगवान से मिल सकते हो। तुम सबों का पूरा जीवन, शरीर रूपी मंदिर के बाहर ही व्यतीत हो जाता है, और तुमसब अपनी ही शरीर रूपी मंदिर के भीतर, प्रवेश नहीं करने के कारण, अपने भगवान से नहीं मिल पाते हो, और बिना मरे ही सबके सब, सदियों से मरते जाते हो। तुमसब सिर्फ सेक्स करने के लिए ही, एक ही भगवान की शरीर रूपी मंदिर को कभी पत्नी, कभी बेटी, तो कभी बहू, तो कभी मां बना देते हो। और तुमसब खुद एक ही शरीर रूपी मंदिर को, कभी पति, तो कभी बेटा, तों कभी बाप बना देते हो। तुमसब अपनी शरीर रूपी मंदिर को ही सच्चा मान लेते हो, जिसकारण, शरीर रूपी रिश्तों में ही उलझकर रह जाते हो। तुमसब कभी भी अपनी ज्ञान से या किसी सदगुरु की ज्ञान से, अपने भीतर प्रवेश ही नहीं कर पाते हो जिस कारण तुमसब मर जाते हो। इस धरती पर सभी शरीरों के भीतर एक ही परमात्मा, हमेशा विराजमान रहते है, लेकिन तुमसब सेक्स करने में इतने अंधे हो गए हो, कि उस परमात्मा को भी सभी रूपों में नहीं देख पाते हो। इस धरती पर जब सभी शरीर की मौत तय है, तो तुमसब, वैज्ञानिक बनकर क्यों रसायनिक, जैविक, परमाणुविक, इत्यादि हथियार बनाते हो। सत्य सभी जीवों के शरीर रूपी रूप में ही हमेशा होता है, इसलिए सत्य या भगवान को पाने के लिए कोइ रास्ता नहीं होता है। सत्य या भगवान को जब भी तुमसब पाओगे, अपनी ही ज्ञान से या किसी सच्चे सदगुरु की ज्ञान से, अपने रूप में ही पाओगे। तुमसब लाख मंदिर, मस्जिद, चर्च , गुरूद्वारा, इत्यादि बनाओ, उसमें भगवान को आकार या निराकार में बैठाओ, फिर भी कभी भी तुमसब भगवान को नहीं पा सकोगे। तुमसब कितना भी रामायण, गीता, कुरान, बाइबिल, या कोई भी ग्रन्थ पढों या किसी धर्मगुरु, पादरी, मौलाना, इत्यादि से इन ग्रंथों को सुनो, कभी भी अपनी सत्य या अपनी भगवान से नहीं मिल सकते हो, क्योंकि तुम सबों का भगवान, तेरे रूप के ही अंदर हमेशा, विराजमान रहते है। उनसे जब भी मुलाकात होगी, तेरी ही रूप में ही होगी। मेरे पास सब आओ, भगवान को अपनी रूप में देखो और सबलोग, अपनी मौत से हमेशा के लिए दूर हो जाओ।
NDEs are NOT hallucinations.
Can you provide data to make your point?
@@reconeix anyone with a shred of intelligence , or indeed those whom have experienced an NDE (atheists included) can tell you their NDE was no hallucination. An hallucination has certain qualities different to NDEs. the NDE is described as more real and vivid than waking consciousness, and their is no distortion or confusion or seeing creatures etc, the NDE changes a person's life, and often people have met deceased relatives whom they never met in life..etc etc..the NDE research is vast, and a good book to start with is Consciousness Beyond Life by Dr Pim Van Lommel. He looks into Quantum Physics and NDEs. Fascinating.
Good luck.
@@Dion_Mustard inside DMT also feels more real than here, when I broke though I was fully conscious, but minus my body ,I was scared and was told to take a look around you ,you have been here before and you will be here again,at that point I recognised the place it was chilling ,like the waiting room before rebirth
Evidence?
@@christopherhamilton3621 you need to do your own studies , beginning with a good book I recommend called consciousness beyond life by Dr pim van lommel. Good luck.