Mr.Sheldrake, from your talks I understood how I am a part of the whole. Mr.Spira, from your talks I understood how I am the whole. I can't thank the universe enough for bringing two of my favourite people together. It would be really interesting if you both could do a talk on Morphic Resonance 🙏
Well, it has basically to do with wave-length, but also about ability and experience. It was some monkeys on a island who find out of washing their roots in a stream, so they avoided sand that destroyed their toots, the young was quick to learn it, the old didn't care. Then some other monkeys on another isolated island adopted this ability. They had basically the same abilities and experience, and also individuals on this level, live with group-consciousness, and this is the telepathic nature that the idea could be transferred without physical contact. There is many examples, the periodic tablet, was also thought from three different person, three different places on Earth, about the same period. Just to give a little idea.
I view these two Ruperts as two really splendid human beings. I'm therefore delighted by this conversation. As a bonus, they both speak such beautiful English 🙂
A very, very solid evidence about how different opinions about whatever serious issue is wonderfully useful. Sheldrake will always defend reason when reason can be defended (true science), and I think he's a master doing that and, Spira just uses reason as a tool to walk beyond reason when it is necessary. To me, both are a priceless gift.
I align with Spira, that we're one being clothed in a variety - an array of beingness, expressing shared beingness, love, a relationship that undulates like breath, a movement like a symphony, like the ebb and tide of the ocean, a dance of life. I felt that religion was too small via a NDE in 1970, and quit the church. My feeling of connection grew.
Rupert Spira is unquestionably the only spiritual guide whose stance or position via the Direct Path resonates with me completely. Attending one of his retreats was a truly profound experience!
@@dianablackman4528 You find Sheldrake's viewing reality in the complex terms of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as making sense? I would propose that you find Spira nonsensical simply because his nondual philosophy is so new to you. In my case, being familiar with Spira's teachings, I find them in accord with my own experience in life: our commonsense experience of conscious awareness is, for me, an individual instantiation of the divine and universal consciousness, the only consciousness that exists. By 15:01 Spira has worked hard to help Sheldrake find that they agree after all, even after Sheldrake's insistence on a Godhead represented by the complex of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Can forging such a common view be nonsensical? I think it takes a great deal of sense to forge such an agreement on the principles of reality. On the other hand, Sheldrake believes that plants and the Sun are conscious (he says so). Does this really make sense to you, while the simplicity of Spira's belief in one consciousness (the nondual philosophy) does not? Spira says that God (or the universal consciousness) is the source of all forms, and comes before all forms, and then Sheldrake says he believes something very similar. Is Spira speaking nonsense? I think not, and neither does Sheldrake. Spira goes on to say that the light of consciousness shines in everybody's mind as awareness, and Sheldrake agrees. Is this nonsense? Sheldrake says, "it's a wonderful vision". Why does Sheldrake say that? The example of John Smith, the actor, who gets lost in his role as King Lear, being led back to reality by his friend backstage is the process of "coming home" to knowledge of who we are, a knowledge called "self realization". Is this metaphor nonsense? I think not. I think it is very helpful to understand how we got lost, got trapped in illusions and suffering, and can find ourselves again. This is precious knowledge in our time of stress, selfishness, searching, suffering, and war all over the world. Spira's message (along with many others) is a message of solution and hope. What does Sheldrake offer? "Morphic resonance", a supposed explanation of supernormal events and experiences (although he does not discuss that major view in this interview). Does morphic resonance help solve the problems of our time? I think not. If you still maintain that Sheldrake makes sense but Spira does not, I would be very interested in some details. Exactly in what ways would you demonstrate or illustrate that belief? Is it just that Spira stutters a bit now and again? Or can you provide any evidence for your opinion? Please give examples of Spira's nonsense and confusion so they can be discussed. I think this was a great meeting of minds, in which Spira tried to help Sheldrake to see a simpler view of reality. Such attempts are to be praised in this time of stress and conflict.
@@dianablackman4528 You are certainly entitled to your view. However, I can say that what Spira said made perfect sense to me and, as I approach the home stretch in my life, I have come to exactly the same conclusion about the nature of reality. That said, I also admire Rupert Sheldrake greatly and, as he acknowledges (to his own surprise?) in this wonderful discussion, his Christian perspective on the nature of reality does not differ significantly from that of Spira.
@@david203 Your question about Morphic resonance is important and possibly needs to be couched with greater sincerity. Is it not possible that Consciousness intends that we learn the language of consciousness. That healing the human mind may include a better understanding of morphogenetic resonance. We seem to be generating ever more dangerous and violent vibrations in all cultures, as though there will be no consequences from such heedlessness. One could belittle the effectiveness of monks or one can be thankful for all souls in redemptive practice. Our 'practical' sciences have been devastating in so many ways and the stubborn human insistence that reality is mechanistic is not bringing forth much hope. Rupert Sheldrake is trying to fathom and put people in touch with a language which is common to everything. In the words of Spira this is what love is about, that is how the god/consiousness reconnects. The trinity as Rupert understands it is not esoteric or convoluted; it is clearly manifest throughout nature and is present in our shared bonds. Both men found tremendous overlap by delving past the formal language. peace to you.
“Love is the natural condition of all experience before thought has divided it into a multiplicity and diversity of objects, selves and others." -- Rupert Spira
I would actually love to hear a continuation of this discussion. I had the feeling that both of you just got started. There is so much to learn from both of you, so please consider that. Many thanks!
One Conciousness Infinite dimensions. Each time a 'King Lear' finds his way back home. A new fully realised dimension of Consciousness earns its place in Infinity.
@@in2net I have no clue what they are talking about either. It's the subject matter. It could go on for years, as there is no definitive answer. It is the "isness" of everything. I sometimes feel the same way as I listen to people to explain physics. I doubt I could formulate a valid critique as there is a lot I don't understand. How do we know these things?
That isn't possible, a fruitless exercise in navel gazing. The ant doesn't know of the farmer on whose land he builds the ants nest, it isn't necessary either, the nest will be built and will function without this knowledge.
Excellent listen, lads! As A.W. says: "You are IT and IT IS you." The issue becomes we are always *both* human and being. There is no unity without duality. That's the mystery. Ram Dass said: "We're all just walking each other home." Ain't it grand? Ho ho, hee hee, hahaha
Thanks. It was really nice and also very beneficial to hear Rupert Spira having a conversation with such a bright mind as Rupert Sheldrake (and vice versa). I hope there will be more conversations between these two lovely people.
. . . . how wonderful to listen to two great thinkers speaking on the most important subject of all, that of the very nature of consciousness - if we don’t have an accurate understanding of this, what hope is there to understand anything that is only appearing in consciousness.
I listened to and really enjoyed your short film here, last week. I listened a couple of times actually, to try to understand it, as I'm not familiar with some of its concepts. I was drawn to the section where Rupert spoke of looking back at who you were. And then looking back further and then further. It caused me to think of a friend who has been struggling with depression for a while. He's been saying he can't find himself and doesn't even know who he is anymore. He is seeking 'professional' help, I just don't seem to be able to say anything right so try to say as little as possible. So anyway, I sent him a link to this, hoping it may trigger something helpful within him. And he liked it! Seems I did the right thing. Small steps. Thank you .
Oh, excellent! Sheldrake is a brilliant guy, so out-of-the-box in his thinking. Watched a lot of McKenna/Sheldrake talks. Thank you, RSpira, for this very interesting chat. I would enjoy hearing more of this sort of presentation. I've learned a lot from you over the past couple years, and when I’m trying to explain something to somebody, I very frequently forward one of your videos to them. You're one of my main go-to people. 😊
Beautiful dialog. You are both revealing the same understanding of the infinite, eternal truth! Your minds are formulating this in slightly different ways, but the understanding is ultimately the same. Thank you for the joy of listening.
I've been subscribed to both Ruperts for a long time, so it was such a pleasure to hear both talking together. I hope to hear more in the future, especially enjoyable in this age of isolation. Thank you very much for the video!
Two Ruperts, representing all of humanity sharing the source in media of language which in itself is a limitation, as well as clearly seeing the roots of bondage through which the enquiry is rising. Having watched young Rupert the scientist getting entangled with Krishnamurti, and here in conversation has inspired me to wonder if there could ever be a connection to the source as long as we are deeply rooted in any "Belief" format. As the story goes, follow the line to which we are tethered, though the length may make you wary; once you arrive at the hook, you may then be freed from "Belief" to become oneness!
So far 1.9K likes and 439 comments. There's intelligent life on this planet. Faith in humanity is almost restored Hail Rupert, Hail Rupert. God Bless the Ruperts!
Very clear and articulate and importantly insightful. The illusion as ‘real’ as R Spira said is worthy of deep consideration and reflection. When King Lear is onstage he must play the part. He ‘is’ and there is no two ways about it. The experience that dims our fundamental nature is therefore real and must be respected. We must play our parts. Society is an amalgamation of parts (all of us single beings living out or through our experiences AND responsibilities to that experience). The tragedy of Lear is our tragedy. The brilliance of the mind that wrote it is our brilliance in experience. Let us transcend to the immanent.
"There is a single reality whose nature is consciousness. What we perceive as the physical universe is what the activity of that consciousness looks like from a localised perspective. The analogy with what takes place during a dream: when we have a dream at night, we dream a dreamed world within our own mind but we cannot directly perceive the dreamed world from our mind. In order to perceive the dreamed world, we have to localise ourselves, we have to enter into our imagination as the character in the dream from whose perspective the activity of our own mind appears as an outside world. This gives us a very good model for the ultimate dreamer, infinite consciousness, whose activity is the universe".
I need to say it's not me. I just thought these statements were so well articulated by Rupert Spira that I wrote them down and pasted them here. I should have made that clear.
My English is nearly there but never there, I understood nearly most of what Rupert Spira said, but you wrote it down made me see it even clearer. I am born buddhist, meditation and practise awareness in daily life. But Rupert Spira's talk always made me awake and understand much deeper level of awareness that we should be looking for or aware of.. Thanks to him. 🙏😊
Excellent conversation, it's great to hear two persons I admire so much talking about this subject that I love. I tend to disagree with both. I'd say that awareness not only is the same in everything, but I intuit it's actually EASIER for awareness to recognize itself in the trees, insects, and the Sun. Because these beings' perception is not veiled by a strongly distorted self image like that which we human beings build for ourselves. Everytime I get in full contact with another being in nature (even rocks), I tend to be plunged immediately into deep awareness. These beings are not only aware, by they're great teachers.
Trying to shut down inward awareness (attention to currently perceived state of consciousness) and focusing on being a conduit for "slower" moving consciousness (i.e plants/rocks/nuts/water...) is most available natural (literally) expansive experience. However, I would argue that it is so expansive exactly because it really ISN'T our awareness while in that state of communion. You are accessing a missing part of universal consciousness that wouldn't be accessible if you persisted on projecting your awareness on whatever you are "uploading". It greatly aids in an attempt to at least slow down the forced models of "our" reality that are based on instruments(either essentially binary or limited sensory) that we've come to rely on completely - making us the most alienated being in nature.
@@Agaryunaer I see your point and I agree with almost everything. But you seem to have understood something I didn't say. I mean I didn't say it's MY awareness being projected onto other forms of existence, nor did I say that it's "my" awareness while in that state of communion. I wouldn't even agree with a distinction such as "my awareness" or "their awareness". Rather I said verbatim that "awareness is the same in everything". And I state literally: these beings are aware. What I could try to describe, according to my perception, is that awareness is always the same, and the forms of existence are doing different degrees of filtration of it. And I tend to believe that the human filter is one of the most restrictive of all beings on Earth. That's probably the reason why I am so deeply plunged into a deep state of awareness when I set a connection with these beings. I probably leave behind "my" own conditioning and "my" processes of filtering, and once I keep in touch with their state of being, with their filter being way more expanded and permissive, I become able to experience awareness in a state much more close to its purity, much less filtered and hence clearer and natural. You say those beings are missing parts of universal consciousness. I'd say that their process of filtration is quite reduced, and ours is huge. So we ourselves are creating, thanks to our inherited conditioning, missing parts of universal consciousness. We're filtering what could be freely available for us to perceive in the world. And the rocks, plants, animals are our windows to help us retrieve those missing parts. That's why I literally say that they're great teachers.
Rogério Lupo well said in yr original comment and follow up. To commune with nature! we have to get ‘out’ into it as often as possible. Breath, wind, fresh air. Thanks.
Consciousness is an emergent phenomena, synergetic, and without language we, like animals, would have awareness but not be conscious and have no ego. The complexity of the language determines the level of consciousness.
He means when sheldrake said his book would be out soon and spira said he looked forward to reading it. Spira is a very kind humble soul but both are gems.
This sounds to me like the start of a series of conversations between you and Rupert Spira :-) I remember how impressed I was when I read "The Presence of the Past" thirty years ago. And I follow Rupert Spira. A continuation of your exchange would be great !
Such a great discussion, is only possible with seeking individuals. They have the ability to listen, and respond, without persuasion, not trying to win. They win. They win, with increased knowledge, respect, and most likely they both have gained a new friend.
Ruperts🙏❤Thanks for sharing, great conversations. I just want to share my understanding why in some spiritual teachings the world being an illusion or nonexistent. I believe the world we see before awakening is projected in our individual minds with limited activities and views. As Jesus said, if our answers would be "yes" or "no" and stayed in the NOW, I believe the world we assume exists right now wouldn't exist. Matthew 5:37 "But let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No,’ ‘No.’ For whatever is more than these is from the evil one." When we look at a tree, body, plant, ... with our distorted mind, pre existing information are different from those who see them as energy/ vibration. Nonetheless, somewhat I believe the projected world exists as illusion, but through renewing our mind, we can see a different world (pure love experience, judgment and guilt free). Romans 12:2 "Do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is-his good, pleasing and perfect will." Thank you. Love you
The rare coming together of two Rupert's. Likely be the only time in my life I listen to a conversation b/t two men named Rupert, unless these two do another interview.
When I read Richard Feynman's "The Strange Theory of Light and Matter" book, After reflecting about Feynamn's book, something came to my mind : "the Universe is a Thought".
I recently went from a lifetime of envisioning God as a being in the universe to the universe being in God. And as a result I started to feel everything is an aspect of God's consciousness. Not saying this is how things are, the reality is probably far stranger and less comprehensible, but it's where I'm at at the moment.
My 2 favourite Ruperts! It seems to me that the main difference lies in Sheldrake’s separation of form from energy. Form is really patterned activity, and activity is energy so the division to me at least appears unnecessary.
Great talk, thank you. No matter where your path takes you It all comes back to one. One God, One universe, one you, one me and we are all that. So we can be at peace and not pieces. Peace.🙏
@@tanseygreen291 when I say God, I am refering to the intelligent creative power that is the universe, that has brought about you and I. You are not a separate individual, you are the whole universe expressing itself as you. If you prefer you can limit yourself to being an individual but that is an illusion. Time to wake up?🙏
Agree. Great piece of wisdom. Gives some new light to Hamlet’s reflection ‘For in that sleep of death what dreams may come, when we shuffle off this mortal coil.’ Perhaps the coil is our experience and we make our return.
hi Rupert Sheldrake. long time admirer here... you really should interview Tom Campbell, the scientist.... he has a youtube channel. great explanation of consciousness. worked with Robert Monroe back in the day
Well he would surely disagree with Rupert Spira on many levels. Their views teachings and models are quite different to say the least, not to mention the language that they use. I'm afraid Rupert Spira doesn't know anything about astral projection and is in fact incapable of doing it. And of course Tom would teach him that time is fundamental to existence which all these "only now" new age guys tend to deny lol. So it likely would be a conversation of two people talking passed each other using a very different language and models and not very fruitful.
Beautiful discussion and synthesis of the vedic and abrahamic philosophies. These are the fruits of seeking truth beyond dogma. In Sanskrit the letters BRHM (where the name abraham comes from) carries multiple meanings - what can be loosely translated to "the one beyond comprehension" and also "one who satiates/fulfills endlessly" - Brahman was originally used as the name for the infinite God - limitless source of all creation - who created through his Voice (Vac). The letters for Allah/Eloh/Elaha ا ل ه carry multiple meanings and are derived from other root words - الوَلــَـه (al-walah) which is endless love/fulfilment which we can only get from God - wallaha - which means bewilderment/amazement/beyond finite comprehension - and aliha which translates to worship/reverence itself meaning true worship is only experienced when directed towards God and no other. The RuH (ra ر = repetion/order, Ha ح= life) i.e. the eternal soul is what we can call the breath of God. All souls originated in God's presence in perfect light and harmony. Few quotes: Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) Saying: Souls are troops collected together and those who familiarised with each other (in the heaven from where these come) would have affinity, with one another (in the world) and those amongst them who opposed each other (in the Heaven) would also be divergent (in the world). Ash-Shura 42:11 فَاطِرُ ٱلسَّمَٰوَٰتِ وَٱلْأَرْضِۚ جَعَلَ لَكُم مِّنْ أَنفُسِكُمْ أَزْوَٰجًا وَمِنَ ٱلْأَنْعَٰمِ أَزْوَٰجًاۖ يَذْرَؤُكُمْ فِيهِۚ لَيْسَ كَمِثْلِهِۦ شَىْءٌۖ وَهُوَ ٱلسَّمِيعُ ٱلْبَصِيرُ (He is) the Creator of the heavens and the earth: He has made for you pairs from among yourselves, and pairs among cattle: by this means does He multiply you: there is nothing whatever like unto Him, and He is the One that hears and sees (all things). Al-An'am 6:103 لَّا تُدْرِكُهُ ٱلْأَبْصَٰرُ وَهُوَ يُدْرِكُ ٱلْأَبْصَٰرَۖ وَهُوَ ٱللَّطِيفُ ٱلْخَبِيرُ No vision can grasp Him, but His grasp is over all vision: He is above all comprehension, yet is acquainted with all things. Fussilat 41:53 سَنُرِيهِمْ ءَايَٰتِنَا فِى ٱلْءَافَاقِ وَفِىٓ أَنفُسِهِمْ حَتَّىٰ يَتَبَيَّنَ لَهُمْ أَنَّهُ ٱلْحَقُّۗ أَوَلَمْ يَكْفِ بِرَبِّكَ أَنَّهُۥ عَلَىٰ كُلِّ شَىْءٍ شَهِيدٌ We will show them Our signs in the horizons and within themselves until it becomes clear to them that it is the truth. But is it not sufficient concerning your Lord that He is, over all things, a Witness? Qaf 50:16 وَلَقَدْ خَلَقْنَا ٱلْإِنسَٰنَ وَنَعْلَمُ مَا تُوَسْوِسُ بِهِۦ نَفْسُهُۥۖ وَنَحْنُ أَقْرَبُ إِلَيْهِ مِنْ حَبْلِ ٱلْوَرِيدِ And We have already created man and know what his soul whispers to him, and We are closer to him than [his] jugular vein Al-Hashr 59:19 وَلَا تَكُونُوا۟ كَٱلَّذِينَ نَسُوا۟ ٱللَّهَ فَأَنسَىٰهُمْ أَنفُسَهُمْۚ أُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ هُمُ ٱلْفَٰسِقُونَ And be not like those who forgot Allah, so He made them forget themselves. Those are the transgressors. All primordial uncorrupted faiths teach worship of the ONE INFINITE creator - self subsisting - independent- in need of none but all depend on him - Al-AHAD - ONE and Indivisible - beyond form/definition/limitation - unlike any created thing - perfect - unchanging. Infinity can only be ONE. We can't add or subtract or divide infinity. Any number divided by infinity is 0 - non existence- self annihilation in the presence of God. Many "spiritual" traditions end on ego death / releasing the spirit from the shackles of mind and body but that's only where the true journey to know God begins as God is infinite and for creation it is an endless journey. Christ called to find God within- same as every prophet/messenger/enlightened being in the past. Linguistically the word "religion" means to "reconnect". In sanskrit the word Dharma translates to "universal law". In hebrew/arabic - the word "Deen" means "true judgement" but also "to lower" - meaning truth is only understood through vertical causation- when we compare things to things - atoms to atoms - dust to dust- it is only horizontal causation and cannot be used to reach truth. The pursuit of truth is to seek what is above and beyond us - relating finite to the infinite. God's veil is perfect light and if it were not for the veil creation within darkness would annihilate - what is behind the veil is beyond imagination. To see God directly is the highest bliss above every paradise- to experience the presence of God is not something that can be put into words - but an experience that is beyond the 5 senses. The vision of God and knowledge of God for us is an endless journey that will increase our own light for eternity - there will NEVER be a point where any soul can say they have complete vision and knowledge of God. Our spirit/soul that originates from the breath of God is therefore also infinite as it was made to know one beyond limitation/set definitions. Nir malam - beyond material impurity/pure. Nir gun - beyond set attributes/definitions Nir va na = beyond the voice - the ripples in the waters of life that reflect light is the realm of created beings - God is not a being within a finite void or contained in any space but the ONE who speaks creation into existence and who's voice manifests the waters of life - SheVa -source of the voice- not a thing - beyond contraction/limitation/form. When one studies etymology- we will find that this concept and division of "religion" amongst mankind does not actually exist...it's a recent invention - not something the ancients understood. Dogma and blind faith are destructive and a symptom of sloth - which is spiritual/intellectual laziness. Truth is universal and not limited to any script, language, creed or race - but universally recognised by the heart. We can find God through the universal practices taught in every tradition: meditation/prayer/fasting/charity/keeping the law - avoiding sexual immorality and harnessing human libido, diet free of negative energy (tortured animals/earth polluting) etc. All prophets were examples for us to follow and emulate. The methods to purify the soul are universal and not contingent on any dogma but how we live our lives. Peace
Wonderful dialogue - please do more!......you both seamed to be unlocking so many commonalities as you went. There is obviously more common ground to discover and much more to discuss that really homes in and works from the crest of both of your bodies of work at their present stage - what a fantastic insightful discussion to hear. loved it.
A great conversation that touches on that which is inherent to who we are. They could go further by looking at what blocks seeing that, such as social schemes and thought systems that construct a mental position into what we are not.
It all depends on what lens we look at the whole with. Rupert looks at the nature of consciousness with a more eastern lens, which may help you experience the whole in a moment of pause in between two thoughts. Sheldrakes lens is less abstract and more scientific and analytical of the systems within Awareness / field of consciousness. Both are beautiful. It is helpful when you can synergies both ways together and see it from different perspectives.
From Set material - "As you have probably supposed by now, there is consciousness in everything. Visible or invisible to you, each fragment of the universe has a consciousness of its own." Session 18, Page 118
I have been a student of Rupert S. I feel that when he says that Consciousness is dimmed in individual consciousness…and when he says that, in his John Smith / King Lear analogy that there is no separate self, ie, no “King Lear” …that the individual has to divest himself of individual mind to experience “go back to” the true reality of undifferentiated consciousness…this negates the whole evolutionary process and the emergence in the separate self toward more emergent perspectives. The perspective that Rupert S. puts forward to us individuated humans…as a teacher in his Retreats, is received in our individual minds …and these concepts can evolve our world view…We bring our experience, understanding, our perspective to his teachings and decide for ourselves if they “land” with us. If they do, then we can decide to meditate, adopt practices that will nurture this viewpoint…so as a separate self, we decide what “feels good” to us. In contrast, Rupert’s view makes our human experience into an impediment to higher consciousness…where, ie., the evolutionary model, that of the evolving separate self as soul or psyche, …I feel that the separate self as being foundational in the evolutionary process feel is a very plausible competing narrative. Rupert S. Negates the significance of the separate self..and any evolutionary model. I feel when he has said, to reference back to his John Smith analogy…that there “is no King Lear” …or there is no separate self…leaves me with a question like, “ What about evolution?” or…”What is the place of human experience in all this?” or, “What’s the point of all this?”
But please understand that I am not negating the concept of the undifferentiated field of consciousness…the “divine ground of Being.” I think if we have experiences that draw us toward an interest in such things, that evolving individuality is what we are, and what we have, to bring us to our journey towards ever widening perspectives….
a wonderful discussion! Rupert Spira outlines perfectly the nature of the unknowable nature of consciousness! Excellent! Thank you Rupert S for hosting such a enquiry.
An interesting discussion from 2 thinkers with a platform. Certainly as Mr Sheldrake correctly states Mr Spira’s ideology raises more questions than answers yet the evidence to me at least points in the idealists direction. There certainly is enough evidence to posit consciousness survives death. There is enough evidence to question material existence being fundamental. It is unlikely however Mr Spira is close to explaining / defining ‘God’ nonetheless he is IMO nearer the mark than any alternative I am currently aware of. It is in the absence of science being able to explain existence valid for thinkers to bounce off previous philosophers and it is pleasing to see contemporary work by Bernado Kastrop. It is my hope for a remarriage of science and philosophy as science sees its limits.
The Maharishi explains all this in his great work of philosophy and metaphysics: “Commentary On The First Six Chapters Of The Baghdad Gita” He answers all the questions and explains how and why everything happens, and how any individual can benefit from understanding these things
Wonderful conversation! I think Mr Sheldrake might want to reconsider the tangent of his book! Mr Spira's view is more primary, more open and direct and Mr Sheldrake's is a little more limited by his beliefs and a little resistant, but what Mr Spira suggests is a lot to take in, and maybe, with time, Mr Sheldrake will consider it further. I hope there is another conversation with these two gentlemen in the future.
My sense was Rupert Spira was in his head, needing to dominate this conversation. Whereas Rupert Sheldrake was grounded in faith love trust and I felt a certainty him.
lovely episode, both pointing to a similar thing, but one Rupert is making it simple and foundational, and one Rupert needing to add some more layers in :). Great conversation to observe
My construct: God: “I Am What I Am.” Mans perception: “Is What It Is to us.” The Sentient Individual: “I am what I am without having asked to become.” My opinion: The God, Prime, Origin Consciousness or Greater Consciousness fails to communicate as if It knows us in real-time or promotes Itself as perceptible added value to any material or extra material location we perceive. How can we validate evidence and lessons from Prime, when we carefully are still seeking proof of Prime Consciousness on all aspects perceptible to us? I love this long suffering searching exercise work we get. And I confess to loving watching the soap of a search for Prime detail try to get tangibly academic.
Nothing loses me faster than when discussing the depths of consciousness or all that is and someone mentions Christianity or the religion. Rupert Spira is a teacher of true conventional learning. This world has had enough dumbing down through the power entities that have dictated our well being. We have been damaged enough and now through people like Rupert Spira, Elkhart Tolle, Bob Campbell and Uell S Anderson we can unlearn the harmful ideology’s that have hindered our loving progress.
Hey Rupert. I love the kind of topics you discuss frequently. I'm about 4 minutes into this video, when I heard mention of the analogy of a dreamer, having to localize themselves within the dream. So before I forget this thought, I figured I should comment now. This reminded me of Eric Weinstein who has had a geometric hypothesis for a long time about how to create multiples from a singularity. A brief and simple analogy for his idea on how to leverage geometry, and probably therefore mathematics too, is to consider how to make one of those sealed bottles with a ship ornament fully built inside it. It wouldn't fit through the bottle neck, but if they fold the ship and it's sails and then use threads to hoist the sails once inside, you have accomplished with this ship in a bottle, what seems to be impossible. In the same way, he proposes that theorists in physics should create a lattice work that can be folded, but unfolds when placed inside a physics or geometric model, or something like that.. I don't fully understand, not many do... But he seems to have a strong belief it's worth talking about and considering. He has done a lecture in front of physicists explaining his idea, which can be seen somewhere on youtube. This idea sounds similar to the dream analogy with consciousness. Maybe you and Eric Weinstein would both benefit from a conversation about this idea, in relation to general physics and also metaphysics like the consciousness hypothesis.
23 minutes in, another passing thought. You are possibly reaching the limitations of the English language with regards to the difference between the experience of consciousness and consciousness as the essence of material and phenomenon. I would posit that all matter is consciousness expressed, and that the experience of consciousness, is possibly an illusion, similar to that of free will. That what we as experiencers RE-COGNIZE as consciousness, is some kind of feedback loop which allows us to navigate an environment which is increasing in complexity. Because of this idea, I would say that a rock is conscious, as we are conscious. It's just that the experience of a rock(as a colony of conscious "things in themselves") is limited in it's capacity for sensing and processing sensory interactions. It may be our human need to project or protect, when faced with unsolved problems, which causes us to think that our experience of reality is real and defines all other possible experience. We come from the frame of mind of an experiencer, which I think may put a certain filter over our view of reality, and our ability to stay objective. I've spent a few years considering Descartes "I think therefore I am" problem. Maybe that idea of "I am" is where he may be incorrect. What if "I" is just a conglomerate of things, like everything else, all connected. I'm wondering now if consciousness could in any way exist in a vacuum... Is there an opposite force to consciousness? What if there is a trinity, but consciousness and the opposite force are like Christ and the Devil. The God head not quite being consciousness or not consciousness, but a singularity that split to create both. If I change the name Devil to Lucifer or light bringer, it might be better to say, that the devil is reality and Christ is the other opposite force which is sacrificed in order that light shines as reality. The bible does say somewhere that this is Satan's world. In indian mythology, I believe the Shiva Linga ties in with one of the myths about the main God being challenged by two lesser gods, so he creates an infinite pillar of fire and challenges them to jump over it. Something like that. Again, a trinity of the One, with two lessers or sub-ordinates.
It's not just because they are both British; it is because their views are at heart not opposed. It is, in fact, difficult to be in opposition to a simple philosophy of oneness.
I don’t doubt R. Spira is a splendid fellow and that his formulation of the nature of reality is ‘correct’ but I find Sheldrake’s tripartite formulation provides a richer basis for understanding the human experience.
I was just thinking about how I love there’s 2 ruperts who are badass morally mindful souls and among my favorite truth seekers; but then I see this video? So damn grateful. Need this to happen again soon. Maybe include Lawrence Krauss, Chomsky, Steven Greer, Bruce Greyson, PMH Atwater or even vandana shiva or Gabor Mate, would love to see these souls collaborate some dialogue/presence.
The discussion can be laid out with two analogies: Most people are maybe used to thinking about the "external world" or reality as being there all the time even when we are not looking - like if you turn on and of your flashlight in the dark, all the objects in the room seem uneffected. Rupert Spira suggests that it works more like a videogame, where there seem to be an objective world but it is only there when we look because it is actually generated by our computer(consciousness).
I believe what Spira is trying to say around the 7:00 mark is that the energy that composes what we call a tree is always present, but it takes a localized mind to act as a sort of transducer to modulate that energy into the form we recognize as a tree. Mind is responsible for bringing forth definition and quantity in a field of infinite unbound consciousness.
To the extent that an experience changes you, IT IS REAL. What makes the world an illusion is the FILTERING THROUGH THE EGO/MIND COMPLEX, that constantly distorts reality. That is why we speak of consciousness being the basis of everything: the more conscious of your innerworkings you are, the more you can detach from them in order to focus on actual reality - with littlle or no distortion. It comes back to: KNOW THYSELF AND YOU WILL KNOW THE GODS AND THE UNIVERSE. This is my experience of reality.
Everything Rupert and Rupert agree and disagree about, every clarity and unclarity, every exclamation- or questionmark are expressions of and appear in consciousness. Trying to get concepts clear is nothing more or less the process of consciousness trying to grasp itself. It is like a dog chasing its tail. The dog (consciousness) is always itself, whether it is chasing itself or lying down in its basket (and then finds its tail before its mouth without having to chase it. This is the ultimate signpost of traditional wisdom: seeking keeps the seeker From the sought. This does not mean he (consciousness) have to give up the search, just like the dog does not have to stop chasing its tail. If the searcher realises he is the conscious in which the whole process of “consciousness chasing itself” takes place, he finds out he is the glass in which the storm takes place. The storm does not have to lie down, realising that consciousness (I, you, everybody) is the glass in which it storms, is “enough”. This awareness is unconditional, no special situation, thoughts or feelings are needed.
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 87 วันนี้!! คู่เอก "ก้องชัย vs โชคปรีชา"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YN6e7HVnekw/mqdefault.jpg)
Mr.Sheldrake, from your talks I understood how I am a part of the whole.
Mr.Spira, from your talks I understood how I am the whole.
I can't thank the universe enough for bringing two of my favourite people together. It would be really interesting if you both could do a talk on Morphic Resonance 🙏
Well, it has basically to do with wave-length,
but also about ability and experience.
It was some monkeys on a island who find out of washing their roots in a stream, so they avoided sand that destroyed their toots, the young was quick to learn it, the old didn't care.
Then some other monkeys on another isolated island adopted this ability.
They had basically the same abilities and experience, and also individuals on this level, live with group-consciousness, and this is the telepathic nature that the idea could be transferred without physical contact.
There is many examples, the periodic tablet, was also thought from three different person, three different places on Earth, about the same period. Just to give a little idea.
I view these two Ruperts as two really splendid human beings. I'm therefore delighted by this conversation. As a bonus, they both speak such beautiful English 🙂
A very, very solid evidence about how different opinions about whatever serious issue is wonderfully useful. Sheldrake will always defend reason when reason can be defended (true science), and I think he's a master doing that and, Spira just uses reason as a tool to walk beyond reason when it is necessary. To me, both are a priceless gift.
I felt like I was listening to a conversation where we were at the edge language struggling to create context. Both you guys are brilliant. Love it.
I align with Spira, that we're one being clothed in a variety - an array of beingness, expressing shared beingness, love, a relationship that undulates like breath, a movement like a symphony, like the ebb and tide of the ocean, a dance of life. I felt that religion was too small via a NDE in 1970, and quit the church. My feeling of connection grew.
Rupert Spira is unquestionably the only spiritual guide whose stance or position via the Direct Path resonates with me completely. Attending one of his retreats was a truly profound experience!
The level of Rupert in this video is very nearly overwhelming :)
😂
Rupert Sheldrake is the only one making sense in this discussion. Spiro wanders through the swamp of confusion and nonsense.
@@dianablackman4528 You find Sheldrake's viewing reality in the complex terms of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as making sense? I would propose that you find Spira nonsensical simply because his nondual philosophy is so new to you. In my case, being familiar with Spira's teachings, I find them in accord with my own experience in life: our commonsense experience of conscious awareness is, for me, an individual instantiation of the divine and universal consciousness, the only consciousness that exists.
By 15:01 Spira has worked hard to help Sheldrake find that they agree after all, even after Sheldrake's insistence on a Godhead represented by the complex of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Can forging such a common view be nonsensical? I think it takes a great deal of sense to forge such an agreement on the principles of reality.
On the other hand, Sheldrake believes that plants and the Sun are conscious (he says so). Does this really make sense to you, while the simplicity of Spira's belief in one consciousness (the nondual philosophy) does not?
Spira says that God (or the universal consciousness) is the source of all forms, and comes before all forms, and then Sheldrake says he believes something very similar. Is Spira speaking nonsense? I think not, and neither does Sheldrake.
Spira goes on to say that the light of consciousness shines in everybody's mind as awareness, and Sheldrake agrees. Is this nonsense? Sheldrake says, "it's a wonderful vision". Why does Sheldrake say that?
The example of John Smith, the actor, who gets lost in his role as King Lear, being led back to reality by his friend backstage is the process of "coming home" to knowledge of who we are, a knowledge called "self realization". Is this metaphor nonsense? I think not. I think it is very helpful to understand how we got lost, got trapped in illusions and suffering, and can find ourselves again. This is precious knowledge in our time of stress, selfishness, searching, suffering, and war all over the world. Spira's message (along with many others) is a message of solution and hope. What does Sheldrake offer? "Morphic resonance", a supposed explanation of supernormal events and experiences (although he does not discuss that major view in this interview). Does morphic resonance help solve the problems of our time? I think not.
If you still maintain that Sheldrake makes sense but Spira does not, I would be very interested in some details. Exactly in what ways would you demonstrate or illustrate that belief? Is it just that Spira stutters a bit now and again? Or can you provide any evidence for your opinion? Please give examples of Spira's nonsense and confusion so they can be discussed.
I think this was a great meeting of minds, in which Spira tried to help Sheldrake to see a simpler view of reality. Such attempts are to be praised in this time of stress and conflict.
@@dianablackman4528 You are certainly entitled to your view. However, I can say that what Spira said made perfect sense to me and, as I approach the home stretch in my life, I have come to exactly the same conclusion about the nature of reality. That said, I also admire Rupert Sheldrake greatly and, as he acknowledges (to his own surprise?) in this wonderful discussion, his Christian perspective on the nature of reality does not differ significantly from that of Spira.
@@david203 Your question about Morphic resonance is important and possibly needs to be couched with greater sincerity. Is it not possible that Consciousness intends that we learn the language of consciousness. That healing the human mind may include a better understanding of morphogenetic resonance. We seem to be generating ever more dangerous and violent vibrations in all cultures, as though there will be no consequences from such heedlessness. One could belittle the effectiveness of monks or one can be thankful for all souls in redemptive practice. Our 'practical' sciences have been devastating in so many ways and the stubborn human insistence that reality is mechanistic is not bringing forth much hope. Rupert Sheldrake is trying to fathom and put people in touch with a language which is common to everything. In the words of Spira this is what love is about, that is how the god/consiousness reconnects.
The trinity as Rupert understands it is not esoteric or convoluted; it is clearly manifest throughout nature and is present in our shared bonds. Both men found tremendous overlap by delving past the formal language. peace to you.
“Love is the natural condition of all experience before thought has divided it into a multiplicity and diversity of objects, selves and others." -- Rupert Spira
Whaaaat?!! My two favorite Ruperts!! Together?! I honestly follow and love you both!!!
I've wanted to hear this conversation between these two for many years. Thank you so much.
What a gift to hear 2 thoughtful men discuss differing opinions with love and consideration.
I would actually love to hear a continuation of this discussion. I had the feeling that both of you just got started. There is so much to learn from both of you, so please consider that. Many thanks!
I loved this conversation; I wish more people would attempt to work out the problem of the One and the many.
One Conciousness Infinite dimensions. Each time a 'King Lear' finds his way back home. A new fully realised dimension of Consciousness earns its place in Infinity.
@@in2net I have no clue what they are talking about either. It's the subject matter. It could go on for years, as there is no definitive answer. It is the "isness" of everything. I sometimes feel the same way as I listen to people to explain physics. I doubt I could formulate a valid critique as there is a lot I don't understand. How do we know these things?
That isn't possible, a fruitless exercise in navel gazing. The ant doesn't know of the farmer on whose land he builds the ants nest, it isn't necessary either, the nest will be built and will function without this knowledge.
It would be so good to hear more conversation between you two. Best wishes!
Yes, more Rupert on Rupert action.
Excellent listen, lads! As A.W. says: "You are IT and IT IS you." The issue becomes we are always *both* human and being. There is no unity without duality. That's the mystery. Ram Dass said: "We're all just walking each other home." Ain't it grand? Ho ho, hee hee, hahaha
🎉
Thanks. It was really nice and also very beneficial to hear Rupert Spira having a conversation with such a bright mind as Rupert Sheldrake (and vice versa). I hope there will be more conversations between these two lovely people.
Rupert Spira's lucidity matches that of Spinoza or Adi Shankara. Stupendous!
. . . . how wonderful to listen to two great thinkers speaking on the most important subject of all, that of the very nature of consciousness - if we don’t have an accurate understanding of this, what hope is there to understand anything that is only appearing in consciousness.
Very good. They really need to do this several times more.😊🙏🏽
I listened to and really enjoyed your short film here, last week. I listened a couple of times actually, to try to understand it, as I'm not familiar with some of its concepts. I was drawn to the section where Rupert spoke of looking back at who you were. And then looking back further and then further. It caused me to think of a friend who has been struggling with depression for a while. He's been saying he can't find himself and doesn't even know who he is anymore. He is seeking 'professional' help, I just don't seem to be able to say anything right so try to say as little as possible. So anyway, I sent him a link to this, hoping it may trigger something helpful within him. And he liked it!
Seems I did the right thing.
Small steps.
Thank you
.
U are a good friend.
Oh, excellent! Sheldrake is a brilliant guy, so out-of-the-box in his thinking. Watched a lot of McKenna/Sheldrake talks. Thank you, RSpira, for this very interesting chat. I would enjoy hearing more of this sort of presentation. I've learned a lot from you over the past couple years, and when I’m trying to explain something to somebody, I very frequently forward one of your videos to them. You're one of my main go-to people. 😊
Beautiful dialog. You are both revealing the same understanding of the infinite, eternal truth! Your minds are formulating this in slightly different ways, but the understanding is ultimately the same. Thank you for the joy of listening.
I've been subscribed to both Ruperts for a long time, so it was such a pleasure to hear both talking together. I hope to hear more in the future, especially enjoyable in this age of isolation. Thank you very much for the video!
Two Ruperts, representing all of humanity sharing the source in media of language which in itself is a limitation, as well as clearly seeing the roots of bondage through which the enquiry is rising.
Having watched young Rupert the scientist getting entangled with Krishnamurti, and here in conversation has inspired me to wonder if there could ever be a connection to the source as long as we are deeply rooted in any "Belief" format. As the story goes, follow the line to which we are tethered, though the length may make you wary; once you arrive at the hook, you may then be freed from "Belief" to become oneness!
Vanilla or chocolate ice cream ?......doesn't matter, its all one to me.
So far 1.9K likes and 439 comments. There's intelligent life on this planet. Faith in humanity is almost restored Hail Rupert, Hail Rupert. God Bless the Ruperts!
Very clear and articulate and importantly insightful.
The illusion as ‘real’ as R Spira said is worthy of deep consideration and reflection. When King Lear is onstage he must play the part. He ‘is’ and there is no two ways about it. The experience that dims our fundamental nature is therefore real and must be respected. We must play our parts.
Society is an amalgamation of parts (all of us single beings living out or through our experiences AND responsibilities to that experience).
The tragedy of Lear is our tragedy. The brilliance of the mind that wrote it is our brilliance in experience.
Let us transcend to the immanent.
"There is a single reality whose nature is consciousness. What we perceive as the physical universe is what the activity of that consciousness looks like from a localised perspective.
The analogy with what takes place during a dream: when we have a dream at night, we dream a dreamed world within our own mind but we cannot directly perceive the dreamed world from our mind. In order to perceive the dreamed world, we have to localise ourselves, we have to enter into our imagination as the character in the dream from whose perspective the activity of our own mind appears as an outside world. This gives us a very good model for the ultimate dreamer, infinite consciousness, whose activity is the universe".
Thank you, your explanation is very clear too' 🙏
I need to say it's not me. I just thought these statements were so well articulated by Rupert Spira that I wrote them down and pasted them here. I should have made that clear.
My English is nearly there but never there, I understood nearly most of what Rupert Spira said, but you wrote it down made me see it even clearer. I am born buddhist, meditation and practise awareness in daily life. But Rupert Spira's talk always made me awake and understand much deeper level of awareness that we should be looking for or aware of.. Thanks to him. 🙏😊
Your comment is way more true than all they say! Take out the word " mind" and replace it by mental space and it will be scratchings perfection
Excellent conversation, it's great to hear two persons I admire so much talking about this subject that I love.
I tend to disagree with both. I'd say that awareness not only is the same in everything, but I intuit it's actually EASIER for awareness to recognize itself in the trees, insects, and the Sun. Because these beings' perception is not veiled by a strongly distorted self image like that which we human beings build for ourselves.
Everytime I get in full contact with another being in nature (even rocks), I tend to be plunged immediately into deep awareness. These beings are not only aware, by they're great teachers.
Trying to shut down inward awareness (attention to currently perceived state of consciousness) and focusing on being a conduit for "slower" moving consciousness (i.e plants/rocks/nuts/water...) is most available natural (literally) expansive experience. However, I would argue that it is so expansive exactly because it really ISN'T our awareness while in that state of communion. You are accessing a missing part of universal consciousness that wouldn't be accessible if you persisted on projecting your awareness on whatever you are "uploading".
It greatly aids in an attempt to at least slow down the forced models of "our" reality that are based on instruments(either essentially binary or limited sensory) that we've come to rely on completely - making us the most alienated being in nature.
@@Agaryunaer I see your point and I agree with almost everything. But you seem to have understood something I didn't say. I mean I didn't say it's MY awareness being projected onto other forms of existence, nor did I say that it's "my" awareness while in that state of communion. I wouldn't even agree with a distinction such as "my awareness" or "their awareness". Rather I said verbatim that "awareness is the same in everything". And I state literally: these beings are aware.
What I could try to describe, according to my perception, is that awareness is always the same, and the forms of existence are doing different degrees of filtration of it. And I tend to believe that the human filter is one of the most restrictive of all beings on Earth. That's probably the reason why I am so deeply plunged into a deep state of awareness when I set a connection with these beings. I probably leave behind "my" own conditioning and "my" processes of filtering, and once I keep in touch with their state of being, with their filter being way more expanded and permissive, I become able to experience awareness in a state much more close to its purity, much less filtered and hence clearer and natural.
You say those beings are missing parts of universal consciousness. I'd say that their process of filtration is quite reduced, and ours is huge. So we ourselves are creating, thanks to our inherited conditioning, missing parts of universal consciousness. We're filtering what could be freely available for us to perceive in the world. And the rocks, plants, animals are our windows to help us retrieve those missing parts. That's why I literally say that they're great teachers.
Rogério Lupo well said in yr original comment and follow up. To commune with nature! we have to get ‘out’ into it as often as possible. Breath, wind, fresh air. Thanks.
Consciousness is an emergent phenomena, synergetic, and without language we, like animals, would have awareness but not be conscious and have no ego. The complexity of the language determines the level of consciousness.
So Human language is the highest achievement of Nature? Sad that!
@@marklampo8164 Language is a gift from the Gods.
I was thinking I need to check Rubert.. Both Spira and Sheldrake, well it turned out you just made a video together!
I love listening to these two gentlemen individually, great to hear them having a conversation; I would like to hear more
I've listen to you pair for many years and to finally hears you's together is beautifull .... thank you :)
What rupert said at the end about reading his book was so nice
Kiahlight which Rupert
He means when sheldrake said his book would be out soon and spira said he looked forward to reading it. Spira is a very kind humble soul but both are gems.
This sounds to me like the start of a series of conversations between you and Rupert Spira :-) I remember how impressed I was when I read "The Presence of the Past" thirty years ago. And I follow Rupert Spira. A continuation of your exchange would be great !
Such a great discussion, is only possible with seeking individuals. They have the ability to listen, and respond, without persuasion, not trying to win. They win. They win, with increased knowledge, respect, and most likely they both have gained a new friend.
Rupert Sheldrake...a gem of holy intellect.
Its Grace which made me hear this ...gratitude to life ...
Ruperts🙏❤Thanks for sharing, great conversations.
I just want to share my understanding why in some spiritual teachings the world being an illusion or nonexistent. I believe the world we see before awakening is projected in our individual minds with limited activities and views. As Jesus said, if our answers would be "yes" or "no" and stayed in the NOW, I believe the world we assume exists right now wouldn't exist.
Matthew 5:37
"But let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No,’ ‘No.’ For whatever is more than these is from the evil one."
When we look at a tree, body, plant, ... with our distorted mind, pre existing information are different from those who see them as energy/ vibration.
Nonetheless, somewhat I believe the projected world exists as illusion, but through renewing our mind, we can see a different world (pure love experience, judgment and guilt free).
Romans 12:2
"Do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is-his good, pleasing and perfect will."
Thank you. Love you
Spira is the definition of "the Truth shall set you free."
The rare coming together of two Rupert's. Likely be the only time in my life I listen to a conversation b/t two men named Rupert, unless these two do another interview.
Wow, I am amazed to find myself having imagined very similar conclusions to what Spira is describing. Fascinating.
When I read Richard Feynman's "The Strange Theory of Light and Matter" book, After reflecting about Feynamn's book, something came to my mind : "the Universe is a Thought".
I recently went from a lifetime of envisioning God as a being in the universe to the universe being in God. And as a result I started to feel everything is an aspect of God's consciousness. Not saying this is how things are, the reality is probably far stranger and less comprehensible, but it's where I'm at at the moment.
Sir James Jeans had the same realization years ago.
Ruby Badilla do you have any original thoughts ?
Principle of Mentalism. 'The All is Mind; the Universe is mental.' The Kybalion.
In religion..."and the word was made flesh." Words are vibratory fields that mind perceives as form.
My 2 favourite Ruperts!
It seems to me that the main difference lies in Sheldrake’s separation of form from energy. Form is really patterned activity, and activity is energy so the division to me at least appears unnecessary.
Great talk, thank you. No matter where your path takes you It all comes back to one. One God, One universe, one you, one me and we are all that. So we can be at peace and not pieces. Peace.🙏
Gods are man made its 2020 not bronze age Palestine
@@tanseygreen291 when I say God, I am refering to the intelligent creative power that is the universe, that has brought about you and I. You are not a separate individual, you are the whole universe expressing itself as you. If you prefer you can limit yourself to being an individual but that is an illusion. Time to wake up?🙏
🍀💗🍀
I first saw you with Krishnamurti.. what a legend you are.
'As I get older experience loses its capacity to veil its reality.' That's gold.
I thought that I never gets old. By saying that he rather showed adherence to the sense experience.
Agree. Great piece of wisdom.
Gives some new light to Hamlet’s reflection ‘For in that sleep of death what dreams may come, when we shuffle off this mortal coil.’ Perhaps the coil is our experience and we make our return.
hi Rupert Sheldrake. long time admirer here... you really should interview Tom Campbell, the scientist.... he has a youtube channel. great explanation of consciousness. worked with Robert Monroe back in the day
Well he would surely disagree with Rupert Spira on many levels. Their views teachings and models are quite different to say the least, not to mention the language that they use. I'm afraid Rupert Spira doesn't know anything about astral projection and is in fact incapable of doing it. And of course Tom would teach him that time is fundamental to existence which all these "only now" new age guys tend to deny lol. So it likely would be a conversation of two people talking passed each other using a very different language and models and not very fruitful.
Beautiful discussion and synthesis of the vedic and abrahamic philosophies. These are the fruits of seeking truth beyond dogma.
In Sanskrit the letters BRHM (where the name abraham comes from) carries multiple meanings - what can be loosely translated to "the one beyond comprehension" and also "one who satiates/fulfills endlessly" - Brahman was originally used as the name for the infinite God - limitless source of all creation - who created through his Voice (Vac).
The letters for Allah/Eloh/Elaha ا ل ه carry multiple meanings and are derived from other root words - الوَلــَـه (al-walah) which is endless love/fulfilment which we can only get from God - wallaha - which means bewilderment/amazement/beyond finite comprehension - and aliha which translates to worship/reverence itself meaning true worship is only experienced when directed towards God and no other.
The RuH (ra ر = repetion/order, Ha ح= life) i.e. the eternal soul is what we can call the breath of God. All souls originated in God's presence in perfect light and harmony.
Few quotes:
Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) Saying:
Souls are troops collected together and those who familiarised with each other (in the heaven from where these come) would have affinity, with one another (in the world) and those amongst them who opposed each other (in the Heaven) would also be divergent (in the world).
Ash-Shura 42:11
فَاطِرُ ٱلسَّمَٰوَٰتِ وَٱلْأَرْضِۚ جَعَلَ لَكُم مِّنْ أَنفُسِكُمْ أَزْوَٰجًا وَمِنَ ٱلْأَنْعَٰمِ أَزْوَٰجًاۖ يَذْرَؤُكُمْ فِيهِۚ لَيْسَ كَمِثْلِهِۦ شَىْءٌۖ وَهُوَ ٱلسَّمِيعُ ٱلْبَصِيرُ
(He is) the Creator of the heavens and the earth: He has made for you pairs from among yourselves, and pairs among cattle: by this means does He multiply you: there is nothing whatever like unto Him, and He is the One that hears and sees (all things).
Al-An'am 6:103
لَّا تُدْرِكُهُ ٱلْأَبْصَٰرُ وَهُوَ يُدْرِكُ ٱلْأَبْصَٰرَۖ وَهُوَ ٱللَّطِيفُ ٱلْخَبِيرُ
No vision can grasp Him, but His grasp is over all vision: He is above all comprehension, yet is acquainted with all things.
Fussilat 41:53
سَنُرِيهِمْ ءَايَٰتِنَا فِى ٱلْءَافَاقِ وَفِىٓ أَنفُسِهِمْ حَتَّىٰ يَتَبَيَّنَ لَهُمْ أَنَّهُ ٱلْحَقُّۗ أَوَلَمْ يَكْفِ بِرَبِّكَ أَنَّهُۥ عَلَىٰ كُلِّ شَىْءٍ شَهِيدٌ
We will show them Our signs in the horizons and within themselves until it becomes clear to them that it is the truth. But is it not sufficient concerning your Lord that He is, over all things, a Witness?
Qaf 50:16
وَلَقَدْ خَلَقْنَا ٱلْإِنسَٰنَ وَنَعْلَمُ مَا تُوَسْوِسُ بِهِۦ نَفْسُهُۥۖ وَنَحْنُ أَقْرَبُ إِلَيْهِ مِنْ حَبْلِ ٱلْوَرِيدِ
And We have already created man and know what his soul whispers to him, and We are closer to him than [his] jugular vein
Al-Hashr 59:19
وَلَا تَكُونُوا۟ كَٱلَّذِينَ نَسُوا۟ ٱللَّهَ فَأَنسَىٰهُمْ أَنفُسَهُمْۚ أُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ هُمُ ٱلْفَٰسِقُونَ
And be not like those who forgot Allah, so He made them forget themselves. Those are the transgressors.
All primordial uncorrupted faiths teach worship of the ONE INFINITE creator - self subsisting - independent- in need of none but all depend on him - Al-AHAD - ONE and Indivisible - beyond form/definition/limitation - unlike any created thing - perfect - unchanging.
Infinity can only be ONE. We can't add or subtract or divide infinity. Any number divided by infinity is 0 - non existence- self annihilation in the presence of God.
Many "spiritual" traditions end on ego death / releasing the spirit from the shackles of mind and body but that's only where the true journey to know God begins as God is infinite and for creation it is an endless journey.
Christ called to find God within- same as every prophet/messenger/enlightened being in the past.
Linguistically the word "religion" means to "reconnect". In sanskrit the word Dharma translates to "universal law". In hebrew/arabic - the word "Deen" means "true judgement" but also "to lower" - meaning truth is only understood through vertical causation- when we compare things to things - atoms to atoms - dust to dust- it is only horizontal causation and cannot be used to reach truth. The pursuit of truth is to seek what is above and beyond us - relating finite to the infinite.
God's veil is perfect light and if it were not for the veil creation within darkness would annihilate - what is behind the veil is beyond imagination. To see God directly is the highest bliss above every paradise- to experience the presence of God is not something that can be put into words - but an experience that is beyond the 5 senses. The vision of God and knowledge of God for us is an endless journey that will increase our own light for eternity - there will NEVER be a point where any soul can say they have complete vision and knowledge of God. Our spirit/soul that originates from the breath of God is therefore also infinite as it was made to know one beyond limitation/set definitions.
Nir malam - beyond material impurity/pure.
Nir gun - beyond set attributes/definitions
Nir va na = beyond the voice - the ripples in the waters of life that reflect light is the realm of created beings - God is not a being within a finite void or contained in any space but the ONE who speaks creation into existence and who's voice manifests the waters of life - SheVa -source of the voice- not a thing - beyond contraction/limitation/form.
When one studies etymology- we will find that this concept and division of "religion" amongst mankind does not actually exist...it's a recent invention - not something the ancients understood.
Dogma and blind faith are destructive and a symptom of sloth - which is spiritual/intellectual laziness.
Truth is universal and not limited to any script, language, creed or race - but universally recognised by the heart.
We can find God through the universal practices taught in every tradition: meditation/prayer/fasting/charity/keeping the law - avoiding sexual immorality and harnessing human libido, diet free of negative energy (tortured animals/earth polluting) etc.
All prophets were
examples for us to follow and emulate. The methods to purify the soul are universal and not contingent on any dogma but how we live our lives.
Peace
Always a pleasure to hear Rupert’s voice
One Rupert is more radical than the Other 🙂🙂
Two Ruperts for the price of one! What a DEAL! We used to call that a "TwoFer" at the grocery store.
Wonderful dialogue - please do more!......you both seamed to be unlocking so many commonalities as you went. There is obviously more common ground to discover and much more to discuss that really homes in and works from the crest of both of your bodies of work at their present stage - what a fantastic insightful discussion to hear. loved it.
Nice manoeuvering...Rupert is fab as always!!🙏🧡
Rupert w/ Rupert absolutely love this talk got a new subscriber thanks
Thank you for feeding my mind, RupertSQUARED.
Two absolute gentlemen. Can we have more please
my two favourite Ruperts! A wonderful conversation to overhear.
Rupert squared but also RS squared! What a great conversation in these times ❤
Wow my 2 favorite Ruperts in one conversation.
A great conversation that touches on that which is inherent to who we are. They could go further by looking at what blocks seeing that, such as social schemes and thought systems that construct a mental position into what we are not.
It all depends on what lens we look at the whole with. Rupert looks at the nature of consciousness with a more eastern lens, which may help you experience the whole in a moment of pause in between two thoughts.
Sheldrakes lens is less abstract and more scientific and analytical of the systems within Awareness / field of consciousness.
Both are beautiful.
It is helpful when you can synergies both ways together and see it from different perspectives.
Please do talk more! I feel you both expanding each other deeper into truth, and bringing us all along for the ride
From Set material -
"As you have probably supposed by now, there is consciousness in everything. Visible or invisible to
you, each fragment of the universe has a consciousness of its own."
Session 18, Page 118
These fellows are intellectualizing , the point is embodiment and that is beyond language or concept . Be still and know .
I have been a student of Rupert S. I feel that when he says that Consciousness is dimmed in individual consciousness…and when he says that, in his John Smith / King Lear analogy that there is no separate self, ie, no “King Lear” …that the individual has to divest himself of individual mind to experience “go back to” the true reality of undifferentiated consciousness…this negates the whole evolutionary process and the emergence in the separate self toward more emergent perspectives. The perspective that Rupert S. puts forward to us individuated humans…as a teacher in his Retreats, is received in our individual minds …and these concepts can evolve our world view…We bring our experience, understanding, our perspective to his teachings and decide for ourselves if they “land” with us. If they do, then we can decide to meditate, adopt practices that will nurture this viewpoint…so as a separate self, we decide what “feels good” to us. In contrast, Rupert’s view makes our human experience into an impediment to higher consciousness…where, ie., the evolutionary model, that of the evolving separate self as soul or psyche, …I feel that the separate self as being foundational in the evolutionary process feel is a very plausible competing narrative. Rupert S. Negates the significance of the separate self..and any evolutionary model. I feel when he has said, to reference back to his John Smith analogy…that there “is no King Lear” …or there is no separate self…leaves me with a question like, “ What about evolution?” or…”What is the place of human experience in all this?” or, “What’s the point of all this?”
But please understand that I am not negating the concept of the undifferentiated field of consciousness…the “divine ground of Being.” I think if we have experiences that draw us toward an interest in such things, that evolving individuality is what we are, and what we have, to bring us to our journey towards ever widening perspectives….
a wonderful discussion! Rupert Spira outlines perfectly the nature of the unknowable nature of consciousness! Excellent! Thank you Rupert S for hosting such a enquiry.
The two most polite people on the planet have a conversation:
An interesting discussion from 2 thinkers with a platform. Certainly as Mr Sheldrake correctly states Mr Spira’s ideology raises more questions than answers yet the evidence to me at least points in the idealists direction. There certainly is enough evidence to posit consciousness survives death. There is enough evidence to question material existence being fundamental. It is unlikely however Mr Spira is close to explaining / defining ‘God’ nonetheless he is IMO nearer the mark than any alternative I am currently aware of. It is in the absence of science being able to explain existence valid for thinkers to bounce off previous philosophers and it is pleasing to see contemporary work by Bernado Kastrop. It is my hope for a remarriage of science and philosophy as science sees its limits.
So great to listen to you both ❤. Been doing the same for years. Great exploration of consciousness this video is.
The Maharishi explains all this in his great work of philosophy and metaphysics:
“Commentary On The First Six Chapters Of The Baghdad Gita”
He answers all the questions and explains how and why everything happens, and how any individual can benefit from understanding these things
Really enjoyed the Twopert having previously enjoyed you both individually.
This is simply wonderful. Much food for thought herein. And I like how they end on beauty and love.
Wonderful conversation! I think Mr Sheldrake might want to reconsider the tangent of his book! Mr Spira's view is more primary, more open and direct and Mr Sheldrake's is a little more limited by his beliefs and a little resistant, but what Mr Spira suggests is a lot to take in, and maybe, with time, Mr Sheldrake will consider it further. I hope there is another conversation with these two gentlemen in the future.
My sense was Rupert Spira was in his head, needing to dominate this conversation. Whereas Rupert Sheldrake was grounded in faith love trust and I felt a certainty him.
Awesome conversation, please get together again to challenge our beliefs,and learn from that. Thanks, loved it
lovely episode, both pointing to a similar thing, but one Rupert is making it simple and foundational, and one Rupert needing to add some more layers in :). Great conversation to observe
In those closing statements you could see that Spira has "seen" the intellect for what it is and has moved on or expanded out from it. Good lad.
My construct:
God: “I Am What I Am.”
Mans perception: “Is What It Is to us.”
The Sentient Individual: “I am what I am without having asked to become.”
My opinion: The God, Prime, Origin Consciousness or Greater Consciousness fails to communicate as if It knows us in real-time or promotes Itself as perceptible added value to any material or extra material location we perceive. How can we validate evidence and lessons from Prime, when we carefully are still seeking proof of Prime Consciousness on all aspects perceptible to us? I love this long suffering searching exercise work we get. And I confess to loving watching the soap of a search for Prime detail try to get tangibly academic.
Jiddu Krishnamurti also has some good talks about consciousness with Rupert Sheldrake
thank you for that :)
I'm with Rupert...
So excited for this!
Do we find us in the fabric of awareness? I view all things as conscious energy but these inanimate particles play on our perceptions.
Ahh, my two favourite Ruperts together in one place. Can’t wait to watch this....
yes, yes -- meet more often, please!
Utterly amazing! Many thanks Rupert and Rupert.🏅🏅
Nothing loses me faster than when discussing the depths of consciousness or all that is and someone mentions Christianity or the religion. Rupert Spira is a teacher of true conventional learning. This world has had enough dumbing down through the power entities that have dictated our well being. We have been damaged enough and now through people like Rupert Spira, Elkhart Tolle, Bob Campbell and Uell S Anderson we can unlearn the harmful ideology’s that have hindered our loving progress.
Hey Rupert. I love the kind of topics you discuss frequently.
I'm about 4 minutes into this video, when I heard mention of the analogy of a dreamer, having to localize themselves within the dream. So before I forget this thought, I figured I should comment now.
This reminded me of Eric Weinstein who has had a geometric hypothesis for a long time about how to create multiples from a singularity.
A brief and simple analogy for his idea on how to leverage geometry, and probably therefore mathematics too, is to consider how to make one of those sealed bottles with a ship ornament fully built inside it.
It wouldn't fit through the bottle neck, but if they fold the ship and it's sails and then use threads to hoist the sails once inside, you have accomplished with this ship in a bottle, what seems to be impossible.
In the same way, he proposes that theorists in physics should create a lattice work that can be folded, but unfolds when placed inside a physics or geometric model, or something like that.. I don't fully understand, not many do...
But he seems to have a strong belief it's worth talking about and considering.
He has done a lecture in front of physicists explaining his idea, which can be seen somewhere on youtube.
This idea sounds similar to the dream analogy with consciousness.
Maybe you and Eric Weinstein would both benefit from a conversation about this idea, in relation to general physics and also metaphysics like the consciousness hypothesis.
23 minutes in, another passing thought. You are possibly reaching the limitations of the English language with regards to the difference between the experience of consciousness and consciousness as the essence of material and phenomenon.
I would posit that all matter is consciousness expressed, and that the experience of consciousness, is possibly an illusion, similar to that of free will.
That what we as experiencers RE-COGNIZE as consciousness, is some kind of feedback loop which allows us to navigate an environment which is increasing in complexity.
Because of this idea, I would say that a rock is conscious, as we are conscious. It's just that the experience of a rock(as a colony of conscious "things in themselves") is limited in it's capacity for sensing and processing sensory interactions.
It may be our human need to project or protect, when faced with unsolved problems, which causes us to think that our experience of reality is real and defines all other possible experience.
We come from the frame of mind of an experiencer, which I think may put a certain filter over our view of reality, and our ability to stay objective.
I've spent a few years considering Descartes "I think therefore I am" problem.
Maybe that idea of "I am" is where he may be incorrect.
What if "I" is just a conglomerate of things, like everything else, all connected.
I'm wondering now if consciousness could in any way exist in a vacuum...
Is there an opposite force to consciousness?
What if there is a trinity, but consciousness and the opposite force are like Christ and the Devil.
The God head not quite being consciousness or not consciousness, but a singularity that split to create both.
If I change the name Devil to Lucifer or light bringer, it might be better to say, that the devil is reality and Christ is the other opposite force which is sacrificed in order that light shines as reality.
The bible does say somewhere that this is Satan's world.
In indian mythology, I believe the Shiva Linga ties in with one of the myths about the main God being challenged by two lesser gods, so he creates an infinite pillar of fire and challenges them to jump over it.
Something like that.
Again, a trinity of the One, with two lessers or sub-ordinates.
3 Great Ruperts. Afterall one must not forget the bear.
Hehehe, just not Rupert Murdoch ;)
@@Seanus32 yes! def not him! :O
hahaha, I like it!
diálogo incrível, maravilhoso crossover de ruperts!
This is the second night in a row I have chosen this video to fall asleep with
this is the most politely British debate i have ever heard
ha ha ha that is true :)
It's not just because they are both British; it is because their views are at heart not opposed. It is, in fact, difficult to be in opposition to a simple philosophy of oneness.
I don’t doubt R. Spira is a splendid fellow and that his formulation of the nature of reality is ‘correct’ but I find Sheldrake’s tripartite formulation provides a richer basis for understanding the human experience.
I was just thinking about how I love there’s 2 ruperts who are badass morally mindful souls and among my favorite truth seekers; but then I see this video? So damn grateful. Need this to happen again soon. Maybe include Lawrence Krauss, Chomsky, Steven Greer, Bruce Greyson, PMH Atwater or even vandana shiva or Gabor Mate, would love to see these souls collaborate some dialogue/presence.
A great collaboration. Absolutely love this stuff! ❤️🙏
Please invite Rupert Grin to do a podcast with the two of you
bravo gentlemen, excellent conversation unpacking the Truth
The discussion can be laid out with two analogies:
Most people are maybe used to thinking about the "external world" or reality as being there all the time even when we are not looking - like if you turn on and of your flashlight in the dark, all the objects in the room seem uneffected. Rupert Spira suggests that it works more like a videogame, where there seem to be an objective world but it is only there when we look because it is actually generated by our computer(consciousness).
I believe what Spira is trying to say around the 7:00 mark is that the energy that composes what we call a tree is always present, but it takes a localized mind to act as a sort of transducer to modulate that energy into the form we recognize as a tree. Mind is responsible for bringing forth definition and quantity in a field of infinite unbound consciousness.
lovely. the most conscious conversation starts at 32:36.
To the extent that an experience changes you, IT IS REAL. What makes the world an illusion is the FILTERING THROUGH THE EGO/MIND COMPLEX, that constantly distorts reality. That is why we speak of consciousness being the basis of everything: the more conscious of your innerworkings you are, the more you can detach from them in order to focus on actual reality - with littlle or no distortion. It comes back to: KNOW THYSELF AND YOU WILL KNOW THE GODS AND THE UNIVERSE. This is my experience of reality.
Everything Rupert and Rupert agree and disagree about, every clarity and unclarity, every exclamation- or questionmark are expressions of and appear in consciousness. Trying to get concepts clear is nothing more or less the process of consciousness trying to grasp itself. It is like a dog chasing its tail. The dog (consciousness) is always itself, whether it is chasing itself or lying down in its basket (and then finds its tail before its mouth without having to chase it. This is the ultimate signpost of traditional wisdom: seeking keeps the seeker From the sought. This does not mean he (consciousness) have to give up the search, just like the dog does not have to stop chasing its tail. If the searcher realises he is the conscious in which the whole process of “consciousness chasing itself” takes place, he finds out he is the glass in which the storm takes place. The storm does not have to lie down, realising that consciousness (I, you, everybody) is the glass in which it storms, is “enough”. This awareness is unconditional, no special situation, thoughts or feelings are needed.
It is as it is,leave it alone or you end up in a mental home!