I've watched this three times and I think my head is going to explode. Love Rupert.

@alientube1984

4 жыл бұрын

I'm repeating it also for the third time while working. It's so simple, yet our conditioned mind struggles to accept it!

@rangarajan3774

4 жыл бұрын

dude.. 15th time. now i am taking notes to understand.😂

@RT-fr9tn

3 жыл бұрын

@@rangarajan3774 please explain, I am still struggling

@rangarajan3774

3 жыл бұрын

@@RT-fr9tn tasting chocalate is your experience.. but for a outsider, you are just eating chocolate..putting one object (chocolate) inside another object (mouth).. from god's perspective it is experiencing it as it is.. but from our limited mind's view..it sees objectification of that experiencing..! god's true being is objectified by our mind as world and body! i hope its clear now..

@RT-fr9tn

3 жыл бұрын

@@rangarajan3774 I got the first part, please elaborate your comment "god's perspective it is experiencing it as it is" what is as is? is it actual experience?

Can't be fully comprehended by the analytical brain mind, but leads to a direct experience upon contemplation and openness to pure Awareness and pure Being.

Love this guy's questions nice to hear someone really try to 'get it'. Rather than just accepting what's being explained and then not remembering a thing.

I listened to how he explained different person or consciousness' perspectives of the same experience. At the last few minutes of his talk, it really got me pondering on the subject! Then, I had quite a profound dream followed by my asking last night before I went to sleep - I wanted to understand the differences between the perspective as who I identify as my physical self (where all my struggles and desires reside) and the consciousness as my original self (non-physical). My dream last night: Something really bad happened to someone I love. I was very upset, heartache, I cried and I was so angry. (in that moment, all those situations were so real to me, I really felt the pain and the anger)! The next minute, I woke! I thought to myself, it was just a dream but the experience and pain were so real! Although it was just a dream but I can still remember the pain vividly! Then I realised this was a taste of what I was asking for before I slept. So this dream let me understand that what I am living now is like a dream to my consciouness, the story is like a play scene in the movie to my consciousness, but the experience is very real. When my physical self is dead from this life time, I will return to my non-physical consciousness and look at this whole life time experience as a long dream (or perhaps it is not that long since consciouness is beyond time and space). The only thing that I will be carrying over after I die from this life time is the experience I had from it. This is very profound to me and I thought of sharing it here.

@simonspark8314

8 ай бұрын

I just love you description

@Librawarrior471

21 күн бұрын

That's what I think about what happens when we die too We will still be thinking when we leave this physical plane and will remember the dream we just woke up from, which is the life we had.

I love Rupert's teaching, I can't stand Mary & Jane anymore though haha

Work with mentally ill patients who have Dementia or Parkinson's. In trying to comprehend their sanity, you will start to question your own, and in doing so this all becomes clear.

@alisonsalter8352

Жыл бұрын

Oh yes i have been there this year with my mum

A MIDSUMMER NIGHT’S DREAM ACT 5 SCENE 1 - THESEUS: "And as imagination bodies forth The forms of things unknown, the poet’s pen Turns them to shapes and gives to airy nothing A local habitation and a name."

@NarasimhanMG

4 жыл бұрын

"Such shaping fantasies, that apprehend More than cool reason ever comprehends. The lunatic, the lover, and the poet Are of imagination all compact. One sees more devils than vast hell can hold. That is the madman. The lover, all as frantic, Sees Helen’s beauty in a brow of Egypt. The poet’s eye, in fine frenzy rolling, Doth glance from heaven to Earth, from Earth to heaven." I never understood The Bard in the original, but now "Lord, I can see!".

This should have far more views. The model that is being proposed here is logically superior to the reigning physcialist paradigm. Occam's Razor sides with the fundamentality of mind.

@Dhorpatan

5 жыл бұрын

I just found out someone deleted that thread on here where we had that long debate. That really stinks! That's what happens when you are on someone else's stupid channel where they have the power to delete stuff at their whim. Do you know who did that and why? There was some good stuff on there with good information for future cataloged reference, and you also got tore up real nice in that debate and Kastrup's position was destroyed by myself.

@anduinxbym6633

5 жыл бұрын

@@Dhorpatan If a thread got deleted, then that is a shame. There was indeed good information posted there. Don't kid yourself. You lost that debate. Bernardo Kastrup's idealism is perfectly tenable and remains the most parsimonious position.

@Dhorpatan

5 жыл бұрын

That ticks me off *SO MUCH* . All that time and effort spent on that debate down the drain with no trace it ever occurred. That was a great debate with some excellent hashing out of Kastrup's philosophy and I came up with so many fantastic points that refute Kastrup's position and refutes the notion that the mind is fundamental. I wish I knew what happened. My only hope for getting back the wonderful arguments I made is if KZread still has a copy of my comments in my comments folder. But I'm pretty sure once it's deleted here, it's retroactively gone there. 😢😡🤬

@anduinxbym6633

5 жыл бұрын

@@Dhorpatan ​ You didn't refute anything. You just believe you did. Fundamental mind is still the most logical default position.

@made4mystery930

5 жыл бұрын

@@Dhorpatan Threads can be deleted by the thread originator, not just the channel owner. You seem very attached to the arguments you made, and very disturbed by the fact they were deleted. Perhaps your position isn't on the solid ground you'd like to think it is.

this was enough to drive me back to zen

I think this is one off the clearest understanding of pure consciousness that Rupert has made it really makes sense, the reason I say this is because when you dream objects do feel solid etc, just like they do in the waking state so as he has explained before..matter is just a way of experiencing, not a outside separated thing..brilliant

@Jivanmukta84

Жыл бұрын

It's a good metaphor but no evidence

@84sahi

Жыл бұрын

​@Sebastian111 these things can only be experienced - third eye of knowledge not evidence what this is science is also limited by matter and 5 senses . Become subtle in meditation and you feel the whole world vibrating and merging into one. Rupert isn't talking things this clearly without experiencing reality lol

I would love to see a conversation between Rupert Spira and Sam Harris. There's a lot of intersection between the two but enough difference to make a meeting between them potentially mind blowing.

@alientube1984

4 жыл бұрын

It's already in the motion, bound to happen. Spira has exploded recently, and is about to be main gest in a lot of big podcasts!

@Mevlinous

3 жыл бұрын

Mario Segat there is a conversation between them on the waking up app by Sam Harris.

@victorjcano

3 жыл бұрын

Been done. How about a dialogue between Rupert and Eckhart?

The guy's understanding of the things and making it into the model made it more clear than rupert's eloquent speech.

He's absolutely 1 million % right about that, the brain and thoughts/mind is directly correlated with each other, they have a highly brilliant mutual agreement with each other! But he is also correct in saying that it doesn't necessarily mean to say our own minds are produced by our brains! It could be that our minds have always been within existence, but to be conscious or aware of it, it may have needed a vessel, such as a highly powerful, complex, biologically advanced computer..... our brains, but once again, that doesn't mean our minds/thoughts are 100% controlled or produced by our brains, and once again, yes our brains and thoughts/minds do 100% directly correlate with one another, they have a fantastic mutual agreement with one another! Ps: sorry for the slight repetition there lol

Put briefly, ‘subjective/1st-person experience is mind while objective/2nd-person experience is matter’

Exquisite..the Mahabharata in real time..

@Rupert Spira...All of this will be etched crystal clear for anyone who experiences zero person PoV i.e. dimensionless consciousness...even if that experience is for a few seconds...it will drive home the point.Period.

So beautiful to see these two reflections of one another create clarity from confusion.

Beautiful 💞 "Jewel within a jewel within a jewel"

I could accept as true everything he says, but I don't see how he can be so sure, i don't find these "proofs" he's talking about so strong 😅🍃let's hope he's right, definitely

My head hurts...it's too much...gotta watch this about 15 more times...bookmarked.

@amayaaum9792

5 жыл бұрын

I posted the transcript about 4 posts up from you, if that helps (which is why I did transcribe it also :-) )

@samitroy4464

5 жыл бұрын

Hi Amaya, I couldnt find your transcript....I was wondering whether you could email it to me r_samit@yahoo.co.in

@hydrogenroar

5 жыл бұрын

Yes this is all so heady and ultimately it cannot be fully understood because it appears on the threshold of the mind of God which is unfathomable. Fortunately understanding this stuff isn't necessary for self realization. You need only know 'that which you are' for self knowledge.

@Papa_Owl

4 жыл бұрын

@@hydrogenroar Agreed! This does nothing for the ultimate realization

For myself, this revelation of the unfolding of existence into ever-revealing jewels seems to jog a very deep seated memory/knowing within me. Its as if I've definitively experienced this knowledge before from my ever expansive eternal viewpoint. It made me go light headed and seemed to be deeply moving, as if a truth of myself was spoken. I often get a light vertigo when hearing certain truths. Its beautiful. I don't understand why this is considered a "model" though. After all, many sages have direct experience of this so called model. In my perspective it is a direct knowing, as demonstrated by Ramana Maharshi and others. Love to the one xx

All sensate experience, is a "tool" of navigation within duality. The brain and it's attributes, are not a seat of Consciousness, but rather a processing unit (CPU) though which consciousness may be expressed. As such, duality in the first instance, is an expression of Singularity. The key is, whether one believes consciousness emerges from matter, or knows, matter to be an expression of consciousness.

Stunning. The Living Truth. Unbounded mercy.

The philosophical language and explanation make the subject difficult to understand but experientially it is easy.

What is that, that is looking at your phone right now? Just stop, for a moment..... Whatever that is, that is what is experiencing everything.... It's beyond description and it's a mystery....You are not who you think you are....You are not your thoughts.....they come and go..... Realise that you are this unexplainable stillness and presence! There is nothing to understand....It just needs to be realised. 😊

@scottease1

3 жыл бұрын

Indeed 🙏🏼

Yeah. The guy audience nailed it! There is no thinking with the brain, no seeing with the eye, no hearing with the ears, no tasting with the tongue, etc. In a way, it''s all a type of magic show.

@darrenwalshe8513

3 жыл бұрын

It's all thought?

Is it that our perception of ourselves as a body causes us to instinctively utilize a second person perspective to come to know the first person experience which further reinforces a notion of separation?

@Mevlinous

3 жыл бұрын

This describes the process through which the observer and the observed come about

I donno how I had missed this one. This is my all time favourite Q&A by Rupert ❤️✨🙌🏽

Beautiful!

Amazing!!! 🙏🙏🙏

Rupert is one of my favorite contemporary philosophers, even though he might say that he is not a philosopher.

@modernmountainmonk9666

5 жыл бұрын

It is all about SUBJECTIVE experience.

@kwixotic

4 жыл бұрын

He couldn't be what we consider as a "philosopher" because that would "reduce" what he states essentially to verbally generated matierialism.

What wonderful wisdom from Rupert. Thank you for the marvellous insights.

totally mind bending!

I enjoyed the playing with first and second person perspectives. A pointer I love is 'The witness is seperate from what it sees, however what is seen is not seperate from the witness'.

Very beautiful.

Swimming in LOVE LOVE LOVE ... all else I would say could not even touch that. Such JOY❤️

Hi Rupert, please post a more deep dive discussion on this topic. 🙏

Where consciousness is realizing ''I am'' and directly after this ''I am and there is nothing else'', consciousness can decide to comprehend what 'nothingness' really is, by describing everything that it is not, in great detail. Doing so, creation emerges. From our perspective, 'nothingness' has come to a point where it starts to ask questions about itself. That's us.

The brain has been designated as a transducer. In the same way that a piano soundboard doesn't really amplify the transmission of the mechanical energy of string vibrations but instead the board converts into sound energy.

Beautiful

Beautiful explanation! Mind-blowing!

Could be accurate to say that... when in seeing there is only seeing, in smelling there is only smelling, in hearing there is only hearing...in this case does matter cease to be created? ... Is Shakespeare more eloquent than you, my friend? Maybe.... but certainly these precious verses read by you are a sweet touch of grace. ❤️

This is such a radical inversion of a viewpoint. Thanks so much :))) wow

I am so late but I'll try. Thanks for letting me know.

Oh boy...6:00 he drops the bomb and I never saw it like that before. Wow. That’s changed a lot for me. Thank you 🙏🏻

@atashakgem

3 жыл бұрын

MagnificentDesolation when only thinks that is all it is, but is all finite mind says that, which created by brain,

@cat_lover007

3 жыл бұрын

@MagnificentDesolation Also there is no evidence whatsoever that brain produce consciousness ~ still no one can't prove how brain directly cause all our experiences like taste of chocolate. Material science is doomed.

@degaussingatmosphericcharg575

Жыл бұрын

@@cat_lover007 He was only stating his opinion; no evidence to back that up. We have no evidence of a religious deity, so until one can provide some, it is not logical to state that. As usual, people do not want to accept that mind is what the brain does; it would lead many to conclude that when we die that is the end. Neuroscience is on its way explaining such things. You are wrong, we do have the evidence that brain produces consciousness. We do not have to know everything this minuted to know that mind is what the brain does. Material science is not doomed, but your hope for an afterlife is.

Well explained 11:20👌🙏🙏🙏

The brain produces conditioning. It is our conditioning that produces every thought, feeling, mood, etc. We thin i we are agents with free will, but everything we think, feel, decide, believe, etc is simply the result of conditioning meeting circumstances, over and over again. I went to the Emerald City to see the Wizard of Oz. I looked behind the curtain, and there was no one there pulling levers and pushing buttons. It was all automated.

In a Dream the main character can be walking the streets of X City and seeing other people, a big head (brain), bipedal, etc., yet the brain is obviously a product of consciousness, not the other way around.

Thank u 🙏

He is is best questioner: very probing questions however very succinct. Rupert can you explain it pictorially please?

Sublime ... In the dimensionless presence of consciousness the finite mind (a poets pen) turns it into form and gives God's infinite Being a temporary name and a form, and makes it appear as a world. That pretty much wraps up that mystery :)

@krisc6216

5 жыл бұрын

so, to wrap it up even a little tighter: god = fundamental consciousness = you = me = everthing/everyone

@jackharrison6860

5 жыл бұрын

That's all well and good but now distinguish the Brahman from the Parabrahman?! 😂😂🙏💟

@abcd-wg2iq

5 жыл бұрын

Yeah, wraps itself like small panties on elephants ass...but,i am not stating anything lol

@ikwartin

5 жыл бұрын

In your analogy, what is it that God sees ? I believe that whatever form a poets pen (finite mind) turn it into is the exact thing God sees. When you stand in front of a mirror, whatever you see in the mirror is the same thing your image in the mirror sees

Amazing

Is there a momemt where we have to definitely move back from the second (or third or forth, etc...) "perception's position" to the zero's one.? If so, will the "transfer" be made automatically or do we have to do or "not do" something to go back "home" (out of form to the poit zero).? Thank You sooo Much Thank You 🙂

BRAIN& BODY IS HARDWARE MIND IS SOFTWARE WE ARE ALL QUANTUM IN NATURE

A jewel within a jewel within a jewel with every facet reflecting off every other facet depending on your point of view. This conversation could not take place with out both venerability and confidence.

I’m presuming Rupert is trying to remember if hung the towels out here 12:10

how does physical interaction work, how does consciousness push against another conscious being? If consciousness is at a higher level than matter, and matter more of an emergent phenomena of consciousness. how do they interact and jostle/fight for space?

Does this POV then validate the observation made by a Stanford neurobiologist who wrote recently that a stressed out pregnant mother will secrete hormones(i.e., cortisol) which then results in an enlarged amygdala in the brain and then resulting in the child's becoming over anxious later in life?(it is after all, a scientific/materialist perspective on behavior). This fascinates me only because upon reading, it seemed that I was an illustration of this phenomenon.

Rupert be talking in confusing gibberish sometimes, straight up 💯😐. But he throws it out to Us like the most outstanding Enlightening lingo 💯😂. But I just appreciate that he even gives it a shot 🤷🏾‍♂️🌎😂😂😂

Directed here by Frank Yang. What is the reason/logic to using reason/logic?

The brain does not produce mind. The brain exists within mind along with everything else.

@asbestos6255

5 жыл бұрын

I think you're wrong. There's more reason to believe that the brain requires mind than there is to believe that the mind requires the brain.

@lepomirbakic4422

4 жыл бұрын

@@asbestos6255 so mind can exist separate from brain?in air?

That Jewel (the fourth)> ||| 0 point perspective > 1 point perspective > the 3D world. ( looks also a bit like a Trinity,after the ||| ) . what in Reality is 1. like a infinite expanding geometrical explosion, burst of Universal creativity.

Where can you tube viewers get their personal questions answered by Rupert? Plz tell

@markie9739

4 жыл бұрын

At one of his retreats I guess.;)

10.40 "matter is what mind looks like when viewed from a limited point of view.." If this limited point of view changes,its limitations changes,what mind looks like will change also..isn't so???

@atashakgem

3 жыл бұрын

inner light yes! Your mind basically is creating it, matter is what mind thinks it is,

There are some parts that are buddha taught: mind, imagine, or Consciousness (viññāṇa) are the same thing that appear and terminated all day all night. because of mind, imagine, or Consciousness (viññāṇa) depend on twelve sense base.

@constipatedbowels3473

5 жыл бұрын

The concept of mind and consciousness in Buddhism and Advaita are bit different....but they r both equally valid models....

Quite interesting AND Very confusing at times... . Is Consciousness/God a split personality? 🤔

There is a lovely expression in my country that says "what eyes see, hands do" which people use to cheer on a friend when the task seems too difficult. It completely bypasses the doer. Why the task becomes a simple effortless work out. Somehow it seems appropriate to this subject

@pettiprue

5 жыл бұрын

It is a beautiful expression. It surrenders the doer. It feels like surrendering 'me the doer' will take quite some effortless effort.

@malabuha

5 жыл бұрын

@@pettiprue lol.. you're cute & funny :) me too :)) let them be as much as they like.. their days are numbered anyways 😂😂😂😂

If you'd like to read this transcript for a deepening look into what he says: Go to 'The Teachings of Rupert Spira' Facebook group and click on Group Files. (I tried to post the transcript of this that I'd done (the closed captioning is often wrong here; 'perception' is 'expectation' and such) but it was too long and this comments section wouldn't take it.)

@2943connie

5 жыл бұрын

Thank you very much, Amaya. Although I know English, yet it is not my mother tongue, it was a bit hard to understand the content ( what I needed to comprehend). You provided the transcript which is easily seen on the wall of that facebook group you have suggested going. I appreciate you have taken the time to do so. Now, I have the printed version of the document and I am ready to read it for the first time. :)

But if your brain is altered or damaged cant it change the way you experience the sensory world? So there is the point of view but there also seems to be a symbiotic relationship between the sensory world like a lens or filter that can be changed. So if the lens can be altered something you perceive as bad or harmful can be filtered and boom your perception has changed.

Too deep for first viewing...will have to listen for a couple of times before this sinks in! :)

I love Rupert but I wish he would let people finish their thughts so I could understand all the ideas being discussed.

Consciousness is an aware screen according to Rupert, what does it mean?

I'm struggling as Rupert says (unless I'm mistaken) that awareness forever stands in the absence and inclusion of objective experience ("between two thought" etc) and yet Nisargadatta states that consciousness cannot be (that is to say observe or witness) in the absence of objective experience (because then nothing remains to be witnessed, consciousness being the witness) and that when the mind (a temporary objective experience) dissolves only the absolute ("unawareness") prevails, and always did! (Not consciousness, ie. The terminal "I am") Can someone please address this seeming discrepancy? Notice how Rupert hasn't mentioned Nisargadatta's interpretation in other vids (the distinction between the Brahman (consciousness) and Parabrahman (the absolute - eternal inconceivable non-state).. Thanks. Namaste. 🙏💟

@joemuis23

5 жыл бұрын

Not really an answer but I recommend looking into the gestalt phenomenon. It shows how the mind distorts.

@innerlight617

5 жыл бұрын

Just read this, hope it helps.. "The mind produces thoughts ceaselessly, even when you do not look at them. When you know what is going on in your mind, you call it consciousness. This is your waking state - your consciousness shifts from sensation to sensation, from perception to perception, from idea to idea, in endless succession. Then comes awareness, the direct insight into the whole of consciousness, the totality of the mind. The mind is like a river, flowing ceaselessly in the bed of the body; you identify yourself for a moment with some particular ripple and call it “my thought”. All you are conscious of is your mind; awareness is the cognizance of consciousness as a whole." - ~~Sri Nisargadatta~~ "

@jackharrison6860

5 жыл бұрын

It hasn't helped yet, but thanks.. 🙏💟 What Nisargadatta calls awareness is what he also calls the absolute, which he claims is the permanent unchangeable inconceivable non-state or void of voids, unaware of itself (or more appropriately, it's nothingness) unlike consciousness. He claims that consciousness (although the supreme witness of all that is) is a mere concept by definition, and temporary, and so the final illusion. That only the Absolute ie. the Parabrahman, is eternal in its utter nothingness of zero qualities.. X Understand? X thanks.

@jackharrison6860

5 жыл бұрын

.... that consciousness, unlike the absolute, does have a quality, knowing, and that while it knows and knows only itself, it cannot know the eternal nothingness from which it sprang. Yeah?..

@innerlight617

5 жыл бұрын

Right.It's quite clear to me Nisargadatta's statement.

Consciousness in a pretentious posture is the mind. Everything else including the body and the universe spring from the mind.

Holy.

Is the questioner Jeff Foster?

Is Jeff foster the questioner? sounds very familiar. 🤔

@RT-fr9tn

3 жыл бұрын

does sound like Jeff, I am curious :)... very good and succinct questions..great duel!

There's a higher intelligence in us than the mind that is restricting it

@ONeA2122

5 жыл бұрын

subconscious "mind" is what a dream is as a result of conscious mind, this intelligence is survival instincts everything else is illusory or secondary

@ONeA2122

5 жыл бұрын

SavageArfad. The nature of all consciousness alone is an unstoppable force it only wants to stay alive and to get better at it that's how intelligence becomes self-aware out of the instinct that is causing us to evolve and the continuum of consciousness. the subconscious mind is a result of brain mind or the brains accumulation not life alone itself, its a fixed pattern of behavior

@ONeA2122

5 жыл бұрын

@SavageArfad The subconscious mind is an effect of the brains accumulation through the five senses

As Sufism says the creation is "mystery on mystery" . Don't try understand it . You can't ! Just experience it The creation is not but the experiencing itself!

If Jane really doesn't exist and is only a dreamt up character in Mary's mind. Then who is seeking ? How is Jane who is a phantom figure going to find her way back to her source? Mary, as I understand is the open, aware consciousness who knows her self as herself. Mary already is self realised. How is Jane ( us) going to find her true real self if she doesn't even exist?

@jmerrick2012

5 жыл бұрын

Jane, as she does not exist, cannot find her true self. In this model, Mary could wake up in the dream, i.e. have a lucid dreaming period instead of normal dreaming, and realize that Jane is just a character she is playing, using as an avatar, in her dream. Hope this helps.

@harjotmahal8985

5 жыл бұрын

@@jmerrick2012 thanks jim.it was helpful.

Perhaps all energy is consciousness and the brain shapes that energy into the mind/soul

@indrabali5269

3 жыл бұрын

Still you are saying after the consciousness is matter by saying the brain shapes that energy into the mind.. i was like you too but after meeting a friend who has supernatural power and many time possessed by spirits then he told me: “you know what we call spirit actually is mind/thoughts wandering without body, is like when you dream at night” but he also mentioned there is consciousness which is not personal that gives the life to spirit, human and all creatures in this universe.. Being possessed; concept of reincarnation; indigo; prodigy are actually the same ..mind first then followed by matter

But then why if somebody's brain is changed do they change with it? Their personalities and everything with it? Occam's razor would suggest matter therefore = mind.

@bobore7061

3 жыл бұрын

Because consciousness inhabits the body as limited form.

I viewed this vedio many times cannot understand properly. Can ànyone help me please?

Beautiful. Reminds me of Bernardo Kastrup's metaphor of the whirlpool i.e We are images of processes of self-localization of consciousness, like a whirlpool is the image of a process of self-localization of water. Ergo the entire brain and body is what our interior life/sub consciousness looks like from a second person perspective. Ergo the entire outer inanimate world or universe is the second person experience of 'mind at large'. In other words we are the brain scan of god lol. “Shall I tell you the secret of the whole world? It is that we have only known the back of the world. We see everything from behind, and it looks brutal. That is not a tree, but the back of a tree. That is not a cloud, but the back of a cloud. Cannot you see that everything is stooping and hiding a face? If we could only get round in front--” ― G.K. Chesterton, The Man Who Was Thursday

@nimim.markomikkila1673

5 жыл бұрын

Spira and Kastrup are friends.

@ikwartin

5 жыл бұрын

If the physical universe is the brain scan of God, who is scanning and viewing the scan?

@stephengallagherart4014

5 жыл бұрын

It's just a limited metaphor, but according to Ruperts dream analogy you could say it is always Mary (god) doing the viewing through Janes eyes (us). We are like living peek holes into gods internal activity, the universe experiencing itself as a sensate human being. "When you see the world you see God. There is no seeing God apart from the world. Beyond the world to see God is to be God." Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj

18:00 he is describing Indra's net

I don’t know Jane, but I was in love with a Jean when I was a teenager.

I'm sure he got this explanation from Bernardo Kastrup.

Its always Mary’s experience, never a Jane’s. Mary is life’s experience a temporary non existent self, Mary is a dream, life is the dreamer.

@ 10:34 Rupert is Channeling brand new info... even he got a bit surprised there lol at 8:40 ish, he is also channeling, look at his eyes for a second

@malabuha

5 жыл бұрын

Absolutely :)

@synesthesia251

5 жыл бұрын

not really, most of his videos are about the Mary and Jane example... but that one sentence at 10:34, gets even to him... you can see it on him

@wanderingthepeaks

5 жыл бұрын

Or more likely, he's paraphrasing Bernardo Kastrup's model ... kzread.info/dash/bejne/m3iLlLhmlqucg7w.html ... as they have met in person, and exchanged ideas.

@malabuha

5 жыл бұрын

@@wanderingthepeaks of course, you could tell me the ultimate secret of the universe and repeat it to me dozen times but when i actually comprehend what you have told me my eyes are gonna twinkle for a moment just like his did thanks for the link ;)

Pretty sure that’s Jeff Foster in the audience. He’s a non dualist. Known in the community.

@Mickeysternum245

3 жыл бұрын

Love the irony of there being a community of non dualists

@bornuponawave

3 жыл бұрын

@@Mickeysternum245 Irony is dualistic. 😂

I sense a lot of Bernardo kastrup influence.

@devilinlee

5 жыл бұрын

They’re friends. Don’t know whom influenced whom.

@luckieluuke131

5 жыл бұрын

i think enlightenment is the inspiration

The first person's perspective experiences mind only. The second person perspective experiences matter only. ..Rupert the thug boss of perspectives...

12:32

15:15

Does the brain produce the mind? Well, if it is the brain asking that question the second question it should ask itself is why am I ignorant? Since questions are rooted in ignorance how does insentient unconsciousness matter ( brain ) know ignorance? To know ignorance is to be conscious of your ignorance but if our matter brain is consciousness itself than it is not producing consciousness since it is consciousness. If our mater brain can be consciousness why can't anything insentient being consciousness?

🤯

Here's what I don't get and I'd love some help on this. According to Rupert everything "is." Unquestionably everything is. And this "isness" is existence itself. And since we know we are aware and that we exist this shows that existence is aware. It is conscious. Rupert will tell you that this self aware existence is God's being. Self aware being from which all things borrow their "isness." But here's where I get confused. If all things are essentially God's pure self aware being then that would include the brain right? The brain "is" and therefore it's essential being is itself existence/consciousness. If this is true, and I would say that it is, then why can't consciousness be a product of the brain? Because according to Rupert the brain is just a form of God's infinite existence. Therefore consciousness is derived from God's pure being, which Rupert would agree with. Seems like Rupert is engaging in dualistic thinking when he separates the brain from existence/consciousness.

Pleasing for the mind, isn’t it?

@Papa_Owl

4 жыл бұрын

Very true! Serves no great purpose otherwise

Complicated stuff. =P

Yes, the brain is very powerful, but so is the liver, and the kidneys.