Bernardo Kastrup, in discussing Near-Death Experiences (NDEs), in another interview, suggests that the figures or entities people encounter during these experiences are shaped by their cultural and personal backgrounds. For instance, a Hindu might see Krishna, a Christian might see Jesus, and an atheist might encounter a deceased relative, like a grandmother. These visions, according to Kastrup, are not arbitrary but are deeply symbolic and meaningful, representing concepts like unconditional love, unity, and a sense of totality. Kastrup's point seems to be that during NDEs, people encounter symbols that are most meaningful and comforting to them, and these symbols often embody a profound sense of love and interconnectedness. This indicates that the feeling of love encountered in such experiences is more than just a simple emotion; it's a profound, all-encompassing experience that reflects a deeper reality or truth about existence. In this context, love is not just another feeling but a fundamental aspect of the human experience, possibly indicative of a deeper connection to the universe or existence itself. I don’t understand why he is saying here that love is just another emotion.

love is not an experience like any other experience. love is the background of all experiences, like clear sky behind the clouds, clouds representing the any other experiences. it is the collapse of separation between imaginary self and this what really is

Bernardo is the greatest whirlpool on the lake today.

Good set of questions that successfully brought out Bernardo's ideas about idealism in a surprisingly short amount of time.

First of all, I'm a big fan of this channel. All the interviews and content in general are superb. In the first few seconds of the interview, I noticed a familiar accent in Bernardo's speech. Then I found out he's Brazilian! What a great honour to have such a brilliant mind representing my country!

The dream avatar analogy is brilliant.

Beautiful! Bernardo Is a friend of Rupert Spira. Who says the same only from nondual perspektive... Also the cat and the paintings!❤ Thank you very much for your work! Im happy to be member and vám suppurt you little bit.

After death , the importance of the ego, gradually dissolves, but not until the Physical experience is left behind.

32:00 love is not just an experience... It is the experience of the totality of being the lake in silence.

Thanks for bringing on Bernardo Kastrup. I watched him a couple times in a discussion with Tom Campbell ( My big theory of everything) Excellent!!!

I would love to see a conversation between Bernardo and Daniel Ingram. I wonder what would happen if Bernardo would start applying the yoga sutras of patanjali seriously for just a few months and experience siddhis like telepathy and telekinesis, or an OBE, well described by the work of Monroe Institute. Actually the ancient Vedic texts or Asian philosophy describe the same things he does regarding the fundamental part of consciousness and perception in the way how we perceive reality. Our intellectual mind is actually in the way and prevents accepting the bigger picture. Thanks for this interview and the work of Thanatos tv. 🙏

This is gold! I would say that lake is love. When every other ripple settles there is only the lake of love.

Personally, I think that Eastern philosophy throws more light on these subjects than Western philosophy.

Bernardo is always a great guest, his interviews on TOE podcast are legendary.👍💯

Love the whirlpool metaphor

Well, ok...lovely man, very sure of himself, his theory that is. However, none of it speaks to real human experiences. Let's not discount that reality. Yes, we cannot answer every question that arises from such experiences...we aren't meant to. They bring meaning and some bit of understanding to our lives. I hope he realizes there is more. I love his cat.

Thought and consciousness are not the same. Interesting discussion but i have too many questions to feel inspired

"Appears to us as a physical world" is a great quote by Kastrup.

Thanks!

I love your stories.

Intresting what you talk about how the woman who had a NDE became her father in the NDE experience. I had the same experience when my father died. I became him. I think that is why I love going to funerals. And why I like things dying in general. What is dying comes back to me. Not that I wish for people to die around me, but more that I appresiate it when it happens. Probably I live my waking life already from the viewpoint that the world is in me. I guss what I experience is my own priojections coming back to me.

I don't find his interpretation of what NDE's actually mean, at all satisfactory or persuasive. The self is not an ever changing illusion, I know that personally because I know this self, my "self" has absolutely existed more than once (the same self). I also realise that his dream metaphor is not meant to be taken literally but I think it should be abandoned altogether. NDE's are not in any shape or form similar to dreams. The real time out of body experience entertwined with meeting deceased relatives and friends (some who were not known to be dead) strongly points to substance dualism and nothing Bernado has said can persuade me otherwise. Nice guy but this theory doesn't wash out.

Excellent.....❤ thanks 🙏.

I've long wondered about our perceptions being attuned to the quantum potentialities, in that our brain transduces and interprets the fields and crystallizes the potentialities into a perception, thereby creating the world and all (seeming) physicality. As Bernardo says here: "What is the real world? It's not what is in perception." So if we combine two central things about what our senses are doing -- namely that they are not exactly apprehending an external phenomenon and that they are windows/avenues to experience and being -- this fits with an immaterialist metaphysics in that all of life and the universe is a consciousness production of a quantum figment.

This answered so many questions I've had as a spiritual seeker - I have read and re-read Anita Moorjani's first book, but this interview helps me understand our connection with nature and reality and "the other side" even more - thank you so much (from Sydney Aus) 🙏💕

Very nice! I've seen this scientist chat with the great Donald Hoffman, the scientist who was a very big materialist until his math kept showing that he was in a conscious-based simulation.

Brilliant, this is so fascinating, our physical body dies(along with our ego) and we become one with nature

Super Thanatos! So geht die Forschung doch weiter. Ein ganz wertvolles Video! Bitte, bitte ins Deutsche übersetzen! Man erkennt förmlich wie es Herrn Dr. Eberhard erregt und inspiriert! 👍

Lovely cat :)

Bernardo says all emotional states are as likely once the disassociation illusion ends but the overwhelming NDE and mystical experience is one of Love. This is reported in virtually every one of these types of experiences. As far as meta-cognition, the NDE and mystical experience is reported to be one of greater clarity and more coherent thinking then normal waking consciousness. It's hard to understand how basic awareness could evolve meta-cognition. It's easier to see how the ultimate meta-cognitive intelligence could dumb itself down by limiting information depending on what type of role it's playing.

incredible

Naïve realist materialism entails a contradiction in terms: namely, it presupposes that the qualia of consciousness are not the qualia of consciousness. Now, not only is a naïve realist materialism self-refuting, because it presupposes and is founded upon a contradiction in terms (the assumption that qualia are not qualia), but, it is naïve too, implying the absence of impartial criticism, because under no circumstances whatsoever does impartial criticism lead to a contradiction in terms: in other words, naïve realist materialism entails dogmatism (accepting some thesis as true (namely, the thesis that qualia are not qualia) without further reflection, without grounds, without substantiation). The application of impartial criticism inevitably, incontrovertibly, and necessarily leads to a phenomenalist stance (if by phenomenalism is meant “the acknowledgement that what we know is our own consciousness and its attendant qualia”): the application of impartial criticism cannot lead to a contradiction in terms, and, ipso facto, cannot lead to a naïve realist materialism. In a word, it is superfluous to refute materialism, because materialism refutes itself (by way of entailing a contradiction in terms, by assuming that qualia are not qualia); additionally, naïve realist materialism is incompatible with a genuinely impartial criticism, since the application of impartial criticism inevitably leads one to the conclusion that what we know is our own consciousness and its attendant qualia (that we are consciousness ouroborically in a state of interaction with itself, namely, consciousness interacting with its own qualia). kzfaq.info/get/bejne/bNhipZN92bCtmps.htmlsi=9FJsI_XJoefpWyXD

Thanks for this fascinating talk Bernardo and Reto! I was wondering, from Nature's (MAL) point of vue, what is the point of dissociation? Is MAL lonely in it's solipsistic existence? Is dissociation spontaneous and MAL can't control it? Do people continue to evolve in the afterlife as they would on earth? Suffering seems to be related to survival on a planet and it's dangers, old age and disease, so how would that look like in the afterlife? Where does our metacognition go in the afterlife? Spooky thoughts! haha! Thanks again! 🌿

Bernardo, this is a good one. This woman understands. That letter was ridiculous, that was not how someone should respond to a very real real, honest effort to organize and conceptualize consciousness using a mathematical model. Any critique of it must be in the same domain. It has to be critique Conceptually or mathematically, certainly not with opinion.

Pleurage! Bernardo and his cat hit it perfectly. Inspiration! Thank you Thanatos. I wonder about when we experience an nde or an obe and go to ‘the void’ and we are formless, without the flawed body/senses. We are ‘in reality.’ My obe/nde was like this. It’s indescribable but to define it I’d say it was peaceful, still and ‘no thing’ because it was REAL reality (non dual state) as Bernard describes it as the unraveling the disassociation. I have come to realise that nder’s that experience form such as a tunnel and light, deceased relatives etc, are possibly being ‘tricked by the light’ by those who created this fake matrix system (horrendous suffering.) But that’s another topic entirely that some call the ‘soul trap’ (reincarnation) that Bernardo calls baloney of materialism, perhaps.. And so when we die do we need to be ready to not be distracted by form in order to be formless in the void (our own individual realm) and gradually find out who and what we really are .. no more memory wipes!

Although I am aware that I can learn a lot from Bernardo, it is difficult for me to listen to him because of some of his views that practically return us to the vanity of physicalism. I stopped watching this video when he said that love is the same as, for example, the color red. Although he claims that the basic of those representations is idealistic and physicalism claims that is materialistic - we come to the same thing - which is the devaluation of the higher values of life. His statement is like when we say that, for example, the purpose of life is the same as garbage can. So can it be like that?

Everything he is saying is his opinion people like him are obsessed with trying to explain everything and find an answer to everything unfortunately some things we can’t explain.

See my paper on consciousness "How Self-Reference Builds the World".

What a great mind, Bernardo - can you relate daydreaming with the disassociative level of an NDE or an astral projection and ADHD with DD and why this seems to be medically a mental disorder?

suffering is the resistance to particular experience. if there is no resistance to experience there is no suffering

Wow. Some great delineation of these ideas. Now ... is it metaphor is it it real?

His purely intellectual system reminds me of the stuff Ken Wilbur tried to accomplish. They both seem to drool over the possibility of Explaining IT ALL. It can’t be done. For every premise, there is a backdrop of ideas that must first be accepted upon which the System is built. Infinity means that just when you think you’ve got IT there are an infinite number of other possibilities, ways of approaching it, ways of defining terms, etc. System created by man Even based on certain facts has a boundary. And beyond that. ? At the very core of all great religions, there is always a place reserved for mystery.

Just remember don’t believe that a persons opinion about any theory is not a be all end all no matter who presents it. Perhaps we are not yet evolved physically and psychologically to handle more knowledge at this time

Bernardo, that's exactly right for me, I need a coherent structure of thought that parsimonious and internally consistent And before I accept it totally. That's how I gotten through 75 years successfully and that's how I continued to do it. A long long time ago. It was just a hippie in Berkeley, California when I heard about this group in La called "the family", it turned out that they were the family that we're involved in the tap Sharon Tate killings. The way they were described in Northern California, was that they were into love, sexually liberated and very spiritual. I, however, was a skeptic, I wanted to know what philosophical structure supported their beliefs. It turned out they were Killers! This is an extreme example, but it proves the point point. This mine says has served me well through life. Be warmly, enthusiastic to new ideas, but, these skeptical until they're proven. I spent 3 months internally organizing Analytic like idealism over many many hours until I had a consistent internally coherent view that was virtually parallel and transparent to Bernardo Kastrup understanding of it, then I could personally take it as my own. He has done me a great service. I couldn't attach to Buddhism, taoism, psychology, existentialism, And Pancetism. Analytic idealism jumps through all the hoops conceptually. It has resonance.

Bernard, you talk about mental states particular to consciousness that resides within, in the human and of the brain. But humans and brains are just part of the perceptions on the dashboard , creations that don't exist in " reality". I would extend your argument and say that consciousness creates the illusion of matter, space and time and there is a collective consciousness( God) and then there is the individual consciousness born from the collective yet not separated from it.

I have an internal hierarchy of qualia and feelings like love, anger, attraction have the greatest resonance and I the greatest awareness of them, their totality (in regards to other phenomena). For example, Attraction, is often irrational and self-destructive. The fact that I find myself still attracted to younger people doesn't mean that it's appropriate. It would not serve me well. So, all feelings are subject to self- discipline And introspection. Things that are that are intellectually coherent, have to be spiritually coherent, that's a judgment in the end, is not entirely rational. I give great weight to it. It's the quality of knowing. We have to give time for that.

From nature we came and to nature we will return

Idealism is most likely WHY consciousness incarnates.

I think he is mostly right, but I believe he is wrong on a few very important issues. These being bliss/love compared to fear and also his ideas on metacognition. I feel strongly that the natural subjectivity does have metacognition in some manner. Because that state (not being dissociated) it is very clear (intellectually and intuitively) and can use comparisions. This is evident from the insight one gets of having mistaken one's identity all along and the humor that goes with it. Of how you could not see this simple truth until the moment it was realised. It's hillarious for some reason. This is from personal experience of altered states, sometimes even frightening ones. Past the point of total association though there is no fear at all, only loving peace, bliss and ecstacy. Fear seem to be part of the dissociation. Because when it is realised that what was being sought after is the seeker and that they are one and the same, that you've become or been what you sought all along. Poetically speaking, a naked singularity of quantum yin and yang in eternal coupulation. There is no fear or displeasure anymore. This cannot be fully experienced when dissociated even if it is understood intellectually. It can only be experienced directly and does not stick fully after the window of association closes and fear returns. Fear comes from the idea or perception of not being that which you already actually are.

Oh, the sound is so bad!

Ok, so it’s a not-so-materlistic materialism anyway. An interesting concept but false as well. A good intellectual exercise, not more. As usual, a bad theory hiding behind complex conceptual constructs. Intellectualism for intellectuals. The Truth is always simple and accessible to almost anyone, and it gives people hope, relief and sense of purpose which all these theories don’t. They are just words about words.

Baby boy talks exactly like Rupert Spira.

Hmmmm...

Hi kitty❤

He has attempted to reduce the system of nature too simplistically. There is no room for infinite mystery. It is a cold, dead, dark system. Saying meaning comes to us through our observation of all this rings hollow.

This sounds a lot of what Advaita Vedanta says.

I have come to believe that anyone who cannot work out that materialism is baloney does not have the intellectual abilities required to become a philosopher. Just a someone who cannot add two and two better not try to become4 a mathematician.

I'm third to comment. Hehe

Pourquoi faire simple quand ça peut être compliqué...😮🤤😱😠🤡💀

I personally find Bernardo to be too attached to theory and thus unable to deal seriously with what NDEs and other post morten survival evidence suggests, that individuality is retained after death. For him the death of the body is the dissolution of the principle of individuating, even though evidence suggests otherwise.

He’s really scary. His views are as limited as he says science is. He’s kind of contradicting himself regarding ideas like karma, suffering, love. There is nothing he has beyond his reactive center. It’s pretty arrogant to profess to see all that makes up bedrock consciousness.

😺

Bernardo lost me on the ideas about good and evil as just "ripples"....hi idea became just a mental picture with no meaning for our life.

More woo-woo dressed up to look more sophisticated than mere religion.

Leave it to man, to see God in a burning bush and another man who sees a way to keep warm. Why can a child see a man in the closet and the parent can't? Materialism is baloney when we die, and that materialism is gone, and another materialism is created.

More like Idealism is the baloney one. Bernardo comes up with a lot of straw man fallacies against materialism and metaphysical concepts that he pulls out of his ass. Besides, he ignores entire philosophical frameworks such Mario Bunge's Scientific Materialism or Gustavo Bueno's Philosophical Materialism (the most complete philosophical framework to date by far).

WOW WOW WOW FANTASTIC THIS GUY. GOOD VIDEO THANK YOU